Check the article above. In short, the author thinks that presidents should not swear in on a Bible (nor any other religious text), but rather on a copy of the Constitution. Doing so would remove any sense of exclusion for non-Christians as well as demonstrate, as John Adams did, a stronger loyalty to the laws that one is being sword to uphold and defend, rather than a religious text.
Personally, I think this would be a step in the right direction, for all the reasons stated above. And I don't see how anyone could logically argue that we should continue using a Bible for any reason. It's an asinine tradition that should find itself in the dustbin of history.
What say you, Bungie.next?
-
I don't care if they swear in on a copy of Popular Mechanics. I would just prefer that when they give their word, they actually keep it. The document doesn't matter. If the person taking the oath wants it to be a bible, the quran, or hustler, I don't care. We have freedom OF religion, not freedom FROM it. People's beliefs are supposed to be what they choose to believe, not what others TELL them to.