Recently, I was an observer to a debate on the constitutionality of taking an oath of office on a book or periodical that was not THE HOLY BIBLE. The provocateur of this debate claimed that they did not understand why people were upset that a member of the United States Congress had taken the oath of office on the Quran.

The defense read something like, “To show her allegiance to her country [the Congresswoman] swore in on something that would keep her bond. I think that’s special and to those that don’t like it, please ask yourselves why you don’t.”

Here’s why I don’t:

Elected officials take oaths of office with a hand on the Holy Bible because it means that they are upholding their office and actions to a higher power. When officials say “So help me, God” they are literally begging God for help and guidance to properly govern over the people.

When someone swears on the Christian Sacred Scripture, they are saying that they will govern the people with the help of and to the standards of the Christian God, the One True God, and they will be judged by Him in the afterlife. Meaning, they rule their elected area by the teachings of the 10 commandments and of Jesus Christ.

By swearing on the Quran, the official is saying that he/she will govern the people with the help of the Muslim God and to the standards of Islam, some of which are the antithesis of human dignity. If you are not knowledgeable on the Muslim religion, I encourage all the readers to familiarize themselves with Sharia Law and ask if that is the higher standard we would like our officials to hold themselves. I would respectfully say, absolutely not.

By swearing on the Constitution, like Senator Sinema of Arizona did, the official is saying that they are not subject to ANY higher power. They are exclaiming that he/she is only beholden to man-made law, which we all know can be abhorrent (i.e. Roe v. Wade), instead of natural law and universal truths. Again, I would ask, would we like our officials to hold themselves to the standard of majority influence? I would again respectfully say, absolutely not.

While it may not be unlawful to swear on religious texts that are not the Holy Bible, Americans, especially Catholics, should be cautious to excuse and encourage Islamic or pagan viewpoints through the sacred act of the oath of office.

As libertarians, I understand that we should not force anyone to do something that they are uncomfortable with, such as swearing on the Holy Bible. However, just because the absence of laws allows it, does not mean it should be encouraged. What should be encouraged is the explanation of the importance of the formal promise of the oath of office to the true higher moral authority.

God love you.