“So Help Me God”

10 Responses to “So Help Me God”

1. ◄Dave► says:

   January 16, 2009 at 4:52 pm

   Nice find, and his arguments are persuasive; but the last paragraph took the teeth out of them. Personally, I would have rather assumed that he had made a perfunctory and perhaps vacuous gesture of adding, “So help me god”; than to hear that he made the even more devout gesture of kissing the bible, and then trundled off to a prayer meeting as his first act as POTUS. ◄Dave►
2. Anthony says:

   January 16, 2009 at 6:44 pm

   Can someone say what “So help me God” means exactly? (Does it mean that God will help you in doing something? Or that if you don’t do it, you will have broken a pact with God? Or if you don’t, God will have to help you because you’ll be in trouble? I’m just not clear on the exact meaning.)
3. Donna B. says:

   January 16, 2009 at 10:08 pm

   Interesting question Anthony. I have always viewed as your second meaning, but have never questioned that view.
4. Caledonian says:

   January 17, 2009 at 9:40 am

   It’s a ritual phrase, Anthony, and as such it doesn’t ‘mean’ anything in particular.

   Just as no one expects to tell “the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth”, and if you substituted a phrase with equivalent semantic value into the oath, people would become quite upset with you.

   It’s an empty vocalization whose only purpose is to signal acceptance and conformance with existing standards.
5. Tony says:

   January 17, 2009 at 12:12 pm

   Caledonian, I understand how it is used by most people, but I’m curious as to what it is supposed to mean, or meant originally.
6. Polichinello says:

   January 17, 2009 at 4:37 pm

   In the literal sense, it’s a call for aid. Sort of saying “God please help me keep to this oath.” Figuratively, as Bradlaugh pointed out earlier, it’s come to mean “And I really, really mean it.”
7. Anthony says:

   January 18, 2009 at 7:51 am

   Thanks Polichinello, that makes sense …
8. tom van dyke says:

   January 18, 2009 at 5:00 pm

   Personally, I would have rather assumed that he had made a perfunctory and perhaps vacuous gesture of adding, “So help me god”; than to hear that he made the even more devout gesture of kissing the bible, and then trundled off to a prayer meeting as his first act as POTUS.

   I guess you would have, Dave. But thank you for your honesty about your agenda. I’d like to know who you are, your full name signed properly, as you’re manifestly an honest man.

   This is a great day for the Secular Right blog! Washington almost certainly didn’t say the words “So help me God.”

   But even as Dave notes, at least one account says he kissed the Bible and that’s admittedly only one account, so perhaps it’s untrue as well. I wouldn’t even want to go there.

   But it’s incontrovertible that George Washington used a Bible and with his hand on it said the words, “I solemnly swear.” And Dave, well-observed that immediately after his inauguration, Washington and [almost] the entire Congress “trundled off to a prayer meeting as his first act as POTUS” at St Paul’s Chapel, New York. That’s fact, too.

   Not mere “empty vocalization,” and not Justices Brennan and O’Connor’s citation of the empty phrase “ceremonial deism.” It was prayer and thanks to the Almighty, Whoever He/She is. One might read Washington’s First Inaugural Address, where his words met the symbolism of whatever happened at his swearing-in.

   Make of that what you will, and I’m sure you will.

   I can hang with this “Secular Right” blog’s agenda and epistemology. But the argument vis a vis America is not about the existence of God; the argument is about our belief in Him and His qualities, at the Founding or now.

   Per your own edicts about what can be intelligently [empirically] discussed, theology and metaphysics are matters of consummate indifference anyway. So be it. It’s your blog, you make the rules.

   But George Washington—of his own free will—stuck out his right hand onto a hastily-rounded-up Bible and said “I solemnly swear, &tc.” and then they all [most of them] went off to church.

   That’s just the facts. Opinions may follow. Cheers.
9. ◄Dave► says:

   January 18, 2009 at 11:57 pm

   I’d like to know who you are, your full name signed properly, as you’re manifestly an honest man.

   I am not sure what your point is Tom, but my name is Dave Hunter. There is nothing anonymous about my activities anywhere on the internet. You can even find my e-mail address on my blog, if you have an issue with me. Yes, my integrity is a point of honor with me. I refuse to tell a lie, even a little white one. I have not done so for over thirty years. My associates may not always wish to hear what I have to say; but they know I mean it when I say it, and that it is the truth as best I know it.

   I am not your enemy. You are free to believe; I prefer to reason. We have much more in common than you may realize. There are hundreds of gods neither of us believe in. I just believe in one less than you do, and I have not the slightest interest in convincing you that that one too is an illusion. If you will do me the same courtesy of not proselytizing for your god, keep your piety yourself, and out of the political arena, we have no argument over religion.

   My remark about the author’s last paragraph was precisely because such data would give ammunition to the folks who wish to claim this is a Christian nation. It may have been founded by Christians; but back then they were smart enough to see the danger of permitting the church to control the state, and very deliberately devised a secular government. Of that fact, there should be no doubt. ◄Dave►
10. tom van dyke says:

    January 21, 2009 at 2:39 am

    I have no issue with you Dave—no sarcasm. I was complimenting your honesty.

    I reason fine. My beliefs are private, which suits me and others in fora like this. Cheers.

Comments are closed.