Talk:Oath of office

NPOV

This is practically an identical copy of the linked page, and is hideously NPOV anyway ('moving'?) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.168.71.229 (talk • contribs)

The UNION OF SOUTH AFRICA

South Africa was Commonwealth realm with the british monarch as head of state,so it wasnt an ordinary dominion.

THe arcebishbop of canterbury speech was "Will you solemnly promise and swear to govern the Peoples of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, Canada, Australia, New Zealand,the Union of South Africa...",as you can see at the video of the queen coronation. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 189.5.80.126 (talk) 14:55, 15 November 2009 (UTC)

Merge with President of the United States oath of office

These pages repeat each other; I think the United States section of Oath of office should be merged with President of the United States oath of office. Philip Stevens 10:34, 16 December 2005 (UTC)

• Merge, BUT!, I think that President of the United States oath of office should become a redirect to oath of office. (I have put a copy of this discussion on the other page) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.42.110.168 (talk • contribs) 10:42, 16 December 2005 (UTC)
• Leave evrik 14:18, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

So help me God

The claim that "it has been conventional for Presidents to add "so help me God" at the end of the oath. George Washington did this at his inauguration in 1789." is false. GW did not append shmG in either his 1st or 2nd inauguration, nor did John Adams, and there is reason to believe no president did until Chester Arthur. See http://www.nonbeliever.org/commentary/shmG.html -—Preceding unsigned comment added by 152.216.11.5 (talk • contribs)

• The Architect of the Capitol would disagree with you.

April 30, 1789 - http://www.aoc.gov/aoc/inaugural/inaug_fact.cfm

--evrik 01:32, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

The Architect of the Capital, despite repeated requests, has never produced a first hand account that substantiates GW appended shmG. That they refuse to either produce such a citation or withdraw the claim reflects poorly on them. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 4.249.21.234 (talk • contribs)

The author's own citation for the US Congressional and Presidential oath of office contradicts his claim that the text of the oath does not include the words "so help me God". The citation points to US code title 5, para. 3331: https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/05/3331-

which text clearly includes the words "so help me God", current as of Jan. 2, 2006. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.225.221.27 (talk) 16:26, 6 October 2007 (UTC)

Read the whole thing. It says, and I quote:

“An individual, except the President, elected or appointed to an office of honor or profit in the civil service or uniformed services shall take the following oath: ‘I, AB, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter. So help me God.’” [bolding mine for emphasis] And by the way, "So help me God" is optional. That's why it's perfectly permissible for one to "affirm" the oath. —MicahBrwn (talk) 06:28, 28 October 2008 (UTC)

Languages

Why are the oaths that officials take in Spain, Poland, Mexico, and Italy the only ones with the native languages (Castilian Spanish, Polish, Español Mexicano, and Italian, respectively) AND English? I move that either the oaths in the aforementioned native languages are removed, or the oaths in Belorussian, Portuguese, Fijian, Finnish, German, whatever dialect of Chinese is common in Hong Kong (assuming the oath isn't taken in English), Hindu, Persian, Arabic, Norwegian, Urdu, Romanian, Russian, and whatever other languages I missed, should be included as Spanish and English is included. And by the way, how come the oath of office for French officials (or officials le québécois in Canada) aren't included? —MicahBrwn (talk) 07:27, 27 October 2008 (UTC)

Okay, it's been five days (five days exactly, almost down to the minute, how about that?) and there's been no comment. Hence, I've removed the and Spanish, Polish, Italian. If someone finds the appropriate oaths in Hindu, Persian, Romanian, and the rest; I'll have no problem with someone putting back the Polish, Spanish, and Italian. —MicahBrwn (talk) 07:24, 2 November 2008 (UTC)

UK Lord Chancellor

Wasn't one of the effects of the Constitutional Reform Act 2005 that the Lord Chancellor no longer takes the Judicial Oath? -Rrius (talk) 03:30, 22 November 2009 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Oath of office. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20130510085810/http://www.royal.gov.uk/ImagesandBroadcasts/Historic%20speeches%20and%20broadcasts/CoronationOath2June1953.aspx to http://www.royal.gov.uk/ImagesandBroadcasts/Historic%20speeches%20and%20broadcasts/CoronationOath2June1953.aspx

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 09:30, 23 April 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Oath of office. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20100516102833/http://www.taoiseach.gov.ie:80/upload/static/256.htm to http://www.taoiseach.gov.ie/upload/static/256.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 22:25, 20 July 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Oath of office. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110829055430/http://www.stortinget.no/en/In-English/About-the-Storting/The-Constitution/The-Constitution/ to http://www.stortinget.no/en/In-English/About-the-Storting/The-Constitution/The-Constitution/
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100723110017/http://www.dos.state.ny.us/info/constitution.htm to http://www.dos.state.ny.us/info/constitution.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 00:01, 21 May 2017 (UTC)

Oath is also taken by federal employees in US

This page seems to only refer to elected officers. But the US oath of office is also taken by civil service employees. It's important for people to know that federal employees commit to support the constitution, not the president. If this doesn't belong on this page, then where? Authoritative statement at Cornell: https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/5/3331 Searhes point here: http://twothirds.us/the-oaths-of-office/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by Chipotle (talk • contribs) 15:25, 27 August 2017 (UTC)

Intent of USA oath

I tried adding the following text in the USA section but got reverted. Can anyone help me find a source?

"The intent of the oath for lawmakers is to focus the lawmaker on voting for or signing into law only constitutional laws and not supporting laws just to get re-elected or because of one's personal views or because of promises of campaign contributions. The intent of the Founding Fathers was clearly "one person, one vote" during elections and then laws that achieve a proper union and synergy of national security and the goal to promote the general welfare for ourselves and our posterity as mentioned in the Preamble to the United States Constitution."

--Pages777 (talk) 19:37, 24 July 2021 (UTC)

http://foavc.org/01page/Articles/Violation%20of%20Oath%20of%20Office%20and%20Walker%20v%20Members%20of%20Congress.htm says that the only violation of oath is advocating overthrow of the form of government in an unconstitutional way. It occurs to me that the USA with it's party-line votes and resulting Gridlock (politics) would be much better off if that was the actual intent, but alas, it is not so.--Pages777 (talk) 19:50, 24 July 2021 (UTC)