One of the most foolish things American presidents do is to swear on the Bible.
The Bible’s New Testament is full of contradicting, lying, illogical, cognitively biased statements with no evidence provided, it denies the truth, misleads the reader, perverts reality, alienates people against each other, is full of formal fallacies, is racist, homophobic, superstitious, demagogic, extremely silly, xenophobic, misogynistic, sporadic and dubious claims with Bronze Age-like pathos, parade of stupid fairy tails and charade of falsehoods. And the American presidents swear on it.
Yes, we are talking about a lying, misleading, reality-perverting work that has nothing to offer in terms of science.
Those who have sworn
George Washington set the tone. He took the oath on a Masonic Bible borrowed from a nearby lodge. The book fell open to Genesis, by pure chance.
Thomas Jefferson used his personal Bible, though some doubted his religious views. Symbol mattered more than belief.
Abraham Lincoln took the oath on a modest Bible, later used by Barack Obama and Donald Trump. Its presence turned into ritual.
Franklin D. Roosevelt held onto family tradition. He used the same Bible in all four inaugurations, adding continuity to history.
Dwight D. Eisenhower chose two Bibles. He stacked them and read from both, signaling his complex legacy between war and peace.
Barack Obama followed Lincoln. In 2013, he added Martin Luther King Jr.’s Bible to the stack. A black president standing on the shoulders of two giants.
Donald Trump combined nostalgia and symbolism. He used his childhood Bible and Lincoln’s Bible side by side. One personal, one historical.
Joe Biden went with family legacy. His oath rested on a century-old Bible passed down since 1893. Worn, heavy, and deeply personal.
Most others followed suit. Some chose family Bibles. Others borrowed official ones. The Bible changed, but the gesture remained.
This was never about scripture. It was about weight. A physical object anchoring a moment the world would watch.
Those who didn’t
John Quincy Adams refused to use the Bible. He placed his hand on a law book instead. He wanted to highlight his loyalty to the Constitution, not to religious tradition.
Theodore Roosevelt took the oath in a hurry. After McKinley was shot, there was no time to fetch a Bible. He simply swore the oath without one, standing in a private home in Buffalo.
Lyndon B. Johnson took the oath on Air Force One. No Bible was available. He used a Catholic missal found in a drawer. It was not intentional, but it became part of the history.
These cases remind us that the Constitution does not require a Bible. It only requires the oath. No scripture, no divine name, no ritual. The choice rests with the person taking the office.
This tradition, powerful as it may seem, is just a tradition. And when urgency, conviction, or chance intervenes, even the most sacred symbols are set aside.
Why the Bible?
The Constitution is silent on symbols. It demands an oath but leaves the rest open. No requirement for scripture, no divine name. No ceremonial form. Just the words.
And yet, almost every president has reached for the Bible. Not because they had to, but because they wanted to. The moment demands weight. The Bible delivers it.
It connects a man to something older than politics. Older than the office. It links power to moral obligation. Not always truthfully, not always purely. But symbolically.
A Bible on the stand signals humility. It claims there is something higher than government. That the oath is not just legal—it is moral.
For some, it is faith. For others, it is theater. But either way, the Bible carries cultural authority. It makes the ceremony feel sacred, even when the people in it are flawed.
It also speaks to the public. Presidents know the cameras are on. The image matters. A hand on the Bible sends a message—calculated or sincere.
The Bible does not enforce virtue. It does not guarantee truth. But it holds a place in the American imagination. It has become part of the ritual, even when the soul behind the hand is unknown.
When presidents hold that book, they do not just promise to obey the law. They promise, at least in theory, to serve with conscience.
Bible: President should take an example and not to promote myths
A president should not swear on a book of ancient myths. He should not reduce public duty to religious theater. The office is real. The power is real. The Bible is not.
Religion has no place in a constitutional oath. It adds nothing but superstition. Swearing on scripture implies that truth needs divine backing. It does not. Reality stands on its own. So does law.
If the president values reason, he should act like it. He should place his hand on the Constitution, not on folklore. He should pledge loyalty to the republic, not to invisible gods. Anything less insults the intelligence of the public and undermines secular democracy.
A modern society deserves leaders who think critically. Who separate private belief from public duty. Promoting religious rituals in state functions gives authority to fiction. It legitimizes illusion. A serious president should rise above that. Not pander to it.
If you really want to swear on something, it should be an evolutionary biology textbook
As someone who went through the masterpiece only the brightest minds could produce, I can say this without hesitation: if the President wants to swear on something meaningful, it should be an evolutionary biology textbook. Unlike holy books, it does not pretend. It does not moralize through fear or sell fairy tales to frightened minds. It explains life as it is—messy, brutal, beautiful, and real.
Evolutionary biology is everything religion is not. It is evidence-based. It is precise. Every claim can be tested. Every chapter is built on generations of data, fossil records, DNA sequencing, and rigorous peer review. Nothing is accepted without proof. Nothing stays without challenge. Truth is earned, not declared.
The Bible, by contrast, rejects evidence. It denies natural history, it places humans at the center of the universe with no justification beyond myth. And it claims the Earth is young, that snakes talk, that women came from ribs. It punishes curiosity. It warns against knowledge and tells you not to ask too much—science demands you do.
If a president wants to represent progress, not ignorance, he should swear on Darwin. Or Mayr, or Dawkins. Or any page that survived the fire of scrutiny. Because the goal of science is not obedience—it is understanding. And nothing could honor the oath of reason more than placing a hand on the very book that explains how we came to be, and why truth matters more than comfort.
So, who is going to do it first?
Leave a Reply