5 ms·
As Federal employees, the men and women who work at the NSA swear an oath which dates back to 1884: "I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and de
by nugget 13y ago
As Federal employees, the men and women who work at the NSA swear an oath which dates back to 1884:
"I 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."
Rather than instantly pass the buck about the scope, context and impact of their domestic surveillance work, perhaps the recruiters on this clip should re-read this oath and think about what it really means; what their responsibilities are to the citizens of the United States; and what kind of country they want their children and their children's children to live in.
- ajuc 13y agoEven atheists must do the part with God?
- mjn 13y agoAs far as I know, it may usually (always?) be omitted. Oddly enough, it didn't require a Supreme Court decision, because the precedent was set with the first such oath: the Judiciary Act of 1789 was the first to specify a legal oath ending with "so help me God", and it at the same time explicitly included an opt-out clause, after which that has been accepted practice. See Sec. 7 here: http://memory.loc.gov/cgi-bin/ampage?collId=llsl&fileName=001/llsl001.db&recNum=199 http://memory.loc.gov/cgi-bin/ampage?collId=llsl&fileName=00... The fact that this accommodates atheists, however, is a bit of a coincidence: such opt-out clauses were initially included because Quakers objected to swearing oaths to God.
- calebhc 13y ago"So help me God" should be omitted since it doesn't even make any coherent sense. Might as well say "So help me snorkleflurp". Edit: The reason I say that phrase doesn't make any sense is because "God" has so many inconsistent, incoherent definitions that it seems nonsensical to request help from it. No idea what "God" even is.
- colanderman 13y agoI'd be surprised if the three-letter agencies don't screen out atheists. They screen in Mormons [1]. [1] http://www.businessinsider.com/11-surprising-things-you-didnt-know-about-mormons-2011-6?op=1 http://www.businessinsider.com/11-surprising-things-you-didn...
- rhizome 13y agoThen again, "Business Insider," and a number-of-things article.
- colanderman 13y agoSorry, I just picked the first result on Google. I learned this tidbit from a previous posting on HN; apparently the CIA (or NSA?) recruits heavily from Brigham Young University.
- rhizome 13y agoAnd also not-so-Mormon RPI.
- pyre 13y agoIt was the CIA. There is the possibility that they trend towards Mormons due to some belief/statistic that they are more likely to respect authority, or unquestioningly follow orders. On the other hand, Mormons do a lot of missionary work where they learn the local language, in addition to customs, etc. This is also something extremely valuable to intelligence organizations.
- phaus 13y agoThere's a reserve/guard unit (can't remember which) in Utah that is comprised largely of Mormons who became linguists for the Army. Supposedly, it's the most talented and diverse group of linguists ever assembled, and they have people who speak languages that no other person in the Western world knows.
- 13y ago
- deleted 13y ago[deleted]
- charonn0 13y agoNo. The Constitution prohibits religious tests as a condition of office, and allows either an oath ("so help me god") or an affirmation[1] to be used. [1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Affirmation_in_law https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Affirmation_in_law
- phaus 13y agoWhen I joined the military, I was given the option to take the pledge without a reference to God. I suspect the same option is given to people in any government organization.
- gcb0 13y agobut try to say So help me [allah|budah|spagetti] to see what happens. no religion is for the soul. it's all about control.
- charonn0 13y agobut try to say So help me [allah|budah|spagetti] to see what happens. What would happen? (serious question)
- phaus 13y agoIn almost all cases, your religious preference would be respected, and no one would give a shit. Unless of course you actually did mention the Flying Spaghetti Monster, because this would be an obvious attempt to demean another person's religious beliefs. Yes, Christians are in the majority in the military, but they are also required by regulation and therefore law to treat everyone with respect. There are Muslims, Jews, Scientologists, Wiccans, Satanists, Atheists, Mormons, Mennonites, Taoists, Bhuddists, Harri Krishnas, Jedis, and many more in the United States military. I've even had a friend who claimed to observe traditional Norse beliefs. Every official event that I've been to has had some sort of Christian benediction, which is technically unethical, but at the same time, if it brings comfort to the overwhelming majority of my friends who may soon be risking their lives in combat, isn't it more damaging to attempt to deprive them of it?
- charonn0 13y agoUnless of course you actually did mention the Flying Spaghetti Monster, because this would be an obvious attempt to demean another person's religious beliefs. Do you hear the hypocrisy, the conceit? Who gets to decide which fairy tales are blasphemous? Whose moral outrage is justified when others dare to disagree with their religious beliefs?
- deleted 13y ago[deleted]
- Mordor 13y agoPerhaps they should all be fired.
- ekianjo 13y agoPerhaps they don't know what the Constitution means.
- sbank 13y agoPerhaps they should have to solemnly swear to read it as well.