As if they actually cared about such matters. It would have only been just another excuse to stoke moral panic and outrage as red meat for their rabid base.
It’s exactly the sort of cynicism that, by design and intent, leads to apathy and fascism
Not half, but a veeeery loud quarter of it
Sadly I think it would have been more than half. Personally I’d like less of the Bible in any of our swear ins, but Orange Hitler not doing it just keeps the process rolling forward.
The person can choose what they swear on. He chose the bible, then failed to use it.
What happened?
Can you not read?
Maybe for a meme it has too many words
Trump broke with tradition and didn’t put his hand on the Bible during his inauguration.
One might expect to hear conservative Christians squawking about it, but they have been notably quiet.
Well you’re conveniently forgetting that Obama had the fucking audacity to
eat dijon mustardwear a tan suitbe black.What a dick move of him!
And tan suit which is an anagram for satanic (well, almost…)
satunit
Suitanic
He actually did take the oath without putting his hand on a bible and they did try to make a big deal about it.
John Roberts messed up the oath during the inauguration and they had to redo it later.
During the do-over there was no bible: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_inauguration_of_Barack_Obama
Big Antichrist vibes. Would it have burned his hand? I guess will never know.
I think we can safely assume it would have. Why else wouldn’t he want to touch Jesus Book?
He already did during his last term.
But he held it upside down, maybe that has some theological implications.
I think you might be on to something
He held something upside down, nobody really knows what it actually was.
You guys are overthinking it. Hand to small and weak to put on bible.
or bible too big, make hand look even smaller.
Did the orange turd or someone else do that?
Orange turd.
Whoever succeeds trump, (assuming that happens, and it’s not Vance), should do the same thing, so we can maybe get rid of that dumbass tradition.
“we separate church and state” Church throwing bibles at every god damn state and court event and making people swear on them.
This is just the childish act of crossing your fingers when you make a promise. He didn’t put his hand on the Bible because he isn’t planning on presiding faithfully, and he has absolutely no intention whatsoever to preserve, protect or defend the Constitution of the United States unless it benefits him personally at the time.
It is absolutely not a requirement to swear an oath on a bible, or even to have a bible nearby.
It just happens to be a longstanding custom in the USA. Many politicians take the oath on a bible just for the optics. DT, of all people, is all about optics. Dude probably wasn’t paying any attention, and surely winging his swearing given the last minute changes.
In any case, shouldn’t everyone be applauding a president for refusing to touch a bible, tacitly denouncing religious contexts near government?
Bible is surely a disgrace and pathetic.
It’s understandable and I agree that no President should ever lay hands on that comic.
I do believe 100% that Trump would’ve easily laid his hand on the book Mein Kempf.
Except when Trump was asked what his favorite book of all time was, can you guess what he answered?
That’s right. He said The Bible was his favorite book. You do understand the difference between actually believing in something, or just being a hypocrite and a con-man, right?
It’s not about whether it’s a requirement or not. It’s about a con artist revealing the con, and watching people like you handwave it away.
Some odd books people have been sworn in on:
Oh, The Places You Will Go - Dr. Seuss
The Autobiography of Malcom X
A Superman Comic
Ugh, now you’re going to make me look up who swore in under Dr. Seuss.
Well, who was it?
Edit: https://abcnews.go.com/US/missouri-councilwoman-dr-seuss-book-sworn-office/story?id=65096396
We were duped, it wasn’t a president. Still cool though. Thanks for the link, you posted it twice if you don’t know by the by
In any case, shouldn’t everyone be applauding a president for refusing to touch a bible, tacitly denouncing religious contexts near government?
Not if it’s someone that got elected based on their support for the union of church and state. Now if someone like AOC got elected president and didn’t swear on the bible, that would mean something
AOC should have sworn in on a union contract. Maybe then she wouldn’t have voted to protect the rail corporation from a union strike.
Yeah it is just a custom. But the point still stands.
Yeah aside from the whole using the Jesus vote to win thing.
I thought he won because the handling of the day to day economics of the average citizen was in shambles, but yeah, clearly magic sky man holds more weight
What are you even saying?
He very definitely panders to the religious right, saying otherwise is absurd.
And where are egg prices after he said he’d have them lowered day one?
He literally sells bibles.
He was probably afraid of getting struck by divine lightning or something like that if he touched a Bible while uttering the words with no intentions to follow them.
Is it possible he actually thinks he would go to hell if he did?
The part that blows me away is that he is so forgetful he missed an easy marketing ploy. Dude endorsed a Bible and didn’t call them up, ask for a % proceed and bring his own Bible to the inauguration, then put advertisements up for “Get your own copy of the God Bless the USA Bible, the official Bible Trump swore into office on”
He did that? I never liked Trump that much. He’s the better option by far but I don’t like aspects of his personality. Mostly I don’t think he’s a great Christian, some of his doctrines are iffy and he’s not as pro-life as I’d like. But I mean at least he made it federal law that biology exists. So it’s not as bad as it could be.
„Made it federal law that biology exists“ is such a gross, yet ironic misrepresentation of the actual matter it’s actually funny
Um, the sheer irony of even the “biology exists” part of what you said is that any biologist will tell you how factually incorrect his law is.
Lmao I’ve been told that “at least it’s a more coherent and accurate description of gender than the last administration had”
And like, no, it’s inaccurate and incoherent. How do you define “the sex that produces the large reproductive cell” if someone never produced that cell? Are infertile people sexless, or is there some other sex characteristic that’s more reliable than gamete production? If there is, why not use that as a metric instead?
I don’t know it’s almost like there’s DNA that’s like 99% of the time just two chronosomes, maybe they look a bit like letters, and one is usually an X and the other is a 50/50 on being a second X or missing a leg so it looks like a Y. And the shape of that second one might correspond to what size gametes would then be produced if there isn’t some issue with gamete production. That might be reality. Or maybe I don’t know maybe there’s like set souls and they each can have one of a million billion genders, and when you die and get reincarnated maybe the tooth fairy puts you in the wrong body for your gender sometimes so we need plastic surgery to fix that mistake to make you look like the demi-eagle-pomaranian-10-year-old-girl you truly are inside, or you literally can’t live at all. Which somehow wasn’t a problem before we had plastic surgery. But probably not that second one.
You could have just said “chromosomes.” Good job, you think some men can get pregnant. Of course, you probably think Swyer syndrome is an exception to your rule that XY=male and XX=female, which throws a bit of a wrench in the idea that sex can be defined by something like gamete production or chromosomes. These people exist and have to get driver’s licenses and shit, it’s not like you can just pretend they’re an outlier so they don’t matter. Should their sex be determined by chromosomes, or the gametes they have? Or is there perhaps a third, more useful method of determining whether to call them men or women?
…maybe we could just ask them?
It’s almost like it’s an insanely complicated subject that requires more than a grade school education to understand and more than one sentence to define
This is indeed a comment alright
Obama put his hand on the Constitution. Maybe this is a sarcastic meme? I don’t know
Or maybe you are just a liar??
When U.S. President Barack Obama took the oath of office Monday, he placed his hand on two Bibles.
The first was the Bible used by former President Abraham Lincoln, the 16th president of the United States, when he took the oath for his first term in 1861. The second Bible was the so-called “traveling Bible” used by slain civil rights leader Martin Luther King, Junior.
