Convention, by way of explanation first
of all, the parentheses were inserted de-
liberately to give an option to the person
who is about to take the oath, the same as
in the balance of the recommendation, the
words "or affirm" are in parentheses, like-
wise to give the option to the person who
is being sworn.
Mr. Chairman, I want to apologize for
the lateness of my amendment, mostly be-
cause I was greatly surprised by the fact
that there was nothing else on our agenda
to cover this wording.
As just stated, the purpose of that
amendment is not to dictate to any person
whether or not he should take an oath to
Almighty God, but merely to give the op-
tion to that person, that designee or elected
official, to announce to the world whether
or not he believes in Almighty God and
wants to do so in the nature I might state
of a tiny little prayer before he is sworn.
Now, today, we started with a prayer.
The Supreme Court started with a prayer.
Many people in this room started their day
with a prayer. It is not unusual, so that
those persons who. want to do so will be in
a position to announce to the world in the
presence of Almighty God. It adds dignity.
It adds dignity not only to that ceremony
in the future but also to this document.
Now, I do not think it is important that
we worry about what the Supreme Court
might say about this situation, and I do
not think it is important that we worry
about the possible complaints from agnos-
tics who might want to complain. I am
sure there are many who could care less,
so that I do not think we should worry
about that.
It is possible, if you will look at Dele-
gate Proposal No. 1, the four or five pages,
it is very possible that the only place that
our dear Lord will be referred to in this
Constitution will be in these parentheses
marks.
I do not think that we should deny Him
completely in our Constitution.
There is plenty of religious history in
this State. We can start right with the
foundation of the State and the name of
the State, the name of the first capital of
this State, the fact that the first Catholic
diocese was founded in this State. We could
go on.
I would strongly suggest, Mr. Chairman,
and ladies and gentlemen of this Committee
and of this Convention that we not be |
afraid of being accused of wanting to allow
our officeholders to express a belief in God.
1 strongly suggest to you, sir, that this
would be a good thing.
THE CHAIRMAN: Is there any further
discussion?
(There was no response.)
Are you ready for the question?
DELEGATE BEALL: Yes.
THE CHAIRMAN: The question arises
on the adoption of Amendment No. 1 to
the Committee Recommendation GP-2.
A vote Aye is a vote in favor of Amend-
ment No. 1. A vote No is a vote against.
All those in favor, signify by saying
Aye; contrary, No. The Noes seem to have
it. The Chair will call for a roll call vote.
A vote Aye is a vote in favor of Amend-
ment No. 1. A vote No is a vote against.
Have all delegates voted? Does any dele-
gate desire to change his vote?
(There was no response.)
The Clerk will record the vote.
There being 68 votes in the affirmative
and 63 in the negative, the motion carries.
The amendment is adopted.
Are there any other amendments?
(There was no response.)
The question now arises on the adop-
tion of Committee Recommendation GP-2
as amended. Is there any further discus-
sion? Delegate Bard?
DELEGATE BARD: Mr. Chairman, is
it in order to ask for a clarification of an
earlier response?
THE CHAIRMAN: What response?
DELEGATE BARD: In respect to
whether this particular recommendation as
noted would affect those who hold local of-
fices discussed within the Constitution. I
do not think that response was as clear,
for me at any rate, as it might have been.
THE CHAIRMAN: I understood the
Chairman of the Committee to say that the
Committee believed that the oath applied
to every person elected or appointed to any
office under the Constitution or laws of
this State and would therefore apply to
statewide and to local offices. I will ask
the Chairman of the Committee whether
that was his statement. Delegate Boyer? |
