Atheists as members?

[Drolefille]

Originally Posted by Liberal_South

Back in the day it was enough to swear upon your sacred honor, however, nowadays honor doesn't mean anything. When was the last duel you heard about due to an infringement upon someone's honor? It was the same thing with God and oaths. Now neither mean anything, with proof coming from the fact that atheists are allowed to make oaths.

You're still not making sense. The vast majority of oaths taken do not involve God. Are you saying that even if they Don't involve God, a Christian's oath is better than an atheist's?

What about a Muslim's word? Or a Buddhist's, or a Hindu's, or a Wiccan's?

What about a Jew's.

Does it have to be swearing by YOUR God?

[Tom Earp]

Originally Posted by Drolefille

You're still not making sense. The vast majority of oaths taken do not involve God. Are you saying that even if they Don't involve God, a Christian's oath is better than an atheist's?

What about a Muslim's word? Or a Buddhist's, or a Hindu's, or a Wiccan's?

What about a Jew's.

Does it have to be swearing by YOUR God?

Very good point.

So, the thing is if a possible new member knows what may be in store as far as swearing to some one or something and do not feel comfortable then why even think about joining?

I am curious, what does and Atheist beleive in?

So is it not also true that people are invited to become members? It is not just a right to join. GLOs are selective groups of people anyway.