and in it was about the Oath of Allegiance and how it is going to be changed. I read both the current and the proposed version and I say to myself, "What the hell is the difference?"Here is the current:
The new oneI hereby declare, on oath, that I absolutely and entirely renounce and abjure all allegiance and fidelity to any foreign prince, potentate, state, or sovereignty, of whom or which I have heretofore been a subject or a citizen; that I will support and defend the Constitution and laws of the United States of America against all enemies foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I will bear arms on behalf of the United States when required by law; that I will perform noncombatant service in the Armed Forces of the United States when required by law; that I will perform work of national importance under civilian direction when required by law; and that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; so help me God.
The only difference I see here is that it doesn't mention the second amendment.Solemnly, freely, and without any mental reservation, I hereby renounce under oath all allegiance to any foreign state. My fidelity and allegiance from this day forward is to the United States of America. I pledge to support, honor, and be loyal to the United States, its Constitution and laws. Where and if lawfully required, I further commit myself to defend the Constitution and laws of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic, either by military, noncombatant, or civilian service. This I do solemnly swear, so help me God.
They're arguement about keeping the original is that it will somehow weaken the will of the immigrants to uphold the laws and Constitution which shit sounds like every single person wanting citizenship a criminal!
This is sooo brain hurting.....
Cyaround,
Jason
