[seanhunter]

This oath vs affirmation distinction is made clear in the UK for sure. For example when I became a British citizen I was given the option of swearing allegiance to the queen or making a "solemn affirmation" of the same. The only difference being a slight difference of wording. Weirdly I still remember the wording even though it was more than 30 years ago and I only heard it once just before I said it.

   > I, Sean Hunter, do hereby swear by Almighty God/solemnly affirm that I wil bear faithful and true allegiance to Her Majesty, Queen Elizabeth the second, her heirs and successors according to the law.

[skissane]

I became a British citizen too, and had to say the same thing. I honestly can't remember now if I swore or affirmed–I was just mumbling words because I wanted a piece of paper, which would enable me to acquire other pieces of paper, which would have allowed me to do things I never got around to actually doing. Indeed, maybe somewhat unusually, despite going to the effort of becoming a British citizen, I've never actually stepped foot in the UK (or Europe for that matter) – I said those words from the British Consulate in Sydney, Australia. Great view of Sydney Harbour in the background.

But it isn't just a British (or Commonwealth) thing, Americans have the exact same distinction, part of their British inheritance. Here's a quote from Article II, Section 1, of the US Constitution:

> Before he enter on the Execution of his Office, he shall take the following Oath or Affirmation:—"I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my Ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States."

[solarkraft]

> Indeed, maybe somewhat unusually, despite going to the effort of becoming a British citizen, I've never actually stepped foot in the UK

That sounds funny. Doesn't this give you more disadvantages than advantages? I'm surprised it's even possible; in other countries you have to have lived there for around 7 years or so until you get citizenship.

[skissane]

> Doesn't this give you more disadvantages than advantages?

No real disadvantages. Being a British citizen means I can live and work in the UK if I want. As I said, I’ve never been there-but you never know what the future holds.

Pre-Brexit, it let me live and work anywhere in the EU-not that I ever did that either. But I thought about it. My brother actually did it for a bit.

Maybe one day Scotland will become independent, and I’ll trade my British citizenship for Scottish, and then Scotland will rejoin the EU and I’ll get my EU citizenship back. A man can dream.

One drawback, is as a dual Australian citizen, the Australian constitution says I’m not allowed to run for (federal) Parliament. I doubt I’m ever going into politics, but if I was, I’d legally have to renounce my UK citizenship before nominating as a (federal) candidate. By contrast, the UK doesn’t bar dual citizens from Parliament-in fact, it even lets Australians vote, and run for Parliament-and I mean sole Australian citizens, who aren’t UK dual citizens.

> I'm surprised it's even possible; in other countries you have to have lived there for around 7 years or so until you get citizenship.

Due to the UK’s colonial/imperial history, its citizenship laws are insanely complex-arguably more complicated than any other nation on earth’s-full of all kinds of obscure complex exceptions-I’m one of those. You see, my mother was born in Scotland. My younger siblings, they inherited UK citizenship from her at birth. However, I was born when the old (pre-1983) law was still in force, which said legitimate children could only inherit British citizenship from their father (whereas, illegitimate children could only inherit it from their mother.) Since I was legitimate, and it was my mother not my father who was the UK citizen - no UK citizenship for me. Until, in my 20s, they changed the law so people in my situation could apply for citizenship by registration. Registration is legally equivalent to naturalisation - the ceremony is the same, the legal consequences are almost identical - the difference is, no residency requirements. So that’s how I got to go to my UK citizenship ceremony without ever having stepped foot in the UK in my life

[seanhunter]

   >  By contrast, the UK doesn’t bar dual citizens from Parliament-in fact, it even lets Australians vote, and run for Parliament-and I mean sole Australian citizens, who aren’t UK dual citizens.

In fact we have had a prime minister (Boris Johnson) who had been a dual UK/US citizen although he renounced it when he became foreign secretary[1] and one (Rishi Sunak) who had a US green card but didn't go on to get citizenship[2].

[1] https://money.cnn.com/2017/02/09/news/boris-johnson-us-citiz...

[2] https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-61044847

[eesmith]

"I, sovereign Lidia Thorpe, do solemnly and sincerely affirm and declare that I will be faithful and I bear true allegiance to the colonising Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth the second ..." https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HAJQ_K_CzCE

She was then required to follow the provided text. It's clear she didn't mean it.

Off-screen comment "None of us like it."

[altacc]

When I gained citizenship of a highly religious country I had to swear an oath with my hand on a cross, with silver Jesus attached. I asked if there was an atheist option and the the answer was basically "No, we have enough faith to know that God will punish you for lying."

[angelbar]

Great... no danger from being prosecuted for anything in that country... Jesus will take charge of that...

[altacc]

Well, it also happens to be an incredibly corrupt country with inadequate policing and government, so "let God deal with it" pretty much sums up the approach to everything.

[phonescreen_man]

And she’s buying a stairway to heaven…