Separation of Church and State refers to the first amendment of the constitution which reads "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof..."

It does not mean that there can be no religion in government, only that there is no government established religion, and that the government cannot prohibit you from worshiping whatever religion you choose.

Hi there -- your submission is fine here, but I wanted to drop in a note to let people know that, as always, we do not allow discussion of modern politics on this subreddit. Thanks!

As /u/GaiaGuy already said, separation of church and state does not mean that public officials must pretend to be atheists.

To give you a little perspective: In Germany, a new Federal Chancellor will usually say “So help me God.” (“So wahr mir Gott helf’.”) at the end of his/her oath. So the American Presidents are in good company.

Going further, public holidays in Germany are usually official Christian holidays and named as such. The government officially deducts a special Church tax from Christians together with the person’s income tax, which is then given to the respective Churches (the Catholic Church of Germany or the Evangelic Church of Germany being the two largest ones). Religious education is a completely normal part of the curriculum at public schools in most German states. Usually the classes are separated into a Catholic class and a Protestant class. On Sundays German shops are generally closed, the exceptions being gas stations, special pharmacies and of course the transportation and tourism industries.

And Germany is a secular country and Germans believe that they are doing things right. No governmental body derives its authority from religious arguments. No citizen is “forced” to adhere to a certain religion. No one religion is considered the “official” religion of Germany. And most importantly in the German context, neither Protestantism nor Catholicism is “favored”. Still, many of these institutions would be unthinkable in the United States, because the perception of religious freedom and secularism varies. And France, the UK, … have interpretations of their own.

Coming back to the inauguration of American Presidents: The Bible is only ancillary. 20 years ago Bill Clinton was not made President because he swore on a Bible, but because the American people elected other people who elected him (exactly the same holds true for German Chancellors). Had he skipped that step, then his inauguration would be just as valid. The reason he and almost all other Presidents decided to do so has historic reasons and reasons of public expectations. By making a religious oath it is assumed that the person stakes his/her immortal soul, knowing there will be final judgment by an all-knowing creator who abhors lies. The hope is that such an oath will result in higher fidelity.