Why the (Dis)Loyalty Oath is So Bad

As most people reading this know by now, the Republican Party of Virginia has decided to require voters in its February 12 primary to sign the following statement: “I, the undersigned, pledge that I intend to support the nominee of the Republican Party for President.” If you don’t sign, you don’t vote.

The problem with this oath is that it elevates party above freedom of conscience. Adult citizens of a republic have the responsibility to vote for the candidates whom they believe will best serve the just interests of the people of the nation as a whole and of their jurisdictions. There are some people who sincerely believe that those best candidates are invariably whomever the Republican Party nominates, no matter how pro-abortion, pro-tax, pro-regulation they may be. We can discuss the tenability of this position later.

The question here is why the (dis)loyalty oath is so bad. The answer to that question is that, by imposing this oath, the Party has made it impossible for some citizens to exercise their republican duty according to the dictates of conscience.

There are equally sincere people who cannot state an intention to support an undetermined candidate. Some are conservative republicans, like me, whose candidate of choice is running for the Republican nomination. Others are independents and maybe even conservative democrats for whom the same is true. But we can’t pledge intent to support some unknown nominee who might hold positions anathema to our principles.

Some will surely counter that the Party doesn’t want anybody who won’t sign a my-party-right-or-wrong statement. It’s obvious that such a position will turn many would-be republican voters off. But worse, it excludes people of principle from involvement.

The Party claims that it’s important to prevent partisan Democrats from meddling in a Republican primary. Yes, that’s a reasonable objective (though hardly a first principle). But as a defense for the oath, it smacks of gun-grabber logic: Democrats intent on fouling up the Republican nomination process will keep the pledge, just like criminals will obey gun laws.

Even the oath’s proponents agree that compliance can’t be guaranteed. In fact, the most disheartening aspect of this whole debate has been the emphasis on the unenforceable, even “figurative“, character of the oath.

But for people of principle, a pledge is not unenforceable and certainly not figurative. And the Party is zipping its big-tent flap to these people, people who believe that Truth matters, people who believe that signing a false statement of intent is an affront to God and to human dignity, people who believe that dismissing a pledge as “unenforceable” undermines virtue and individual accountability, people who believe in the things that the Republican Party should stand for.

Did you enjoy this post? Sign up for monthly recipes, coupon codes, travel tips, and more delivered straight to your in-box!

* indicates required

View previous updates.

You can unsubscribe at any time by clicking the link in the footer of our emails.

We use Mailchimp as our email service. That means that the information you provide will be transferred to Mailchimp for processing when you click the button below. Learn more about Mailchimp's privacy practices here.

5 thoughts on “Why the (Dis)Loyalty Oath is So Bad

  1. The RPV knows darn well that Democrat spoilers will lie and sign the “loyalty” oath!

    The only people the RPV is trying to stop are Ron Paul Republicans!

    It goes against conscience!
    It goes against principles Republicans say they stand for!
    It goes the Constitution!
    And it probably won’t hold up in court!

    If you think a pledge can keep out democrat and Independent spoilers, use this one:

    “I pledge to support the candidate I’m voting for in the primary, should he win the nomination.”

    This pledge also allows those who believe in their conscience, the Constitution, and the principles of the Republican party to vote!


  2. What the heck anonymous… don’t you WANT dems to convert and become Republicans?

    Aren’t you really saying, “The Republican party has finally succeeded in ridding itself of it’s most worrisome voters.

    [Ron Paul] Republicans.”

    Why don’t you say who you are or what you really mean?

  3. What’s the big deal about an oath? At the rate things are going the only ones who will turn out to vote in the Republican Primary will be Democrats anyway.

    The Republican party has finally succeeded in ridding itself of it’s most worrisome voters.


  4. I wonder if I could sign the pledge and add a caveat: “… unless the Republican nominee is Guiliani or McCain…”


    My head is getting very tired of banging on this brick wall!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.