I think part of our problem may be that we are being deceived by the English language.
The plural of oath should not be oaths.
- 1 oath produces devotion.
- 2 oaths create division.
- 3 oaths foster delusion.
A dutiful person faced with conflicting oaths can only see damnation.
A creative person presented with conflicting oaths can find unlimited opportunities for justification.
Good analysts are almost infinitely creative. When Snowden was presented with a conflict between his oath to defend the Constitution and his oath to protect government secrets, he found a new path of duty and loyalty.
This conflict exists for hundreds of thousands of people. I would not expect secrecy to be the universal outcome.
So, our path forward should include a new declension for oath:
- I took a single oath.
- She uttered two divisions.
- He swore multiple delusions :^)
