Posted on 08/21/2005 8:42:43 AM PDT by Zrob
“I have absolutely no doubt that higher courts, if it gets there, will say that persons of Muslim faith can swear on a Koran rather than a Christian Bible, said Erwin Chemerinsky ...
(Excerpt) Read more at foxnews.com ...
http://www.americanthinker.com/articles.php?article_id=4693
Bye Bye, Judeo-Christian heritage if the ACLU and the "Religion of Pieces" (arm there, leg here, head on the floor, etc" gets to break up this tradition.
Do not change the original headline.
Interesting.
What does it matter? They're allowed to lie to an infidel court.
No swearing on the Bible in the Courts (MD, DC, VA) I practice in.
They, in fact can lie to the infidel with impunity. Why not let them swearon a Dell comic book? It'd have the same effect as the Koran.
Sadly most Americans ,like most of the rest of the world ,
seem to no longer trust nor believe in any higher power.The
solmn oath, the covenant agreement, the Christian morality
once the foundation for our schools and society have been
too long neglected If one continues a tradition and no one
bothers explain WHY (as with the Jewish Passover) then there will come a time when that traditionwill be cast off.
We have rejected the foundationand have chosen for our leaders men who do not rule in fear of G-d.We have turned from the G-d our founding fathers revered and from the
authority they cited more than any other .The divided house
removed form its foundation is beinb moved with every wind
that blows and is unsafe for all within.
Amen!
How does this matter? People lie all the time, even after swearing on the bible.
I have one word for you...
So, how can one SWEAR on a piece of toilet paper that REQUIRES IT'S BELIEVERS to LIE to Infidels?!?!
How about a new policy...if an Islamazi is on trial, or testifying...automatically arrest them for PERJURY!
I guess that means that X-42 Krintong was not only our "first Black President"...he was also the "First Islamazi President", because he NEVER SPOKE A WORD OF TRUTH IN HIS LIFE...ESPECIALLY in front of a Judge and Jury!
(Denny Crane: "Sometimes you can only look for answers from God and failing that... and Fox News".)
1) Swear on the Bible
2) Affirm you're telling the truth (no religious swearing).
3) Swear on any other religious book you'd like to bring in and have checked by security in advance.
No way should we spend money buying every alternative religious book on the planet. If the Court is in an area where there is a significant non-Christian population the courts may accomodate and accept and store another donated religious tome.
No way should this become a "diversity right" requiring local governmnets to spend lots of money, given the opt-out option of number 2) above.
What is the purpose of swearing on a Bible?
-Christians will be less inclined to tell a lie.
Does the Bible have any impact on an athiest
- No, the Athiest considers the bible a fairy tale, so to him it would be like swearing on a comic book.
If you were sworn in on a Hindu holy book, would this 'force' you to tell the truth?
- Probably not, for being (I am assuming here) a non-Hindu believer, telling a lie on their sacred text would trouble you no more than telling a lie.
Before the flame starts, I will assume that telling a lie is something you do not, would not, nor have ever done in the past. Simply illustrating a point here.
The whole purpose of "swearing in", is to 'force' the witness to tell the truth. Whether this is by using a profession of faith, or threat of prosecution for lieing in court (unless you are a Federal employee, this is illegal). So, if the person you are questioning is devout Buddhist, Jewish, Islamic or Christian; wouldn't the appropriate sacred text be common sense?
John F Kennedy said, "...rights of man come not from the generosity of the state but from the hand of God."
So, if you do not believe in God, than who gave you YOUR rights? And who can take back that which is given?
You had the same thought that I posted on the previous thread: "When then-President Clinton lied under oath in front of the whole country and Hillary (the smartest woman in America) "couldn't recall" anything, it sent a pretty clear message that blatant lying was acceptable (to them and theirs).
I don't think swearing on a Bible or anything else will ever have any meaning for congenital liars."
Somewhere in my dimming memories, I recall instances in American judicial history where courts used whatever book or item or whatever for a person to "swear to" or "affirm to" mostly as a visual confirmation that the person will tell the truth (a hint of eternal damnation didn't hurt either).
That way a witness couldn't say - like lawyers do now - that he didn't know he couldn't lie. Of course that was back when HONOR meant something.
You NEVER were required to swear on a Bible either - because if you were a devout Christian, it could be construed as "taking the name of the Lord in vain" - I refuse to swear on a Bible for secular causes for that reason.
A "So help me God" or "by Allah" or simply "On my Honor" are all equal in a court of law.
As our Bill of Rights states ...
Congress shall make NO LAW establishing ... or prohibiting ...
If a Muslim wishes to bring in his Koran, a Christian his Bible - I see nothing truly unconstitutional.
Where we hit the big slippery slope where govt secularism makes sense .... IF we insist or allow a Bible or a Koran, why then would we refuse a satanist the "Gran Grimoire" ?
So ... ???
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.