Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

CAIR Asks N.C. Judges to Allow Use of Quran In Oaths
US Newswire ^ | 6/22/2005 | Puppage

Posted on 06/22/2005 6:11:14 AM PDT by Puppage

WASHINGTON, June 21 /U.S. Newswire/ -- A prominent national Islamic civil rights and advocacy group today called on judges meeting this week in North Carolina to allow use of the Quran, Islam's revealed text, when administering oaths.

The Washington-based Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) said the current exclusive use of the Bible may be an inappropriate state endorsement of religion.

CAIR issued its call after Guilford County judges said they would not allow use of Qurans in their courtrooms. "An oath on the Quran is not a lawful oath under our law," said W. Douglas Albright, Guilford's senior resident Superior Court judge. State law only refers to swearing an oath by putting a hand on the "Holy Scriptures." Those who do not wish to take an oath using the Bible may instead make an "affirmation."

A preliminary opinion last week by North Carolina's Administrative Office of the Courts said that state law allows people to be sworn in using a Quran rather than a Bible.

"By stating that only one book qualifies as 'Holy Scriptures,' the court may be making an inappropriate endorsement of a single set of religious beliefs," said CAIR Legal Director Arsalan Iftikhar. "Eliminating the opportunity to swear an oath on one's own holy text may also have the effect of diminishing the credibility of that person's testimony."

Iftikhar said CAIR will offer a free copy of the Quran to any judge in North Carolina or throughout the United States for use in oaths or for personal awareness of the holy text.

CAIR, America's largest Muslim civil liberties group, has 31 offices and chapters nationwide and in Canada. Its mission is to enhance understanding of Islam, encourage dialogue, protect civil liberties, empower American Muslims, and build coalitions that promote justice and mutual understanding.


TOPICS: Miscellaneous
KEYWORDS:

1 posted on 06/22/2005 6:11:14 AM PDT by Puppage
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Puppage
CAIR Asks N.C. Judges to Allow Use of Quran In Oaths

Under penalty of what?

I'd rather go to jail, thankyouverymuch.

2 posted on 06/22/2005 6:15:32 AM PDT by Publius6961 (The most abundant things in the universe are ignorance, stupidity and hydrogen)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Puppage

That has about as much integrity as swearing in on a Where's Waldo book, only not as much fun.


3 posted on 06/22/2005 6:15:59 AM PDT by Zeppelin (Keep on FReepin' on.....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Puppage
The problem is not allowing Muslims to swear on the Koran.

The problem is that no matter what they swear on, their oath means nothing.

4 posted on 06/22/2005 6:17:55 AM PDT by Alouette (The only thing learned from history is that nobody ever learns from history.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Puppage
Allowing the use of the korn will set a bad precedent. Witches will demand evil spell books, Atheists will demand Time magazine, etc. etc.
5 posted on 06/22/2005 6:18:25 AM PDT by Patti_ORiley
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Puppage
CAIR, America's largest Muslim civil liberties group, has 31 offices and chapters nationwide and in Canada. Its mission is to enhance understanding of Islam, encourage dialogue, protect civil liberties, empower American Muslims, and build coalitions that promote justice and mutual understanding, disseminate hate speech, build schools for the training of killers, organize sleeper cells for act of mass murder, build arms depots... errr... ammo dumps... errrr mosques, collect funds to support mass murder world-wide.
6 posted on 06/22/2005 6:19:35 AM PDT by Publius6961 (The most abundant things in the universe are ignorance, stupidity and hydrogen)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Comment #7 Removed by Moderator

To: Alouette

The CAIR group is run by John ZOGBY's Brother !

He is a America HATER, and the ACLU loves him !!


8 posted on 06/22/2005 6:21:12 AM PDT by Zenith
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Puppage
It's optional, just like the Bible is. No big deal.

-Eric

9 posted on 06/22/2005 6:24:01 AM PDT by E Rocc (If God is watching us, we can at least try to be entertaining)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Puppage
"By stating that only one book qualifies as 'Holy Scriptures,' the court may be making an inappropriate endorsement of a single set of religious beliefs,"

Well, DUH!

"Christianity is part of the Common, or Natural Law.
Therefore it is Christianity that is the basis of our government.
Religion of any other type is not synonymous with the American experience of Liberty!"

Justice James Wilson, a signer of the Declaration, the Constitution, Original Justice on the U. S. Supreme Court, and the father of the first organized legal training in America.

How much longer are Americans going to allow the twisted 'separation of church and state' fallacy to destroy our country?

10 posted on 06/22/2005 6:32:44 AM PDT by MamaTexan (I am NOT a *legal entity* ......... Nor am I a 'person' as created by law!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Puppage
"By stating that only one book qualifies as 'Holy Scriptures,' the court may be making an inappropriate endorsement of a single set of religious beliefs," said CAIR Legal Director Arsalan Iftikhar. "Eliminating the opportunity to swear an oath on one's own holy text may also have the effect of diminishing the credibility of that person's testimony."

Umm...I'm pretty sure that CAIR's position is to fanatically endorse a single set of religious beliefs, while not recognizing the sanctity of anyone else's beliefs. They are hypocrites. And as far as diminishing the credibility of testimony, I don't grant credibility to any member of the proposed religion of peace no matter what they lay their filthy hands on. Screw them, screw their proposed religion of peace and flush the koran!
11 posted on 06/22/2005 6:42:37 AM PDT by FairfaxVA (SELECT * FROM liberals WHERE clue > 0. Zero rows returned!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Puppage

Pure bullshit.


12 posted on 06/22/2005 6:47:14 AM PDT by Unicorn (Too many wimps around.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Unicorn

would that mean they can lie if they are promoting the work of the faithful as the Koran endorses?


13 posted on 06/22/2005 6:52:19 AM PDT by zek157
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Puppage

This is absolute crap..

Why?

Simple...

Islam is supposed to follow up on Christianity... the Bible new and old is accepted as holy word of God as well.

So no Muslim should have any problem swearing an oath on the Bible.

The problem with the Kuran is that it openly says LYING and CHEATING are perfectly fine as long as it furthers the aims of Islam.... The Bible does not.

To swear to tell the truth on the Quran is meaningless.


14 posted on 06/22/2005 6:54:22 AM PDT by HamiltonJay
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Puppage

Swearing on a Bible was supposed to increase pressure on the witness to tell the truth, because of their fear of God should they violate an oath taken on the Bible.

My opinion is that this is a non-christian concept. We are not to swear on anything, but simply to let our yea be yea and our nea be nea.

But in any case, surely having a non-christian swear on a bible serves no useful purpose. They don't respect the bible or the religion, why would they care? Even the "so help me God" would mean nothing to an Atheist.

The problem is, if a muslim WANTS to swear on a Quran, they should be able to do so. It would mean as much as an average christian swearing on a bible. It's just symbolic, and the symbol should have some meaning.

From the state perspective, we should find out for each witness what it is that they value most, and have them swear on it -- if we really want it to be meaningful. Of course, we couldn't do that.

Last thought -- is swearing on a Quran acceptable to muslims? Or is it a sacrilige? We certainly would have to take great care -- if a non-muslim chose to swear on a Quran, and put his hand on it, that would be "desecration" and maybe some terrorists might try to kill us. (HEAVY SARCASM ALERT, LIKE TERRORISTS NEED A REASON).


15 posted on 06/22/2005 6:56:02 AM PDT by CharlesWayneCT
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: zek157

I don't think they need an excuse to lie,comes easy to them.


16 posted on 06/22/2005 7:12:33 AM PDT by Unicorn (Too many wimps around.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Puppage

Yeah, lets let more muslims immigrate here. We gotta be nuckin futs.


17 posted on 06/22/2005 7:20:55 AM PDT by skeeter ("What's to talk about? It's illegal." S Bono)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: CharlesWayneCT
Swearing on a Bible was supposed to increase pressure on the witness to tell the truth, because of their fear of God should they violate an oath taken on the Bible.

My opinion is that this is a non-christian concept. We are not to swear on anything, but simply to let our yea be yea and our nea be nea.

It has also been recognized since the beginning of this Republic that certain Christian sects (and also, Orthodox Jews) do not swear oaths of any kind, therefore the "affirmation" option was included. It was called the "Quaker oath."

I think that we should do away with "swearing in" altogether, and in cases of court testimony read the witness a disclaimer warning that lying on the witness stand will result in criminal procsecution for perjury.

18 posted on 06/22/2005 7:59:46 AM PDT by Alouette (The only thing learned from history is that nobody ever learns from history.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Alouette
The problem is that no matter what they swear on, their oath means nothing.

Exactly !

As long as the practice of Al-Taqiyah is a standard component of their ideology nothing they state can be considered reliable.

19 posted on 06/22/2005 8:11:00 AM PDT by Freebird Forever (Imagine if islam controlled the internet.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Alouette

That is the whole thing in a nutshell!


20 posted on 06/22/2005 10:37:28 AM PDT by sheik yerbouty
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson