Posted on 02/20/2010 6:28:41 AM PST by Free Vulcan
It is a violation of the attorney’s civil rigths to demand him remove what is not to be touched! I was always taught that removing the ashes is akin to rejecting Christ.
Maybe in Ohio, but I’ve never seen it in NYC and I’ve been in more than a few courtrooms over the years. The only time I’ve seen it, and here I agree, was a friend who happens to be both an attorney and a Catholic priest had to appear in court in a business suit with no evidence of his clerical life. But that’s a different matter.
No court has ever held so. To some limited degree, attorneys willfully abandon some of their Constitutionally protected rights when acting as officers of the court. The attorney volunteers application for admittance to the bar, and to a courtroom, under the premise that the Court is the final arbiter of behavior (to include the dress code) in the courtroom.
If the Court deems certain religious adornments as prejudicial to defendant's or plaintiff's case, then it's prejudicial and must be removed. It's as simple as that.
It really depends on the judge, and the circumstances of the case that's being adjudicated. Some judges don't allow head covering of any kind in their courtrooms. As such, yarmulkes, Sikh turbans, hijabs and other religious or secular hats/scarves/coverings must be removed.
I've been in Federal Court when defense counsel has asked that the prosecution cover or remove a Crucifix she was wearing outside her blouse. The judge instructed it so. It happens with some frequency.
Ashes are a sign of repentence. They are not a sign of fasting. Logically there would be no point to getting the ashes as a reminder of repentence if someone immediately washes it off.
In NYC court proceedings are routinely recessed for the High Holydays if any of the participants,including jurors, are observant.While this is not a similar situation, it does demonstrate the system’s deference to religious practice.
I would guess that's a practical consideration for logistics alone. The concentration of Americans of Jewish faith in NYC is so great that it probably makes logistically & administratively impossibility to operate the court without all the administrative/security/courtroom employees who would be absent during Jewish high holidays.
But, as an example, while Sunday is the Christian sabbath and Saturday is the Jewish Sabbath, courts all across America - federal, state, local - are open for business on Friday, the day of the Muslim "sabbath" (or whatever it's called in Islam). A court won't adjourn on Fridays simply because plaintiff or defendant is Islamic.
Towards the prosecution or the defense?
Were all the jurors Catholics?
Or were they Calvinists who'd consider him to be an idiot for wearing ashes and hence might be swayed towards the defense?
The only way it wouldn’t be is if everyone in the court had ash on their foreheads.
Does everyone in the court wear the same color jacket? Does everyone in the court wear the same hairstyle? If a lawyer has long hair and a ponytail is that "prejudicial"? Should the judge tell him to get a haircut if he's the only one with long hair?
I say the American flag in the attorney's lapel is "prejudicial". Get rid of it.
If you need to ask that question, you didn't read the article.
The judge has the responsibility to ensure that the proceedings are fair and without unnecessary influence on the jury.
LOL Finally, you admit you said something stupid.
Do you really think you're not rude and condescending?
Well, I thought it was bad form for Biden to leave his very conspicuous ash mark on as he went about public duties.
We were always taught to remove it before going out in public as it could be thought of as an ostentatious display of piety which Jesus warned against.
Ashes are not a sign of righteousness, rather the opposite - penance and humility.
What did I say that was stupid? Don’t break your brain.
I am not a Roman Catholic.
I do not believe the RC Church represents true Christianity
you should do a lot more follow up on Catholocism....yes it does represent true Christianity, in fact it is the ONLY christian group that does......it alone was founded by Christ, on the apostles and has lasted for over 2,000 years...none other can even suggest making that claim.....none
Rude and stupid. Your post has nothing to do with the issue.
Discuss the issues all you want, but do not make it personal.
Maybe I read it a little better than you did.
The article carries nothing more than a one line statement that the defense attorney asked for the removal of the ashes because they could "influence" the jury. So we see that counsel believed that it could be detrimental to the defense. I see no evidence in the article to support this assertion.
You however, made the flat statement that the ashes were clearly "prejudicial".
So I repeat my question.
"Prejudicial" to whom and why?
It seems to me that the answer to this question depends on the religious composition of the jury. Do you know the religious affiliation of the jury members?
It's important, because as I mentioned in my first post, a jury carrying significant numbers of non-Catholics of certain persuasions could view the wearing of ashes as ridiculous and could be swayed towards the defense.
In short, the issue is not as clear as you attempt to portray it. I see nothing in the article to suggest that the ashes might be "prejudicial" either way.
Jesus does NOT tell those people in Matthew 6 to basically keep on doing what they've always been doing, only make sure their hearts are in the right place. Nowhere in Matthew 6 does he say anything close to that. I am wondering what is so hard to understand about this:
"...your Father who sees what is done in secret will reward you."
It should be quite obvious that He is not telling them to abandon public observances since He Himself took part in public observances.
What he is telling the disciples is that when they take it upon themselves to personally do things that are above and beyond the public observances that they should do those extras in secret - unlike the Pharisees who did their extra observances publicly.
Ash Wednesday is not a private exercise of personal devotion - it is a public observance of the universal Church.
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.