People lie under oath. It's considered purgery. People put their hand on the Bible (I imagine the New Testament) and swear to tell the truth, the whole truth etc. etc.

Two questions.

#1- If the person swearing is a non-Christian, and the Bible doesn't mean anything to them, what duty do they have to tell the truth?

#2- Why is it that lawyers aren't sworn to tell the truth and nothing but the truth? (Other than the fact their job is to bend and contort the truth for money).

One would think the jury should honor justice itself. Not find in favor of the slicker of the two snake oil salesmen.

Thoughts?

You do have a valid point. If the bible means nothing to the person, how can you trust them to swear upon it?

I also wonder though how they can take the 10 commandments off the courthouses because of separation of church and state but yet they still use a bible. It seems a little hypocritical. I'm sure the bible will be next to go. There are too many people with too much time on their hands that just want to find something to bitch about. Don't forget, there were some people who wanted to change our money too.

"Why is it that lawyers aren't sworn to tell the truth and nothing but the truth?"

I'm sure there is some kind of oath or code of ethics that comes along with being a member of the bar.

Now to what extent some of them follow it....

============================================

No 10 Commandments but still swear on the Bible...

Yeah, that doesn't make much sense to me either. I don't think either should be in the court. And I think you can opt to not use the Bible to be placed under oath. Also, for those who follow the NT more literally, I have heard that some courts ask "Do you hearby swear OR AFFIRM that the testimony you are about to give...." so the more literal interpreters don't violate their interpretation of not swearing.."let your yes be yes and your no be no."

As far as people "bitching" about taking out the Bible/10 Commandments/etc. I have a very strict separation of Church and State mindset. I honestly fail to see how infusion of expressed religious faith in our public institutions is not a violation of 1st Amd.

But that's just me. I "bitch" more about how both sides try to argue their points more than their actual points. Flaming idiots and crybabies at both ends of the political rainbow.

I am mason, and when we take our oaths (you know those ones you read about), you swear upon your own book of faith. A muslim mason would swear upon the Koran, etc.

Makes sense doesn't it?

Last month the N. Carolina chapter of the ACLU filed a lawsuit to allow the Quran, the Bhagavad-Gita, and the King James Version of the Old Testament to be used in addition to the New Testament that is currently used.

N. Carolina, along with most other states doesn't "require" the use of a Bible, but rather gives the person a choice of to testify in court to take their oath either by laying a hand over a "Holy Scripture," by saying "so help me God" without the use of a religious book, or by using no religious symbols at all. When I testified in Colorado once, I used no symbolism at all and simply stated "I affirm."

Given that the books state that the item used can be a "Holy Scripture," it seems fitting that folks could use just about any book they wanted as long as it was a recognized holy book. N. Carolina has so far rejected people's of other faiths to use any other book than the New Testament (going against the rules, since the law says "Holy Scripture," not "New Testament."

Any opinion on this? Quite personally, a Muslim swearing in on a New Testament makes about as much sense to me as a Baptist Minister swearing in on a copy of Hustler.

I agree with tolerance of religious differences.

"Baptist Minister swearing in on a copy of Hustler."

I know ya'll won't believe me...but I'm a licensed Baptist minister. That was a direction long since abandoned...but I'm still official.

Of course, if the particular church that licensed me knew I believed that many Hustler readers were more honest with themselves than many of the people that licensed me...they'd revoke it.

carefull Andy, you'll be labeled a liberal commie pinko for that......

I'm not too worried about labels Adroomi.

I think that the issue to be discussed here is how and when the New Testament found it's way into the courtroom as the "exclusive" book of scripture to begin with. It goes back to the argument regarding whether the USA was founded as a "Christian Nation" or a nation whose government is based on Christian teachings.

Thats a good subject, but I am sleepy now.

Billyjackson, are you sure about the "Affirm" thing. I was told once it was for those offended by the idea of swearing on a bible because they didn't want to have anything to do with it not because they took it too seriously. I don't know from whom I heard this and it is probably wrong but I'd like to know the actual reason for it for sure. Thanks, Rug (not his wife).

Ps I agree with using the book of the person’s faith like the masons or maybe the constitution etc?

God Has Final Judgement!!

Hog

VERY VERY nice to hear from you hog.

rug...you might be right...we both might be

Billy, who knows?

I've always wondered what would happen if when they give you the oath about telling the truth...etc, etc..and you answered " NO "...what would they do ?

At least your being honest about not telling the truth...

TANK

I just finished jury duty and the witness' never put their hand on any bible? The court clerk would just have them raise their right hand and she said her lines and "I do" was all that was needed. The clerk just read the lines and didn't have a bible in her hand or around her. This is California so is it different?

Why can't lawyers go to the beach?

The cats keep burying them

If I swear on the bible, then I am going to tell the truth!!

Well, that is... unless lying would keep my stupid ass out of prison.

Jesus died for my sins, right? I'll just ask him for forgiveness later.

Yes, I was being facetious.

It would appear that you have no idea how our courts work and/or what attorneys do for a living... as confirmed by misinformed statements like "Other than the fact their job is to bend and contort the truth for money". Funny how everyone hates attorneys until they get end up in court.

Hey Buckwheat -

I have friends that are lawyers. I'll admit that here because no one knows me. lol. They love attny jokes and make similar statements about distorting truth etc.

And about a decade ago I had the misfortune of needing a lawyer. I'm sure glad I had him becaue my ex's attny was a scumbag that lied and distorted the truth for money. Mine wasn't much better, but he was on my side.

As for the original thought of the post, the swear on the bible thing is peculiar in todays political climate.