What do you lot think of this. Say in a murder or rape case both parties have to swear an oath on the bible. Now everyone knows for sure at least one is lying, so thats disrespectful. Everyone does it regardless of belief or disrespect.
Do you think the oath should be abolished, whats your opinion on it?
2006-08-16 06:53:50 · 32 answers · asked by becky_ms 4 in Society & Culture ➔ Other - Society & Culture
One i'm English, many of you think Im american, well assume.
Also, I went to court about 7months ago in england, as a witness I may add, and had to swear on the bible.
I am not sure if I could just swear an oath of truth or whatever, but although I did tell the truth my oath meant nothing as I am not religious.
2006-08-16 09:25:03 · update #1
I reckon that the person who laid their hand on the bible and is later found to of lied should take the copy to jail with them and study it. Then only until they can answer 100 random questions correctly about it's content can they be released.
2006-08-16 07:02:51 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
Yes unfortunately it now means very little. There used to be a time where people genuinely felt that there afterlife was important and compromising it by lying under oath not worthwhile.
Unfortunately morals have gone out of the window and greed is so ingrained that it consumes people's sense of right and wrong.
I honestly do not know how judges are able to distinguish between the lies and conceit.
On the other hand, I do not think that it should be abolished because it is disresepectful, it should be abolished because it means very little and is superfluous.
They should use lie detector tests instead. I am sure it is more difficult to fool the lie detector then lie under oath.
2006-08-16 07:02:42 · answer #2 · answered by jimbomediterraneo 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Of course you should have to take an oath. Of course you should have to swear you are telling the truth. Maybe it doesn't mean much to people to lie after taking an oath, but it probably does at least a LITTLE more than NOT taking an oath, so why not?
2006-08-16 07:04:34 · answer #3 · answered by Milana P 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
British Courts do have an oath that you can use instead of the bible, its a non religious oath, which ever you use just make sure you are telling the truth as you can go to prison for perjury.
2006-08-16 09:42:54 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
I attend court regularly as part of my job. The bible is provided along with other religious texts such as the Quran. However, if you are not religious you do not have to swear on the bible. You will instead read an "affirmation" that states what they are about to say is the whole truth etc.
However, you make a valid point that it doesn't make much difference but if it makes the difference in one case then that's something I suppose
2006-08-16 07:03:15 · answer #5 · answered by eggy74uk 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I think swearing on the Bible is wrong because it goes against the separation of church and state.
I think you should swear an oath of truthfulness because otherwise, you couldn't be found in contempt for lying and there would be no punishment for lying in court. I just don't think it should involve religion.
2006-08-16 06:59:34 · answer #6 · answered by Elaura 3 · 3⤊ 0⤋
Both Canada and the US were founded on Christian principles and both have a large base of Christian adherents. Swearing on the bible may not work for everyone, but pretty much anyone with a conscience is going to tell the truth.
2006-08-16 06:59:16 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
In the UK you have the choice of oaths. If you are religous you may swear on the bible if not you have an non-religous one where you simply swear to tell the truth.
2006-08-17 07:23:18 · answer #8 · answered by bob kerr 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
No they should not abolish it... they take an oath with the hands in the bible to remind them of their responsibility of telling the truth to give right justice. Why Bible? America and other country believes in God (just look at your dollar bill, " in got we trust")... and in the bible written 10 commandments.. thou shall not give false witness againts each other ( thou shall not lie). Placing their hands in the bible is a symbol and a reminder or thier covenant. And if we will abolish it.. It will not be attach to our morality anymore.
2006-08-16 07:07:10 · answer #9 · answered by curious 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I have never been in a courtroom where they swore on The Bible. But have not been in that many. I am on jury duty right now and our court dose not use a Bible. Just stand and swear to tell the truth.
I am of The Christian Faith and I am one to say The Bible should not be use in that way. I agree with your point
2006-08-16 07:00:45 · answer #10 · answered by IdahoMike 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I don't think the Oath itself should be abolished, but with the still-active practice of "Seperation of Church and State," that the Bible should be banned from courtrooms and another form of a vow of truth should be initiated.
2006-08-16 07:47:33 · answer #11 · answered by Jylsamynne 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋