Does it really count in court when an atheist is sworn in under oath using a Bible?

Answer 1

The bible is only symbolic. You can swear an oath on anything, the point is not what you are swearing ON but rather WHAT you are swearing. You could swear and oath on Winnie the Pooh and if you lied on the stand it would still be perjury.

Answer 2

Great question, I'm fairly certain you can swear an oath in other ways other than using the bible but as I have no religious beliefs I think would have to raise the point at the time not solely for my own conscience but also I would think that anybody judging my answers would therefore believe I would be telling the truth as I had been honest enough to state the fact.
However how could anybody still know if i was lying or not as I'm sure plenty of people, do even though they have taken the oath on the bible. The only way I can see to try to ensure people tell the truth under any form of oath is to hand out very harsh penalties for those found to be committing perjury.

Answer 3

I found this on another web site, hope it helps

When a witness refuses to swear to God, the court accepts an "affirmation" instead. In a jury trial, the smart lawyer will arrange for this ahead of time in the judge's chambers, so the witness won't look unduly obstreperous or morally deficient in open court. The judge may then instruct the jury that the funny oath they are about to hear should be considered legally valid.

In U.S. District Court (to take the most widespread example), the standard oath is amended to: "You do affirm that all the testimony you are about to give in the case now before the court will be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth; this you do affirm under the pains and penalties of perjury?" After the witness replies, "You got it, Jack," or whatever godless heathens say in such situations, everyone sits back and pretends that the "pains and penalties of perjury" are every bit as intimidating as the wrath of a vengeful Almighty. It's not an ideal situation, if you want my opinion, but I suppose it's the best the judges can do under the circumstances.

Answer 4

I am an Athiest so i can try to answer your question.

I think it depends on the person.

Personally, if I were in court I would tell the truth to the best of my knowledge no matter what, taking an oath using the Bible would not change the outcome of whether I am telling the truth or not, as I would not lie in the first place.

But, if I were a dishonest person, and knew I was going to lie. I would not object to taking an oath on the bible and then lying in court.

I guess it is not only the Bible you are taking an oath to though. You are also asked to bow to the Crest of the Queen in court(UK), so as an athiest you are kinda taking an oath to the Queens court and judge/magistrate too. And the fact you can get a sentence for lying in court!

Dunno if this helps or has just made this one question turn into several!

Answer 5

YES, the oath is a mere formality and the bible is seldom used anymore. the oath sets up the legal sanctions for perjury so it does not matter what you swear on. people are not as God fearing as they were in days of yore. they are afraid of prison for perjury. The courts replace god now.
Actually i am glad you asked because the oath was originally used to replace the required torture of all defendants for a confession. Previously, no testimony was considered reliable enough for court unless it was taken by torture.
Somebody finally realized that real god-fearing people were more afraid of god than torture so they started using an oath to god instead. also the torture was unreliable because people would say almost anything to escape it so they would lie and you did not really get the truth anyway.

that is one big practical reason, apart for humane reasons and morality, that we should not allow torture of prisoners to get information. the information is unreliable. we are going back to the stupid dark ages when we resort to it.
whenever an innocent man is convicted using torture to get information, a guilty man goes free. also whenever we rely upon torture obtained information from guilty people, we falll prey to their plots. they could use this to give us false info that seems more reliable than if it was not obtained by torture. We also feed the resistance and make them stronger because we become the very thing we detest and are fighting against.
Soon USA is the storm troopers like in Star wars or in Nazi germany. if we invade cities full of innocent civilians and kill them trying to obstruct leaders we do not like, then we are the monsters too.
We do not really win anything unless we win using the right methods. We are not Genghis Khan and his raiders. They never had to stay there and rebuild. They destroyed and raped and pillaged and then went home with slaves and booty. that makes sense at least. That is war at its best.
If it was not profitable to invade, they did not do it. makes you wonder who is profiting from our invasions. hmmmm
how are we different?

Answer 6

I think compelled oaths are foolish and no one should be forced to take them. There are plenty of instances where religious people have lied under oath and I'm sure that atheists are no more or less inclined to lie or tell the truth based on having to swear on a Bible. It depends on the character of the person to begin with which in my experience can be totally unrelated to religious beliefs. I know people who consider themselves religious and are awful people and atheists who are very decent people.

Answer 7

Legally, yes, though it would be a really great excuse. (kidding) It should count for societal reasons alone. One can be an atheist (or for that matter, anything but Christian) and still respect the government systems without putting any special significance in the Bible. Now if your atheist was also an anarchist and felt no compulsion to follow the rules of society....

Answer 8

It would not count but then a true atheist who holds no regard for the bible other than just a book uses a diffrent type of vow which relates more to there beliefs in them selves.Howvere when I did jury service only one person did it in 4 weeks

Answer 9

The last time I had jury duty they did not use the Bible. They had the witnesses raise their hands and say "Do you swear that you are telling the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth?" They did not add 'so help you God' and there were no Bibles present. Do they still do that in other courts?

Answer 10

Of course it does not. Neither does it for a believer either. If you decide not to swear by anything at all or do not want to make promises you can not keep, you will be prosecuted for contempt. Yet everybody lies their a**es off when in court, what does it amount to? If you got the money, you win. Might makes right so who cares what people swear or don`t ?