2006-12-28 03:48:35 · 17 answers · asked by mia 1 in Politics & Government ➔ Law & Ethics
Separation of church and state. Get rid of the bible.
2006-12-28 03:52:24 · answer #1 · answered by ebush73 5 · 2⤊ 0⤋
No. There is no requirement to swear on the Bible in Federal and most state courts. There is a requirement to swear to the truth the whole truth, and nothing but the truth and the consequences of breaking this oath is prosecution for perjury or contempt of court. Swearing on the Bible would be meaningless for an atheist. Some Religions including Islam and some Christian denominations forbid swearing on the Bible. Forcing such a person to disobey their religion is a violation of the First Amendment.
2006-12-28 12:08:12 · answer #2 · answered by wyldfyr 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
No. The very first phrase of the very First Amendment guarantees Freedom of Religion for every American, including atheists.
The Bible has no meaning or value to an atheist, beyond that of any other book of fiction. Asking an atheist to swear on the Bible would be like asking a Christian to swear on a copy of "The Cat in the Hat".
Atheists can tell the truth without putting their hands on a book. Incidentally, Christians don't have to swear on a Bible, either, if they can be trusted to tell the truth without it.
2006-12-30 04:30:17 · answer #3 · answered by gelfling 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
it depends on the jurisdiction.
in all candor, the bible is simply a prop in a ritualisitc ceremony. the language of the swearing in is irrelevant. all that needs to be confirmed is that the witness recognize that he/she has a legal duty to testify truthfully, and that there is a penalty for failing to do so.
the prop was chosen because christianity and its scipture used to be important to people who live in cultures created or influenced by anglo-american jurisprudence. the english are an officially christian people, so it makes sense for them to employ the bible for this purpose. since american courts are based on english legal traditions, and their rituals pre-date the adoption of the constitution, the ritual was already in place before the arguments for separation of church and state were ever posited.
for an ignorant witness, swearing on a bible creates a sense of almost animistic religous significance. for the faithful, it could imply punishment from God for swearing before Him falsely, but even a pagan might consider it "unlucky" to swear falsely before a foreign god.
what might be a better question: "how are witnesses sworn in to testify in the courts of India?". India acquired much of the machinery of british government as a result of the Raj. including courts of law. did they get a bible swearing tradition along with that? or do they swear on the upanishads, or the vedas? i really wonder.
2006-12-28 12:06:14 · answer #4 · answered by Paul S 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Good Question! I have no idea but I'll take a stab at it and say that the religious types believe the following:
a) that no one could possibly tell the truth on their own without divine supervision
b) everyone should believe in the christian god and by pushing it in everyone's face on a daily basis will hopefully provide converts. "Cause if you ain't Kuhrishtyun, you ain't nothin!" Especially here in the south.
c) like the blue laws, and before people recognized that not everyone has the same beliefs, it's just done that way because it would be too time consuming to change it and that's the way it's been forever.
2006-12-28 11:55:52 · answer #5 · answered by Lilith 4 · 1⤊ 2⤋
They still put you under oath and make you swear to tell the truth, etc. but I dont think they use a Bible anymore, because of the separation of church and state.
2006-12-28 11:57:43 · answer #6 · answered by kyeann 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Do you know how many "Christians" are in jail / prison ? Alot ! In most areas swearing on the bible is out-dated and no longer used.
2006-12-28 12:01:40 · answer #7 · answered by Kaori 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
No, you can 'affirm' that what you say will be the truth. It's about time they threw the bible out of court - people really don't take that seriously anymore.
2006-12-28 11:51:25 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
We know why not.
----
Samuel Adams:”The liberties of our country, the freedom of our civil Constitution, are worth defending at all hazards; and it is our duty to defend them against all attacksWe have received them as a fair inheritance from our worthy ancestors: they purchased them for us with toil and danger and expense of treasure and blood,and transmitted them to us with care and diligence. It will bring an everlasting mark of infamy on the present generation, enlightened as it is, if we should suffer them to be wrested from us by violence without a struggle, or to be cheated out of them by the artifices of false and designing men.”.
2006-12-28 12:05:52 · answer #9 · answered by QuiteNewHere 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Democratic people allow atheists to 'solemnly affirm'.
2006-12-31 03:36:28 · answer #10 · answered by Spiritualseeker 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋