If we have a Separation of church and state, the why do you put your hand on the bible in a court room before you testify??
2007-05-30 14:58:03 · 11 answers · asked by Anonymous in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
You dont... not anymore... as far as i know you simply hold up your right hand and swear to tell the thurh, the whole truth to the best of your knowlege
2007-05-30 15:06:19 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
Separation of church and state is an applied concept within the Constitution -
The separation of church and state is an important legal and political principle derived from the First Amendment to the United States Constitution, which reads, "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof . . . ." The phrase separation of church and state was introduced by Thomas Jefferson in an 1802 letter to the Danbury Baptists. The phrase itself does not appear in the constitution, or any other founding American document, but it has been quoted in several opinions handed down by the United States Supreme Court.
Putting your hand on a bible is an old practice and no longer required by most states.
2007-05-30 15:07:19 · answer #2 · answered by ndmagicman 7 · 2⤊ 2⤋
"Separation of Church and State" is a phrase that has been badly mangled and abused by people with an agenda...
Think about it...if the U.S. were NOT a Christian Nation, as they suggest, then how did such traditions as this one ever get started?
We hear lots of noise about Christian symbols in public places...for instance, the Ten Commandments in courtrooms, or crosses on hillsides...how did those things get there in the first place?
If we accept that "all men are created equal, and endowed by their Creator with certian inalienable rights", don't we accept that there is, indeed, a Creator?
If prayer were not a part of our daily lives, why did it ever have to be removed, in the first place? (And are we any better off without it?)
And what about "blue laws"? You know "thou shalt not buy beer on Sunday" type laws, which are still in force in many places?
I could go on and on, but I think the point has been made. Yes, indeed, whether "they" like it or not, our roots are definitely Christian. The earliest Pilgrims were Christians, and, to this day, the majority of U.S. citizens claim to be "Christian"...
Truth is a rather tuff opponent, but, if you keep telling yourself the same lie for long enough, it can be done, I suppose...
:*(
2007-05-30 15:16:18 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 2⤋
just to make sparkling issues the 1st substitute prevents the government from installation a countrywide faith it does not forbid them from interactions from universal religions. That has have been given to be between the funniest arguments i've got examine yet. No i do no longer think of the Bush is ignoring the separation of Church and state if something i do no longer think of he's preserving churches sufficient. churches exceptionally Christians have been under attack for relatively it sluggish now and that they are robotically being silenced mutually as another group accessible gets to assert regardless of they want. no rely while you're religious or no longer, you should open your eyes and notice that we are systematically silencing communities that we can't trust which will finally lead in no freedom of speech era. i will no longer trust particular communities yet I agree interior the reality that they must be allowed to talk basically as I must be allowed to talk in basic terms it does not look to artwork that way anymore while it includes faith.
2016-11-23 20:04:24 · answer #4 · answered by latshaw 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Pamiekin, same-sex marriage is widely rejected because marriage by definition is the union of husband and wife. To have two men or two women joined in union is not marriage. It would be like a white kid applying for a scholarship from the United ***** College Fund; they would have to change their definition of what a ***** is in order to accomidate the wants of that individual. To call a civil union "marriage" would be to redefine an existing English word, removing its cultural relevance.
And there is no strict seperation of church and state in the Constitution. The Constitution bases our freedom on the fact that we were granted rights by our Creator. Thus, if there is no Creator, our rights are not inalienable. We place our hand on the Bible when we swear an oath in mimicry of the Free and Accepted Masons.
2007-05-30 15:13:34 · answer #5 · answered by Jonathan 3 · 0⤊ 2⤋
I'm not sure. Do they still do that in courtrooms?
I've never testified in a court case (and I hope I never have to), but if I did have to, I would have no problem swearing on a Bible. But I would respect it if someone else didn't want to.
.
2007-05-30 15:06:41 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
It's never been a requirement.
The choice to "affirm" has always been available for those who choose not to swear an oath on the Bible
2007-05-31 02:35:36 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
You aren't required to , per say.
But when our country was founded, there were no such thing of atheists. And the Jewish and Muslims were very, very low in number.
Bigger question: if there is a separation of church and state, why is gay marriage outlawed when it is clearly a religious issue?
2007-05-30 15:01:54 · answer #8 · answered by pamiekins 4 · 1⤊ 2⤋
Because there is nothing in the constitution regarding separation of church and state. You are not required to put your hand on the Bible.
2007-05-30 15:01:23 · answer #9 · answered by Fish <>< 7 · 2⤊ 6⤋
Maybe you do that in the US but you don't elsewhere. And its because the religious have FAR too much power in the US.
2007-05-30 15:01:26 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 2⤋