I recall hearing, many years ago, that a person could not be declared insane - no matter how obviously loopy they were - if their delusions were religious in nature.
Though I expect that this was a piece of anti-religious propaganda (yes, we do it too), and I've not heard it repeated since, I wondered if anyone could shed light on the origin of this rumour. Was there a specific incident where a nutter got off by pleading religiosity? Is there an ancient law that approximates this rule?
Serious question. Serious data appreciated.
2007-10-14
01:02:03
·
11 answers
·
asked by
Super Atheist
7
in
Society & Culture
➔ Religion & Spirituality
I think I do recall hearing something along those lines. However I can't remember a specific case so I went goggling for information.
This doesn't exactly answer the question but I think it shows that religious insanity was not an acceptable plea because the people in these cases (and others that I found) were inprisoned and found insane based on their religious beliefs.
"The writer discusses other accused criminals who have used the insanity plea recently. The writer believes that this "trend" will work against Guiteau, for it will seem fashionable. The writer believes Guiteau has the same sort of insanity that Cain, the brother and killer of Abel in Genesis, had, and he hopes that the trial will clarify the line between the criminal and the insane."
"The opening column of this issue argues that a movement for reform that does not draw upon the Bible, that ignores or opposes it, cannot be given respect. Goes on the argue that the Bible is clear, in St, Paul, that women should be subordinate to men."
Throughout much of the nineteenth century, psychiatrists and ordinary citizens agreed that one of the chief causes of mental illness was religious excitement. Discovery of hitherto untouched data from the 1860 census, giving supposed cause of insanity for 2,258 inmates of 17 asylums, provides the opportunity for exploring the alleged role of religion in producing insanity
2007-10-14 02:31:39
·
answer #1
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
0⤋
If a person committed a crime of a serious nature I don't think there is a court of law on the planet that would let them get off by pleading religiosity. And I think this would be the same no matter what period of history. There has always been two kinds of insane anyway - the harmless crazy and the dangerously insane. Look at Fred Phelps for example; he's as nutty as a fruitcake but he hasn't yet committed any crimes so he's still allowed to preach his insanity to his flock of fools.
2007-10-14 01:24:28
·
answer #2
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
I can only get two "near misses" to your concept.
1) the non-religious strange idea that certain crimes carried a different status, at least for press and propaganda purposes if they could be declared "political".
See below for a law report discussion on how assassination and bank robbery might come under this classification!
(And still relevant too, in the UK because it can make a difference to extradition considerations.)
2) "The benefit of clergy"
A clause which originally exempted Christian clergy from trial by secular courts. For some time up to the1500's illiterate non-clergymen could avoid hanging if they had memorised the psalm used for the "literacy test" which gave access to this privelege. See second article below.
2007-10-14 06:45:26
·
answer #3
·
answered by Pedestal 42 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
Technically, there is no way of knowing whether a God exists or not through any scientific tests. So why should people be locked away for something that could in fact be true? Also religions have a lot of power and billions of followers. 99% of the planet would be locked up if such a law were ever passed. Maybe this is why such a measure has never been implemented, though in some Communist regimes some religious people were shut away or done away with altogether.
2007-10-14 01:14:31
·
answer #4
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
2⤋
I dont rather comprehend the respond there yet DO comprehend, religions very plenty tolerate the insane and much less fortunate. i've got faith the training are that those stricken are touched by employing God and are to be left on my own, helped, yet no longer taken with none attention or abused. assorted religions flow so a techniques as to have good Taboos against any harming of mentally volatile persons till it brings undesirable success to the entire society. besides, faith right here doesnt count, being variety and beneficiant to those much less fortunate is what counts--doesnt it ???
2016-10-22 08:51:38
·
answer #5
·
answered by ? 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
I cant speak for everywhere else but i know in the states that doesnt matter. Crazy is crazy. I did see that issue on law and order a few years ago and the guy was indeed let go, maybe thats where the rumor originated.
2007-10-14 02:56:40
·
answer #6
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
It is false, at least here in the US it is. There have been multiple cases where obviously insane people have caused harm to other people believing they were inspired by God and they were declared as insane.
2007-10-14 01:19:53
·
answer #7
·
answered by Radictis 3
·
1⤊
0⤋
Warren Jeffs comes to mind.
2007-10-15 02:09:36
·
answer #8
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
Have you ever heard an evangelist speak? ... it's a fine line indeed
2007-10-14 01:09:44
·
answer #9
·
answered by I'm an Atheist 3
·
3⤊
1⤋
Everyone in the institution is saying, "I am the ONE"!
2007-10-14 01:05:46
·
answer #10
·
answered by Premaholic 7
·
0⤊
0⤋