|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total) |
| |
popoi | |
Total: 915,815 Year: 3,072/9,624 Month: 917/1,588 Week: 100/223 Day: 11/17 Hour: 0/7 |
Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: So help me dog (or god, whatever!). | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
kjsimons Member Posts: 821 From: Orlando,FL Joined: Member Rating: 6.7 |
I just wanted to vent my spleen and see if anyone else shares my view and thinks I should take any action. I was just recently honored with the civic responsibility of jury duty. I attended, was selected and even was made the jury foreman (without any lobbying on my part! ). The thing that stuck in my craw is that I had to swear an oath that included the words "so help me god" as did all the witnesses. This was in Orange County, FL for the Ninth Judical Circuit Court of Florida. I felt this was a clear violation of my rights as a citizen of the USA to freedom of religion or in my case, freedom from religion. Coffee house I think.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
jar Member (Idle past 394 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: |
I was under the impression that if you want you can also say "I so affirm" or an equivalent affirmation if you wish.
Aslan is not a Tame Lion
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
kjsimons Member Posts: 821 From: Orlando,FL Joined: Member Rating: 6.7 |
Well they didn't really give me the chance. When it came time to swear the jury or witnesses in, a clerk would read the oath out, including the "so help me god" and the jury or the witness would have to say "I do". Essentially agreeing with the oath. It just rubbed me the wrong way, as if I wasn't trustworthy unless some bully god was keeping me in line!
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
nwr Member Posts: 6408 From: Geneva, Illinois Joined: Member Rating: 5.1 |
You could bring it up with the state ACLU.
Unfortunately, the swearing in of a jury is not a good place to protest this. In Illinois, the swearing in of jurors does not include such a statement, at least in my county court system.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
iano Member (Idle past 1940 days) Posts: 6165 From: Co. Wicklow, Ireland. Joined: |
You could have done what a friend of mine did when he stood in a court to give evidence under a similar oath. Cross your fingers behind your back. He's not a believer (quite antagonistic about the G-word in fact) But seeing as he wasn't planning to tell the truth he must have fiqured on hedging his bets
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Coragyps Member (Idle past 734 days) Posts: 5553 From: Snyder, Texas, USA Joined: |
I think that might get me a bit warm, too. I think that I've been told that you can "affirm" instead of "swear" here in Texas if you just tell the judge/bailiff/whoever, presumably ahead of time. But then I don't know for a fact how oaths are done here, or if it varies by the court.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
crashfrog Member (Idle past 1466 days) Posts: 19762 From: Silver Spring, MD Joined: |
The thing that stuck in my craw is that I had to swear an oath that included the words "so help me god" as did all the witnesses. I did that to get a federal job. I sort of wish I had voiced my concerns; but of course the advantage of atheism is that there's no metaphysical repercussions to feigning religious affiliation. It does stick in your craw a bit, though. It's my understanding that folks like Jehovah's Witnesses, whose religious beliefs preclude the swearing of oaths, are allowed to affirm, etc. Probably you can choose to avail yourself of the same option?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Phat Member Posts: 18262 From: Denver,Colorado USA Joined: Member Rating: 1.1 |
The argument put up by the conservative Christians shows a cultural history in our nation of such phrases being used in the Judiciary---indeed the Supreme Court itself opens its sessions with an utterance involving God.
Its a battle that won't soon go away because for everyone who feels insulted mentioning God as a symbol of affirmation of obedience to a overseeing social benevolance, there are as many people who feel equally insulted that humans acknowledge no such benevolance. The entire church/state controversy is being debated between liberal humanist organizations such as the A.C.L.U. who are being urgd to eliminate religion from public life, and neocon conservatives who do NOT want such historic tradition eliminated from public life. As long as the "state" is made up of people, there will be debates and discussions on these issues. Some of us get offended that our children are being taught that collective human wisdom is the apex of authority. Others of us get offended that Christianity is pushed as the authoritarian standard in a nation founded on pluralistic principles. This issue, if aggressively pursued by EITHER side, will eventually split the U.S. into two or more seperate nations (or nation states.) I cant understand why you are so sensitive to it, since I am a Christian....(I never understood freethinkers passion at being allowed to think as they so wanted) but then I would probably be offended if the culture changed and Islam became a majority and I HAD to acknowledge Allah as my one true God! Despite being a Christian, I think that pluralism is the way to go, but it may take quite a few years to get the majority vote needed to establish a truly religion-free society.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
nwr Member Posts: 6408 From: Geneva, Illinois Joined: Member Rating: 5.1 |
The entire church/state controversy is being debated between liberal humanist organizations such as the A.C.L.U. who are being urgd to eliminate religion from public life, and neocon conservatives who do NOT want such historic tradition eliminated from public life.
That's not correct, although perhaps an accidental mistake. What the ACLU and other groups oppose, is state sponsored religion. The ACLU has actually argued in support of religion in public life, for cases where it is not state sponsored. Compassionate conservatism - bringing you a kinder, gentler torture chamber
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
jar Member (Idle past 394 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: |
The entire church/state controversy is being debated between liberal humanist organizations such as the A.C.L.U. who are being urgd to eliminate religion from public life, and neocon conservatives who do NOT want such historic tradition eliminated from public life. But that statement is simply wrong on several counts. First, the ACLU is as active protecting religion as in opposing it. No less Christian Icon than Jerry Falwell used the ACLU to support his religious rights. The ACLU is NOT a liberal humanist organization despite the attempts by the fundies and evangelicals to characterize it as such. Second, no one is trying to eliminate religion from public life.
Some of us get offended that our children are being taught that collective human wisdom is the apex of authority. Yet no one has been able to show that that is even happening. Aslan is not a Tame Lion
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
kjsimons Member Posts: 821 From: Orlando,FL Joined: Member Rating: 6.7 |
Well Phat, it's not that I just am offended by it, I can't actually take or accept the oath as given. If I say "I do", I'm lying. I would have to make a special request, prior to the swearing in to have a different oath read, just to me, so I could accept it. If I were a witness, I'm sure many members would hold it against me that I didn't want to swear to their god, as if doing that would ensure that I tell the truth. In the case of the jury duty I just finished, I was not aware that god was going to show up in the oath and I hesitated but decided not to halt the court preceedings just to get them to change the oath. I shouldn't have to. The government shouldn't automatically foist god on all jurors, witnesses and defendants.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Coragyps Member (Idle past 734 days) Posts: 5553 From: Snyder, Texas, USA Joined: |
The government shouldn't automatically foist god on all jurors, witnesses and defendants. Precisely. And the New Testament has some verse prohibiting swearing oaths anyway - "let your yea be yea and your nay be nay" or some such. So the Christians shouldn't be forced to break their own rules, either.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
kjsimons Member Posts: 821 From: Orlando,FL Joined: Member Rating: 6.7 |
LOL! That would be fun to get them to change the oath so that christians won't break their rules. You could probably get much more sympathy from the general public for that than you could ever get for non-believer.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
jar Member (Idle past 394 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: |
Actually that was the origin of the Affirm statement. It was an action by Christian groups, IIRC Mennonite or Amish, against swearing.
Aslan is not a Tame Lion
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
lfen Member (Idle past 4677 days) Posts: 2189 From: Oregon Joined: |
Some of us get offended that our children are being taught that collective human wisdom is the apex of authority. Well it's either that or teaching children that the collecive human wisdom of the ancient Jews, or the early Christians as collected in the Holy Bible is, because of long tradition by large cultural groups, held to be divine? Why? because human wisdom claims they are divine! I prefer the honest falliblity of human science to the endless arguments of what did God mean by writing and so carelessly preserving his so called inerrant word which nobody is supposed to change or disobey but which large groups of believers over the past thousand years have not been able to agree on the meanings. I understand the insecurity of facing that your obviously fallible judgements are all you have, but to tell yourself that you, a human, now have certainty because you decided that your understanding is what the divine meant is self deception. So all humans have is their fallible wisdom to understand anything anyway. To say science is somehow lesser than religion because it admits what is true while religion denies what is true seems to me intellectually disingenuous. Tradition is pre scientific collective human wisdom. And it is worth something but it does stand corrected in many instances by scientific discovery. lfen
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024