So help me dog (or god, whatever!).

From here

quote:

---

Art. 36. That as it is the duty of every man to worship God in such manner as he thinks most acceptable to Him, all persons are equally entitled to protection in their religious liberty; wherefore, no person ought by any law to be molested in his person or estate, on account of his religious persuasion, or profession, or for his religious practice, unless, under the color of religion, he shall disturb the good order, peace or safety of the State, or shall infringe the laws of morality, or injure others in their natural, civil or religious rights; nor ought any person to be compelled to frequent, or maintain, or contribute, unless on contract, to maintain, any place of worship, or any ministry; nor shall any person, otherwise competent, be deemed incompetent as a witness, or juror, on account of his religious belief; provided, he believes in the existence of God, and that under His dispensation such person will be held morally accountable for his acts, and be rewarded or punished therefor either in this world or in the world to come.

​

Nothing shall prohibit or require the making reference to belief in, reliance upon, or invoking the aid of God or a Supreme Being in any governmental or public document, proceeding, activity, ceremony, school, institution, or place.

​

Nothing in this article shall constitute an establishment of religion

---

bold emphasis mineI'm not sure how the judge can ensure the requirements for a juror can be met if he has to follow the requirements of the second paragraph. Seems like a bit of a contradiction to me.Good luck in performing your civic duty. Hang the guilty bas...um...I mean...Bring to bear all your wisdom and experience in determining the disposition of the accused.Edited by LinearAq, : Emphasis for quote