Islamic Group Calls for Use of Koran to Take Oath

[Wezil]

Re: Re: Re: Islamic Group Calls for Use of Koran to Take Oath

Originally posted by SpencerH


Johnboy and Billy are certainly very, very, popular with a huge marketshare...

'Nuff said.

[Boris Godunov]

Originally posted by DanS
I don't know how I would view it. Probably as a bastard oath.

So a Muslim swearing on the Koran is meaningless to you, swearing on the Bible is a bastard oath...

Seems like your problem is more with Muslims than whatever it is they're using for the oath.

[MikeH]

That's ridiculous. Would you expect a muslim to consider your swearing on the bible as a bastard oath?

[DanS]

Would you expect a muslim to consider your swearing on the bible as a bastard oath?

Why would they? The Bible is holy scriptures to me. But the fact that they are muslim makes the oath lose power.

In other words, most everybody has to be christian in society in order for an oath on the Bible to have its intended ritual impact. Once not everybody is christian, it starts to look like state establishment of religion, and is unconstitutional.

[curtsibling]

Originally posted by DanS


It's also to reinforce to the public the seriousness of what is about to be testified. If somebody swears on the Koran, that means nothing to me as a christian.

And what makes your made-up god better than their made-up god?

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by MichaeltheGreat


5-15 year range of sentences for perjury ought to make that point more effectively. Especially given the Christian view that virtually all sin is forgiveable, the state's penalties are a bit more hard-nosed than God's.

But, er, not everyone gets caught for perjury, but they MIGHT think god sees everything.

and at least in MY religion you cant just sin and think "I wont get punished, I'll just say hail mary and it wont count" I will have to let christians and others answer for their religions.

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by DanS


It's also to reinforce to the public the seriousness of what is about to be testified. If somebody swears on the Koran, that means nothing to me as a christian.

with all due respect I disagree. I dont see why the public needs that. When the US judicial system was evolving how much of the "public" attended a trial? Other than lawyers, interested parties, etc?

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by DanS


Because I as a juror can't fully participate in that ritual if I also don't take the Koran seriously. It would be about like a protestant going to mass, but not being able to take communion.
.

I cant participate in the ritual when someone swears on a bible that includes the NT. Not at all. Like we're talking major issues here. Yet I still the seriousness, as Boris does.

[DanS]

Originally posted by curtsibling


And what makes your made-up god better than their made-up god?

Nothing. Just that I don't share a belief in god as they view him. I'm not denigrating their belief, just making clear that I don't share their belief. We should have an oath on a belief that everybody shares.

[DanS]

Originally posted by lord of the mark
with all due respect I disagree. I dont see why the public needs that. When the US judicial system was evolving how much of the "public" attended a trial? Other than lawyers, interested parties, etc?

It's a public event though. Not a private event. You are swearing before the public and god that you will tell the truth.

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by DanS
I think they were being vague as to "holy scripture" in order to accomodate Jews.

they could have just said "a bible". AFAIK no Christian upon seeing a Jewish text of the Hebrew scriptures would deny that its "the bible" despite it not including the NT. Am I incorrect?

[Provost Harrison]

Originally posted by MikeH


Don't assume that just because they are Christians that they are ignorant bigots though.

Some Christians are very nice tolerant people.

Stop being so damn PC...religion is a grown up fairy tale...

[DanS]

Originally posted by lord of the mark
I cant participate in the ritual when someone swears on a bible that includes the NT. Not at all.

I agree. Just that no Jews that I know of have made a stink about it.

[Provost Harrison]

Originally posted by DanS
I think they were being vague as to "holy scripture" in order to accomodate Jews.

So Judaism is fine but Islam is not? At least I despise all religions but you are just being a bit of a bigot!

Why would they? The Bible is holy scriptures to me. But the fact that they are muslim makes the oath lose power.

In other words, most everybody has to be christian in society in order for an oath on the Bible to have its intended ritual impact. Once not everybody is christian, it starts to look like state establishment of religion, and is unconstitutional.

What if they find it offensive to have to swear on the bible? Why do you insist that tyranny of the majority without minority rights is perfectly acceptable?

[DAVOUT]

Originally posted by Boris Godunov


Of course, all that is me giving the benefit of the doubt that the particular Muslims/Christians involved are, in fact, honest in their devotion.

Giving the benefit of the doubt that people are honest in their devotion does not require an oath on an Holly Book, and is in any case of no use in a court which is not the Inquisition.