This story says that the ACLU and CAIR (a pro-Muslim group) have joined together to challenge a North Carolina judge’s interpretation of a law that asks witnesses to swear on “the holy scriptures” (meaning the Bible) when in court. They say that Muslims should be able to swear on the Koran, and one judge disagrees with them. Which of course means that Mormons should be able to swear on the Book of Mormon.
For the record, I believe using the Bible is just fine. Muslims, by the way, share a reverence for many stories in the Bible. The Bible has a special and unique place in the history of the United States. Some people believe case law supports the use of alternate scriptures. This seems like multiculturalism run rampant, but I’m sure some people here may disagree.
Question for the lawyers out there: can witnesses swear on other scriptures in other states?
I’m no lawyer, so take my comment for what it’s worth, but why do we need to do it on a set of scriptures anyway? Why don’t we swear on the Constitution? Or swear on “whatever god you worship”? If I were a muslim I would feel less loyal to a sworn oath on a book of another god than I would on my own god. Is there good, sound reasoning behind this (other than tradition)?
This at Volokh is probably worth reading.
“I don’t know why this should be a problem, since this issue was settled law in England before the American Revolution. In 1744 in Omichund v Barker, the Chancery Court held that a Hindu could testify and be sworn (while touching a Brahmin) but not an atheist, since for the oath of a Hindu “still the substance is the same, which is that God in all of them is called upon as a witness to the truth of what we say.â€
Typically the state bends over backwards to religions. I remember when I got my security clearance they were pretty accommodating and said Mormons didn’t need to swear and oath because (according to the agent) it was against our religion to swear oaths. Which I thought rather funny. I’d heard that a few times from some members, but it’s definitely not Mormon doctrine.
Clark, interesting stuff. I’m learning more all the time. I’d like some additional input from some of the other lawyers out there. Do they agree with Volokh? It seems a pretty persuasive argument that we don’t want a Muslim swearing to tell the truth on a document he doesn’t believe in.
Why do we swear on any scriptures at all? Doesn’t Jesus say in the Sermon on the Mount not to swear at all but to let our communication be “yea yea” or “nay nay”?
Well, then what do atheists swear on?
I have a few professors who would likely swear on Marx’s Das Kapital or Derrida’s Of Grammatology. 😉
This discussion may be of interest:
http://www.timesandseasons.org/index.php?p=1884
I don’t know that I would swear on a Bible. I’m vaguely uncomfortable with the idea, and I’m not quite sure why. I think it’s the idea that doing so would make my statements somehow more trustworthy. If I’m more likely to tell the truth because I swore on a stack of Bibles, doesn’t that amount to saying that I’m a liar sometimes?
At any rate, I’ve heard a little more discussion on this particular issue than many of you, since the suit is from North Carolina. I’m no lawyer, but here are some of the issues I’ve heard raised:
At the heart of the matter is the question of how the term “holy scriptures” is to be defined. Clearly, the Bible was intended when the statue was written, but in a religiously diverse society, it is also clear that many to whom the statue applies may differ in their interpretations. It seems a matter of common sense to allow the witness to provide their own interpretation of what “holy scripture” is. I certainly wouldn’t expect an evangelical Christian to swear on a Book of Mormon as a book of holy scripture.
Fine, you say. The statute currently allows for witnesses to affirm or attest to the truthfulness of their testimony. The problem here is that doing so may have a prejudicial effect on a jury. Given that the large majority of witnesses will have no problem swearing on a Bible, a witness who does not stands out. While the witness’ refusal to do so may actually be a sign of strong convictions, which should inspire more confidence, in the minds of a Bible-belt jury, anyone who will not swear on a Bible may be suspect. Allowing witnesses to swear on a different book of scripture would largely eliminate this problem.
A few suggestions (disclaimer: IANAL)
Have them sign a document ,acknowledging in writing, the penalties for perjury etc. And make penalties for lying on the stand stiffer!
For the hardcore “I swear, on penalty of death if I’m caught lying …”
For those that want to avoid religious connections, but are Ok with connecting to their childhood .. “Cross my heart, hope to die …”
But really … I think people can be allowed to ‘swear’ on what is important to them, but they must also remember what is important to them. The issue is that they understand that they need to tell “The truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth”. I think this is just another example of someone taking offense and making a big stink when no offense was ever intended.
Just as an aside … I had an Arabic Professor who told a story of how in order to get his point across of how serious he was about something he said “Wa Smithee” … He swore by Joseph Smith, assuming that would mean something to the LDS mind. Muslims often ‘sweary by ‘ to show how serious they are. In this case, he swore by something important (at least perceived) to the other person.
These things can always be looked at both ways.
Then there are Brigham Young’s oaths in Roughing It:
By the slaughtered body of St. Parley Pratt!
Shade of Nephi!
By the ghost of Orson Hyde!
I seem to take the idea of swearing on a bible similar to the phrase “as the Lord liveth” from the scriptures. This is an oath that so long as God lives, I will uphold what I have promised, whether that be in words or actions.
I think its completely fine to do so on whatever “sacred” thing a person holds dear to them. If a person wanted to “swear on my mother’s life” and the person’s mother was alive, we should accept it.
The only thing that suprises me more is why a person would be considered more trustworthy after making a religious declaration of honesty and why this hasn’t been challenged more by those seeking to remove religion from public life.
J White’s comment reminded me of the drunk guy in Honduras that was bugged that Davis and I wouldn’t give him our shoes, and repeatedly called on Joseph Smith (he knew we were Mormons) to witness our wickedness from heaven. Davis, Joseph, and I had a good time laughing at that guy.
TOUCHSTONE. Mistress, you must come away to your father.
CELIA. Were you made the messenger?
TOUCHSTONE. No, by mine honour; but I was bid to come for you.
ROSALIND. Where learned you that oath, fool?
TOUCHSTONE. Of a certain knight that swore by his honour they were good pancakes, and swore by his honour the mustard was naught. Now I’ll stand to it, the pancakes were naught and the mustard was good, and yet was not the knight forsworn.
CELIA. How prove you that, in the great heap of your knowledge?
ROSALIND. Ay, marry, now unmuzzle your wisdom.
TOUCHSTONE. Stand you both forth now: stroke your chins, and swear by your beards that I am a knave.
CELIA. By our beards, if we had them, thou art.
TOUCHSTONE. By my knavery, if I had it, then I were. But if you swear by that that not, you are not forsworn; no more was this knight, swearing by his honour, for he never had any; or if he had, he had sworn it away before ever he saw those pancackes or that mustard.
I recently attended a court hearing and watched a person swear on the Holy Bible.The hand was shaking as the scriptures were read maybe because this person could feel the ground opening up and fire about to spew out and steal their soul.Well that moment passed and all seemed fine, so now it was ok to let the lies fly.This person could have been from any religion,atheist or from the planet Kripton whichever ,their conscious ,their faith their morals meant nothing to lie to win their case.And did this person win using deception,yes they did.Maybe putting your hand in an jug of scorpions sitting on a Bible would stop people lying in court,except only the judge knows there is only crickets in the jug.We would have to send and email to the Kriptonits to explain the power of Scorpoins and the Bible.