US Constitution
Article VI, Section 1, Clause 3: OATH OF OFFICE
The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the Members of the several State Legislatures, and all executive and judicial Officers, both of the United States and of the several States, shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation, to support this Constitution; but no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States.
So does this clause in any way say that swearing in on the Bible and God should no longer be allowed? Every President in our country's history has done just that. Should this be banned?
Does this violate the First Amendment? Did the Founders who created these laws but yet allowed the swearing and oath taking on God and the Bible fail to understand their own laws?
I would be very hesitant to believe that. Unfortunately our conservative politicians often fail to stand against such falsehoods. Or if they do they dont know how to defend it.
Know your laws and know your rights. This is the only way you will know when they are being abused, taken, or upheld.
The Federal Rules of Evidence
Rule 603 – Oath or Affirmation to Testify Truthfully
Before testifying, a witness must give an oath or affirmation to testify truthfully. It must be in a form designed to impress that duty on the witness’s conscience.
The Federal Rules of Evidence are a set of rules that governs the introduction of evidence at civil and criminal trials in United States federal trial courts.
Below was your typical giving of a oath and the understanding behind it.
Witness Testimony Under Oath
the witness with his hand on the bible or right hand raised, swearing to tell “the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth, so help you God.” By taking an oath, or affirmation, the witness is implicitly inviting punishment from God if the statement is untrue. But even if the witness doesn’t believe in God, the legal consequence of taking an oath is to subject the witness to penalties for perjury if the statement is false. Such severe consequences should force people to tell the truth.
So before testifying, a witness must give an oath or affirmation to testify truthfully. It must be in a form designed to impress that duty on the witness’s conscience.
What is conscience???
Not dealing with psychology but as related to US law.
"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness (property)--That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men..."
- US Declaration of Independence.
Government is instituted to protect property of every sort. . . . Conscience is the most sacred of all property.
-JAMES MADISON
In 1789, James Madison — nicknamed "the father of the Constitution" — proposed 12 amendments that ultimately became the 10 amendments that make up the U.S. Bill of Rights. Madison was unquestionably the person who wrote the First Amendment in this respect.
No provision in our Constitution ought to be dearer to man than that which protects the rights of conscience against the enterprises of the civil authority. It behooves every man who values liberty of conscience for himself to resist invasions of it in the case of others, or their case may, by change of circumstances, become his own. Our rulers can have no authority over such natural rights only as we have submitted to them. The rights of conscience we never submitted – we could not submit. We are answerable for them to our God.
-THOMAS JEFFERSON
The founders believed that conscience was a unalienable right and that came from God the creator and no man or government had the right to take what was already given by God. They understood that God judges the inner thoughts and that God being the ultimate judge makes us all accountable for how we live. Without God many have every reason why they shouldn't tell the whole truth especially if they are guilty. Might as well try to get away with it if the only punishment you are facing is earthly.
Same idea goes for oaths of office. Why shouldn't the person being sworn in be corrupt and progress their selfish desires? Atheism cannot answer this. Secular Humanism cannot answer this.
With God the Creator found in our Declaration. Nothing is being violated in the first Amendment. The Government isnt forcing a State religion. Nothing in the Religious Test Clause is being violated as to have So help you God or the hand on the Bible can be publicly denied by the witness. But obviously this shows if the witness doesn't fear God then your only hope is if they fear the punishment enough to speak truthfully. Unfortunately many do not fear the earthly punishment.
Article VI, Section 1, Clause 3: OATH OF OFFICE
The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the Members of the several State Legislatures, and all executive and judicial Officers, both of the United States and of the several States, shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation, to support this Constitution; but no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States.
So does this clause in any way say that swearing in on the Bible and God should no longer be allowed? Every President in our country's history has done just that. Should this be banned?
Does this violate the First Amendment? Did the Founders who created these laws but yet allowed the swearing and oath taking on God and the Bible fail to understand their own laws?
I would be very hesitant to believe that. Unfortunately our conservative politicians often fail to stand against such falsehoods. Or if they do they dont know how to defend it.
Know your laws and know your rights. This is the only way you will know when they are being abused, taken, or upheld.
The Federal Rules of Evidence
Rule 603 – Oath or Affirmation to Testify Truthfully
Before testifying, a witness must give an oath or affirmation to testify truthfully. It must be in a form designed to impress that duty on the witness’s conscience.
The Federal Rules of Evidence are a set of rules that governs the introduction of evidence at civil and criminal trials in United States federal trial courts.
Below was your typical giving of a oath and the understanding behind it.
Witness Testimony Under Oath
the witness with his hand on the bible or right hand raised, swearing to tell “the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth, so help you God.” By taking an oath, or affirmation, the witness is implicitly inviting punishment from God if the statement is untrue. But even if the witness doesn’t believe in God, the legal consequence of taking an oath is to subject the witness to penalties for perjury if the statement is false. Such severe consequences should force people to tell the truth.
So before testifying, a witness must give an oath or affirmation to testify truthfully. It must be in a form designed to impress that duty on the witness’s conscience.
What is conscience???
Not dealing with psychology but as related to US law.
"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness (property)--That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men..."
- US Declaration of Independence.
Government is instituted to protect property of every sort. . . . Conscience is the most sacred of all property.
-JAMES MADISON
In 1789, James Madison — nicknamed "the father of the Constitution" — proposed 12 amendments that ultimately became the 10 amendments that make up the U.S. Bill of Rights. Madison was unquestionably the person who wrote the First Amendment in this respect.
No provision in our Constitution ought to be dearer to man than that which protects the rights of conscience against the enterprises of the civil authority. It behooves every man who values liberty of conscience for himself to resist invasions of it in the case of others, or their case may, by change of circumstances, become his own. Our rulers can have no authority over such natural rights only as we have submitted to them. The rights of conscience we never submitted – we could not submit. We are answerable for them to our God.
-THOMAS JEFFERSON
The founders believed that conscience was a unalienable right and that came from God the creator and no man or government had the right to take what was already given by God. They understood that God judges the inner thoughts and that God being the ultimate judge makes us all accountable for how we live. Without God many have every reason why they shouldn't tell the whole truth especially if they are guilty. Might as well try to get away with it if the only punishment you are facing is earthly.
Same idea goes for oaths of office. Why shouldn't the person being sworn in be corrupt and progress their selfish desires? Atheism cannot answer this. Secular Humanism cannot answer this.
With God the Creator found in our Declaration. Nothing is being violated in the first Amendment. The Government isnt forcing a State religion. Nothing in the Religious Test Clause is being violated as to have So help you God or the hand on the Bible can be publicly denied by the witness. But obviously this shows if the witness doesn't fear God then your only hope is if they fear the punishment enough to speak truthfully. Unfortunately many do not fear the earthly punishment.
-
1
- Show all