Judge's statements spark controversy

[Walt Starr]

Judge's statements spark controversy

6-22-05

By Eric Collins, Staff Writer
News & Record



GREENSBORO — The decision by local court officials to deny the use of the Quran for oaths has garnered national media attention and the scrutiny of a Washington-based Islamic civil rights group

Officials with the Council on American-Islamic Relations said Tuesday that statements by Guilford County's top judge seem to endorse a particular religion and could be a violation of the U.S. Constitution.

Guilford Senior Resident Superior Court Judge W. Douglas Albright told the News & Record last week that an oath taken on the Quran is not a lawful oath under state law. The law refers to laying one's hand on the "Holy Scriptures."

"Everybody understands what the holy scriptures are," Albright said then. "If they don't, we're in a mess

<snip>

Can you say, slippery slope? I knew that your could. BIG ISSUES HERE! Welcome to the theocracy!

http://www.news-record.com/news/local/gso/quranreax_062205.htm

[aden_nak]

1. Could someone sufficiently geeky lay their hand on a Star Wars script?

It is sometimes referred to as the Holy Trilogy.

[Inland]

2. I can't understand why any of it could be a problem.

One doesn't have to invoke anything more sacred than a promise to tell the truth just about anywhere.

Therefore one could lay a hand on any document that didn't detract from the solemnity of the oath, like, for example, a piece of paper that says "I'm Lying Right Now."

Or no document at all.

[central scrutinizer]

3. Most Republicans worship Mammon

they should swear on their mutual fund prospectus

[CrispyQ]

6. LOL! So true!

:rofl:

[bluestateguy]

4. This should be an open and shut case

Government cannot play favorites with religion, or favor religion over non-religion. Witnesses before a court must be allowed to swear on a Bible, a Koran or any sacred religious text, or a secular affirmation. It should not matter to the Court, even if a person wants to swear on a Harry Potter book, as long as it is understood that the oath is legally binding.

[tanyev]

5. It's just silly to lay your hand on anything when you give your oath.

What, the local drug lord is suddenly going to start telling the truth because his fingers touched a Bible? Is his flesh going to melt off if he swears on the Bible but tells a lie anyway?

[pokercat999]

29. Now, now. I would trust the local drug lord way before I'd

trust a *ush.

Hell, I'd rather have my daughter marry a local drug lord before a *ush.

Local drug lords aren't really that bad, they just get lousy press.

[WePurrsevere]

7. Is this a state "law"?

It seems to violate the Constitution if so.

Actually I thought people could refuse to swear in using the Bible (or ever "swear in") since to some it is either meaningless (due to different or non spiritual path) or considered blasphamous by other (including Christians due to a Biblical directive of not swearing on anything).

[brooklynite]

8. They apparently don't see the practical issue here

If placing a hand on a Bible is supposed to insure veracity, wouldn't they see a flaw in having a non-Christian swear an oath on a document that's meaningless fiction to them?

[Tyrone Slothrop]

18. That was my first thought too

Do they really want Muslims swearing on the Bible?

What's the point?

[DrZeeLit]

9. Hmmm. So what do they do with Quakers who do not swear?

Don't they allow them to use the word "affirm" and not put their hand on the Bible?
I don't get why it matters.
We aren't in the Middle Ages where most people believed lightening would strike, or most people never touched a Bible and therefore thought it magical, endowed with powers.

Geez. Talk about being in a mess.
Here we go again.

[gratuitous]

10. Or Brethren or Mennonites

Quite a number of Christians follow Jesus' dictum to "let your 'Yes' be 'Yes', and your 'No' 'No'" (Matthew 5:37; James 5:12) and decline to "swear" by anything. Civil law recognizes this, and makes reasonable allowance for folks to testify "on oath or affirmation." I don't see why the judge in this case can't make a reasonable allowance that "holy scriptures" may mean different things to people of different religions. Unless he's some kind of backwoods ignoramus, that is. Then I see perfectly well why he'd have a problem with folks swearing on the Koran.

[Coastie for Truth]

31. They "affirm" on their personal honor.

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

11. Yes, your Honor, everyone understands what the holy scriptures are

even the devil can quote them as we have all seen.

[speedingbullet]

12. Swearing on the Bible

My redneck, red state's law requires only a generic swearing to tell the truth. I've practiced law here for 20 years and never heard of a court using a bible or any other text. I'm surprised that any state would still require this. Then again, we seem to moving back that direction.

[Igel]

13. So the issue here isn't that people have to swear on the Bible.

You have two options: affirm that you're telling the truth, nothing on-dead-tree in evidence; or swear on a Bible.

It accommodates one religion, but not others; I would point out that having T-day and Xmas as federal holidays does the same. And, in both cases, it's probably more an accommodation to tradition than religion.

But nobody's forced to swear on a Bible.

[AndyTiedye]

14. We Should Be Able To Swear on a Copy of the CONSTITUTION!

That is the sacred text that we all share as Americans.
So many have died defending it that it must surely qualify as a sacred text by now,
and defending, protecting, and acting in accordance with the Constitution
is any court's job, after all.

[Toots]

15. This really is a backward state, the great majority of states gave up

using the Bible years ago. Now it is a simple raise your right hand and swear to tell the truth. No bible or any religious items involved. Religion should have no place in our jurisprudence

[Judi Lynn]

16. The very Bible Christians use said not to swear on anything.........

Found this in a quick grab from google:

Should a Christian Swear an Oath (Matthew 5:33)?
The answer is that they should not! The Bible is very clear on this point: "But above all, my brethren, do not swear, either by heaven or by earth or with any other oath. But let your 'Yes' be 'Yes,' and your 'No,' 'No,' lest you fall into judgment" (James 5:12).

Jesus Himself said, "But I say to you, do not swear at all: neither by heaven, for it is God's throne; nor by the earth, for it is His footstool; nor by Jerusalem, for it is the city of the great King. Nor shall you swear by your head, because you cannot make one hair white or black. But let your 'Yes' be 'Yes,' and your 'No,' 'No.' For whatever is more than these is from the evil one" (Matthew 5:34-37).
(snip)

http://bibletools.org/index.cfm/fuseaction/Library.showResource/CT/BQA/k/105

I heard these verses in church from infancy to adulthood, being a "p.k."

[progressivebydesign]

17. Why are we still using "holy scriptures" at all?

I really can't fathom why.. are Hindus required to swear on the bible?

[zara]

19. But its a tradition!

Umm, like slavery was a tradition, too, I suppose.

[damntexdem]

20. I'm sorry, but I won't take your oath unless it's on a copy of ...

Gideon's Quran. Oh, all right, I'll accept a copy of Gideon's Torah.

Hey, wouldn't even a conservative Christian recognize Torah as part of 'Holy Scriptures'?

[Richard Steele]

21. It's not QUITE as bad as it seems, if you read the article.

SNIP
The issue surfaced after an Islamic Center in Greensboro tried to donate copies of the Quran to the county's two courthouses. The idea came from one of the center's members, who asked to be sworn in on the Quran during a court hearing but was turned down. State law allows people who do not wish to swear on oath on the Christian Bible to give an affirmation to tell the truth -- which is treated the same by law.

On Friday, the county's top two judges conferred and told officials with the Al-Ummil Ummat Islamic Center in Greensboro that state law precluded them from allowing people to be sworn in using the Quran.
ENDSNIP

So you CAN simply swear an affirmation with no book at all.

That being said, WHY did it have to be NC again?
ARRRGH!:banghead:

This is a really nice state,
but these news stories over the last few months
make us look like the third-looniest in the nation!

[LiberalFighter]

27. North Carolina Statute Chapter 1 Sec 11&#8209;4. Affirmation in lieu of oath.

When a person to be sworn shall have conscientious scruples against taking an oath in the manner prescribed by G.S. 11‑2, 11‑3, or 11‑7, he shall be permitted to be affirmed. In all cases the words of the affirmation shall be the same as the words of the prescribed oath, except that the word "affirm" shall be substituted for the word "swear" and the words "so help me God" shall be deleted. (1777, c. 108, s. 4, P.R.; c. 115, s. 42, P.R.; 1819, c. 1019, P.R.; 1821, c. 1112, P.R.; R.C., c. 76, s. 3; Code, s. 3311; Rev., s. 2356; C.S., s. 3191; 1985, c. 756, s. 3.)

[LiberalFighter]

22. It appears to violate their own constitution

Sec. 13. Religious liberty.

All persons have a natural and inalienable right to worship Almighty God according to the dictates of their own consciences, and no human authority shall, in any case whatever, control or interfere with the rights of conscience.

[LiberalFighter]

24. Their Preamble I would think would be going further than they have a right

because they as the state of north carolina is determining who rules the United States that being God


PREAMBLE

We, the people of the State of North Carolina, grateful to Almighty God, the Sovereign Ruler of Nations, for the preservation of the American Union and the existence of our civil, political and religious liberties, and acknowledging our dependence upon Him for the continuance of those blessings to us and our posterity, do, for the more certain security thereof and for the better government of this State, ordain and establish this Constitution.

[Solon]

26. Yep and thier own constitution violates the Federal...

First Amendment, for they give preference to the Judeo-Christian-Muslim God, mentioned Him as the ONLY one people are "free" to worship in the state.

[Orion The Hunter]

23. RE: Last time I checked...

...there was suppose to be a separation of Church and State. So how exactly did the Bible get to the head of the Holy books line?

[JerseygirlCT]

25. I thought the whole point was to have the person

swear on something he/she holds sacred -- sacred enough to hold them to the oath.

What the judge finds sacred would then be entirely beside the point, as would having a Muslim swear on the Christian bible.

[GarySeven]

28. I have NEVER seen a Bible used to swear in a witness

Not in more than 25 years, 3,000 plus trials, bajillions of depositions. Not ever, ever, ever. And I'm in the first notch of the bible belt.

[IA_Seth]

30. Quote from the Bible:

Jesus said it himself:

"Again you have heard that it was said to your ancestors, 'Do not take a false oath, but make good to the Lord all that you vow.' But I say to you, do not swear at all; not by heaven, for it is God's throne; nor by the earth, for it is his footstool; nor by Jerusalem, for it is the city of the great King. Do not swear by your head, for you cannot make a single hair white or black. Let your 'Yes' mean 'Yes,' and your 'No' mean 'No.' Anything more is from the evil one."
(Matt. 5:33-37)

What ever happened to that?