Page 1 of 8 123456 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 152
  1.    #1  
    The ACLU has filed a lawsuit in and against the state of North Carolina seeking
    1. That the Court enter a declaratory judgment that the term Holy Scriptures, as set out in N.C.G.S. 11-2, includes not only the Christian Bible, but other religious texts, including but not limited to, the Quran, the Old Testament and the Bhagavad-Gita;
    2. That the Court, in the alternative, enter a declaratory judgment that N.C.G.S. 11-2 violates the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment of the United States Constitution and Article 1, Section 13 of the Constitution of North Carolina
    http://www.aclu.org/Files/OpenFile.cfm?id=18819

    First of all, each and every one of the Christian Bible, the Quran, the Old Testament, and the Bhagavad-Gita in fact "holy scriptures" why would a declaratory judgment be needed?

    Second, if separation of church and state is the goal, why would the use of "holy scriptures" in such precedings be acceptable with any text?

    Third, if there is such a thing as "holy scripture" would it not be more fitting to identify the criteria for being declared such, and then only allow such qualifying texts to be used?
  2. #2  
    What's (N.C.G.S. 11-2)'s intent and purpose?
    --
    Aloke
    Cingular GSM
    Software:Treo650-1.17-CNG
    Firmware:01.51 Hardware:A
  3. #3  
    Some folks whose religion is neither Christianity or Judaism object to having to swear on the Bible in court; they would prefer to use their own holy book.
    V > Vx > m505 > m515 > T/T > T3 > TC > 650 > 680
    <script type="text/javascript" src="http://download.skype.com/share/skypebuttons/js/skypeCheck.js"></script>
    <a href="skype:wwgamble?call"><img src="http://mystatus.skype.com/balloon/wwgamble" style="border: none;" width="150" height="60" alt="My Skype status" /></a>
  4. #4  
    FYI (I didn't know this):

    A declaratory judgment is a judgment of a court which declares what rights each party in a dispute should have, but does not order any action or result in any legal damages.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Declaratory+judgment
  5. #5  
    Quote Originally Posted by Bill Gamble
    Some folks whose religion is neither Christianity or Judaism object to having to swear on the Bible in court; they would prefer to use their own holy book.
    here's mine:
    Attached Images Attached Images
    MaxiMunK.com The Forum That Asks, "Are You Not Entertained?"

    Remember: "Anyone that thinks the Treo should just work right out of the box, shouldn't own a Treo..."
  6. #6  
    What if you're an Atheist or Agnostic? Do you swear on your favorite novel?
  7. #7  
    Hahaha. I don't think there is a "separation of church and state" written into the Constitution but I do believe this blatantly violates the establishment clause. Even if the term Holy Scriptures were to refer to any religion, threatening the wrath of God in a written law seems bit over-the-top to me.

    N.C.G.S. 11-2
    Judges and other persons who may be empowered to administer oaths, shall (except in the cases in this Chapter excepted) require the party to be sworn to lay his hand upon the Holy Scriptures, in token of his engagement to speak the truth and in further token that, if he should swerve from the truth, he may be justly deprived of all the blessings of the holy book and made liable to that vengeance which he has imprecated on his own head.
  8. #8  
    Quote Originally Posted by Christinac130
    What if you're an Atheist or Agnostic? Do you swear on your favorite novel?
    No. They use the phone book
    Well behaved women rarely make history
  9. #9  
    I am an atheist. So, am I immune from perjury if I take the oath with my hand on ANY religious text?

    I prefer using the Constitution instead.
    --
    Aloke
    Cingular GSM
    Software:Treo650-1.17-CNG
    Firmware:01.51 Hardware:A
  10. #10  
    Quote Originally Posted by aprasad
    I am an atheist. So, am I immune from perjury if I take the oath with my hand on ANY religious text?

    I prefer using the Constitution instead.
    Just out of curiousity...what exactly do you believe as being a self-procaimed athiest? Would it offend you to have God mentioned in the Declaration of Independence by which you would swear? Does God offend you period?
    The only thing that separates the men from the boys...is the lessons they learn.
    www.planetmills.com
  11. #11  
    God offends me to the same extent as Ghosts, Leprechauns, the Monster in my closet (and under my bed). I consider (until/unless confronted by hard evidence, that is repeatable and reproducable) all of these as figments of our imagination. These entities help some to deal with life's adversities. I don't need them.

    As for the role of these imaginary entities in our daily lives: to each his own unless their ideas are imposed on me. I have no problem if the masses chose to live their lives under the influence of whatever imaginary entities they choose.. as long as they don't impose it on the unwilling.

    In a secular country (we are still secular, right?), I expect all _beliefs_ and _faiths_ to have equally minimal role. Please note that this does NOT equate to a lawless anarchist society.. any more than going to church/temples leads people to cheat less on their taxes or spouses...
    --
    Aloke
    Cingular GSM
    Software:Treo650-1.17-CNG
    Firmware:01.51 Hardware:A
  12. #12  
    Quote Originally Posted by aprasad
    God offends me to the same extent as Ghosts, Leprechauns, the Monster in my closet (and under my bed). I consider (until/unless confronted by hard evidence, that is repeatable and reproducable) all of these as figments of our imagination. These entities help some to deal with life's adversities. I don't need them.
    This is plain silly. If ghosts and leprechauns offend you, you're way too sensitive.

    I don't believe in God. Nor do I care. Halloween with all its ghosts and goblins no more bothers me than Christmas and nativity scenes. Why because I'm consistent. I don't go ballistic over one "fairy tale", and not the other.

    I don't understand how if you don't believe in something, it can offend you.

    If I go to court and am ask to swear on a bible, I'm not going to wet my pants like some of you act like you would. Big deal, Bible, Koran, TV Guide, who cares...
    MaxiMunK.com The Forum That Asks, "Are You Not Entertained?"

    Remember: "Anyone that thinks the Treo should just work right out of the box, shouldn't own a Treo..."
  13. #13  
    Quote Originally Posted by millsda2
    Just out of curiousity...what exactly do you believe as being a self-procaimed athiest? Would it offend you to have God mentioned in the Declaration of Independence by which you would swear? Does God offend you period?
    Technically the Declaration of Independence is not a document of law. It was written prior to the founding of this state.
  14.    #14  
    Quote Originally Posted by aprasad
    God offends me to the same extent as Ghosts, Leprechauns, the Monster in my closet (and under my bed). I consider (until/unless confronted by hard evidence, that is repeatable and reproducable) all of these as figments of our imagination. These entities help some to deal with life's adversities. I don't need them.

    As for the role of these imaginary entities in our daily lives: to each his own unless their ideas are imposed on me. I have no problem if the masses chose to live their lives under the influence of whatever imaginary entities they choose.. as long as they don't impose it on the unwilling.

    In a secular country (we are still secular, right?)
    Actually, the more I think about it. We are not a secular society. There is a strong push to become one. However the current founding documents recognize a "creator." While such a designation does not denote a particular religion, clearly the concept of a creator is not a secular notion. That notwithstanding, your argument still merits examination.
    Quote Originally Posted by aprasad
    , I expect all _beliefs_ and _faiths_ to have equally minimal role. Please note that this does NOT equate to a lawless anarchist society.. any more than going to church/temples leads people to cheat less on their taxes or spouses...
    Minimizing religious beliefs and faiths does not "equate" to a lawless anarchist society. However, it can be a major contributing factor. NOT because of the absence of "religion" per se but because of the absence of an objective standard of some sort to which or under which all citizens can rally. Without an objective standard, all ideas are inherenty of equal value and equal worth. The only rationale for employing one idea over another is might, be it militaristic or majority.

    In fact, the lack of civility in national governance bodies can be traced to the erosions of an objective standard. For even when a given political party has garnered a majority, and the right to rule that such a majority grants, the opposition continues attempts to assert its defeated platform. The crafty simply change the arena.

    This lawsuit is a great example. Unable to make the legislative changes that are desired, the ACLU presses for court proceedings. If you want a secular society, why not just change the consitution? Because the citizenry would stand for such a blatant move. However, the citizenry is largely unaware of various court cases that are brought all over the country. By then, "precedent" is set in such a way as to make meaningless the legislative process.

    For the record: I fully respect the ACLU's right to pursue its agenda, whatever it may be. And, I recognize that my characterization of it's motives may be inaccurate. It is not my goal to mischaracterize but to offer my assessment.
  15.    #15  
    Quote Originally Posted by KRamsauer
    Technically the Declaration of Independence is not a document of law. It was written prior to the founding of this state.
    Yet, it communicates the rationale underpinning the establishing document.
    Last edited by shopharim; 08/02/2005 at 11:03 AM.
  16. #16  
    Quote Originally Posted by Insertion
    This is plain silly. If ghosts and leprechauns offend you, you're way too sensitive.


    I don't understand how if you don't believe in something, it can offend you.

    If I go to court and am ask to swear on a bible, I'm not going to wet my pants like some of you act like you would. Big deal, Bible, Koran, TV Guide, who cares...
    Insertion ... I think he meant it the other way around ... that he is NOT offended by ghosts and leprechauns, and therefore neither is he offended by others worshipping God.
    Palm m505 -> Treo600 (GSM ATT) -> Treo650 (Cingular) -> BB8700g -> BB Pearl
    "The point of living and of being an optimist, is to be foolish enough to believe the best is yet to come."
  17. #17  
    Quote Originally Posted by chillig35
    Insertion ... I think he meant it the other way around ... that he is NOT offended by ghosts and leprechauns, and therefore neither is he offended by others worshipping God.
    Maybe. If that's the case, then we agree, and I apologize.
    MaxiMunK.com The Forum That Asks, "Are You Not Entertained?"

    Remember: "Anyone that thinks the Treo should just work right out of the box, shouldn't own a Treo..."
  18. #18  
    I think the first amendment spells it out clearly:

    Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;
    It is black and white - the government cannot endorse or mandate any particular religion. However it cannot stop anyone from exercising their right to practise religion either. If the majority of the american people choose to believe in God (a christian god in particular) and they choose to dessiminate that religion, then the government has no right to stop them. They just cannot help them, that's all. Now just substitute the words "religion" or "belief in God" with agnosticism or atheism and the same principle holds. The government cannot promote or support atheism anymore than it can support christianity or any other religion.
    Palm m505 -> Treo600 (GSM ATT) -> Treo650 (Cingular) -> BB8700g -> BB Pearl
    "The point of living and of being an optimist, is to be foolish enough to believe the best is yet to come."
  19. #19  
    I think we need daThomas here to clear this whole thing up.
    Well behaved women rarely make history
  20. #20  
    Quote Originally Posted by clairegrrl
    I think we need daThomas here to clear this whole thing up.
    nahhh ...he'll just do selective editing like:

    Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion
    Palm m505 -> Treo600 (GSM ATT) -> Treo650 (Cingular) -> BB8700g -> BB Pearl
    "The point of living and of being an optimist, is to be foolish enough to believe the best is yet to come."
Page 1 of 8 123456 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions