"Do you swear to tell the truth... so help you God?"

This was something interesting I had thought about tonight.
You always hear about the arguments on whether or not children in public schools should have to say the pledge of allegiance - or even whether or not the allegiance should say "Under God"

But you never really hear any mention of this statement that is said every day in court and pledging to God that they are indeed telling the truth.

There's lots of debate over this and really doesn't seem to have a clear and concrete message.

There is no bible for you to put your left hand on.
However, now we have what you call an affirmation. Which, has the same force in law as an oath. If an atheist chose to take an oath, without revealing his or her beliefs, then the oath would be binding in law.

I read an interesting article, about an atheist man who went to court:


A comment to the guy in the article was:


I don't see it as unable to have the conscious to swear onto God, that's the problem with a lot of these assumptions. If you're not lying then you wouldn't fear pledging onto God. Well, if I'm swearing not to lie would I lie in order to convince them I won't lie?

Someone is lying in the court room, if both are swearing onto God that they're innocent then clearly someone has already lied.

Doesn't that defeat the purpose?
If somebody was able to commit a crime, or somebody was able to be dishonest and frame a person for a crime they did not commit - does that not already disqualify them from being 'good honest Christians'?

What basis does swearing to God really have?

If you were brought into court and you had to testify for something and happened to be atheist: Would you swear to God? Or would you risk being discriminated against?

It depends on what I am being judged on.

If it's something serious that could land me in jail for a long time then I would lie all the way through.

Better telling a simple lie than to tell the truth and end up in jail for a long time.

Hmm, I'm Atheist and Deal with thoughts like this all the time. I have been in Awkward situations dealing with my Beliefs as well.

Sadly, I think i would Lie and just say: "i swear to god." I only choose to do so because after being Discriminated against so many Times for what I believe in I have learned its better to tell a "little white lie" every once in a while.

People are not Yet Understanding of "change, and Difference" and will do things to punish you even if your in the right in certain situations just because of your Beliefs...

Because daddy's wrath is a scary thing. He'll put you in hell if you lied using his name...




Lol, I'm an atheist, and I'd still swear the way they want it. People's belief is hard to correct even with sound and valid arguments, so I think it's pointless to tell them "I'm a logic/reason man" in such situations. That's why I'll just swear that way for the hell of it. What I need is my victory, and if adding some meaningless words to my speech helps me achieve my goal, why not?

Hmm...maybe I'll try to tell the judge I'm an atheist after I won the case. I wanna see his face when I do.

edit: and as the commenter-san said, the court system is biased.

None, lol
But then again, I am atheist.


I would probably do the same as the person in the article. Although I question the implication that he lost the case due to it.

In the court room, the Judge is GOD so ya... even if you are atheist you can swear to god because that means that you swear that you will tell the judge the truth.

It gives people the false comfort of believing one to be made out of the same moral fiber as himself/herself.


I would swear to God or any other (what I believe to be) non-existential being for that matter simply because it is less of a hassle to lie than possibly be labeled and persecuted.

This is an outdated practice that started way back when, when everyone was religious and believed that God would punish them if they lied when swearing by his name to tell the truth.

Nowadays it's more of keeping the tradition going and of a formality than anything.



I'd swear to God, it's the same as saying I swear to tell the truth, just adding the extra words, "To God." In there. Not swearing to God would put me at a disadvantage because there's a pretty high probability that the judge/jury are religious and will lean towards believing the man who swears to God.

Hah, I remember thinking about this myself quite awhile ago. Always used to confuse me as a child, for the very same reasons you've stated.

Indeed, I would swear to their God; I have no reason not to. To me, it's a lot like saying 'I swear to tell the truth under the name of this uncomfortable chair.' I have no reason not to tell the truth the the chair, even if it is an uncomfortable one. The chair is not who I'm trying to convince here.

Heh, I do respect the guy in the article, though. Stating his opinion and beliefs, even when it would have been easier just to follow the norm.

None tho, many still lie in court, we know it and the judge knows it too. Its more of a common procedure I guess.


Im an atheist and Ill probably do, I do it to stand a level ground with the opponent, create no problems for myself and to the court, even if I dont believe in god.

In my opinion tho, I think that the cause for the case is just the opponent is a better liar, and probabbly the lack of evidence ( thinking maybe he was cheated online ). Judges watch liers everyday even after swearing to god atheist or not, so i doubt normal judges would judge based on that. I think that the man said something unneccesary, but he have my respect for being pretty honest in court.

Eh, I am one of those "assholes" who refuses to stand for the Pledge of Allegiance. Let's just hope I never have to testify in court.

All I ever heard was that I was "just a non-conforming conformist" or just being a jerk, but whatever. I don't believe in God and I'm certainly not going to swear anything to an imaginary man in the sky.

Well the issue with the pledge of allegiance is "under god" wasn't even originally part of the pledge. It was added in the.... *wikis* 1954.

I never minded standing for the pledge, I never said it though. Unless I had a douche bag of a teacher that'd make you say it alone if you didn't say it with the class.

My reasoning was people fight for this country, and the least I can do is stand and recognize them in the morning.

Though for some religions they're even against that. JW for example.

Though I don't care if other people stand or not stand. It's their decision, it's not like my standing affects the soldiers any bit.

Even for people who believe in God this serves no real purpose as they can lie anyway and then later repent for it. Even if it only counts if you truly mean that you are sorry you lied, it's a hell of a lot easier to be sorry you lied 40 years later down the line after not having gone to prison than it is to deal with being in prison for whatever number of years.

As for the pledging allegiance...I never did it unless a teacher or whatnot was hover over me. I sure as hell don't feel I need to pledge allegiance to a country to gives me less than what I put into it. If someone offers me money to move to another country and badmouth america I'd freakin do it. If someone offered me money to bomb a building full of people I wouldn't not because I feel I owe it to this country but because I don't want to kill people.

Oh, I didn't know God took IOU's.

What meaning do you think confession has then?

I'd take the oath as prescribed, win the case and go home, done. A courtroom is rarely the appropriate place for political protest, especially when just a small fraud case is on trial.
The courtroom as an institution simply does not smile upon infractions, no matter how minor. This has little to do with the courtroom being biased against atheists; it's biased against obstructionists. The most wise course of action, if you wish to win a small trial like that, therefore is to swallow your pride and conform to the arcane conventions of the court one hundred per cent, and win the case because you put up no resistance to the institution and its rules.

@ZiggyOtaku: my question to you is if one did not believe in God in the first place, on what basis would one be afraid of lying in front of the whole court? I view it as a custom, akin to the pledge of allegiance. I do it to fit in; being a chameleon is necessary under the circumstances without trying to raise a big scene.

What's funny, since I long forgot the entire pledge of allegiance, I looked up the pledge of allegiance and found this interesting little blurb:



I wonder if that those words "under God" can be striked from the allegiance, seeing how communism isn't as big of a threat as it was back then. It certainly has to do with issues where people all over the States are objecting to overt Christianity references in all walks of life, including crosses in veteran memorials, of which I read in an article just recently.

The basis of perjury being a serious offence and heavily punished?
The law, to quote M.L.A. Hart, in this is "the gunman situation writ large"; no gods necessary.


What's even more funny is that anyone would believe that adding "under god" grants protection against communists. It's like a medieval spell against frost, or something.

@gibbous: people lie anyways, and some can tell that they aren't of the Christian faith. It's a custom, and people since then have long stopped treating it as something unsecular.

As for the "under god" thing, it's brainwashing, and ineffective in my opinion. Then again, the whole red craze was idiotic to begin with, and mass hysteria can pull off some dumb things.

Oh, I agree perfectly that the "under god" is simply an arcane ritual one needs to submit to in the courtroom. It's just like a witness being instructed that he shouldn't lie: Everyone already knows that he shouldn't, and everyone knows that he will. The institutional setting however requires it to be made explicit - ritual.

But, your earlier question looked to me as though you were speaking in favour of the "under god" keeping anyone from lying, which I reject. What stands between people and the most outrageous lies is not the "under god", but the threat of severe legal punishment if they get caught.