Traditionally, people testifying in court are asked to repeat “I swear to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help me God,” and I’m a bit curious about the last part.
What does that mean, exactly? Did the people who formed this oath mean to imply that you were risking eternal damnation if you lied? And were people taking the oath then actually supposed to be agreeing to that?!
Well, yes, basically…threre’s that whole “don’t bear false witness” commandment.
Not necessarily “eternal damnation.” There are lesser penalties a believer could incur for lying, such as prolonging your time in Purgatory.
Last time I was in court, no god was mentioned. Just, Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth.
I did.
And the “or affirm” is because some Christian groups object to swearing, based on Jesus’ line about “let your yes be yes and your no be no”. In other words, you should always be telling the truth anyway, so swearing shouldn’t make you any more truthful.
Last time I was in court (in California), it appeared that the court system had adopted a secular oath as the default.
It said something like “Do you solemnly affirm under penalty of perjury that the evidence you are about to give is the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?”
Interesting that they added “under penalty of perjury.” I guess they need something to threaten you with, now that they’ve done away with the friendly reminder (if you believe in that stuff) that if you lie you might go to Hell.
Some places have even dispensed with the “the whole truth and nothing but the truth” part. In King County, WA, for example, the oath is basically “Do you swear or affirm that the testimony you are about to give will be the truth?”
I think it’s worth noting that as recently as the 1800’s in America, the testimony of certain non Christians (in this case, Chinese immigrants) was not allowed in court.
My question is what if you answer ‘No’ to the oath? If you’re required by law to testify and tell the truth, what’s the point of the swearing in?
IRCC as late as the 1930s atheists were disqualified as witnesses in legal proceedings in some states because they didn’t believe in a supreme being or future state of rewards & punishments.
If you decline to swear or affirm, they won’t take your evidence.
If you are under an obligation to testify - i.e. a subpoena - then they still won’t take your evidence. Plus, you will be treated as being in contempt of court.
“So help me God,” I believe, means “may God assist me to that end”; to put it another way, “Do you swear to tell the truth … so help you God?” means"Do you swear to tell the truth as best you can?"
…making the swearing-in superfluous and unreasonable…
Depends. The purpose of the swearing-in is to impress upon the witness the more than ordinarily great signficance of telling the truth on this particular occasion, and getting from them some acknowledgement of this.
Child witnesses are not sworn. Instead, they are quizzed to establish whether they understand the concept of “truth”, and the importance of telling the truth. Same purpose, but it takes longer.
As late as the 2010’s, a majority of Americans don’t believe atheists can be moral or ethical people, and lawyers still go to great lengths to not bring it up if their client or witness is an atheist. Progress comes slow.
Exactly. Plus a little bit of making sure they get fair warning that if they do lie, they can get punished for it.
Yes, I suppose that’s it…more effective to have the witness make an oral vow rather than just giving them an admonishment about perjury.
I’ve often wondered if you wanted to be a hostile witness, could you answer the oath with “But your honor, I don’t believe in God, so how should I swear in?” Yes, a lot of Canadians just shake their heads at the emphasis Americans put on religion.
Plus, yes, you are not condemned to eternal damnation with no salvation - ever - but there is the separate sin of, IIRC, “presumption” if you take the attitude that you can offend God and will be forgiven later. Of course, that sin too can be forgiven. Only God knows if you are truly sorry or just presuming to collect the promised forgiveness to get out of guilt.
I like the secular system better - two to ten years in Purgatory State Pen unless the governor pardons you.
As others have said, it’s to get you to acknowledge that you understand the consequences of perjury.
American courts allow you to affirm that you will tell the truth if you don’t believe in god or if taking oaths violates your religion (Jehovah’s Witnesses, for example).
Correct, but it some courts the oath is the default option and you have to specifically request an affirmation. When I served on a jury none of the witnesses were asked (at least in our presence) if they wanted to swear of affirm; the clerk just asked everyone to place their hand on the Bible and swear by “Almighty God”. She (along with a few of the other jurors) also gave me the stink eye when I insisted on being affirmed seperately instead of taking the group oath when were empaneled.