And the only reason I’m posting you this post now is cause you may know somebody in a similar situation, or you may be in a similar situation, and if your in a situation like that there’s only one thing you can do and that’s to stand up in court and say “You got it, Jack” and sit back down.
You know, if one person, just one person does it they may think he’s really crazy and they won’t let him sit on the jury.
And if two people, two people do it, in harmony, they may think they’re both folk singers and they won’t take either of them.
And can you, can you imagine fifty people a day, I said fifty people a day standing up in court and saying “You got it, Jack” and sitting back down. And friends they may think it’s a movement. And that’s what it is, the “You got it, Jack” I Can’t Think of a Better Way to Get Out of Jury Duty Movement, and all you got to do to join is say it the next time your called for jury duty.
Am I the only one who came in here expecting a discussion of how atheists swear different from non-atheists when they’re upset, or how it’s odd that atheists will still say ‘god dammit’ even when they supposedly don’t even believe in god?
I made the mistake in traffic court, when the judge asked everyone present if they swear, instead of “I do”, I said “I affirm”. I shortly was told by the judge that this immediately branded me a lawyer. And I was held to tighter rules of evidence. When I protested that I was not a lawyer but an atheist, he softened and allowed me to introduce evidence without first “laying a foundation”.
Why should we? The point of a swear word is to demonstrate to others how irate you are. Using words they find offensive is plenty useful for that. Using words that are commonly used to convey that meaning are plenty useful. Why should I have* to make up completely new swear words? It’s not like I’m all that creative when I’ve just stubbed my toe/bumped my knee/gotten ticked off. Swear words are usually on automatic pilot.
*Some people take great pleasure in how creative they are with their invective, and how they can go on four hours without repeating themselves. I don’t get it. FUCK! FUCK! FUCK! FUCK! FUCK! works fine for me.
No odder than all the Christians (mainly Brits) who continue to say “By Jove” when they don’t believe in Jove the Father of the Gods in Classical Antiquity.
did you read my post? I don’t care either way whether atheists swear more or less - I just reckoned when I clicked on this thread that it would be about that discussion (swearing among/ in the group of atheists) rather than about the swearing in of atheists.
Yes I read your post, I even quoted it. Yes, I got that your main point was confusion over the thread topic.
But in your post, you stated an opinion
Rather than tearing you a new one for assuming that atheists are not sincere in their claim to not believing in deities, I addressed the question of why atheists would continue to reference God in their epithets. I assumed that since you came in to discuss that topic, an actual answer would be useful. But no, apparently, you didn’t actually want to discuss the topic, you just wanted to express confusion over what the thread led you to expect.
Odd interpretation of what I wrote, but what the hell. That’s not ‘my’ opinion, that’s just ‘an’ opinion that one could conceivably debate about and argue in favor of. If I said I expected a debate about how Santaclaus mistreats his reindeer, that does not mean I think he mistreats his reindeer, just that someone who does believe that started a debate about it.
Admittedly I am in the UK, not the US, but I did Jury Duty a couple of years ago. I was the only one to take (make?) the affirmation.
After the first day several of my fellow jurors said they wished that they had done it too.
The thing that annoyed me was that the wording here is about twice as long as that for the theists. It seems to imply that if you believe in a ficticious being (my own opinion) that your word was more reliable than that of a person who relied on evidence and proof of the exisitence of such a being.
I know who I would want on the jury if I was in the dock.
In New Jersey, they say do a mass swearing in, and ask you to “swear or affirm”. I also don’t believe they ask you to say “so help me God” although the judge held up a Bible as he was swearing us in. I guess it makes those that the need for such things feel better.
But you didn’t say “how some people might think it odd…” or “whether it is odd…”, you said “it’s odd…” That sounds like you are expressing an opinion, not stating a possible position one could take. It’s not an odd interpretation, it’s a straightforward reading of your words.
As far as mass swear ins, it is easy to say “affirm” or drop the “so help me God” and nobody even notice.
This seems to be the newst thread on the subject of oaths so I put my two bits in here.
I live in Finland which is part of the EU. Now EU has laws that say that all the people living in EU have freedom of religion including not to have one. And this freedom is postive which means that no-one is required to tell their religion.
This then causes problems with oaths. I don’t know how other member countries have solved this but in Finland we don’t swear by god in: justice system (judges, jurors, witnesses), civil servants (inculding police force), ministers and president. We still have swearing by god in military which brings up the problem that as we have conscription the year group is all sworn in at the same time and it’s a public event. Now that means that the soldiers need to tell their affilitiation to religion publicly which is in fact something they under EU-law are not recuired to do.
The laws covering the military oath are under revision but there’s a major cultural bias not to change them. But IMHO they have to be changed and it’s only time when it happens.
The non-religious oath we have is by ones honor and conscience.
