Dismiss Notice
Join Physics Forums Today!
The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

Separation of Church and State

  1. Dec 5, 2008 #1
    I was watching Law & Order and I realized a blatant violation of the separation of church and state.

    (1) When you swear to tell the truth, you put your hand on a bible.

    (2) When you talk to a preist, they are legally allowed to not repeat what you told them in confession, even if you admitted to a crime!

    You have the right to remain silent if you are the one under prosecution, but if someone else is called to the stand they must tell the truth.
     
  2. jcsd
  3. Dec 5, 2008 #2

    mgb_phys

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    Homework Helper

    3, It says in god we trust on the money
     
  4. Dec 5, 2008 #3
    But 'In God we trust' is secular.
     
  5. Dec 5, 2008 #4

    Gokul43201

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    You don't have to. You can ask for a non-religious oath if you are atheist.

    But, hey, if you want to be President, Congressman or Governor, you're going to have a hard time (at least from Republicans) if you don't take the oath of office on a Bible.

    http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D8MEPKIG0&show_article=1
     
  6. Dec 5, 2008 #5
    Oh, I'm sure when your on trial for murder and you take the stand and say I don't believe in god, the jury is going to LOVE that.
     
  7. Dec 5, 2008 #6

    mgb_phys

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    Homework Helper

    I thought christians weren't allowed to swear on the bible?

    Mat 5:34 But I say unto you, Swear not at all; neither by heaven; for it is God's throne:
    Mat 5:35 Nor by the earth; for it is his footstool: neither by Jerusalem; for it is the city of the great King.
    Mat 5:36 Neither shalt thou swear by thy head, because thou canst not make one hair white or black.
    Mat 5:37 But let your communication be, Yea, yea; Nay, nay: for whatsoever is more than these cometh of evil.
     
  8. Dec 5, 2008 #7
    I don't know. But I'd like to know if a preist really is allow to keep quiet if he has information on someone that confessed to comitting a crime. Or can he be prosecuted for not talking under oath? If he can keep quiet, this is a serious problem.
     
  9. Dec 5, 2008 #8
    A priest testifying about your confession to him is hearsay.
     
  10. Dec 5, 2008 #9

    Gokul43201

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    I think you can arrange that in chanbers or whatever - I think I learned that from Law & Order too. But hey, if you want to be tried by a jury of your peers, you better make sure your lawyer gets that straight during jury selection. In any case, the state does provide for a separation, but there's only so much separation you can hope to get in a deeply religious country/state/county.
     
  11. Dec 5, 2008 #10

    Pythagorean

    User Avatar
    Gold Member

    I still don't understand how it's secular... could someone please explain?

    Here's the argument against it being secular from that site:

     
  12. Dec 5, 2008 #11
    Is it also hearsay if it were a friend he had told also?
     
  13. Dec 5, 2008 #12

    russ_watters

    User Avatar

    Staff: Mentor

    That isn't required, so there is no violation.
    Could you explain why you see that as a violation? The same priveledge exists for doctors, lawyers, shrinks, and even reporters.
    Is that your reasoning? No one is saying a priest needs to lie. They just don't talk.
     
  14. Dec 5, 2008 #13
    It's secular because it simply says 'In God We Trust".

    Not, "In Jesus we Trust"

    Not, "In Abraham we Trust"

    Not, "In Muhammad we Trust"

    Not, "In Visnu we Trust"
     
  15. Dec 5, 2008 #14
    It doesn't matter if its required, no one should be put in a position to have to refuse. If I'm in the southern bible belt being convicted of a crime judged by my good christian peers and I take the stand and say 'oh, no thanks' to the bible, I'm screwed.

    I think I remember a reporter that went to jail because they were told to reveal their source and decided to stay quiet. It was probably about a year ago. I cant remember exactly what it was though.

    In any event, why do they get special passes either?


    If you are called to court and you are asked a question and you refuse to answer, isn't the judge supposed to throw you in jail? You sware to tell the truth, not to tell what you feel like saying.
     
  16. Dec 5, 2008 #15

    russ_watters

    User Avatar

    Staff: Mentor

    Could you explain further please? It sounds like you think that secular means not referring to a specific religion. Secular means not religious or spiritual. How is a reference to god not religious or spiritual?
     
  17. Dec 5, 2008 #16
    I guess it depends on how tight you want to make the definition. I thought secular means no particular religion.

    In other words, the framers allowed for the mention of God, but not any specific God/Gods/Spaghetti Monsters.

    I.e. God: Yes.
    Religion: No.
     
  18. Dec 5, 2008 #17

    russ_watters

    User Avatar

    Staff: Mentor

    Since a high fraction of people would do it, it makes sense to prepare as if people will do it. A person who knows they will be called to testify should tell their lawyer beforehand, rather than refusing on the spot. It works the same for people doing oaths of office. I see no violation.
    How is that different than being convicted due to racism? That's not the govenrment discriminating on you, that's the members of the jury. It has nothing to do with separation of church and state.
    To a priest? That would surprise me.
    What do you mean? What "special pass"? Do you understand why anyone has confidentiality?
    No. Haven't you heard of the 5th Amendment? And obviously, confidentiality exists and is incorporated into the legal system. There are special rules that apply to different situations. Ie, if the situation is not covered by confidentiality and you are not capable of incriminating yourself, the court can compel you to testify.
     
  19. Dec 5, 2008 #18

    russ_watters

    User Avatar

    Staff: Mentor

    This I didn't know:
    http://answers.google.com/answers/threadview?id=503591
    So there's that answer.
     
  20. Dec 5, 2008 #19

    russ_watters

    User Avatar

    Staff: Mentor

    Dunno, sounds to me like you're manufacturing your own definition. How are we supposed to have a discussion if people just make up words on the spot?

    More to the point, the people who designed "separation of church and state" used the dictionary definition. And even more to the point, "In God we trust" is a recent addition that is intended to promote a christian god. It is most certainly a violation of separation of church and state. http://atheism.about.com/library/FAQs/cs/blcsm_gov_motto.htm
     
    Last edited: Dec 5, 2008
  21. Dec 5, 2008 #20
    It does not matter. The jury is going to notice. They will go hmmmmmmm, he never swore to tell the truth on a bible. Isnt that peculiar............ it should not be allowed, period. So no one knows one way or another if they were or were not going to sware on a bible.


    In that case, you don't sware on a bible. You sware on a copy of the constitution.

    Because the government put you into that position by its practice of having people sware on a bible.

    Confidentiality is something between a group of people. It should have no bearing in a court of law though.

    As far as I am aware, the 5th amendment has to do with incriminating yourself. If you are a witness to a crime comitted by someone else, you can't sit there and cry the 5th, can you?
     
Know someone interested in this topic? Share this thread via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook

Have something to add?