posted
Right. And since they are therefore, in fact, lying about their beliefs, that makes Bible believers less likely to be honest. So, what was your point?
Posts: 10645 | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
I was under the impression that you said they were lying. In any case, if they aren't lying about their beliefs, then they are still in jail, presumably for having done something their mothers wouldn't approve of. Which leads me to my point: If a small fraction of believers are liars, and there is no corresponding fraction among the non-believers, then that is a correlation, although possibly a small one. Though it has to be noted, with the US prison population being what it is, jailed Christians are probably not so small a percentage of all Christians.
Posts: 10645 | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
In North Carolina, you are allowed to 'affirm' if you feel uncomfortable with swearing on the Christian Bible. This was originally instituted to allow non-religious people to take oaths. Unfortunately, some people see affirming as admitting lack of religious belief, which in a very religious community can undermine the credibility of the witness' testimony. The recent ruling by the State Court to allow the Koran to be used for swearing oaths is a nod to the growing diversity in certain areas of our state, but I don't expect that it will be widely used. How a jury might interpret this use, and how it might affect their judgment of the testimony given is an open question. I suspect some research has been done on this matter since juries can be swayed by subtle signals. The attempt to develop one way of promising to tell the truth and nothing but the truth is likely to remain an ideal whatever book or words are used.
Posts: 42 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |