to be annoyed with my friend

[cecinestpasunepipe]

She is involved in a court case in which her evidence contradicts that of some other witnesses. I have no opinion regarding who is telling the truth, but she has told me that her evidence should carry more weight because she swore an oath on the Bible, and the other witnesses, "only made an affirmation". When I called her up on this, saying that if I had to appear in court, I would affirm as I have no religious beliefs, she insinuated that meant that I had no way of telling right from wrong.

[MangoMonster]

I'd be annoyed too, but I don't think there's much point in challenging the religious beliefs of others, so I probably try to let it go. YANBU though.

[sloggies]

Annoying, I agree.

[SinicalSal]

say to her in a belittling and patronising way 'Oh dear, X, you are confusing your morals with your metaphysics aren't you'.

Well, don't actually say it, maybe, but YANBU.

[TidyDancer]

I guess to some people, a rejection of swearing on the Bible could be construed as "I don't want to swear on the Bible because I will not be telling the truth". So that's where I suppose it's coming from.

But YANBU.

[Mitmoo]

It's not her decision to make, the jury or magistrate or whoever, will believe people based on their credibility not on the oath they took.

[ripstheirthroatoutliveupstairs]

YANBU. i would be mightily pissed off if my integrity and honesty were called into question because I have no reliigous belief.

[catsrus]

affirmation came in as a concession to Quakers - who do not swear oaths at all. To swear an oath is to effectively say "THIS time I really will tell the truth" - and admit that sometimes you might lie. Quakers believe that you must always tell the truth in every aspect of your life - so swearing oaths is against Quaker beliefs. This is one huge reason why Quaker companies did so well - those they did business with could trust that agreements would be kept :-) Those who affirm then might possibly have a much higher standard of truth than those who swear on oath :)

Interesting list of Quaker founded companies here - including Sony would you believe!

[worraliberty]

Worra loada crap considering how many lies have been told in court through the years Lol

[SinicalSal]

That's interesting about the Quakers

[TrillianAstra]

If she knows that they are superstitious about bibles Christian then she might have some grounds for her belief that they are more likely than her to be lying.

But YANBU, she is being ridiculous saying that people who are not religious have no way of telling right from wrong.

[Andrewofgg]

There is a theory that an affirming witness carries more weight (subconsciously) as a person who has thought through the question of what is true and what is not.

[Crosshair]

yanbu.

[WreckaJones]

I am pretty anti institutional religion but the more I learn about Quakers the more I like them! There were a few MNers on another thread I was on about religion who had been/are Quakers and their input was fascinating!

OP YANBU. I'd be really pissed off with that insinuation to the point that I'm not sure I could hang out with that person much in the future.

[Onemorning]

YANBU

I was a juror and made an affirmation instead of swearing on the bible. It would have been dishonest for me to swear on a book that I don't believe in. Personal honesty doesn't rely on a belief system, IMO.

[Animol]

Many Christians - not just Quakers - choose to affirm rather than swear on the bible because of the bible's own teaching.

[EldritchCleavage]

The Oaths Act 1978 (I think) makes it clear the court is not allowed to differentiate between witnesses based on whether they swore or affirmed. I.e. in law they are treated as equally valid. Your friend has her own personal belief about this but she is being VU to expect everyone else to share it.

[Onemorning]

Animol, I didn't know that, I suppose I'd assumed that Christians would automatically swear on the Bible. Why is that?

[catsrus]

onemorning it's because of a passage in Matthew's gospel (which is the root of the Quaker practice too)

Matthew 5:33-37
New International Version (NIV)
Oaths
33 ?Again, you have heard that it was said to the people long ago, ?Do not break your oath, but fulfill to the Lord the vows you have made.? 34 But I tell you, do not swear an oath at all: either by heaven, for it is God?s throne; 35 or by the earth, for it is his footstool; or by Jerusalem, for it is the city of the Great King. 36 And do not swear by your head, for you cannot make even one hair white or black. 37 All you need to say is simply ?Yes? or ?No?; anything beyond this comes from the evil one.[a]

[differentnameforthis]

So she feels her truth is the only truth because she has religion? Tell her that LOTS of religious people lie.

Child abusing priests & the subsequent cover up?