SO HELP ME GOD, OR MAYBE NOT!

I'm surprised it took as long as it did for someone to challenge this one. A North Carolina District Judge has asked his county's Board of Commissioners that all references to "so help me God" and "God save the state and this honorable court" be removed from his courtroom whenever he presides over his district's sleepy little hamlet court. From an AP story:

"...the court system is seeing an increasing number of people from other cultures that are not necessarily Christian, Honeycutt expressed. I believe that the burden should not be on those individuals to speak up and request an oath that does not mention God or use the Christian Bible." The decision did not sit well with some members of the community, however. Rick Lanier, a former member of the County Board of Commissioners and an organizer of a "In God We Trust" petition, denounced Honeycutt's action. "It's totally in opposition to the very basis of our constitution, the very basis for our laws," Lanier said. "He's a judge. He should be subject to complying with the bylaws that we established and founded for our nation. Because we are a Christian nation and we've been a Christian nation for 300 years, the thing that bothers me is, are we conforming to a minority?"

Seems reasonable to me. If it's a sin to bear false witness (which most religions seems to agree on), then what is the oath for in the first place... is it not really to force religious doctrine on non-believers? One possible solution--and I've thought this for years--change the "so help me God part to something like "under consequence of perjury, which carries a sentence of 'yada, yada, yada'."

I agree with Mikal's suggestion about "under consequence of perjury . . ." I have long been opposed to use of such language. Historically, we are NOT a Christian nation and never have been. We are a secular democratic republic.

This is a beauty: "It's totally in opposition to the very basis of our constitution, the very basis for our laws," Lanier said. This guy is neither a historian nor a lawyer. He is presenting his own views as prima facie truth and fact, when in fact, they are simply his opinion. This is why America today is close to becoming the very theocracy that we fought to destroy in Iraq, but we've put in a conservative, fundamentalist, Protestant Christian God rather than some form of Islamic teaching and Allah.

I whole-heartedly agree. I've had to take the stand, and provide a deposition for legal proceedings. In both cases, I explained to the attorney that I refused to take an oath on a Bible. I explained that I was not a christian and therefore would be committing perjury by swearing to a god, or on a Bible. I don't believe that we cater to the minority by removing God from government. Rather, we provide a clearing for all belief systems. We provide a government that truly treats people equally. We provide a place for humans to conduct legal business - from courtroom to public service - without the undue burden of religion. Religion is a personal conviction, which I fully support for our citizens. That's the beauty of our country, we allow ALL religions to practice here. We may not agree with the tenets, but as long as they fall within our justice system, anyone can practice their faith in the United States of America. Solely because we have a separation of Church and State can we have the religious freedoms we often take for granted. Taking God out of government doesn't take God out of people's hearts and minds.