Why I Like The Aclu

[Ed Palmer]

Debate Brews Over Use of Qur’an in US Court
Arab News ^ | 9 December 2005 | Barbara Ferguson


Posted on 12/09/2005 12:56:14 AM PST by kipita


WASHINGTON, 9 December 2005 — Here in the United States, witnesses taking the stand in a court of law traditionally are asked to swear to tell the truth — by placing their right hand on the Bible.

So when Muslims in Guilford County, North Carolina, tried to donate copies of the Qur’an for courtroom use, Chief District Court Judge Joseph Turner rejected the proposal.

Taking an oath on the Qur’an is not allowed by North Carolina state law, he said, which specifies that witnesses shall place their hands on the “Holy Scriptures,” which he interprets as the Christian Bible.

“We’ve been doing it that way for 200 years,” he told reporters. “Until the legislature changes that law, I believe I have to do what I’ve been told to do in the statutes.”

The Council on American-Islamic Relations and the American Civil Liberties Union challenged the decision by the Guilford County Courts.

“This was the first time that we had a judge... going on record and stating unilaterally what is a holy scripture and what is not — what we believe to be a violation of the establishment clause,” said Arsalan Iftikhar, legal director of CAIR.

The anticipated decision comes four months after the ACLU of North Carolina and CAIR filed a lawsuit asking a judge to clarify that state law allows people to swear on religious texts other than the Christian Bible. The lawsuit followed objections made this summer over the inability of Muslims to be sworn in Guilford County courts using the Qur’an.

When the state Administrative Office of the Courts declined to intervene, the ACLU and CAIR took the issue to court, arguing that the term “Holy Scriptures” is broad enough to include many religious texts.

Local papers report that the state attorney general’s office initially argued in court papers that the ACLU and CAIR lacked the right to sue because there is no controversy to settle between the parties.

[OLE SARG]

I am getting so sick of this ****. The U.S. bending over backwards not to offend *******s here in the US (most illegally) with religion, traditions, or whatever. In my opinion, they can take their koran, qur'an, or however you say it, and stuff it. Most of these countries we bend over backwards to "Not Offend" don't allow a bible in their country and if you get caught with one you could be executed.
The ACLU (includes all the snakelike attorneys doing the dirty work) can kiss my ass. If something in the U.S. "OFFENDS" you, then go to hell back where you came from!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

SEMPER FI,
OLE SARG

[yellowwing]

The purpose of swearing on the Holy Scriptures is to reaffirm that the person is to tell the truth.

The Law needs the Truth. It is vital for the legal process to succeed.

“We’ve been doing it that way for 200 years,” when there was not such a large non-Christian population. The Bible was then sufficient to cover the population.

In our Native circles, we hold tobacco or an eagle feather to reaffirm the Truth. Even some Christian sects forbid swearing and oath, and the law allows them to 'affirm' they are telling the Truth.

If a muslim wants to use the Qur’an to reaffirm the Truth, Justice will still be served and the legal process is still safeguarded.

I still believe that the Constitution is a sacred guide. It allows for change in our Nation. And its been the best form of government on this planet since 1789.

Individual Freedoms are ensured if they do not harm the greater masses. I know I will not be irreparably harmed if some muslim in North Carolina takes an oath on a Qur'an.

[mrbsox]

If a muslim wants to use the Qur’an to reaffirm the Truth, Justice will still be served and the legal process is still safeguarded.

I'd be more inclined to believe a Muslum if he/she swore oath on THEIR Holy scripture, than on ours(mine).

[yellowwing]

I don't think the Hebrews make such a big deal about it.

Judge Goldman, ADA Feinstein, and the witness Mr. Blum do not insist that they use a Torah instead of a Bible.

They just do it and get to Justice. Perhaps there is a lesson there.

[hrscowboy]

Give me a break, people lie in court all the time no matter if they swear or affirm and the courts do nothing when its found out they did lie...

[BigCat1]

Yellowing....in response to your statement regarding the constitution "It allows for change in our Nation", that is only true if you believe that the constitution is a living, breathing document. I submit to you sir that it is not! Those who want to change our nation by changing the constitution only wish to bring this nation to its knees. The ACLU is a "progressive secular" organization who's agenda is to tear down the foundations which made this country great. As for CAIR...they are a radical muslim organization who, somehow, have gained legitimacy in this country. The ACLU and CAIR are nothing more than the modern day KKK, only their weapons of choice are radical courts (i.e. the 9th circuit court of appeal) and rogue judges who legislate from the bench that which is the pervue of the US legislature. Eighty five percent of the population of this country consider themselves a Christian in one form or another. We should not be brought to "heel" by a very small minority in this country who cannot stand the Christian beliefs or by those who have no belief system at all. Like it or not....believe it or not...we are a Christian nation. If those who live here do not like that, then they are free to move to a muslim nation or any other nation they see fit.

[yellowwing]

Hey don't get me wrong, I have strong Christian beliefs. I was adopted and raised by a good Methodist family in Tennessee. Those lessons even when as a teenager sometimes pssed me off, but they were meant to reinforce my character. I see that now and am very grateful for those lessons. I am now a better example of Manhood for it.

In these past months I have been mulling over the statement of Judges Legislating from the benches of Justice.

Ignoring the sensationalism, a Judge weighs the evidence and presentation to determine if a Law approved by our Legislators goes against the ideals of the Constitution. Is it Legislating from the bench if they determine that the challenged law violates the tenants of our Sacred Constitution?

KKK and the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals? There is now a movement from the Administration to separate the 9th Circuit's Liberal record into a smaller prevue. And the ACLU does not kidnap, torture and hang those that oppose their ideals. O'Reilly, Coulter and Limbaugh have not been found scorched bodied a dangling from an oak tree.

That former FLA College Professor has been exonerated from Patriot Act charges. I really don't know if the US Attorney General is staffed by incompetents, but so far they have a very poor record of convictions on what should have been 'slam dunk' cases. 12 Joe Americans do not believe the Governments case.

And I still cannot believe that VP Cheney is fighting tooth and nail against John McCain's rider language to explicitly forbid our use of torture. Meanwhile Condi Rice is assuring our EU allies that we do not use torture.

Its totally FUBAR. The SecState is denying torture while the VP is advocating it.

We need a man like HrsCowboy to set it right! Reagan, where are you now when we need you the most?