John Lofton/Oaths

[RJLipkin at aol.com]

I doubt that most people,  even religious people, are more ready to tell the 
truth only if the swear an  oath to God rather than simply being informed that 
the perjury rules  apply.  But that aside, Jim presses the question, do we 
accept variances  because "we are a pluralistic society or because we are a 
tolerant one."? I  responded both, and I'm not sure I understand why Jim presses 
this  question.  Is it because he thinks "merely" tolerating someone's religion 
 is already to denigrate that religion. A fuller acceptance of the religious  
beliefs of others rather than tolerance is required? (I'm guessing.)
 
        I would be eclectic here.  If someone needs the administration of an 
oath, so be it. If another does  not, simply remind him or her about the rules 
of perjury. 
 
        In my view, the EC is in  play when one sectarian book or artifact is 
required for everyone. 
 
Bobby
 
Robert Justin  Lipkin
Professor of Law
Widener University School of  Law
Delaware
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.ucla.edu/pipermail/religionlaw/attachments/20050729/96b584cd/attachment.html