Sitting in the bath last night, whilst vigorously scrubbing
off the weekend's Catholic guilt, I came to wonder about the power of a spoken
(or indeed, written) oath. What first brought this to mind was the
practice of swearing upon an individual's life, be it your
father/mother/sister/brother and so on. I thought to myself that if put
in such a position, as I most likely have in the past, I would certainly lie on
this oath to conceal the truth. Not because I'd ever wish any such harm
on a loved one, but simply because like many rational modern adults I do not
believe in Voodoo. I mean, how could something as arbitrary as the
(however moronic) verbalisations spewing from my gobshite mouth have any
physical effect on another living being? The very fact that I've been
presented with such a troglodytic challenge would in fact make me more likely
to want to lie to simply prove a point, if not to the accuser who would remain
eternally ignorant of my mortal sin, but to myself, so that I could have a
chuckle about how much more enlightened I am at a later date.
Having exhausted this simple gripe my mind naturally
wandered to the old enemy, Organised Religion™. For fear of going too far
into Dawkins territory, I'll concede that enough has said about the dogmatic
bullshit used by these animals over the past few millennia. The one area
that did come to mind was the system of swearing by oath in a courtroom.
I'm not 100% up to date on the current procedures in all (or indeed any)
jurisdictions, however I had thought of the custom of swearing on a Bible, or
any other relevant religious text before giving evidence. Now, first of
all for those who lack religious conviction this is an irrelevant practice in
general. Those aware of the wonders of Pastafarianism (which I capitalise
with the utmost sincerity) will be fully aware of this. Surely the fact
that you're in some serious shit should give a general implication that you're
going to have to tell the truth? If you can't grasp that concept then
surely society would benefit greatly from your removal. Secondly, I'd
imagine that in any major religion, using the sacred text as leverage in a
dispute between two individuals would be morally questionable in some way,
especially when the suited vultures representing either party are factored
in. In either case, I just found it ludicrous. A quick online check
of a randomly selected jurisdiction brought the following quote:
"If an oath has been properly administered and taken,
the fact that the person to whom the oath was administered had no religious
beliefs at that time does not affect the validity of the oath."
- Dept. of Justice,
Victoria Australia
Yes it does. It renders it wholly invalid in the
realms of common sense. Fair enough, because someone in a relevant legal
position has said so and presumably created a precedent at one time, it can be
held as law. However it is antiquated, pointless, and most likely just
another line that can be used to "subjugate the meek", in the words
of reggae/punk rocker and sex-Olympian Sting. Just another example of
the use of the Boogey-Man to make Joe Bloggs shit his pants and squeal. I
know I'm glossing over the obvious fact that in a court of law this is a minor
facet of a hugely confusing labyrinth of a yes/no game, however I felt that the
issue was more with the act of making a person swear to tell the truth.
It makes no difference to those with the sense to know that a little white lie
will have no detrimental effect on their physical health, it's simply preying
on the fears of those who believe in Flying Spaghetti Monsters and their ilk.
In conclusion, I'd simply like to point out that this is the
conjecture of a man bathed in cynicism and self-loathing, in the immediate
aftermath of a particularly punishing weekend. In regard to any Atheistic
subtext detected in the preceding paragraphs, I'd like to point out that I am
not a fan of religious zeal in any form, regardless of how bodaciously
righteous it may be, righteously bodacious even. To paraphrase a line
from my own personal spiritual reference, The Simpsons (again, capitalisation
intentional), I guess one person can change the world, but most of the time
they probably shouldn't. I'm only speaking out because Whitey's keeping
me down.
Be excellent to each other.
No comments:
Post a Comment