Should religious fundamentalists be banned from jury duty?

I say 'yes.'

Here's my reasoning:

1. Faith is belief without evidence
2. Religious fundamentalists deliberately and openly apply a high degree of faith to the most important questions in their own lives
3. Therefore, they cannot be reasonably expected to rule on anything based solely on the evidence.

Views: 45

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Couldn't agree more
Mind you, there are times when bigots are helpful
Helpful bigots! Now you have my head spinning trying to think of the scenario ... it's not like I can google it or anything.
To be reasonable - I was just lashing out with logic - so to speak. Honestly, I contend that no group of people is more committed to the First Amendment than atheists.
yes, i think juries should consist of lawyers and retired lawyers and detectives and people who actually study what good evidence is... none of this stage show nonsense.
I would not mind getting rid of the Jury system all together but I dont think there is really a better option.
And a very logical conclusion it is. Not very practical, as Marcus suggests, but logical, nonetheless.
Actually, the Constitution doesn't say any thing about peers - what it says in Amendment VI is "...the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial by an impartial jury..."
You know - you're right. I wonder where the 'peers' language came in?
Probably from Magna Carta:

20. A freeman shall not be amerced for a slight offense, except in accordance with the degree of the offense; and for a grave offense he shall be amerced in accordance with the gravity of the offense, yet saving always his "contentment"; and a merchant in the same way, saving his "merchandise"; and a villein shall be amerced in the same way, saving his "wainage" if they have fallen into our mercy: and none of the aforesaid amercements shall be imposed except by the oath of honest men of the neighborhood.

21. Earls and barons shall not be amerced except through their peers, and only in accordance with the degree of the offense.
how about my 'lawmen in the jury' compromise? ^
What about a fundamentalist judge?

Bailiff: "Put you hand on the Bible please."
Atheist defendant: "But I don't believe in God."
Judge: "Guilty!" (pounds gavel)
Lol. The worst would be a fundamentalist President. Who needs someone who thinks the end of the world will be a good thing with their finger on the button!


Support Atheist Nexus

Donate Today



Help Nexus When You Buy From Amazon




Latest Activity

Future replied to Joan Denoo's discussion Scientists warn we are on the brink of the next major mass extinction event
5 minutes ago
DAN DANA posted a photo
6 minutes ago
Pat commented on Loren Miller's status
9 minutes ago
Profile IconDAN DANA, nice girl, KOUSTAV GUHA and 3 more joined Atheist Nexus
20 minutes ago
Randall Smith commented on Sentient Biped's group Godless in the garden
31 minutes ago
Trick replied to Anthony Jordan's discussion Free Will [Sam Harris]
45 minutes ago
Trick replied to Anthony Jordan's discussion Free Will [Sam Harris]
59 minutes ago
Sentient Biped commented on Sentient Biped's group Godless in the garden
1 hour ago
Loren Miller posted a status
"Has anyone else noticed that A|N links to comments aren't working? You get to the post, but not to the exact comment. Something's broke!"
1 hour ago
Loren Miller commented on Bertold Brautigan's blog post Do We Exist?
1 hour ago
Lord Ainsworth liked Freethinker31's blog post We Are Not Alone in the Universe
2 hours ago
Idaho Spud commented on Sentient Biped's group Godless in the garden
2 hours ago

© 2014   Atheist Nexus. All rights reserved. Admin: Richard Haynes.

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service