There is a big difference between a "religious court" and someone on a jury being asked to make a moral decision. The jury was making a determination within the law based on their moral beliefs, as they were asked to. If the death sentance was not already legal in this case the jurors would not have had the option of choosing it. The only reason the ruling was overturned was because it turned out those beliefs were Biblical. To me that shows bias against religion.Originally Posted by Dark.
I would like to remind everyone, again, that the Consititution does not say anything about a seperation of church and state in spite of what the media tells you. All the "Constitution" says is that people running for office cannot be discriminated against based on their religion and all the "Bill of Rights" says is that the government is not allowed to make laws concerning or discriminating against religion.
To say that the Bible doesn't belong in a courtroom seems a little absurd to me since US legal code is based on the Bible. Like it or not, the country was founded by Christians. If they had belonged to another religion chances are our penal code would be a lot stricter.
Exactly.Originally Posted by Lord Katsuhito
PS.Kikieru, how would lowering ourselves to torture be effective? And would you really want someone with a job like that in government employ?