Under God, so help me God. That was your Oath.

Re: Under God, so help me God. That was your Oath.

Postby Prajna » Sat May 01, 2010 1:47 pm

Veronica wrote:
Prajna wrote:Thanks, V. A quiz, goodie, goodie, I'll be quiet while I check it out. :grin:

Write the answers on a postcard, and send to David Cameron.


:grin: Excellent article, V. Crystal clear. Thank you.
FREEDOM Best Before: 11 Sept 2001
http://tomboy-pink.co.uk/ and http://DeclarePeace.org.uk/
User avatar
Prajna
Moderator
Moderator
 
Posts: 627
Joined: Sun Apr 25, 2010 2:51 pm
Location: UK

Re: Under God, so help me God. That was your Oath.

Postby huntingross » Sat May 01, 2010 10:24 pm

IamallthatIam wrote:"Under" refers to the fact that under God we are all equal based on the teaching of the bible - which they want us to swear on


I have never been into the bible and god stuff.....but this is the bit they don't like to shout about......

Genesis Chapter 3.5. for God doth know that in the day ye eat thereof, then your eyes shall be opened, and ye shall be as God, knowing good and evil.'


We shall be as God.....WE shall....WE are EQUAL to God.

So the "under god" bit.....means....yup....under US.....you can see why that would piss them off.

The other bit they don't like is this one....

Matthew 5:
33 “Again, you have heard that it was said to an older generation, ‘Do not break an oath, but fulfill your vows to the Lord.’
34 But I say to you, do not take oaths at all – not by heaven, because it is the throne of God,
35 not by earth, because it is his footstool, and not by Jerusalem, because it is the city of the great King.
36 Do not take an oath by your head, because you are not able to make one hair white or black.
37 Let your word be ‘Yes, yes’ or ‘No, no.’ More than this is from the evil one.


Do not take oaths at all....This following article, explains the history behind "juris-diction"...."oath-spoken"....I found it very interesting and put Quakers into a context I hadn't appreciated.

http://1215.org/lawnotes/lawnotes/jurisdiction.htm
Success nourishes hope
User avatar
huntingross
Moderator
Moderator
 
Posts: 4324
Joined: Mon Mar 09, 2009 11:29 pm
Location: FIDACH, Near Edinburgh

Re: Under God, so help me God. That was your Oath.

Postby 1965freeman » Thu May 06, 2010 9:16 am

UNDER GOD, SO HELP ME GOD - Be very clear -This phrase IS NOT CONTAINED in any oath a Judge/Mag. may swear.
Their oaths swear allegiance to the Queen.
The Queen's coronation oath, I believe, did contain this phrase.
We are asserting that they are therefore also bound by this phrase.


Further info on the various levels of Judge:

Deputy District Judge: Solicitor/Barrister(QC) who is NOT a full time judge. i.e. they only 'sit' as a judge for a certain number of days a year.
NOTE: Their 'Judge's Oath' is obviously activated and de-activated dependant on which 'role' they are playing in court on a given day/case.
e.g.: They HAVE NO JUDICIAL POWERS if they are acting in court as a barrister/solicitor. SO, asking them if they are under their judicial oath during a hearing is obviously a legitimate question......... :grin:

The prefix 'Deputy' can also allude to the fact that they are semi-retired.
"Come to the edge, he said. They said: We are afraid. Come to the edge, he said. They came. He pushed them and they flew.” (G.Apollinaire)
I do not offer legal advice, I offer common sense suggestions based on shared knowledge.
User avatar
1965freeman
Moderator
Moderator
 
Posts: 409
Joined: Fri Jun 12, 2009 8:55 am
Location: East Sussex

Re: Under God, so help me God. That was your Oath.

Postby notolivercromwell » Thu May 06, 2010 10:09 am

And, promising to tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth, he started to read from the first chapter of Genesis. Only to be stopped after few moments by the magistrate.

He carried on.
notolivercromwell
 
Posts: 217
Joined: Fri Nov 06, 2009 9:15 pm

Re: Under God, so help me God. That was your Oath.

Postby Veronica » Thu May 06, 2010 8:11 pm

1965freeman wrote:The Queen's coronation oath, I believe, did contain this phrase.

It did. And they all swear allegiance to the reigning Monarch (before they swear anything else).
Freedom's just another word for: "Nothing left to lose" (Janis Joplin)
"There is no path to peace, peace IS the path" (Mahatma Ghandi)
"There is no path to freedom, freedom IS the path" (Veronica Chapman)
User avatar
Veronica
Founder
Founder
 
Posts: 4537
Joined: Tue Feb 17, 2009 1:28 pm
Location: Feltham, Sovereign Republic of England

Re: Under God, so help me God. That was your Oath.

Postby huntingross » Thu May 06, 2010 9:01 pm

Doh....I didn't add the link....so here it is

http://1215.org/lawnotes/lawnotes/jurisdiction.htm
Success nourishes hope
User avatar
huntingross
Moderator
Moderator
 
Posts: 4324
Joined: Mon Mar 09, 2009 11:29 pm
Location: FIDACH, Near Edinburgh

Re: Under God, so help me God. That was your Oath.

Postby Freeman-B » Fri May 07, 2010 11:58 am

I knew I had it somewhere - from my thread regarding FOI request for judges oaths - http://www.fmotl.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=59&t=2036&hilit=+oath

All judicial office holders, when they are sworn in, take two oaths/affirmations. The first is the oath of allegiance and the second the judicial oath. Lords Justices and Head of Divisions are members of the Privy Council and also take that oath......

Oath of allegiance

“I, _________ , do swear by Almighty God that I will be faithful and bear true allegiance to Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth the Second, her heirs and successors, according to law. ”
Judicial oath

“I, _________ , do swear by Almighty God that I will well and truly serve our Sovereign Lady Queen Elizabeth the Second in the office of ________ , and I will do right to all manner of people after the laws and usages of this realm, without fear or favour, affection or ill will. "


there it is in black and white - according to law (not statute) and without fear or favour, affection or ill will

Also, regarding Musahi's comment earlier about magistrates absenting themselves - this is from a discussion I have ongoing with HR

Magistrates Act 1980 http://www.opsi.gov.uk/RevisedStatutes/Acts/ukpga/1980/cukpga_19800043_en_18#pt7-pb1-l1g150

121 Constitution and place of sitting of court.

(1)A magistrates’ court shall not try an information summarily or hear a complaint except when composed of at least 2 justices unless the trial or hearing is one that by virtue of any enactment may take place before a single justice.

(2)A magistrates’ court shall not hold an inquiry into the means of an offender for the purposes of section 82 above [F1or determine under that section at a hearing at which the offender is not present whether to issue a warrant of commitment] except when composed of at least 2 justices.

(3)F2. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

[F3(4)Subject to the provisions of any enactment to the contrary, a magistrates' court must sit in open court if it is—

(a)trying summarily an information for an indictable offence,

(b)trying an information for a summary offence,

(c)imposing imprisonment,

(d)hearing a complaint, or

(e)holding an inquiry into the means of an offender for the purposes of section 82.]

(5)A magistrates’ court composed of a single justice F4. . . , shall not impose imprisonment for a period exceeding 14 days or order a person to pay more than £1.

(6)Subject to the provisions of subsection (7) below, the justices composing the court before which any proceedings take place shall be present during the whole of the proceedings; but, if during the course of the proceedings any justice absents himself, he shall cease to act further therein and, if the remaining justices are enough to satisfy the requirements of the preceding provisions of this section, the proceedings may continue before a court composed of those justices.

(7)Where the trial of an information is adjourned after the accused has been convicted and before he is sentenced or otherwise dealt with, the court which sentences or deals with him need not be composed of the same justices as that which convicted him; but, where among the justices composing the court which sentences or deals with an offender there are any who were not sitting when he was convicted, the court which sentences or deals with the offender shall before doing so make such inquiry into the facts and circumstances of the case as will enable the justices who were not sitting when the offender was convicted to be fully acquainted with those facts and circumstances.


Not more than £1......erm....how many times has that one been breached?

And as per section 121 (7) as soon as he leaves the room he has forfeited any right he may have presumed to judge anything!

:peace: :love:
B
He who joyfully marches to music in rank and file has already earned my contempt. He has been given a large brain by mistake, since for him the spinal cord would suffice. Einstein
Banking doesn’t “involve” fraud...banking IS fraud. Tim Madden
Freeman-B
Moderator
Moderator
 
Posts: 455
Joined: Tue May 19, 2009 2:04 pm
Location: Scotland/France

Re: Under God, so help me God. That was your Oath.

Postby Veronica » Fri May 07, 2010 12:05 pm

Yes ... all good stuff ... but actually IN LAW (REAL LAW, I mean ... not all this Faux Stuff) ... a Magistrate can't do anything but decide whether or not a case should proceed to a Higher Court (ONE WITH A JURY! UMPIRED BY A JUDGE) ... OR to dismiss everything if that isn't warranted.

That's REAL Law, though. (You know: Customs, Traditions, Common Sense ... all that stuff)

ONLY THE VERDICT OF A JURY IS BINDING IN REAL LAW ... otherwise there is always the possibility of tyranny.

(And, if that hasn't been proved endlessly, I don't know what has)

However, yes ... I agree ... it is nice to be able to fling their own FAUX RULES back in their faces!

Take a look at this, and tell me where I'm wrong:
http://www.fmotl.com/wiki/index.php/Law
Freedom's just another word for: "Nothing left to lose" (Janis Joplin)
"There is no path to peace, peace IS the path" (Mahatma Ghandi)
"There is no path to freedom, freedom IS the path" (Veronica Chapman)
User avatar
Veronica
Founder
Founder
 
Posts: 4537
Joined: Tue Feb 17, 2009 1:28 pm
Location: Feltham, Sovereign Republic of England

Re: Under God, so help me God. That was your Oath.

Postby diasan » Fri May 07, 2010 12:28 pm

Veronica wrote:
1965freeman wrote:The Queen's coronation oath, I believe, did contain this phrase.

It did.


Err...

I can find the text "So help me God' at the end of the coronation oath text/ceremony.

However, I can not find the literal text 'Under God' within the questions / answers that comprise the coronation oath ceremony. Neither the form perscribed by statue, nor the version that lizzy subscribed.

So unless you're inferrring that from some of the other phrases, or actions, I'm a bit lost.

Would you please point to where you get 'Under God' part from?
diasan
Newbie
Newbie
 

Re: Under God, so help me God. That was your Oath.

Postby Freeman-B » Fri May 07, 2010 4:33 pm

Veronica wrote:ONLY THE VERDICT OF A JURY IS BINDING IN REAL LAW ... otherwise there is always the possibility of tyranny.

(And, if that hasn't been proved endlessly, I don't know what has)

However, yes ... I agree ... it is nice to be able to fling their own FAUX RULES back in their faces!

Take a look at this, and tell me where I'm wrong:
http://www.fmotl.com/wiki/index.php/Law


No argument from me V - I completely agree!

:peace: :love:
B
He who joyfully marches to music in rank and file has already earned my contempt. He has been given a large brain by mistake, since for him the spinal cord would suffice. Einstein
Banking doesn’t “involve” fraud...banking IS fraud. Tim Madden
Freeman-B
Moderator
Moderator
 
Posts: 455
Joined: Tue May 19, 2009 2:04 pm
Location: Scotland/France

PreviousNext

Return to The Court System

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests

cron