SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: tejek who wrote (149753)8/15/2002 10:15:14 PM
From: i-node  Read Replies (1) of 1574007
 
Clinton was lying to hide that he was committing adultery.

The liberal position that lying about CERTAIN things under oath is acceptable while lying about OTHER things is NOT, is a totally baffling proposition. By definition, lying under oath is NEVER acceptable.

It is beyond reasonableness to suggest that a person testifying UNDER OATH should be able to lie, without regard for the subject. What is the PURPOSE of the oath in the first place? If the judge felt the answer wasn't important, she would undoubtedly have said, "you don't have to answer that question".

I'd appreciate your serious answer to the following:

(1) Do you believe our judicial system will function if a WITNESS is permitted, without consequence, to decide on which subjects he will be truthful versus those in which he will lie? Should we abolish the concept of perjury altogether?

(2) What is the purpose of the "oath"?
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  

HomeMailHotSubjectMarksPeopleMarksKeepersSettings
Terms Of UseContact UsCopyright/IP PolicyPrivacy PolicyAbout UsFAQAdvertise on SI
© 2025 Knight Sac Media.  Data provided by Twelve Data, Alpha Vantage, and CityFALCON News