Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Stupid Question: What about an 8th commandment bill?

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » General Discussion Donate to DU
 
DetlefK Donating Member (449 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-11-11 03:52 PM
Original message
Stupid Question: What about an 8th commandment bill?
"You shall not bear false witness against your neighbor."
I'm a scientist, so to me lying is among the worst crimes imaginable.

The bill would automatically put any and all elected members of Congress, elected members of the Senate, elected members of the White House and the White House Staff under oath, as long as they are physically inside the buildings of either Congress, Senate or the White House.
-> You lie? 1 Week in jail without access to telephone, TV, radio or internet.



Who would dare argue against that bill?
Would all this permanent fact-checking by attack groups actually slow down the legislative process?
Should "leaving-out-essential-information-despite-knowledge" count as a lie? (For example, the "there is no climate change consensus"-lie. There is no consensus, but the opinions are split 99.7% <-> 0.3%)
Where should the non-partisan panel declaring the sentence come from?


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
polichick Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-11-11 03:54 PM
Response to Original message
1. Problem is, those on the right don't always realize that they're lying...
They're such simpletons that they confuse desperately-needed-belief with the truth.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
el_bryanto Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-11-11 03:56 PM
Response to Original message
2. You know what - we should also put a bell around the neck of the cat
That way we'd always know when it comes around.

Or to put it another way - this law would be great if Dennis Kucinich got to decide who was telling the truth, and somewhat less great if Sarah Palin got to decide.

Bryant
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
meegbear Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-11-11 03:57 PM
Response to Original message
3. I would be in violation of the 1st Amendment ...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DetlefK Donating Member (449 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-11-11 04:05 PM
Response to Reply #3
5. Being under oath violates the 1st Amendment?
The bill would be about a defined set of persons and a defined set of circumstances. A politician could say anything he wants, anywhere, anytime, except when he's at work.


And the bill would not cover the Media...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
el_bryanto Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-11-11 04:09 PM
Response to Reply #5
6. Does campaigning count as work? n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Kennah Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-11-11 04:36 PM
Response to Reply #3
9. You stirred me to do a little searching about Jane Akre and Steve Wilson
The extras on DVD of "The Corporation" talked about Fox's appeal and how the court appeared to be holding them liable for Fox's legal fees of, IIRC, about $1.7 million.

According to SourceWatch, they had to pay Fox $150K. Thank you, Florida Second District Court of Appeal.

Jane Akre
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jane_Akre

Steve Wilson
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steve_Wilson_%28reporter%2...
http://michigannewscenter.org /

SourceWatch
http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Jane_Akre_an...

Florida Second District Court of Appeal
http://www.2dca.org/opinions/Opinion_Pages/Opinion_Page...

http://www.2dca.org/opinions/Opinion_Pages/Opinion_Page...

Because the FCCs news distortion policy is not a law, rule, or regulation under section 448.102, Akre has failed to state a claim under the whistle-blower's statute. Accordingly, we reverse the judgment in her favor and remand for entry of a judgment in favor of WTVT.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
meegbear Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-11-11 04:47 PM
Response to Reply #9
10. Incredible eh?
It's amazing that all this happened BEFORE they became a major network.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Kennah Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-11-11 03:57 PM
Response to Original message
4. Old joke from an IT guy
What is the difference between a used car salesperson and a computer salesperson?

The user car salesperson knows how to drive and knows when they are lying.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dkofos Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-11-11 04:13 PM
Response to Original message
7. Since when have the godly critters concerned themselves with lying?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hosnon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-11-11 04:20 PM
Response to Original message
8. Clearly unconstitutional at least regarding the House and Senate.
Edited on Fri Feb-11-11 04:28 PM by Hosnon
Article 1, Section 6, Clause 1: The Senators and Representatives shall receive a Compensation for their Services, to be ascertained by Law, and paid out of the Treasury of the United States. They shall in all Cases, except Treason, Felony and Breach of the Peace, be privileged from Arrest during their Attendance at the Session of their respective Houses, and in going to and returning from the same; and for any Speech or Debate in either House, they shall not be questioned in any other Place.


Liar litigation would become a political tool. It might be useful if it were never abused, but that's not realistic.

ETA: One source I found claims that the protections are not limited to the physical buildings, but protect any and all speech when a legislator is acting in his or her official capacity.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
demwing Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-11-11 06:09 PM
Response to Original message
11. I would argue against it
simply because it was legislating religion
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Donald Ian Rankin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-11-11 06:18 PM
Response to Original message
12. Please tell me this is a joke?
I hope you're not seriously advocating apointing a state body with the power to imprison anyone who says something they decide isn't true?

The right to be wrong is the basis of freedom of speech.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DetlefK Donating Member (449 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-12-11 01:00 PM
Response to Reply #12
13. No joke.
Luckily man does not depend on man when it comes to truth. We no longer live in medieval times.

Today we have that cute invention called "record". We have files, we audio-records, we have video-records.
If you say without evidence that Iraq had WMDs, and the report by UN weapons inspector Hans Blix says that they didn't, then that would prove that you lie.


And the right to lie is the cancer of free speech.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SDuderstadt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-12-11 01:04 PM
Response to Reply #13
14. Do you understand the difference between...
a lie and a false statement?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Tue Oct 23rd 2018, 12:49 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » General Discussion Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC