Note the phrase "oath or affirmation"; unless I miss my guess, I'd imagine they're referring to the Quaker practice of refusing to take oaths, but instead to "affirm" that they're telling the truth. In any case, it certainly also gives atheists equal status with religious people in this context.

This seems to open some big, wide holes in the theory that the framers of the Constitution intended to confer some kind of special status on fundamentalist Protestantism.
By ANNE GEARAN, Associated Press Writer (Tuesday November 28 2:24 PM ET)

"WASHINGTON (AP) - In a significant ruling on the use of police power, the Supreme Court struck down random roadblocks intended for drug searches, saying they are an unreasonable invasion of privacy under the Constitution.

Law enforcement in and of itself is not a good enough reason to stop innocent motorists, the majority concluded Tuesday in the first major ruling of the new term.

``Because the checkpoint program's primary purpose is indistinguishable from the general interest in crime control, the checkpoints contravened the Fourth Amendment,'' which protects against unreasonable searches and seizures, Justice Sandra Day O'Connor wrote.

The court's three most conservative justices dissented, saying the roadblocks Indianapolis set up in high-crime neighborhoods served valuable public safety and crime-fighting goals. Chief Justice William Rehnquist and Justices Antonin Scalia and Clarence Thomas dissented."

This is our least protected and most often violated right. I just got done coming through a state trooper manned "safety check". They flagged me down, and gave my car a quick search. Of course they didn't find anything, but that's not the point. That's my tax dollars they are wasting to violate my Constitutional right.

Where's the phrackin ACLU when you need them.

Log in or registerto write something here or to contact authors.