There isn't one, but in the real world you have an option to lie.

Also, in case of the fifth amendment, your non-answer cannot be used to determine your guilt. Guilt has to be determined independently of your non-answer, which is not what you wanted. If you read your own post above, you wanted, I quote, "skilled judge or prosecutor will be able to interprete the answers", which is not an option in case of the fifth amendment.

EDIT: This brings us to my original point. Your idea of the vow did not have the option of preventing self incrimination, whereas I said that allowing for it dilutes the vow to the point where it becomes no more useful that not using it.

EDIT2: I guess we're stuck in another debate where neither of us are going to agree, so I'm going to stop at this point.

 

So you're saying those who believed in the consequences of lying spoke the truth the others didn't. But that's not what I'm talking about. Making an unbreakable vow has real and 'visible' consequences.

 

Here's the problem
Starfox assumes that the reason an unbreakable vow is not used in canon is the currupt wizengamot.
Starfox, tell me why the currupt wizengamot explains why the unbreakable vow was not used in canon? I'm curios. It doesn't seem to explain it at all. Even if most of the wizengamot was corrupt it seems to me eventually an honest member would suggest the unbreakable vow, and the others would have trouble refuting it if it was such a perfect solution.

 

No, my point is that western society and others as well saw no moral problem with making oaths or vows that they thought were unbreakable on pain of death, and even today's court oaths have their historical foundation in such beliefs. By the way, those who believed it would also point to "real and visible" consequences for lying under oath. Hell, trial by combat and trial by ordeal are based on the same roots—that God will strike down the guilty.

But, this too is turning into a thread derail, so I'll give you last word.

 

Pet Peeve of the Day - The constant refusal of authors to write stories about Harry which do not feature Hermione or Ron in some way. Look, I know they're two of the main characters, but you're not chained to them like to a rock.

Even in stories where Harry goes to Slytherin he somehow ends up friends with Hermione and/or Ron. This is so infuriating and unoriginal, why can't people just develop other characters as Harry's friends? It's like people lack imagination or something.

 

Xandrel, you edited your post at just the right time, didn't you?

 

At the end of the day they are just that..... beliefs. Have you ever seen a witness being killed for lying? They might perjure themselves in which case they face a fine and imprisonment but something like an unbreakable vow kills people for breaking it.
You seem okay with that. Well I'm not. So lets agree to disagree.

 

I posted it and then decided that I shouldn't have posted it so I edited almost immediately after that.

 

They outlawed it, with any excuse they could get, no matter how stupid. (They outlawed flying carpets too, for example, and it went through.)

"It's a slight against the honor of a wizard or witch, to suggest they would lie to the court without a vow."

"An unbreakable vow is a personal matter, not something to drag into court"

"If such was allowed, everyone would do it, and we would have people dieing in court."

"We did well enough without such lethal measures."

Canon shows that with enough money or power, any law can be passed, no matter how insane or stupid.

 

Sirius' trial with a vow:

Crouch: "Are you responsible for the Potters' death?"

Sirius: "Yes."

Case closed.

 

Because I think we should move this away from Unbreakable Vows...

Fics where Hermione is almost immediately BFFs with Hermione, while Ron is at best ignored and at worst relentlessly Bashed.

 

I personally like and enjoy FtS explanation on this matter...but it's still irrelevant to this discussion. It's based on the concept that the Wizarding World has a intense problem with giving up their magic as a cultural issue, which isn't something of canon (even though it does fit with canon).

That said, this discussion has become irrelevant to this thread.


I agree Xandrel. I'd add, though, that it annoys me how if Harry's house does change, he still has to meet his future friends on the train ride.

 

Non-magic AU's. What's the point?

 

Hermione being bffs with herself?

 

So business as usual then?

 

Time-turners make for some interesting masturbation.

 

And self orgies, mustn't forget self-orgies

 

Time-turner + Polyjuice. Who even needs a relationship?

 

I think I once came across a smutfic like that, where Hermione was using Harry's hair for Polyjuice and a Time-Turner so that she could basically fuck herself, and even organize gangbangs. I believe the Time-Turner actually had a crack on it from overuse.

She knocked herself up and then manipulated Harry into having a relationship with her, slept with him once and did the whole "I'm pregnant and it's yours (except not really)!" thing.

Seriously, it's like they never invented a spell like Abortus Fetus.

 

How the hell did she knock herself up?