When I hear "Voir Dire", I hear "Jury Tampering"... but maybe that is just me.

For those that feel they are "lying" if they say no to the voir dire questions about whether you would vote against the evidence, I say keep in mind the fact that lawful is different than legal.

Lawful relates to factual law.

Legal depends on legislation enacted by politicians.

It is perfectly lawful to nullify a law, so looked at properly one cannot be accused of perjury on such questions as criminal charges are all under the guise of 'legal', not 'lawful'. You can uphold law (no victim no crime) while nullifying legality.

And thanks for the recommended reading. I have no use for democracy, but could potentially respect a democratic republic. The difference in my mind being that the latter upholds rights that cannot be taken away by any majority.