Senator wants to be sworn in on the Quran. Unamarican?

24567

Comments

  • exhaustedexhausted Posts: 6,638
    this is almost as good as any given yahoo article discussion.
  • normnorm Posts: 31,146
    exhausted wrote:
    this is almost as good as any given yahoo article discussion.
    You're right. I'm outta here.
  • hippiemomhippiemom Posts: 3,326
    miller8966 wrote:
    icarus wrote:
    the pilgrims were separatists who wanted to practice differently than what the church of england mandated. they left england to practice their own form of worship without being ordered by the state to practice a certain way."

    Than they came to america and ordered everyone else to practice christianity. This is a christian nation my friend.

    He should be sworn in on the bible or not sworn in at all.
    The puritans settled the land, they did not form the country. They had nothing to do with our fight for independence, or our constitution.
    "Nothing in the world is more dangerous than sincere ignorance and conscientious stupidity." ~ MLK, 1963
  • 1970RR1970RR Posts: 281
    miller8966 wrote:
    This is why you have to love america...because well probaly allow this to happen. Imagine if this guy was in a muslim country...they would have taken his head off.
    Except the document he is swearing to uphold prohibits the use of religious tests.
  • hippiemomhippiemom Posts: 3,326
    i second that. if we have to swear on something, why not use the constitution from now on? we can avoid this religious bickering and maybe it would encourage some of our reps to actually read that document they're supposed to be upholding... i can dream cant i?
    That's exactly what I was thinking, and what I would request if I were being sworn in.

    When I was a witness in court and they swore me in, when they told me to put my hand on the bible I said "I think you should know that this means nothing to me." The bailiff asked if I had an objection to swearing on the bible and I said I didn't care, but thought it would be dishonest not to tell them it meant as much to me as swearing on a copy of "Green Eggs and Ham." He shrugged and went on with the swearing in. I testified honestly, but the bible sure had nothing to do with it.
    "Nothing in the world is more dangerous than sincere ignorance and conscientious stupidity." ~ MLK, 1963
  • normnorm Posts: 31,146
    hippiemom wrote:
    That's exactly what I was thinking, and what I would request if I were being sworn in.

    When I was a witness in court and they swore me in, when they told me to put my hand on the bible I said "I think you should know that this means nothing to me." The bailiff asked if I had an objection to swearing on the bible and I said I didn't care, but thought it would be dishonest not to tell them it meant as much to me as swearing on a copy of "Green Eggs and Ham." He shrugged and went on with the swearing in. I testified honestly, but the bible sure had nothing to do with it.
    That's it! Everybody should swear to "Green Eggs & Ham" :D:D
  • secular state that is America? I thought there was separation of religion from state in America? Why are people made to swear on holy books?
    If Pearl Jam was a beer, they'd probably be the best beer in the world!!
  • darkcrowdarkcrow Posts: 1,102
    This has to be the dumbest thing I've ever seen here. I'm going to hope that this Prager guy is the only one idiotic enough to hold these opinions.

    unfortuantly not. it didnt take the religious right much time to "act"
    http://www.afa.net/aa112806_2.asp
  • normnorm Posts: 31,146
    darkcrow wrote:
    unfortuantly not. it didnt take the religious right much time to "act"
    http://www.afa.net/aa112806_2.asp
    Thanks for making me more angry.
  • darkcrowdarkcrow Posts: 1,102
    cutback wrote:
    Thanks for making me more angry.

    sorry mate. hey in my county (the uk) you still have to swear alligence to the queen if you get ellected to parliment. i am staunchly republican (anti-monarchy), im not the bad republican ;) lol
  • KatKat Posts: 4,871
    I hope no one minds if I spout off on this one. The founding fathers did not designate any book to be used for swearing in and there is no law about it. They only have to swear to uphold the Constitution. The Supreme Court would have to knock a law down if one was made because one of our basic rights is freedom of religion...there is no state religion.

    That being said, when I'm sworn in, I want to use Hitchhiker's Guide To The Galaxy when I raise my left hand. I can use my left hand, right?

    Thanks. :)

    Love,
    Kat
    Falling down,...not staying down
  • bootlegger10bootlegger10 Posts: 15,944
    cutback wrote:
    "They" haven't read this yet. Just wait.

    Ah yes, "they" being the hillbilly rednecks right in the middle of the country right? Another tolerant liberal... Can't have a difference of opinion can we? Your belief is right, and those who disagree are part of the "they" group.
  • darkcrowdarkcrow Posts: 1,102
    Kat wrote:
    I hope no one minds if I spout off on this one. The founding fathers did not designate any book to be used for swearing in and there is no law about it. They only have to swear to uphold the Constitution. The Supreme Court would have to knock a law down if one was made because one of our basic rights is freedom of religion...there is no state religion.

    That being said, when I'm sworn in, I want to use Hitchhiker's Guide To The Galaxy when I raise my left hand. I can use my left hand, right?

    Thanks. :)

    Love,
    Kat

    no one likes a leftie... not even a pj leftie... lol ;) only kidding. you use whatever hadn you wanna. :D kat posting on my thread... i feel honoured lol
  • bootlegger10bootlegger10 Posts: 15,944
    darkcrow wrote:
    unfortuantly not. it didnt take the religious right much time to "act"
    http://www.afa.net/aa112806_2.asp

    Just like it doesn't take the ACLU anytime at all to act in a reverse manner.
  • hippiemomhippiemom Posts: 3,326
    Ah yes, "they" being the hillbilly rednecks right in the middle of the country right? Another tolerant liberal... Can't have a difference of opinion can we? Your belief is right, and those who disagree are part of the "they" group.
    No ... I believe that "they" refers to those unable to read and comprehend Article VI of our constitution.
    "Nothing in the world is more dangerous than sincere ignorance and conscientious stupidity." ~ MLK, 1963
  • miller8966miller8966 Posts: 1,450
    There is no "complete seperation" of Church and State...thats just a liberal fantasy.

    “We have staked the whole future of American civilization, not upon the power of government, far from it. We’ve staked the future of all our political institutions upon our capacity…to sustain ourselves according to the Ten Commandments of God.”
    James Madison, 1778 to the General Assembly of the State of Virginia

    The Law given from Sinai [The Ten Commandments] was a civil and municipal as well as a moral and religious code.”
    John Quincy Adams. Letters to his son. p. 61

    All the miseries and evils which men suffer from vice, crime, ambition, injustice, oppression, slavery
    and war, proceed from their despising or neglecting the precepts contained in the Bible.”
    Noah Webster. History. p. 339

    Thomas Jefferson







    “The doctrines of Jesus are simple, and tend to all the happiness of man.”
    “Of all the systems of morality, ancient or modern which have come under my observation, none appears to me so pure as that of Jesus.”

    "I am a real Christian, that is to say, a disciple of the doctrines of Jesus." [Letter to Benjamin Rush April 21, 1803]

    “God who gave us life gave us liberty. And can the liberties of a nation be thought secure when we have removed their only firm basis, a conviction in the minds of the people that these liberties are a gift from God? That they are not to be violated but with His wrath? Indeed I tremble for my country when I reflect that God is just, and that His justice cannot sleep forever.” [Notes on the State of Virginia, 1781]

    “It [the Bible] is a document in proof that I am a real Christian, that is to say, a disciple of the doctrines of Jesus."
    [Jan 9, 1816 Letter to Charles Thomson
    America...the greatest Country in the world.
  • hippiemomhippiemom Posts: 3,326
    Just one question, miller ... if it was so vitally important to the founders that this be a Christian nation, why oh why did they neglect to put it in the constitution????
    "Nothing in the world is more dangerous than sincere ignorance and conscientious stupidity." ~ MLK, 1963
  • qtegirlqtegirl Posts: 321
    I think the real question is, why make him swear on the Bible, which doesn't mean anything to him?

    If he swears by the Koran, which he believes is the word of God, doesn't that make the swearing in more meaningful?

    THe whole idea of swearing on the Bible, like when you're in court, is to make you feel that if you lie, or don't do what you're saying your going to do, you're violating your principles and offending God. If the Koran is the book that hold that specific meaning for the Senator, then that's the book that should be used.
  • enharmonicenharmonic Posts: 1,917
    That this is even an issue clearly demonstrates the myth of Freedom of Religion in this country.

    Anyone who has a problem with this is a fucktard. It's just about that simple.

    America's "holiest book" is its checkbook.
  • enharmonic wrote:
    That this is even an issue clearly demonstrates the myth of Freedom of Religion in this country.

    Anyone who has a problem with this is a fucktard. It's just about that simple.

    America's "holiest book" is its checkbook.

    Thanks for putting it in such simple terms.
  • I love this bit:

    "Devotees of multiculturalism and political correctness who do not see how damaging to the fabric of American civilization it is to allow Ellison to choose his own book need only imagine a racist elected to Congress. Would they allow him to choose Hitler's "Mein Kampf," the Nazis' bible, for his oath? And if not, why not? On what grounds will those defending Ellison's right to choose his favorite book deny that same right to a racist who is elected to public office?"

    HaHa, if they elected a racist why would they object to Mein Kampf? if they did he wouldnt have been elected! Fuck you yanks crack me up big style!!
  • enharmonicenharmonic Posts: 1,917
    Specifics wrote:
    I love this bit:

    "Devotees of multiculturalism and political correctness who do not see how damaging to the fabric of American civilization it is to allow Ellison to choose his own book need only imagine a racist elected to Congress. Would they allow him to choose Hitler's "Mein Kampf," the Nazis' bible, for his oath? And if not, why not? On what grounds will those defending Ellison's right to choose his favorite book deny that same right to a racist who is elected to public office?"

    HaHa, if they elected a racist why would they object to Mein Kampf? if they did he wouldnt have been elected! Fuck you yanks crack me up big style!!

    There have been plenty of racists who have served. There have even been presidents who were slave owners.

    A nation of dim-witted hypocrites. We deserve whatever we get.
  • normnorm Posts: 31,146
    miller8966 wrote:
    There is no "complete seperation" of Church and State...thats just a liberal fantasy.

    “We have staked the whole future of American civilization, not upon the power of government, far from it. We’ve staked the future of all our political institutions upon our capacity…to sustain ourselves according to the Ten Commandments of God.”
    James Madison, 1778 to the General Assembly of the State of Virginia

    The Law given from Sinai [The Ten Commandments] was a civil and municipal as well as a moral and religious code.”
    John Quincy Adams. Letters to his son. p. 61

    All the miseries and evils which men suffer from vice, crime, ambition, injustice, oppression, slavery
    and war, proceed from their despising or neglecting the precepts contained in the Bible.”
    Noah Webster. History. p. 339

    Thomas Jefferson







    “The doctrines of Jesus are simple, and tend to all the happiness of man.”
    “Of all the systems of morality, ancient or modern which have come under my observation, none appears to me so pure as that of Jesus.”

    "I am a real Christian, that is to say, a disciple of the doctrines of Jesus." [Letter to Benjamin Rush April 21, 1803]

    “God who gave us life gave us liberty. And can the liberties of a nation be thought secure when we have removed their only firm basis, a conviction in the minds of the people that these liberties are a gift from God? That they are not to be violated but with His wrath? Indeed I tremble for my country when I reflect that God is just, and that His justice cannot sleep forever.” [Notes on the State of Virginia, 1781]

    “It [the Bible] is a document in proof that I am a real Christian, that is to say, a disciple of the doctrines of Jesus."
    [Jan 9, 1816 Letter to Charles Thomson
    I'm sorry but is any of this in the Constitution of the United States?
  • know1 wrote:
    If he's Muslim, I'd rather have him swear on the Koran than the bible as it would mean more to him personally.

    That being said, I'm not really sure they should be using religious documents in the swearing-in process.

    Makes sense :)
    "We have to change the concept of patriotism to one of “matriotism” — love of humanity that transcends war. A matriarch would never send her own children off to wars that kill other people’s children." Cindy Sheehan
    ---
    London, Brixton, 14 July 1993
    London, Wembley, 1996
    London, Wembley, 18 June 2007
    London, O2, 18 August 2009
    London, Hammersmith Apollo (Ed solo), 31 July 2012
    Milton Keynes Bowl, 11 July 2014
    London, Hammersmith Apollo (Ed solo), 06 June 2017
    London, O2, 18 June 2018
    London, O2, 17 July 2018
    Amsterdam, Afas Live (Ed solo), 09 June 2019
    Amsterdam, Afas Live (Ed solo), 10 June 2019



  • enharmonic wrote:
    There have been plenty of racists who have served. There have even been presidents who were slave owners.

    A nation of dim-witted hypocrites. We deserve whatever we get.

    I just have to say that i like and respect your clarity and down to earth way of expressing it En, if i may call u that? haha. Not your usual sanctimonious, soundbite spewing, yankee "Patriot", [name-calling removed by Admin, see Posting Guidelines and the post at the top of the page please.].

    Seriously well done man you restored a bit of faith in me that the USA might join the rest of us down on Earth :-)
  • enharmonic wrote:
    That this is even an issue clearly demonstrates the myth of Freedom of Religion in this country.

    is "freedom FROM religion" covered in the constitution? i am tired of all of this religion mixed with politics bullshit. if we had freedom FROM religion nobody would give a shit about which collection of stories you swear on.
    "You can tell the greatness of a man by what makes him angry."  - Lincoln

    "Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."
  • enharmonicenharmonic Posts: 1,917
    Specifics wrote:
    I just have to say that i like and respect your clarity and down to earth way of expressing it En, if i may call u that? haha. Not your usual sanctimonious, soundbite spewing, yankee "Patriot", [name-calling removed by Admin, see Posting Guidelines and the post at the top of the page please.].

    Seriously well done man you restored a bit of faith in me that the USA might join the rest of us down on Earth :-)

    ZThanks. I catch a lot of shit for not being a lemming, but it's worth it.
  • Uncle LeoUncle Leo Posts: 1,059
    know1 wrote:
    If he's Muslim, I'd rather have him swear on the Koran than the bible as it would mean more to him personally.

    That being said, I'm not really sure they should be using religious documents in the swearing-in process.

    I don't often agree with you but you hit this one out of the fucking park.
    I cannot come up with a new sig till I get this egg off my face.
  • bootlegger10bootlegger10 Posts: 15,944
    hippiemom wrote:
    No ... I believe that "they" refers to those unable to read and comprehend Article VI of our constitution.

    Right right, because nobody has ever disagreed about the Constitution before. Aren't all Supreme Court rulings 9-0?
  • soulsingingsoulsinging Posts: 13,202
    Right right, because nobody has ever disagreed about the Constitution before. Aren't all Supreme Court rulings 9-0?

    then i assume you can make a case that there is a part of the constitution mandating that our representatives must be sworn in on a bible?
Sign In or Register to comment.