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?
I didn't address that issue in my original post. I was referring to the "they" comment. Where anyone who disagrees with the liberal good buddy network on this board is included in the "they" group.
I don't care whether the Bible is used or not. It's hypocritical most of the time anyway. Not the Bible, but the politicians.
I'm sorry but is any of this in the Constitution of the United States?
O now Mr. LEftie wants to look at the Constitution. How about when it comes to gun control. You seem to look toward a "living" constitution, whenever that is mentioned
"I am for freedom of religion, & against all maneuvres to bring about a legal ascendancy of one sect over another."
-- Thomas Jefferson
Because religious belief, or non-belief, is such an important part of every person's life, freedom of religion affects every individual. State churches that use government power to support themselves and force their views on persons of other faiths undermine all our civil rights. Moreover, state support of the church tends to make the clergy unresponsive to the people and leads to corruption within religion. Erecting the "wall of separation between church and state," therefore, is absolutely essential in a free society.
- - Thomas Jefferson
"As I understand the Christian religion, it was, and is, a revelation. But how has it happened that millions of fables, tales, legends, have been blended with both Jewish and Christian revelation that have made them the most bloody religion that ever existed?"
-- John Adams
"We should begin by setting conscience free. When all men of all religions ... shall enjoy equal liberty, property, and an equal chance for honors and power ... we may expect that improvements will be made in the human character and the state of society."
-- John Adams
"Can a free government possibly exist with the Roman Catholic religion?"
-- John Adams
"God is an essence that we know nothing of. Until this awful blasphemy is got rid of, there never will be any liberal science in the world."
-- John Adams
"The rights to religious freedom are of the natural rights of mankind, and ... if any act shall be ... passed to repeal [an act granting those rights] or to narrow its operation, such act will be an infringement of natural right."
-- Thomas Jefferson
"Millions of innocent men, women, and children, since the introduction of Christianity, have been burnt, tortured, fined, and imprisoned; yet we have not advanced one inch toward uniformity. What has been the effect of coercion? To make one-half the world fools and the other half hypocrites. To support roguery and error all over the earth."
-- Thomas Jefferson
theres plenty more
I can find plenty more to support my point of view also.
O now Mr. LEftie wants to look at the Constitution. How about when it comes to gun control. You seem to look toward a "living" constitution, whenever that is mentioned
i support gun ownership. i still think this is a crock of shit. can your wilfully ignorant mind wrap itself around that contradiction?
senator? i think he just a congressman elected by wacko idiots from the idiot area,whats so good about him? just because hes muslim hes good ? minnesota is stupid
senator? i think he just a congressman elected by wacko idiots from the idiot area,whats so good about him? just because hes muslim hes good ? minnesota is stupid
First of all nobody was trying to address "whats so good about him." They were just addressing whether or not he should get to use the book of his choice. But "wacko idiots from the idiot area" and "Minnesota is stupid." is pretty constuctive.
Address the question of whether he should be able to do this.
There it is. The Fifth district. What is your point?
And yes, I live in Minnesota. Yes, I was born and rasied in that district. Minneapolis would be the greatest city in America if not for the lousy weather for five months out of the year (I won't impugn Seattle, as I think Seattle is a great place as well.)
Just because the people of the district don't just dismiss a candidate because he is Muslim does not mean that they are wacko and their state is stupid.
Edited to tone down my reaction...I try to be respectful
I cannot come up with a new sig till I get this egg off my face.
this is completely ridiculous. first of all this country wasnt founded on the bible. this country was founded to escape religious persecution.
what would be the point of making him swear on the bible if the bible doesnt mean anything to him? wouldnt it make a lot more sense to make him swear on a book that he actually abides by?
i love it when people say stuff is unamerican but their very attitude is whats unamerican.
I agree.
Personally I think it's rediculous and entirely hypocritical of us to swear people on any kind of religious literature.
This is a stupid issue. And if we're going to insist on swearing people in on religious script it might as well be his own.
i wonder if hes for death penalty -minn isnt really? muslims are i think
what a silly statement... muslims are for the death penalty.... that is like saying all guys with long hair are hippies who surf and smoke weed. generalising reall doesnt help.
ive never heard of any muslim activists against the death penalty and what has farrakan said about it ?
i have no idea ,but the koran seems to support death penalty
all this mercy stuff is only from allah if youve been good and it encourgaes charible giving to other muslims only?but it doenst say love your enemies as the new testament says as far as i know
i've never heard of any muslim activists against the death penalty and what has farrakan said about it ?
i have no idea ,but the koran seems to support death penalty
all this mercy stuff is only from allah if youve been good and it encourgaes charible giving to other muslims only?but it doenst say love your enemies as the new testament says as far as i know
Believe me, when I was growin up, I thought the worst thing you could turn out to be was normal, So I say freaks in the most complementary way. Here's a song by a fellow freak - E.V
big deal. Let him use what he wants. We allow Christians to not swear an Oath (they can use the word affirm). We should allow this guy to use what is important to him. All we want our representatives to say is that they'll uphold the constitution / laws...maybe we should have people swear in on that.
make sure the fortune that you seek...is the fortune that you need
Either this country has freedom of religion, or it does not. If it does not, then this guy shouldn't be expected to swear on a book he doesn't believe in. If we do indeed have, instead of just say we have, freedom of religion, a person should be free to be sworn in on any book that reflects their faith--or no book at all should anyone openly agnostic or atheistic ever be elected to a high office. And what a cold day in hell that will be. In this country elected officials are unofficially free to believe in any religion they wish to so long as it conforms with the most popular one to the letter.
There are two options here. Either the guy swears on the Bible, or nobody swears on anything. The Bible being sworn is between the United States and God (of the Bible). I'm sure the idea was not that every public officially swears on the religious book of their choice. They picked the Bible. Some of you assuredly disagree with this choice, which is why I think there are only the two solutions presented above. What is the point of having 5 gods watch over Congress? Pick one or none.
There are two options here. Either the guy swears on the Bible, or nobody swears on anything. The Bible being sworn is between the United States and God (of the Bible). I'm sure the idea was not that every public officially swears on the religious book of their choice. They picked the Bible. Some of you assuredly disagree with this choice, which is why I think there are only the two solutions presented above. What is the point of having 5 gods watch over Congress? Pick one or none.
Then none. Because obviously, swearing in on the bible does little to keep this people from being corrupt. And why not have five gods watch over congress? I mean, the one told bush to go to war and look how thats turned out. Maybe we need a little checks and balances with the gods.
well first of all, theres nothing that says anyone has to swear on anything. so your whole 'people have to swear on the bible' thesis has no basis on anything.
"They picked the Bible." nobody picked anything.
Custom. And most everybody used the Bible because the country was founded by Christians. There are unwritten rules. I'm just saying that there is no point swearing on five different books. There should be one or none. Cause if everyone doesn't swear by the same thing, then what is the point of it?
This country was founded by Christians and our laws were based off Christianity. You shouldnt be forced to put your hands on a Bible, and you shouldnt force them to use a Quran.
Chicago '98, Noblesville '00, East Troy '00, Chicago '00, Champaign '03, Chicago '03, Chicago1 '06, Chicago2 '06, Milwaukee '06, Chicago1 '09, and Chicago2 '09
And there is no point swearing on 5 different books. That is why I say, one or none, and lean towards none.
There's more reason to swear on a hundred different books than to swear on one that means nothing to you. I suppose the point is supposed to be that a believer of a certain faith may have a difficult time breaking promises that have been sworn on their holy book. What point would their be in swearing at all if it was a meaningless act?
If you want to tell people the truth, make them laugh, otherwise they'll kill you.
Man is least himself when he talks in his own person. Give him a mask, and he will tell you the truth.
-Oscar Wilde
There's more reason to swear on a hundred different books than to swear on one that means nothing to you. I suppose the point is supposed to be that a believer of a certain faith may have a difficult time breaking promises that have been sworn on their holy book. What point would their be in swearing at all if it was a meaningless act?
Exactly, that is why I say don't swear on any if you don't swear on one. Congress is one group that should have a common goal, so why have people swear on different belief systems? What is the point of that?
While this situation may seem miniscule, it is interesting. There is no doubt that this country was founded on Christian beliefs, whether they were put in the Constitution or not. The general public is comfortable with swearing on the Bible because 87% (or some other insanely high number) of the country is Christian, and we are comfortable having that as the basis (in reality or just for show) for our political system. In reality Congressman are greedy bastards. But, a lot of folks, including me, are not comfortable that someone swears by the Koran, when a lot of Muslim countries are places I would not want to live. But that isn't to say that a Muslim can't be a congressman. Just a reason why some of us aren't comfortable with some swearing on the Koran. When Muslim values are served you get what we have in the Middle East. When Christian values are served you get what we have in the US. The United States allows more freedom than any country in the world. There are problems with both societies, but I would take ours 100% of the time.
Comments
Man is least himself when he talks in his own person. Give him a mask, and he will tell you the truth.
-Oscar Wilde
i have not seen a single post to change my opinion of him. pure ignorance is spouted with every tap of the keyboard
I didn't address that issue in my original post. I was referring to the "they" comment. Where anyone who disagrees with the liberal good buddy network on this board is included in the "they" group.
I don't care whether the Bible is used or not. It's hypocritical most of the time anyway. Not the Bible, but the politicians.
O now Mr. LEftie wants to look at the Constitution. How about when it comes to gun control. You seem to look toward a "living" constitution, whenever that is mentioned
I can find plenty more to support my point of view also.
i support gun ownership. i still think this is a crock of shit. can your wilfully ignorant mind wrap itself around that contradiction?
http://groups.msn.com/PearlJamNirvana/messages.msnw
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minnesota%27s_5th_congressional_district
http://groups.msn.com/PearlJamNirvana/messages.msnw
Address the question of whether he should be able to do this.
What does this prove? It was done by people from Minnesota, which, as we know, is stupid.
There it is. The Fifth district. What is your point?
And yes, I live in Minnesota. Yes, I was born and rasied in that district. Minneapolis would be the greatest city in America if not for the lousy weather for five months out of the year (I won't impugn Seattle, as I think Seattle is a great place as well.)
Just because the people of the district don't just dismiss a candidate because he is Muslim does not mean that they are wacko and their state is stupid.
Edited to tone down my reaction...I try to be respectful
Then they'd be dino.
And Prager continues his crusade of non-tolerance. He actually compared it to being sworn in with a copy of Mein Kampf. A true servant of god he is.
Personally I think it's rediculous and entirely hypocritical of us to swear people on any kind of religious literature.
This is a stupid issue. And if we're going to insist on swearing people in on religious script it might as well be his own.
http://www.wishlistfoundation.org
Oh my, they dropped the leash.
Morgan Freeman/Clint Eastwood 08' for President!
"Make our day"
he hangs out with farrakan i bet
i bet silly garrison keilor voted for him
i wonder if hes for death penalty -minn isnt really? muslims are i think
http://groups.msn.com/PearlJamNirvana/messages.msnw
what a silly statement... muslims are for the death penalty.... that is like saying all guys with long hair are hippies who surf and smoke weed. generalising reall doesnt help.
http://www.myspace.com/thelastreel http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=19604327965
i have no idea ,but the koran seems to support death penalty
all this mercy stuff is only from allah if youve been good and it encourgaes charible giving to other muslims only?but it doenst say love your enemies as the new testament says as far as i know
i need to read the koran i guess
http://groups.msn.com/PearlJamNirvana/messages.msnw
I guess you should read it.
naděje umírá poslední
Then none. Because obviously, swearing in on the bible does little to keep this people from being corrupt. And why not have five gods watch over congress? I mean, the one told bush to go to war and look how thats turned out. Maybe we need a little checks and balances with the gods.
Custom. And most everybody used the Bible because the country was founded by Christians. There are unwritten rules. I'm just saying that there is no point swearing on five different books. There should be one or none. Cause if everyone doesn't swear by the same thing, then what is the point of it?
And there is no point swearing on 5 different books. That is why I say, one or none, and lean towards none.
old music: http://www.myspace.com/slowloader
There's more reason to swear on a hundred different books than to swear on one that means nothing to you. I suppose the point is supposed to be that a believer of a certain faith may have a difficult time breaking promises that have been sworn on their holy book. What point would their be in swearing at all if it was a meaningless act?
Man is least himself when he talks in his own person. Give him a mask, and he will tell you the truth.
-Oscar Wilde
why would they ban me? how long you been a liberal mr polically correct in massachupits?
im part american indian -ill take the oath on a tomahawk
youre muslim ? right?
http://groups.msn.com/PearlJamNirvana/messages.msnw
Exactly, that is why I say don't swear on any if you don't swear on one. Congress is one group that should have a common goal, so why have people swear on different belief systems? What is the point of that?
While this situation may seem miniscule, it is interesting. There is no doubt that this country was founded on Christian beliefs, whether they were put in the Constitution or not. The general public is comfortable with swearing on the Bible because 87% (or some other insanely high number) of the country is Christian, and we are comfortable having that as the basis (in reality or just for show) for our political system. In reality Congressman are greedy bastards. But, a lot of folks, including me, are not comfortable that someone swears by the Koran, when a lot of Muslim countries are places I would not want to live. But that isn't to say that a Muslim can't be a congressman. Just a reason why some of us aren't comfortable with some swearing on the Koran. When Muslim values are served you get what we have in the Middle East. When Christian values are served you get what we have in the US. The United States allows more freedom than any country in the world. There are problems with both societies, but I would take ours 100% of the time.