Jump to content

Bible or Koran?

EvilMonkey

By EvilMonkey
in The Filibuster

 Share

Recommended Posts

EvilMonkey Grand Master

EvilMonkey

Posted
Posted (edited)

Keith Ellison, Minnesota congressman-elect, who has ties with the Nation of Islam and CAIR, is reported to ask to take his oath of office with a Koran. Would that imply that he is pledging to uphold Islamic law instead of the Constitution? This just doesn't seem right to me.

Edited by EvilMonkey
Link to comment
Share on other sites
CrimsonWeltall Grand Master

CrimsonWeltall

Posted
Posted

I don't think it would imply it any more than swearing on the Bible implies an official will uphold Judeo-Christian more than the Constitution. The point of the act is to say that you swear to your deity that what you are about to say is true, so if the guy is a Muslim, a Bible would not be appropriate.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
NorthSideSox72 Grand Master

NorthSideSox72

Posted
Posted
QUOTE(CrimsonWeltall @ Nov 12, 2006 -> 08:02 PM)
I don't think it would imply it any more than swearing on the Bible implies an official will uphold Judeo-Christian more than the Constitution. The point of the act is to say that you swear to your deity that what you are about to say is true, so if the guy is a Muslim, a Bible would not be appropriate.

Exactly.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
LowerCaseRepublican Grand Master

LowerCaseRepublican

Posted
Posted
QUOTE(NorthSideSox72 @ Nov 12, 2006 -> 08:23 PM)
Exactly.

But but but...he's a *gasp* Muslim and prays to a different invisible man than me!

 

This faux outrage in this thread is almost as comical as Daniel Pipes' "invisible radar" in his head that tells him who the people are that want to create an Islamic state in the US.

 

I know a guy who was in the Nation when he was younger as well. He's a really nice guy and we get along great. But I'm sure that he's just waiting for me to get my guard down before indoctrinating me or taking my white devil ass out, right EM?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
mr_genius Grand Master

mr_genius

Posted
Posted (edited)

haha, this guy is perfect for the Republicans. i hope he intends on taking center stage in the congress.

 

his ties to CAIR plus his swearing in with a Koran is almost comical. CAIR is a organization which supports hamas, even Durbin (D) says CAIR is "a group that has deep ties to terrorism".

Edited by mr_genius
Link to comment
Share on other sites
EvilMonkey Grand Master

EvilMonkey

Posted
  • Author
Posted
QUOTE(LowerCaseRepublican @ Nov 13, 2006 -> 02:35 AM)
But but but...he's a *gasp* Muslim and prays to a different invisible man than me!

 

This faux outrage in this thread is almost as comical as Daniel Pipes' "invisible radar" in his head that tells him who the people are that want to create an Islamic state in the US.

 

I know a guy who was in the Nation when he was younger as well. He's a really nice guy and we get along great. But I'm sure that he's just waiting for me to get my guard down before indoctrinating me or taking my white devil ass out, right EM?

Come down of your f*cking high horse before you hurt yourself. Where do you see outrage? I said this just doesn't seem right to me, and it doesn't. I didn't say that this makes a mockery of the Constitution, or anything to even suggest moderate 'outrage'. THIS JUST DOESN"T SEEM RIGHT TO ME. Can you read that, or is YOUR faux outrage getting in the way?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
mr_genius Grand Master

mr_genius

Posted
Posted (edited)
QUOTE(Rex Kicka** @ Nov 12, 2006 -> 09:07 PM)
Personally, I don't see the problem.

 

do you have any concerns with his ties to terrorist groups? What about domestic violence, a woman has a retstraining order against him. How about blatant compaign finance violations? or refusing to pay his taxes, thus forcing the IRS has to put a lein on his home.

 

well, atleast he didn't call someone 'macaca'.

Edited by mr_genius
Link to comment
Share on other sites
sox4lifeinPA Grand Master

sox4lifeinPA

Posted
Posted
QUOTE(EvilMonkey @ Nov 12, 2006 -> 11:17 PM)
Would they be pledging to uphold the stomach-enlarging ability of trans-fat?

 

as Cake best said... "Bowel shaking earthquakes of doubt and remorse...assail him, impale him, with monster truck force"

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Rooftop Shots Mentor

Rooftop Shots

Posted
Posted
QUOTE(CrimsonWeltall @ Nov 12, 2006 -> 08:02 PM)
I don't think it would imply it any more than swearing on the Bible implies an official will uphold Judeo-Christian more than the Constitution. The point of the act is to say that you swear to your deity that what you are about to say is true, so if the guy is a Muslim, a Bible would not be appropriate.

I don't post very often, mainly because most of my previous replies were usually negative, and I'm sure I'll get a lot of hate replies on this one as well, but that's OK. You can hate me for disagreeing with me, but at the same time respect me for standing up in what I believe in.

The one issue I have is that The Constitution was based on Biblical principles and put together by men that were Christian and were solely convicted that what they were putting together was baseed on the laws of this nation being guided by their biblical and Christian principles that they saw fit to be upheld. The men that put the Constitution together did not use The Koran as their means of guidance and conviction when putting our nations document together, therefore............, if you take your office by ways of an oath by the Koran, and you decide to go against anything that is in the Constitution,............. would you be not held guilty of breaking the law since the oath that you took was one that was from a source other than what the Constitution was based on in the first place? The Bible is what our founding leaders were convicted of and guided by, therefore if someone is going to take office, he/she better agree with it. If not, don't run!

Agree or disagree with me! Whichever you choose! But my beef is, that once again, someone is trying to devalue and push out something that our country's rights, laws, and documents are based upon, and that I believe that God would like to see our country run..............on Judeo-Christian values and principles. The ACLU is always on the attack of it as well as other organizations. My OPINION.......If you want to be someone with a voice that help to govern laws in a state in our country, then you' better comply with what our founding fathers based it upon......and take an oath to it that shows your allegiance and respect to it. If you can't do that..............THEN EITHER DON"T RUN FOR OFFICE OR MOVE TO A COUNTRY WHERE YOUR FATHERS MADE THERE LAWS BASED UPON THEIR CONVICTIONS! THIS IS AMERICA! GOD'S COUNTRY! GOD'S HOLY WORD IS THE BIBLE! Simply stated..........RESPECT IT and ABIDE BY IT! OUR COUNTRY IS FOUNDED AND GUIDED BY IT. IF you cannot do that........and you are against , and you want to do whatever is in your power to devalue it........................THEN LEAVE!

Link to comment
Share on other sites
santo=dorf Grand Master

santo=dorf

Posted
Posted

QUOTE(Rooftop Shots @ Nov 12, 2006 -> 10:35 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
I don't post very often, mainly because most of my previous replies were usually negative, and I'm sure I'll get a lot of hate replies on this one as well, but that's OK. You can hate me for disagreeing with me, but at the same time respect me for standing up in what I believe in.

The one issue I have is that The Constitution was based on Biblical principles and put together by men that were Christian and were solely convicted that what they were putting together was baseed on the laws of this nation being guided by their biblical and Christian principles that they saw fit to be upheld. The men that put the Constitution together did not use The Koran as their means of guidance and conviction when putting our nations document together, therefore............, if you take your office by ways of an oath by the Koran, and you decide to go against anything that is in the Constitution,............. would you be not held guilty of breaking the law since the oath that you took was one that was from a source other than what the Constitution was based on in the first place? The Bible is what our founding leaders were convicted of and guided by, therefore if someone is going to take office, he/she better agree with it. If not, don't run!

Agree or disagree with me! Whichever you choose! But my beef is, that once again, someone is trying to devalue and push out something that our country's rights, laws, and documents are based upon, and that I believe that God would like to see our country run..............on Judeo-Christian values and principles. The ACLU is always on the attack of it as well as other organizations. My OPINION.......If you want to be someone with a voice that help to govern laws in a state in our country, then you' better comply with what our founding fathers based it upon......and take an oath to it that shows your allegiance and respect to it. If you can't do that..............THEN EITHER DON"T RUN FOR OFFICE OR MOVE TO A COUNTRY WHERE YOUR FATHERS MADE THERE LAWS BASED UPON THEIR CONVICTIONS! THIS IS AMERICA! GOD'S COUNTRY! GOD'S HOLY WORD IS THE BIBLE! Simply stated..........RESPECT IT and ABIDE BY IT! OUR COUNTRY IS FOUNDED AND GUIDED BY IT. IF you cannot do that........and you are against , and you want to do whatever is in your power to devalue it........................THEN LEAVE!

Thank GOD the Constitution prevents the Government from mandating religion on individuals like you are suggesting.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Rex Kickass Grand Master

Rex Kickass

Posted
Posted

I don't see the problem with taking your oath of office on the book of your faith.

 

What would be the point of a muslim swearing to uphold our constitution on the tenets of your faith? Frankly, I'd be more concerned if he swore to uphold our constitution on a bible, because that isn't an instrument of his belief system.

 

And ultimately, what does this change? Nothing. Does this make him less or more exempt from prosecution for breaking the law? No. Does this make him less or more likely to represent his constituent's wishes? No.

 

As far as I'm concerned a Congressman can swear on an encyclopedia, a picture of his family, or whatever he finds important to him and it makes no difference to me what he uses to take his oath. As long as he takes and upholds the oath he needs to take.

 

Mr Genius: as far as the other stuff you mentioned? Seeing as how it doesn't pertain to this issue - I still don't have a problem with him swearing on a Koran. If what you allege is true: sure I have a problem with it. But that doesn't mean a thing with what he swears on to uphold an oath.

 

Rooftop Shots: Thanks for coming in the Filibuster. Thanks for offering your opinion. But frankly, your opinion - in this case - is shortsighted and wrong. We are guaranteed religious freedom in this country - and that includes our choice of worship manual to use when taking an oath of office. If you don't appreciate religious freedom - that's what's Unamerican.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Reddy Grand Master

Reddy

Posted
Posted
QUOTE(Rooftop Shots @ Nov 13, 2006 -> 12:35 AM)
I don't post very often, mainly because most of my previous replies were usually negative, and I'm sure I'll get a lot of hate replies on this one as well, but that's OK. You can hate me for disagreeing with me, but at the same time respect me for standing up in what I believe in.

The one issue I have is that The Constitution was based on Biblical principles and put together by men that were Christian and were solely convicted that what they were putting together was baseed on the laws of this nation being guided by their biblical and Christian principles that they saw fit to be upheld. The men that put the Constitution together did not use The Koran as their means of guidance and conviction when putting our nations document together, therefore............, if you take your office by ways of an oath by the Koran, and you decide to go against anything that is in the Constitution,............. would you be not held guilty of breaking the law since the oath that you took was one that was from a source other than what the Constitution was based on in the first place? The Bible is what our founding leaders were convicted of and guided by, therefore if someone is going to take office, he/she better agree with it. If not, don't run!

Agree or disagree with me! Whichever you choose! But my beef is, that once again, someone is trying to devalue and push out something that our country's rights, laws, and documents are based upon, and that I believe that God would like to see our country run..............on Judeo-Christian values and principles. The ACLU is always on the attack of it as well as other organizations. My OPINION.......If you want to be someone with a voice that help to govern laws in a state in our country, then you' better comply with what our founding fathers based it upon......and take an oath to it that shows your allegiance and respect to it. If you can't do that..............THEN EITHER DON"T RUN FOR OFFICE OR MOVE TO A COUNTRY WHERE YOUR FATHERS MADE THERE LAWS BASED UPON THEIR CONVICTIONS! THIS IS AMERICA! GOD'S COUNTRY! GOD'S HOLY WORD IS THE BIBLE! Simply stated..........RESPECT IT and ABIDE BY IT! OUR COUNTRY IS FOUNDED AND GUIDED BY IT. IF you cannot do that........and you are against , and you want to do whatever is in your power to devalue it........................THEN LEAVE!

 

theres one huge flaw in your argument... the founding fathers were not mostly christian but Deists... guess your post was pointless...

Link to comment
Share on other sites
southsider2k5 Grand Master

southsider2k5

Posted
Posted
QUOTE(LowerCaseRepublican @ Nov 12, 2006 -> 08:35 PM)
This faux outrage in this thread is almost as comical as Daniel Pipes' "invisible radar" in his head that tells him who the people are that want to create an Islamic state in the US.

 

Actually this would be a very true statement. Part of the charge of Islam is to make EVERY nation an Islamic state. I have no doubt that there are people working in the USA today to make this happen.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
NorthSideSox72 Grand Master

NorthSideSox72

Posted
Posted

I want to seperate the two arguments here.

 

There is one argument being made about whether or not being sworn in on the Quran is somehow a problem. Its been suggested even that it defies the Constitution to do so. In this case, really, there is no argument. Freedom of religion is a huge key to the Constitution, and those same forbearers were smart enough to make sure that was clear. Frankly, if you are threatened by someone swearing an oath on a Quran or some holy text other than the Bible, then you need to go read the Constitution again. Rooftop, I am glad to see new blood in here, but you are simply way off base.

 

Then there is the issue of Ellison having ties to CAIR and the Nation of Islam. This, to me, is definitely something worth discussing. If indeed Ellison has some sort of significant ties to terror-supporting organization(s), then that could be a very bad thing. So... who has some information they'd like to share on that topic? My understanding is that he was part of the Nation of Islam some long time ago. If that's all there is to it, then I'm not overly concerned. But is there more? Can someone show me?

 

Please, on both sides of this very sensitive discussion, try to stop with the straw man arguments and intentional exagerration of the other sides' words. Let's try to stay on topic.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Texsox Grand Master

Texsox

Posted
Posted
QUOTE(southsider2k5 @ Nov 13, 2006 -> 08:04 AM)
Actually this would be a very true statement. Part of the charge of Islam is to make EVERY nation an Islamic state. I have no doubt that there are people working in the USA today to make this happen.

 

And witnessing is a great tradition of Christians. Shall we study all the Missions in the US and Mexico? Remember the Alamo!

 

I would offer that the one true religion we have here in the US is democracy and we like to spread that world wide, even if it means dying to accomplish the task.

 

 

QUOTE(NorthSideSox72 @ Nov 13, 2006 -> 08:04 AM)
Then there is the issue of Ellison having ties to CAIR and the Nation of Islam.

 

The voters sent him, end of discussion. :usa

Link to comment
Share on other sites
southsider2k5 Grand Master

southsider2k5

Posted
Posted
QUOTE(Texsox @ Nov 13, 2006 -> 08:10 AM)
And witnessing is a great tradition of Christians. Shall we study all the Missions in the US and Mexico? Remember the Alamo!

 

Did I ever claim it didn't? I was adressing a falsehood in LCRs statement, not the history of Christianity. Believe me I know if I asked, I would get a thesis on every evil ever done in its name.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...