Muslim congressman and The Bible

This word is used so much, that it's going to lose it's meaning. It probably already has.

 

This issue is neligible to me,...jmo.

 

Just because a word is missused does not nessisarily mean that it will loose it's meaning, especially when used in a specific case and context. For example, if you talk to a computer engineer or mathematician about "boolian logic", the meaning of that phrase still has a specific and clear cut definition, despite how some people use one word in that phrase.

 

If any one ask any of you guys or me to put our hand on the qur-an and swear on it would you do it ? I wouldn't why cause i'm not muslim i'm christian so I guess he has the right to choose the book he believes in

 

Yahoo News has a good article on this issue at: http://news.yahoo.com/s/csm/20061207/ts_csm/aoath

Here are some key statements from that article:

According to the article Congressmen normally do not put their hand on anything although some have carried a Bible with them. It also stated that one Congressman was sworn in on a Bible that included the Book of Mormon. Also at least two Presidents did not use a Bible at their swearing in. President John Quincy Adams took the oath on a law book that included the Constitution and President Theodore Roosevelt didn't use any book.

To those who claim we are a Christian country, the following statement is a good rebuttal to this false claim:

To deny a Congressman the right to have a copy of the Koran or to say that there was something wrong with this or to try and force him to use a Bible is inherently anti-American and it is nothing short of spitting on our Constitution.

 

I was reading the same from some other sources. They stated that they do not use the bible or any book as a standard, which really makes this entire conflict a moot point.

 

Thank you, KBL, for saying something (with references) That I did not have the time to compile, or knowledge of where to look for the resources, and for having the courage to come forward and say it.

 

KLB, I agree with you to some degree on your last post. My point has never been about forcing one to swear in on the Bible. I would be against that. It's perfectly normal that an Atheist, a Hindu, a Sihk or any other religion could very easily be voted into office. I would take no issue with them using their holy books or using the Book of Morman.

My argument has been, that the quran specifically holds scriptures that call for the death of and prohibits the befriending of, the very people the Congressman is swearing he will protect and serve. I take issue with that. I would never ask him to take an oath on another religion's book though. Instead, if one must place their hand on something, make it the Constitution.

The quran calls for muslims to fight and kill non-believers. It instructs them not to befriend non-believers (Christians and Jews). If we can get past the denial that their quran calls for these things and look at it objectively, the book counters what the Congressman is being asked to uphold.

To counter your counter claim that we are not a Christian based country:

Alabama 1901, Preamble. We the people of the State of Alabama, invoking the favor_and guidance of Almighty God, do ordain and establish the following Constitution ...

Alaska 1956, Preamble. We, the people of Alaska,_grateful to God and to those who founded our nation and pioneered this great land ...

Arizona 1911, Preamble. We, the people of the State of Arizona, grateful to Almighty God for our liberties, do ordain this Constitution...

Arkansas 1874, Preamble. We, the people of the State of Arkansas, grateful to Almighty God for the privilege of choosing our own form of government...

California 1879, Preamble. We, the People of the State of California, grateful to Almighty God for our freedom ...

Colorado 1876, Preamble. We, the people of Colorado, with profound reverence for the Supreme Ruler of Universe.

Connecticut 1818, Preamble. The People of Connecticut, acknowledging with gratitude the good Providence of God in permitting them to enjoy ...

Delaware 1897, Preamble. Through Divine Goodness all men have, by nature, the rights of worshipping and serving their Creator according to the dictates of their consciences ...

Florida 1885, Preamble. We, the people of the State of Florida, grateful to Almighty God for our constitutional liberty . establish this Constitution...

Georgia 1777, Preamble. We, the people of Georgia, relying upon protection and guidance of Almighty God, do ordain and establish this Constitution...

Hawaii 1959, Preamble. We, the people of Hawaii, Grateful for Divine Guidance ... establish this Constitution.

Idaho 1889, Preamble. We, the people of t! he State of Idaho, grateful to Almighty God for our freedom, to secure its blessings ...

Illinois 1870, Preamble. We, the people of the State of Illinois, grateful to Almighty God for the civil, political and religious liberty which He hath so long permitted us to enjoy and looking to Him for a blessing on our endeavors.

Indiana 1851, Preamble. We, the People of the State of Indiana, grateful to Almighty God for the free exercise of the right to chose our form of government.

Iowa 1857, Preamble. We, the People of the State of Iowa, grateful to the Supreme Being for the blessings hitherto enjoyed, and feeling our dependence on Him for a continuation of these blessings . establish this Constitution

Kansas 1859, Preamble. We, the people of Kansas, grateful to Almighty God for our civil and religious privileges . establish this Constitution.

Kentucky 1891, Preamble. We, the people of the Commonwealth of grateful to Almighty God for the civil, political and religious liberties...

Louisiana 1921, Preamble. We, the people of the State of Louisiana, grateful to Almighty God for the civil, political and religious liberties we enjoy.

Maine 1820, Preamble. We the People of Maine .. acknowledging with grateful hearts the goodness of_the Sovereign Ruler of the Universe in affording us an opportunity ... and imploring His aid and direction.

Maryland 1776, Preamble. We, the people of the state of Maryland, grateful to Almighty God or our civil and religious liberty...

Massachusetts 1780, Preamble. We...the people of Massachusetts, acknowledging with grateful hearts, the goodness of the Great Legislator of the Universe ... in the course of His Providence, an opportunity .and devoutly imploring His direction ...

Michigan 1908, Preamble. We, the people of the State of Michigan, grateful to Almighty God for the blessings of freedom ... establish this Constitution

Minnesota 1857, Preamble. We, the people of the State of Minnesota, grateful to God for our civil and religious liberty, and desiring to perpetuate its blessings.

Mississippi 1890, Preamble. We, the people of
Mississippi in convention assembled, grateful to Almighty God, and invoking His blessing on our work.

Missouri 1845, Preamble. We, the people of Missouri, with profound reverence for the Supreme Ruler of the Universe, and grateful for His goodness ... establish this Constitution ...

Montana 1889, Preamble. We, the people of Montana, grateful to Almighty God for the blessings of liberty. establish this Constitution ...

Nebraska 1875, Preamble. We, the people, grateful to Almighty God for our freedom .. establish this Constitution .

Nevada 1864, Preamble. We the people of the State of Nevada, grateful to Almighty God for our freedom establish this Constitution...

New Hampshire 1792, Part I. Art. I. Sec. V. Every individual has a natural and unalienable right to worship God according to the dictates of his own conscience.

New Jersey 1844, Preamble. We, the people of the State of New Jersey, grateful to Almighty God for civil and religious liberty which He hath so long permitted us to enjoy, and looking to Him for a blessing on our endeavors ..

New Mexico 1911, Preamble. We, the People of New Mexico, grateful to Almighty God for the blessings of liberty ..

New York 1846, Preamble. We, the people of the State of New York, grateful to Almighty God for our freedom, in order to secure its blessings.

North Carolina 1868, Preamble. We the people of the State of North Carolina, grateful to Almighty God, the Sovereign Ruler of Nations, for our civil, political, and religious liberties, and acknowledging our dependence upon Him for the continuance of those ..

North Dakota 1889, Preamble. We, the people of North Dakota, grateful to Almighty God for the blessings of civil and religious liberty, do ordain...

Ohio 1852, Preamble. We the people of the state of Ohio, grateful to Almighty God for our freedom, to secure its blessings and to promote our common ...

Oklahoma 1907, Preamble. Invoking the guidance of Almighty God, in order to secure and perpetuate the blessings of liberty ... establish this ...

Oregon 1857, Bill of Rights, Article I. Section 2. All men shall be secure in the Natural right, to worship Almighty God according to the dictates of their consciences..

Pennsylvania 1776, Preamble. We, the people of Pennsylvania, grateful to Almighty God for the blessings of civil and religious liberty, and humbly invoking His guidance.

Rhode Island 1842, Preamble. We the People of the
State of Rhode Island grateful to Almighty God for the civil and religious liberty which He hath so long permitted us to enjoy, and looking to Him for a blessing.

South Carolina, 1778, Preamble. We, the people of he State of South Carolina, grateful to God for our liberties, do ordain and establish this Constitution.

South Dakota 1889, Preamble. We, the people of South Dakota, grateful to Almighty God for our civil! and religious liberties ... establish this Constitition.

Tennessee 1796, Art. XI.III. That all men have a natural and indefeasible right to worship Almighty God according to the dictates of their conscience...

Texas 1845, Preamble. We the People of the Republic of Texas, acknowledging, with gratitude, the grace and beneficence of God.

Utah 1896, Preamble. Grateful to Almighty God for life and liberty, we establish this Constitution .

Vermont 1777, Preamble. Whereas all government ought to ... enable the individuals who compose it to enjoy their natural rights, and other blessings which the Author of Existence has bestowed on man...

Virginia 1776, Bill of Rights, XVI ... Religion, or the Duty which we owe our Creator ... can be directed only by Reason ... and that it is the mutual duty of all to practice Christian Forbearance, Love and Charity towards each other ...

Washington 1889, Preamble. We the People of the State of Washington, grateful! to the Supreme Ruler of the Universe for our liberties, do ordain this Constitution ...

West Virginia 1872, Preamble. Since through Divine Providence we enjoy the blessings of civil, political and religious liberty, we, the people of West Virginia .. reaffirm our faith in and constant reliance upon God...

Wisconsin 1848, Preamble. We, the people of Wisconsin, grateful to Almighty God for our freedom, domestic tranquility ...

Wyoming 1890, Preamble. We, the people of the State of Wyoming, grateful to God for our civil, political, and religious liberties ... establish this Constitution...

To accept your counter claim, one would have to accept that every State's Constitution is wrong.

Religious freedom and tolerance is very much part of our Country's heritage and I value it very much. I don't recall seeing anyone mention that he should use a Bible instead. I could be wrong, but I don't believe *anyone* said such. That being the case, your argument would then be the "strawman" argument because you can beat it down by saying it's anti-American and spitting on our Constitution. Unfortunately, there is no qualification for that argument in the first place.

Again, I invite you to view:

http://forums.digitalpoint.com/showpost.php?p=1132348&postcount=37

and

http://forums.digitalpoint.com/showpost.php?p=1276336&postcount=59

These are not, as you've previously suggested, "taken out of context." The context is clear. You cannot "deny them away," they are there. If you so desperately need them to be untrue, take the scripture numbers and do your own research. They are out there, in thousands of references. It is not politically incorrect to be informed. It is not politically incorrect to be aware. Tolerance should not be about sweeping things under the carpet.

 

GTech,

While I dislike any call to violence save that to defend those who cannot defend themselves, I am of the opinion that the First Amendment, and the… was it the 16th Amendment that guaranteed equal protection under the law…? In any case, I believe that these amendments make it clear that we cannot forbid someone from carrying, or holding a book pertaining to their religion, when other documents are allowed to be held, or carried.

 

Josh, your agument has no value, because I nor anyone else in the thread that I've noted, have taken issue with carrying or holding a book pertaining to their religion.

It's not about carrying a book or holding it. Are you reading a post that I have overlooked? If so, please point it out.

It's about taking an oath to office by affirming on a book that specifically calls for the death of the very people the person is affirming to uphold and serve.

That has been the basis for my argument all along, despite numerous attempts from muliple participants to twist the argument in many different directions.

 

GTech I have no desire to hold any discussions with you due to the way you constantly insult others and maliciously try to twist what they say.

Your very acts in this thread, your outrage against a Congressman's desire to hold a Koran at his swearing in and your general intolerance of the religion of others throughout this entire forum is entirely anti-American. This country was born on the premise of religious freedom and religious tolerance the very moment our founding fathers signed the Constitution.

You do not have to embrace Islam nor accept its beliefs, but as an American citizen (and I assume you are) you have an obligation to the Constitution and country I assume you so love to not spread hatred and to be tolerant of others. IF Islam is truly a violent religion like you constantly claim, it will in time show its true colors and the peaceful amongst its believers will either force change from within or walk away from Islam.

All attacks upon Islam from non-believers does is create an us vs. them siege mentality that prevents true progress in society. The greatest chance for change we have is amongst the moderate Muslims of our own country. Rather than berating them every step of the way we need to show tolerance and acceptance such that they can show to their brethren why our country is so great and help bring a moderation of the more extreme elements in their religion. Just like we need to try and bring more moderation amongst the more extreme elements of the Christian religions.

They say honey attracts more flies than vinegar and all I see from you in these forums is vinegar.

 

When one "Swears in upon" a book, they are placing their hand on it in some manner. The name of the book is not even refferenced in the oath. I do not believe that forbidding them to TOUCH the Koran in any way that a Christian would be allowed to touch the bible durring their swearing in is legal. There is no rule concerning what one may or may not have their hand on while swearing in to my knowledge, aside from any item that would be illegal to posess, so I cannot see how we can, according to the constitution, forbid this congressman from using the Quran during his swearing in.

 

Especially when the Constitution expressly prohibits a religious test. I will say again as I said earlier if putting his hand on a Koran causes the congressman to take oath of office and responsibilities even slightly more seriously than we should all encourage this act. I only wish some of our Congressmen who took their oath on a Bible had taken their oath and responsibilities more seriously as we would have a lot less corruption in Congress.

 

Duly noted. I will treat you with the same hostility you've afforded me from here on out. Denial is your choice and sweeping truth under the carpet is your preferred method. You are so afraid of being poltically incorrect that you are willing to use denial and obfuscation as your shields.

You've clearly demonstrated that being aware, for you, is politically incorrect. That, is un-American and I appreciate you clearing that up. The greatest chance for change we have, is being aware and not sweeping tough issues under the carpet of political correctness. I can't help but wonder what else you would be willing to hide.

 

I am very aware of the world and the reality around us and this has nothing to do with political correctness. It has everything to do with not becoming the enemy you so fear. It was once said that "we have nothing to fear but fear itself." Intolerance and hatred is what fear breeds and if we as a society give in to fear our enemies will have won. If we forsake our Constitution and withhold rights from others we are no better than our enemies we try to protect ourselves against.

By spreading fear and hatred the way you do in a misguided attempt to protect our country, you play into the hands of the extremists like Bin Laden who depend upon fear and hatred to trick moderate rational people into following them and their evil ways.

We can not solve and have never been able to solve the world's problems by spreading fear, hatred or intolerance. There are truly evil people in this world and the only way to defeat them is to deny them what gives them power. Attacking Islam the way you do only helps to harden minds on both sides of this issue and drive away moderate people with whom we could have real discussions and find real solutions. This will be the most fatal mistake of President Bush's presidency.

His rhetoric and the rhetoric of those around him have helped to strengthen the hand of hardliners in Iran and the rest of the Middle East and have made recruiting so much easier for the extremists in the Middle East. Intolerance and rhetoric has made it nearly impossible for moderate voices to be heard, which would have allowed us the very real possibilities of real lasting solutions in the Middle East.

By spreading hatred and intolerance the way you do in this forum, which has an international audience, you only help to show America in the worst light and harden attitudes on a personal level. Showing tolerance isn't about giving up one's own beliefs it is about a live and let live attitude and working to find common ground between different peoples. If we can show tolerance on a personal level and work to find common ground with others in this forum we can have a positive impact on world affairs at a personal level. If we show courtesy, tolerance and respect to our Islamic brethren they will see for themselves that we are not the evil infidels bent on their destruction that their extremist and hard line leaders try to make us out to be. In this way we undercut the extremists and give moderates a chance to bring change from within without us trying to force change upon them from without.

 

Unfortunately, I have begun to see the current “Terrorist” hunt as a return of McCarthyism under a different guise. We are hunting those who have ties to those who have ties to those who have ties to people that may be our enemies. The rights of the individual are shrinking, and the government has more power to ruin people’s lives in the name of protecting them.

 

Being aware is not hatred. It's easy to confuse the information being aware of, with the hatred itself. For example, as I pointed out, the quran does call for the death of non-believers. It does instruct it's followers not to befriend Christians and Jews. *That* is the hatred. Being aware of such, is not hatred.

I can't tell whether you are specifically still trying to deny it. When I posted the references I took issue with that supported why I was against him taking an oath on the quran, you chose denial that they even existed. That doesn't mesh with your "I am very aware of the world and the reality around us"

Further, your initial post that anyone who didn't agree with your view, was a wacko was unto itself, the very bigotry you attempted to project upon me.

My position is clear. No matter how you attempt to rewrite it, I take issue with anyone taking an oath of office to protect and serve the people in which the very book of affirmation calls for their deaths.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but you are arguing that I should not take issue and even though the book does call for the deaths of the very people the Congressman is affirming to protect and serve, I should be tolerant of his religious book's call for their death?

How twisted is that? You really take issue with someone taking issue with that? It's like a man and a woman marry and the husband takes his vows and affirms on a book that instructs husbands to kill their wives. And you'd expect the wife to be tolerant of it?

Tolerance goes so far. If you want to tolerate someone's right kill you and your family, by all means, display your mighty "political correctness" to the world. Just don't expect everyone to be so willing to lay down and die or not take issue with such. That's a form of intolerance unto itself. You're trading one form of intolerance for another.

 

You are very right. There are many many very scary parallels between the McCarthy era and today.

Anyone who hasn't should see the movie "Good Night and Good Luck". It is really good. I am proud to say that it was a Republican junior Senator from Maine named Margaret Chase Smith who also happened to be the first woman elected to both the U.S. House and Senator who stood up to Joe McCarthy at great peril to her self and really helped to bring him down.

 

GTech: What I am saying is that it is illegal to stop him from using that book. I make no claims one way or another as to the contents of that book. I merely make a claim as to my understanding of the US constitution. I will not say that Quran does or does not support something, as I have never read even a single page of it. If you feel that it is a book that should not be swarn in on, I support your right to that opinion, and your right to protest the use of that book through peaceable assemble. However, I am supporting this Congressman’s right to religious freedom, and equal protection under the law.

 

AH! *writes the name of that movie down.* I've been trying to remember the name of that movie for forever now. Not that I'll have time to WATCH it for a bit. Thank you!