Should the first Muslim in Congress swear on the Bible?

[Arkie]

I think he should swear on the Quran because the Bible may be meaningless to him and that would make the oath meaningless.

[Crushaholic]

He shouldn't be forced to swear on the Bible...

[OregonBronco]

Which leads to a bigger question:

Why are members of Congress forced to swear on the Bible?

What if he/she was Buddhist?
Or atheist?
Or agnostic?
Or Zoroastrian?
Or Wiccan?

Separation of church and state will never happen when the majority of people running the state go to the same church.

[defenseman]

Interesting question. I could care less for the most part...dman

*Then again, if the rules state the bible, I'm thinking they do, he should do so. That, or change the rule. One way or the other, he should follow the rules as prescribed by the house to which he will serve. If not, hit the road.

[Bronx33]

Interesting question. I could care less for the most part...dman

*Then again, if the rules state the bible, I'm thinking they do, he should do so. That, or change the rule. One way or the other, he should follow the rules as prescribed by the house to which he will serve. If not, hit the road.


Exactly, also religous or not it's kind of a slap in the face IMO to the american people due to the current situaition going on, is it that important to him? and what exactly does the koran have to do with his job in an american goverment position. (kinda odd if you ask me) is he just showboatin for the other muslims saying (look) one step in taking over the US? lot's of questions come up as far as his motives are concerned.

[OregonBronco]

and what exactly does the koran have to do with his job in an american goverment position.

What does the Bible have to do with his job in an American government position? Not to disrespect anyone's faith, but as far as I'm concerned he may as well be swearing oath on a copy of Harry Potter. If he swears an oath to this country, he should be held accountable no matter what his hand is on.

[Bronco_Beerslug]

Which leads to a bigger question:

Why are members of Congress forced to swear on the Bible?

What if he/she was Buddhist?
Or atheist?
Or agnostic?
Or Zoroastrian?
Or Wiccan?

Separation of church and state will never happen when the majority of people running the state go to the same church.
Exactly! why should any politician or government official be swearing on the Bible?

[Northman]

Yeeeeeeep.

[RaiderH8r]

I could give a **** if he took an oath on a phonebook.

[defenseman]

What does the Bible have to do with his job in an American government position? Not to disrespect anyone's faith, but as far as I'm concerned he may as well be swearing oath on a copy of Harry Potter. If he swears an oath to this country, he should be held accountable no matter what his hand is on.

Da rules is da rules, change them, or hit the road is my take....not here to debate the validity of swearing on anything...dman

*The "house" has been doing it this way for quite a while now, i see no reason to change it for anyone at this point in time.

[defenseman]

Exactly! why should any politician or government official be swearing on the Bible?

Maybe, it's prescribed by the rules of the office? If so, he's going to be in the house, if that's the "house" rules, then he gets sworn in via whatever method or book. To be honest, DC is so PC these days I'm guessing that the house will pass some sort of temporary whatever to allow him to do it however he wants. I'm for making him play by the rules, or change the rules, or hit the road. Any of the three works for me. But then again, I'm not someone to "knuckle" readily to special requests as a general rule, I'm thinking alot of politicians are, freaking reeds in the wind.....dman

[RaiderH8r]

Now that I think of it....these people SHOULD take an oath on the phone book, from their district or state. That's who they're in Congress to represent. Dang I'm good.

[Bronco_Beerslug]

Maybe, it's prescribed by the rules of the office?
No I understand the ritual, am just asking why. What's the benefit or purpose? It's obviously not a deterrent or moral pledge to a lot of politicians.

[OregonBronco]

Maybe, it's prescribed by the rules of the office?

I'm not arguing how the rules are written. I'm arguing that the rules are wrong and (dare I say it?) unconstitutional. The rules are written to keep a particular sect in power.

Imagine, if you will, a newly-elected congressman who happens to be agnostic. Said congressman will not swear on the Bible or any other religious text.

Political career = over.

[baja]

I think he should swear on the Quran because the Bible may be meaningless to him and that would make the oath meaningless.

No because if he were to even touch the bible his hand would burst into flames such is the wrath of god

[baja]

I'm not arguing how the rules are written. I'm arguing that the rules are wrong and (dare I say it?) unconstitutional. The rules are written to keep a particular sect in power.

Imagine, if you will, a newly-elected congressman who happens to be agnostic. Said congressman will not swear on the Bible or any other religious text.

Political career = over.

This thread is so silly. Think about it the only person bothered by swearing on a bible is a deep believer ( which when considering this would be a politician would number about 1 in 10,000) so all the others could care less about the symbolic practice anyway.

[defenseman]

I'm not arguing how the rules are written. I'm arguing that the rules are wrong and (dare I say it?) unconstitutional. The rules are written to keep a particular sect in power.

Imagine, if you will, a newly-elected congressman who happens to be agnostic. Said congressman will not swear on the Bible or any other religious text.

Political career = over.

Then, get them changed. If not, and the majority of the convening authority desires to maintain said requirement, time to swear in accordingly. If not, hit the road..dman

[defenseman]

This thread is so silly. Think about it the only person bothered by swearing on a bible is a deep believer ( which when considering this would be a politician would number about 1 in 10,000) so all the others could care less about the symbolic practice anyway.

If it is in fact a "rule", then if they are bothered? Change it, if not, status quo..dman

[defenseman]

No I understand the ritual, am just asking why. What's the benefit or purpose? It's obviously not a deterrent or moral pledge to a lot of politicians.

Good question. I'm thinking this, it's "their" ritual, they being those who are serving in the house, if it is their desire to continue the ritual, ceremony, swearing in, whatever you want to call it, then "they" should be allowed to do so. After all, it is "they" who are serving...dman

[OregonBronco]

Then, get them changed. If not, and the majority of the convening authority desires to maintain said requirement, time to swear in accordingly. If not, hit the road..dman

So by your logic:

BUS DRIVER: Ma'am, you're going to have to give up your seat.

ROSA PARKS: But that not fair!

BUS DRIVER: That's the rules.

ROSA PARKS: Ok, I guess I'll just walk then.


I know that's exaggerating it a bit, but apathy and complacency is not a good recipe for society.

[bendog]

It's tradition. The US Const expressly states there can be no religious test for office. No offense intended towards Arkie, as he just posted the thread, but it appears the RWers have their panties in a dither over this. I googled koran oath affirmation and got all kinds of fringe stuff. I was really unsure, and still am really, whether islam would normally allow "swearing" on the koran.

[RaiderH8r]

No because if he were to even touch the bible his hand would burst into flames such is the wrath of god

His or theirs? Punishment by his for having touched such a foul text or punishment by theirs for being a heretic? I'm confused...

[RaiderH8r]

It's tradition. The US Const expressly states there can be no religious test for office. No offense intended towards Arkie, as he just posted the thread, but it appears the RWers have their panties in a dither over this. I googled koran oath affirmation and got all kinds of fringe stuff. I was really unsure, and still am really, whether islam would normally allow "swearing" on the koran.

I'm a right-winger and my panties are squarely un-dithered. I seriously propose the phone book.

[defenseman]

So by your logic:

BUS DRIVER: Ma'am, you're going to have to give up your seat.

ROSA PARKS: But that not fair!

BUS DRIVER: That's the rules.

ROSA PARKS: Ok, I guess I'll just walk then.


I know that's exaggerating it a bit, but apathy and complacency is not a good recipe for society.

This is not a good analogy, you need to do better...dman

[OregonBronco]

This is not a good analogy, you need to do better...dman

Really? Ok, how about:

CONGRESS: Sir, you're going to have to swear on the Bible.

MUSLIM: But that not fair!

CONGRESS: That's the rules.

MUSLIM: Ok, I guess I'll just hit the road then.

[Bronx33]

Really? Ok, how about:

CONGRESS: Sir, you're going to have to swear on the Bible.

MUSLIM: But that not fair!

CONGRESS: That's the rules.

MUSLIM: Ok, I guess I'll just hit the road then.

CONGRESS: Don't let the door hit ya in the a**

[TheDave]

I could give a **** if he took an oath on a phonebook.

ditto

[defenseman]

CONGRESS: Don't let the door hit ya in the a**

If congress decided to "ammend" the requirement, which wouldn't surprise me in the least considering the "reeds in the wind" that prevail there, then he should be allowed to swear in however he choses. But, if there is no change, agreed, hit the road...dman

[bendog]

I'm a right-winger and my panties are squarely un-dithered. I seriously propose the phone book.

oh me too. I was referring to some RW blogger Rushwannabies.

I think most of us guys who are pretty much Reagan democrats and old-school Goldwater conservatives are pretty much left out, and what's funny is there may be more of us than either party has in it's hardcore support.

I really wonder though whether a muslim can swear on the koran. (I can't spell it the new way) I mean they don't say the prophet's name, nor really that of Allah. And really, what the religion means is you "submit" to God's will .. the nature of things. I personally don't view that as in conflict with Christianity but it seems different. Sure the Koran's a holy book, swearing to man's law upon God's law ..... I think some mullah in Iran or Iraq would drill holes in him with a power drill and cap him.

[Bronx33]

Point is: You let one person alter a tradition (and i really don't care what they swear on) becuase before you know it somebody will want to swear in on a mad magazine or a playboy next it just degrades a system some hold pretty high. But for gods sakes (not a koran) it's weak for him to even ask IMO.

[bendog]

The pt is .... there's no law and in reality no tradition of using the bible.

http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2006/11/29/oath-of-office/

even the frigging natl review realizes this is a Rushism joke, lol

http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=MWRjNjk2NTdmMThlOWFjYmMzNDMwZmZkYmJmZDg3MDM=

[OregonBronco]

All I'm saying is someone taking a position in government should not be swearing on a religious text.

Here's an idea: why don't they swear on the Constitution of the United States?

[bendog]

Rather than swearing an oath, I think they should just affirm ... and post a bond.

[defenseman]

Rather than swearing an oath, I think they should just affirm ... and post a bond.

LOL at dog...good one..dman

[Bronx33]

Rather than swearing an oath, I think they should just affirm ... and post a bond.


How about this....

http://aycu03.webshots.com/image/8682/2003879653925954708_rs.jpg

[defenseman]

OUCH!!!...dman

[bendog]

That poor congressional page will never again walk fully upright.

[Dudeskey]

I thought there was a scripture in the book of James that says something about not using the bible when taking an oath/ swearing or something like that.

Anyway, its my understanding that when a congressman is sworn in it is done on the floor of congress and there are no books used, just the right hand is raised. This swearing on the bible/quaran/book of mormon/ yellowbook, whatever is a bull**** photo op and not the actual swearing in.

[bronco_diesel]

you shouldn't have to swear on any source. you should be trusted at your word....

the sad part, it really doesn't matter...we are lied to one way or the other.

[bronco_diesel]

I thought there was a scripture in the book of James that says something about not using the bible when taking an oath/ swearing or something like that.

Anyway, its my understanding that when a congressman is sworn in it is done on the floor of congress and there are no books used, just the right hand is raised. This swearing on the bible/quaran/book of mormon/ yellowbook, whatever is a bull**** photo op and not the actual swearing in.

the bible says let your yes be yes and your no be no. you shouldn't have to make promises or swears etc. you should be trusted at your word.

i would never swear on the bible...

[Arkie]

Point is: You let one person alter a tradition (and i really don't care what they swear on) becuase before you know it somebody will want to swear in on a mad magazine or a playboy next it just degrades a system some hold pretty high. But for gods sakes (not a koran) it's weak for him to even ask IMO.

The Koran does not degrade our American system. It would if we change to a Christian state, but we aren't there yet. This country practices free religion. The Bible and Koran are probably the two most sacred books in the world. I think neither should be used, or they should use the right book that goes with the right faith.

[Bronx33]

The Koran does not degrade our American system. It would if we change to a Christian state, but we aren't there yet. This country practices free religion. The Bible and Koran are probably the two most sacred books in the world. I think neither should be used, or they should use the right book that goes with the right faith.


I never said it did i just said if they let him do this (others will follow suite) with other stuff, but the timing is really bad on his request no?

[baja]

His or theirs? Punishment by his for having touched such a foul text or punishment by theirs for being a heretic? I'm confused...

Well you bring up a good point I think in that case they would be off setting penalties.

[baja]

I'm a right-winger and my panties are squarely un-dithered. I seriously propose the phone book.

I think the Tibetan Book of the Dead would just about cover all the bases.

[baja]

ditto

Will this be going into your resume?

[Arkie]

I never said it did i just said if they let him do this (others will follow suite) with other stuff, but the timing is really bad on his request no?

I guess the timing is bad, but so is the timing of the first Muslim elected.

[GonzoLays]

Point is: You let one person alter a tradition (and i really don't care what they swear on) becuase before you know it somebody will want to swear in on a mad magazine or a playboy next it just degrades a system some hold pretty high. But for gods sakes (not a koran) it's weak for him to even ask IMO.


This is burning your ass isn't it.

hahahahahahaahahaahah

[defenseman]

This is burning your ass isn't it.

hahahahahahaahahaahah

Enjoying someone "twisting in the wind"? One can only hope the favor is returned to you very soon.....dman

[Spider]

Swearing on a Bible ? as if that will help .............these bastards lie , steal , Cheat , on any given issue ..............

[Spider]

Point is: You let one person alter a tradition (and i really don't care what they swear on) becuase before you know it somebody will want to swear in on a mad magazine or a playboy next it just degrades a system some hold pretty high. But for gods sakes (not a koran) it's weak for him to even ask IMO.
Tradition ? Hilarious!
how many different sects of Religion do we have ? all have different traditions .
Degrades the system ? Hilarious! ............ new to this country or what ?
tell me the last time you heard an honest politician ?
Playboy is the same as the bible , though I think the Bible has more sex and violence , but the point is if you dont believe in either one , then they just dont matter ............
Take a look at Foley , he swore on the bible , and he is completely batshít ..

[Bronx33]

Tradition ? Hilarious!
how many different sects of Religion do we have ? all have different traditions .
Degrades the system ? Hilarious! ............ new to this country or what ?
tell me the last time you heard an honest politician ?
Playboy is the same as the bible , though I think the Bible has more sex and violence , but the point is if you dont believe in either one , then they just dont matter ............
Take a look at Foley , he swore on the bible , and he is completely batshít ..

That's what is was getting at spider but the fact is they get sworn in with a bible (why)? i really don't care.

[maven]

You don't have to take an oath on the bible. There have been other members of congress that have taken oaths on books of faith other than the new testament.

There's no legal requirement that there be an oath of office.

[Bronx33]

You don't have to take an oath on the bible. There have been other members of congress that have taken oaths on books of faith other than the new testament.

There's no legal requirement that there be an oath of office.


Fact is the koran (is bad timing) really bad timing and if this guy pushes the subject hes only crapping on the american public which he wants to be a servant too.

[Spider]

That's what is was getting at spider but the fact is they get sworn in with a bible (why)? i really don't care.

well that needs to change

[Bronx33]

well that needs to change


Just an example of how religion envolves itself in everything (that needs too change)

[Spider]

I was realy hoping for a Bill O'Reilly type of rant on how S-P are ruining america with San Fransico values ;D

[Dudeskey]

I was realy hoping for a Bill O'Reilly type of rant on how S-P are ruining america with San Fransico values ;D

:spit:It took 3 pages for someone to finally throw that in

[Dudeskey]

Fact is the koran (is bad timing) really bad timing and if this guy pushes the subject hes only crapping on the american public which he wants to be a servant too.

Why? Because these wackos are Islamophobes? I'm glad he's staying true to himself, and nobody should be critized for that...

Please place this item at the very bottom of the list of "current events to get upset about". Matter of fact it shouldn't even be on the list

[TheDave]

Will this be going into your resume?
Gotta be careful what you say these days

[Bronco Bob]

Fact is the koran (is bad timing) really bad timing and if this guy pushes the subject hes only crapping on the american public which he wants to be a servant too.

How so?

[yavoon]

Why? Because these wackos are Islamophobes? I'm glad he's staying true to himself, and nobody should be critized for that...

Please place this item at the very bottom of the list of "current events to get upset about". Matter of fact it shouldn't even be on the list

I'm an islamophobe! I traded my commiephobe card in for islamophobe.

[Arkie]

Tradition ? Hilarious!
how many different sects of Religion do we have ? all have different traditions .
Degrades the system ? Hilarious! ............ new to this country or what ?
tell me the last time you heard an honest politician ?
Playboy is the same as the bible , though I think the Bible has more sex and violence , but the point is if you dont believe in either one , then they just dont matter ............
Take a look at Foley , he swore on the bible , and he is completely batshít ..

Hilarious!

[Dudeskey]

I'm an islamophobe! I traded my commiephobe card in for islamophobe.

booga booga!

[yavoon]

booga booga!

AHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!:)

seriously though, islam is an ideology, if ur literate u can read about it. a lot of it is very unpleasant.

maybe I should keep my commiephobe card though. I could be a dual card holder.

[banyon]

You don't have to take an oath on the bible. There have been other members of congress that have taken oaths on books of faith other than the new testament.

There's no legal requirement that there be an oath of office.


Yes there is, it just doesn't have to be religious.

U.S. Constitution:

Article VI

The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the Members of the several State Legislatures, and all executive and judicial Officers, both of the United States and of the several States, shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation, to support this Constitution; but no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States.

Representatives sometimes take a photo op with their hand on the Bible, but that's even separate from the regular swearing in.

[bendog]

Fact is the koran (is bad timing) really bad timing and if this guy pushes the subject hes only crapping on the american public which he wants to be a servant too.

That post sucks. On several levels.

[Dudeskey]

AHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!:)

seriously though, islam is an ideology, if ur literate u can read about it. a lot of it is very unpleasant.

maybe I should keep my commiephobe card though. I could be a dual card holder.

In my experience I thought there were some unpleasant things in christianity as well.

I do beleive thant any person (regardless of religious doctrine) that truely has a healthy fear of god (whoever that may be) wouldn't arbitrarily resort to violence. Islam has been perverted into something else by certain hardliners and some clerics need to find their nads.

As for your commiephobe card, you may need to keep it, China's starting to increase their military budget (booga booga!)

[yavoon]

In my experience I thought there were some unpleasant things in christianity as well.

I do beleive thant any person (regardless of religious doctrine) that truely has a healthy fear of god (whoever that may be) wouldn't arbitrarily resort to violence. Islam has been perverted into something else by certain hardliners and some clerics need to find their nads.

As for your commiephobe card, you may need to keep it, China's starting to increase their military budget (booga booga!)

if thats true then the first person to pervert islam was mohammed. I just think thats a naive position to take. islam is an ideology, u can read about it. I'd say the ppl most perverting islam are the liberal muslims. maybe osama is a little to the militant side compared to mohammed, but he's closer to mohammed then the liberal muslims are.

and its hardly arbitrary violence, its very calculated violence following religious doctrine.

as for china, I'm not as worried about china(in what way are they still communist? looks like a capitalist one party dictatorship to me). but do u like communism? do u think its swell and wouldn't mind living in a communist state? because it seems to me u dont think communism is a big deal.

[Dudeskey]

if thats true then the first person to pervert islam was mohammed. I just think thats a naive position to take. islam is an ideology, u can read about it. I'd say the ppl most perverting islam are the liberal muslims. maybe osama is a little to the militant side compared to mohammed, but he's closer to mohammed then the liberal muslims are.

and its hardly arbitrary violence, its very calculated violence following religious doctrine.

as for china, I'm not as worried about china(in what way are they still communist? looks like a capitalist one party dictatorship to me). but do u like communism? do u think its swell and wouldn't mind living in a communist state? because it seems to me u dont think communism is a big deal.

No I don't think its a big deal, the wall fell, McCarthy's dead, the cold war is over

[yavoon]

No I don't think its a big deal, the wall fell, McCarthy's dead, the cold war is over

after a mere 100 million died. there's something intensely wrong w/ an offhand remark like urs. no wonder u have such an ignorant opinion of islam, u have an ignorant opinion of communism as well.

[bendog]

yavoon, out of curiosity, what makes you qualified to give an opinion as to what Islam is, or is not? And, btw, what does Isalm mean?

[alkemical]

If you get to the root of the ritual, it would have to be something that would be 'sacred' to the individual - IMO - if he's muslim allow the Quoran, if he's athiest, allow him to swear on a suitcase of money ;) -

[yavoon]

yavoon, out of curiosity, what makes you qualified to give an opinion as to what Islam is, or is not? And, btw, what does Isalm mean?

literacy does. the word? submission.

[bendog]

If you get to the root of the ritual, it would have to be something that would be 'sacred' to the individual - IMO - if he's muslim allow the Quoran, if he's athiest, allow him to swear on a suitcase of money ;) -

If a republican, the naked butt of an underage page of the same gender (-:

[alkemical]

that's an interesting analogy

[penguintheory]

is he just showboatin for the other muslims saying (look) one step in taking over the US? lot's of questions come up as far as his motives are concerned.

Umm... what if he were an American citizen, born and raised? What "showboating" or "motives" would he have?

[penguintheory]

Fact is the koran (is bad timing) really bad timing and if this guy pushes the subject hes only crapping on the american public which he wants to be a servant too.

Because he's a Muslim, he ain't American. Gotcha.

[bcbronc]

[QUOTE=yavoon;1386969]if thats true then the first person to pervert islam was mohammed. I just think thats a naive position to take. islam is an ideology, u can read about it. I'd say the ppl most perverting islam are the liberal muslims. maybe osama is a little to the militant side compared to mohammed, but he's closer to mohammed then the liberal muslims are.

and its hardly arbitrary violence, its very calculated violence following religious doctrine.

What does "islam is an ideology, u can read about it" mean?

The calculated violence is people in power using a perversion of religion to gain more power.

Islam is about 1400 years old. Compare the actions of extreme Islamists of today with the actions of extreme Christianists back in the 15 century. Only the weapons have changed.

as for china, I'm not as worried about china(in what way are they still communist? looks like a capitalist one party dictatorship to me). but do u like communism? do u think its swell and wouldn't mind living in a communist state? because it seems to me u dont think communism is a big deal.

communism is a political system. in and of itself it's neither good nor bad. its like the bumper sticker "guns don't kill people, people kill people". The great thing about humanity is that we'll use any doctrine that gives us authority to trample our way to the top.

[Bronx33]

Because he's a Muslim, he ain't American. Gotcha.


Nice assumption.

[gunns]

I think the original intent was because the majority of people in this nation were Christians and they figured that swearing on the bible, they wouldn't dare lie in the face of God. What if they didn't believe in "God"?

Problem is that people rationalize their religion, any religion, to fit what they do. Lying, at any time, is wrong, but these guys don't see it that way. If swearing on the bible and then lying were that incriminating, our jails would be full. It means nothing anymore, to the Christians and of course to any others. Get rid of it as they have done in the courts.

[yavoon]

[QUOTE]

What does "islam is an ideology, u can read about it" mean?

The calculated violence is people in power using a perversion of religion to gain more power.

Islam is about 1400 years old. Compare the actions of extreme Islamists of today with the actions of extreme Christianists back in the 15 century. Only the weapons have changed.



communism is a political system. in and of itself it's neither good nor bad. its like the bumper sticker "guns don't kill people, people kill people". The great thing about humanity is that we'll use any doctrine that gives us authority to trample our way to the top.

what I mean about u can read about it is exactly what it says. u think its perverted, but is it? why don't u read about it. many ppl called for the killing of danish cartoonists after they lampooned mohammed, u think this is a perversion. but mohammed killed poets for lampooning him. so is it really a perversion?

and communism is most certainly bad, its bad in theory, its bad in practice. its just bad, and that has been pretty easily proven.

[yavoon]

I think the original intent was because the majority of people in this nation were Christians and they figured that swearing on the bible, they wouldn't dare lie in the face of God. What if they didn't believe in "God"?

Problem is that people rationalize their religion, any religion, to fit what they do. Lying, at any time, is wrong, but these guys don't see it that way. If swearing on the bible and then lying were that incriminating, our jails would be full. It means nothing anymore, to the Christians and of course to any others. Get rid of it as they have done in the courts.

lying in islam is not bad. its called taqiyya and ur allowed to lie so long as inside u stay true to islam when u feel u are compelled to lie.

[Dudeskey]

Exactly, also religous or not it's kind of a slap in the face IMO to the american people due to the current situaition going on, is it that important to him? and what exactly does the koran have to do with his job in an american goverment position. (kinda odd if you ask me) is he just showboatin for the other muslims saying (look) one step in taking over the US? lot's of questions come up as far as his motives are concerned.

This was America last time I checked, he should be allowed to do his photo op of swearing on a religious text that is important to him. He's not promoting any kind of religion or anything like that... Oh and it should be noted that the first muslim to serve overseas as a US ambassador was sworn in using a quran.

Dennis Pragar is an asshole and a moron comparing the quran to mein kampf. Once these other Jewish groups snap their pocketbooks shut on him and stop booking him for speaking engagements, he'll apologize.

[yavoon]

This was America last time I checked, he should be allowed to do his photo op of swearing on a religious text that is important to him. He's not promoting any kind of religion or anything like that... Oh and it should be noted that the first muslim to serve overseas as a US ambassador was sworn in using a quran.

Dennis Pragar is an a-hole and a moron comparing the quran to mein kampf. Once these other Jewish groups snap their pocketbooks shut on him and stop booking him for speaking engagements, he'll apologize.

the koran may or may not be like mein kampf(I've never read mein kampf). but mein kampf is a best seller in the arab world. its called I believe jihadii(my struggle). jihad, struggle.. mein kampf, my struggle.

the world it appears, is not w/o a sense of humor.

yaya this was tangential, its just information:).

[Dudeskey]

we're talking about religious texts here but...

I beleive Mein Kampf is part autobiographical and part ideological.

[penguintheory]

Nice assumption.

Well, since you didn't pick up on the sarcasm, I'll tell you flat out... I don't see how an American citizen and politician who happens to practice the Muslim faith would "showboat" being sworn in order to show to his fellow Muslims that they are "one step closer toward taking over America."

Did it ever occur to you that perhaps that politician's loyalty to the United States transcends that of his faith? Most Muslims don't even come close to aligning with the jihadists and terrorists, just as most Christians don't even come close to aligning with Jerry Falwell.

Creating this kind of "us against them" mentality, especially when applied to our own citizens, is what stirs up discontent in the first place. See Europe, where disenfranchised and socially segregated Muslims are lashing out angrily. If the hegemony in the United States were to adopt a nervous stance toward politicians of the Muslim faith, or any influential Muslims in our government or society, there would be similar discontent. Thankfully most people have not been so overtly ignorant, but who knows what will come to pass in this era of fear and paranoia.

[yavoon]

Well, since you didn't pick up on the sarcasm, I'll tell you flat out... I don't see how an American citizen and politician who happens to practice the Muslim faith would "showboat" being sworn in order to show to his fellow Muslims that they are "one step closer toward taking over America."

Did it ever occur to you that perhaps that politician's loyalty to the United States transcends that of his faith? Most Muslims don't even come close to aligning with the jihadists and terrorists, just as most Christians don't even come close to aligning with Jerry Falwell.

Creating this kind of "us against them" mentality, especially when applied to our own citizens, is what stirs up discontent in the first place. See Europe, where disenfranchised and socially segregated Muslims are lashing out angrily. If the hegemony in the United States were to adopt a nervous stance toward politicians of the Muslim faith, or any influential Muslims in our government or society, there would be similar discontent. Thankfully most people have not been so overtly ignorant, but who knows what will come to pass in this era of fear and paranoia.

europe's muslims aren't disenfranchised, they just don't want to be european. they don't want to follow european law, they don't want to have european jobs and they dont want to be among europeans.

as a famous imam said, "we are muslims in europe, not european muslims"

and thats the tip of the iceberg, norwegian imams have been caught preaching that u shouldn't get a job in europe because it would contribute to the kuffir society.

swedish imams have made long explanations about how raping swedish girls isnt that bad because they're probably already whores who have been ****ed before and they were asking for it anyway.

and it goes on and on, not european, but australian called australian women uncovered meat that deserved to be raped. and these aren't pissant imams, in the australian case it was the highest up imam in the country.

and the craziest part about all these imam's is they are gov't funded(most of em). the european gov'ts are paying them.

europe's culture is being stripped. in norway cartoons involving pigs are now being replaced by foxes. christmas is now called winterval. all because the muslims demand it, because otherwise they would be offended.

well how long do u think that can continue? france can't even police its muslim areas, don't be surprised if france has a hezbollah copy in a few years.

[yavoon]

http://www.brusselsjournal.com/node/1183

“Asian youths,” a British euphemism for Pakistanis and Muslims from South Asia, in parts of Oldham are trying to create no-go areas for white people. One of them told: “There are signs all around saying whites enter at your risk. It’s a matter of revenge.” However, it’s not just the white natives that are targets of Muslim violence, but other non-Muslims, too. A report on Hindus being driven out of the English city of Bradford by young Muslims was described by some Hindus as “ethnic cleansing.” Some of them want to leave the city to escape the “Talibanization of Bradford.”

not even the hindu's are safe from the aggression of islam(like the hindus have ever been safe from muslim aggression).

[yavoon]

http://watch.windsofchange.net/themes_92.htm

It is Friday prayer in the mosque on Medborgarplatsen in Stockholm. Every week some 2 000 Muslims gather here to listen to Sheik Hassan Mousas sermon. He is the highest Imam in the mosque.
Friday May 14, when SvD visited the mosque, the Imam was talking about the torture pictures of Iraqi prisoners in the Abu Ghraib prison. Hassan Mousa speaks formal, classical Arabic and roars into the microphone.
“What's wrong with you grandchildren of Mohammed? How long will you endure this humiliation of Muslims without reacting? American and British soldiers, grandchildren of Hitler, are torturing Muslims in Iraq.”
The words sink like a carpet bombing over the hall. Everybody feels them. Many have tears in their eyes. Heads are sunk and eyes are lowered onto the the blue coloured soft carpet.

[yavoon]

http://www.danielpipes.org/blog/268

The London Muslim Centre in Whitechapel, reports the BBC, has just opened. One of the largest Muslim community centers in Western Europe, the six-storey building can hold 10,000 worshippers and includes a gym, a library, crèche and classrooms.

The themes of his sermons are characterized by confrontation toward non-Muslims. Al-Sudayyis calls Jews "scum of the earth" and "monkeys and pigs" who should be "annihilated." Other enemies of Islam, he says, are "worshippers of the cross" and "idol-worshipping Hindus" who should be fought. Al-Sudayyis has been consistent in calling for jihad in Kashmir and Chechnya, for Jerusalem to be liberated, and for the "occupiers in Iraq" to also be fought. He often claims that Islam is superior to Western culture. …

The concluding supplications of Al-Sudayyis sermons are often filled with statements concerning current affairs. He consistently calls for "Muslims to humiliate the infidels (non-Muslims)," as well as for their destruction. For example, on November 1, 2002, he stated "O Allah, support our mujahedeen bothers in Palestine, Kashmir, and Chechnya."

[yavoon]

anyone remember what year the magna carta was signed? because 2007 might be the year it becomes outdated:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2006/11/29/nsharia29.xml

[yavoon]

not europe, but this shows how realy aggressive islam is, and how effective that aggression is. congressman served pork in restaurant, slaps the staff and threatans them w/ a bread knife. demands separate dining room for muslims to adequately show cultural sensitivity.

http://www.manilatimes.net/national/2006/nov/22/yehey/top_stories/20061122top5.html

[penguintheory]

anyone remember what year the magna carta was signed? because 2007 might be the year it becomes outdated:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2006/11/29/nsharia29.xml

Originally chartered in 1215, major modifications came in 1225 (the Magna Carta was annulled in 1216 and subsequently modified several times from its original standing).

I believe you refer to some of the amendments made in 1225 regarding the implication of the separation of church from the courts. It's interesting that Britain is allowing what would be considered in the US as a "rogue judiciary" in allowing Muslim law courts to be established and respected as actual judicial authority. I'm not familiar with British law, but if a rape victim drops charges then there is most likely nothing that can be done in terms of prosecution. Amazing to me that they're allowing this to go on - citizens of the UK should be bound to obey the laws of the UK and thus be subject solely to the government's judicial system. It is not a matter of "cultural law," it is the law of the land. Unfortunately, in modern Western society, there is no place for religion transcending the ultimate authority of a secular government based on the decrees and votes of the general population. At least in theory.

[yavoon]

Originally chartered in 1215, major modifications came in 1225 (the Magna Carta was annulled in 1216 and subsequently modified several times from its original standing).

I believe you refer to some of the amendments made in 1225 regarding the implication of the separation of church from the courts. It's interesting that Britain is allowing what would be considered in the US as a "rogue judiciary" in allowing Muslim law courts to be established and respected as actual judicial authority. I'm not familiar with British law, but if a rape victim drops charges then there is most likely nothing that can be done in terms of prosecution. Amazing to me that they're allowing this to go on - citizens of the UK should be bound to obey the laws of the UK and thus be subject solely to the government's judicial system. It is not a matter of "cultural law," it is the law of the land. Unfortunately, in modern Western society, there is no place for religion transcending the ultimate authority of a secular government based on the decrees and votes of the general population. At least in theory.

equality under the law has no place in multicultural europe. it will be an interesting fight anyway, the ultra progressive vs the sane.