The term "Islamofascism" was introduced by... - Page 3 - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Free Your Mind > Free Your Mind Archive
Click Here to Login
 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 12-02-2006, 01:56 PM   #31
Rock n' Roll Doggie
VIP PASS
 
CTU2fan's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 5,366
Local Time: 08:51 PM
From a practical perspective, wouldn't you rather have a Muslim swear on a Koran rather than a Bible? I'd think swearing on the Koran would carry more weight with a Muslim.

The Cons must have a hard time with this...of course they love the term "Islamofascism" but they're torn up inside at the idea of using a term coined by a (gasp) Marxist. What to do...
__________________

__________________
CTU2fan is online now  
Old 12-02-2006, 02:38 PM   #32
Blue Crack Addict
 
verte76's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: hoping for changes
Posts: 23,331
Local Time: 12:51 AM
I really hate it that people are on Ellison's case because he wants to use his religion's holy book to take his oath of office on. Here in the U. S., we don't have a state religion. Christianity is the religion of the majority of Americans, but that doesn't make us a Christian state. There would be something dishonest and inconsistent about a Muslim using a Christian holy book to take an oath on. I can't believe Ellison is catching flak for doing something consistent with his values.
__________________

__________________
verte76 is offline  
Old 12-02-2006, 02:42 PM   #33
Blue Crack Addict
 
verte76's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: hoping for changes
Posts: 23,331
Local Time: 12:51 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by CTU2fan
From a practical perspective, wouldn't you rather have a Muslim swear on a Koran rather than a Bible? I'd think swearing on the Koran would carry more weight with a Muslim.
Absolutely. The Christian holy book wouldn't mean anything to a Muslim. People seem to be forgetting that he's making a promise to do his job. He's only being consistent.
__________________
verte76 is offline  
Old 12-02-2006, 02:44 PM   #34
Rock n' Roll Doggie
VIP PASS
 
CTU2fan's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 5,366
Local Time: 08:51 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by verte76
I really hate it that people are on Ellison's case because he wants to use his religion's holy book to take his oath of office on. Here in the U. S., we don't have a state religion. Christianity is the religion of the majority of Americans, but that doesn't make us a Christian state. There would be something dishonest and inconsistent about a Muslim using a Christian holy book to take an oath on. I can't believe Ellison is catching flak for doing something consistent with his values.
__________________
CTU2fan is online now  
Old 12-02-2006, 03:27 PM   #35
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 40,640
Local Time: 06:51 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by Macfistowannabe
Your debating skills disappoint.

I ask for specific examples, and you chicken out.
This is truly one of the funniest things ever coming from you. You go on 2 week hiatuses when you are asked for specifics.

BTW the Cold War is over, it cracks me up when conservatives are still stuck there.
__________________
BVS is online now  
Old 12-02-2006, 04:07 PM   #36
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,471
Local Time: 07:51 PM
this thread feels like crazy pills.
__________________
Irvine511 is offline  
Old 12-02-2006, 05:28 PM   #37
War Child
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: OC
Posts: 711
Local Time: 12:51 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by verte76
I really hate it that people are on Ellison's case because he wants to use his religion's holy book to take his oath of office on. Here in the U. S., we don't have a state religion. Christianity is the religion of the majority of Americans, but that doesn't make us a Christian state. There would be something dishonest and inconsistent about a Muslim using a Christian holy book to take an oath on. I can't believe Ellison is catching flak for doing something consistent with his values.
so either the atheist and jewish members who take office and swear on the bible are lacking the same values, or the whole process is irrelevant, arcane and silly
__________________
cardosino is offline  
Old 12-02-2006, 06:26 PM   #38
Rock n' Roll Doggie
VIP PASS
 
CTU2fan's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 5,366
Local Time: 08:51 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by cardosino


so either the atheist and jewish members who take office and swear on the bible are lacking the same values, or the whole process is irrelevant, arcane and silly
Both?
__________________
CTU2fan is online now  
Old 12-02-2006, 07:33 PM   #39
Blue Crack Addict
 
verte76's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: hoping for changes
Posts: 23,331
Local Time: 12:51 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by cardosino


so either the atheist and jewish members who take office and swear on the bible are lacking the same values, or the whole process is irrelevant, arcane and silly
No, it's not. It's just that the criticisms of Ellison are way, way off base. He's doing something that's consistent with his values, and no doubt something his supporters are proud of. It should be a matter of choice, just like religion itself.
__________________
verte76 is offline  
Old 12-02-2006, 07:36 PM   #40
War Child
 
Ormus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Frontios
Posts: 758
Local Time: 08:51 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by cardosino
so either the atheist and jewish members who take office and swear on the bible are lacking the same values, or the whole process is irrelevant, arcane and silly
I can only imagine the furor if a Christian was forced to swear on the Koran.

It's a matter of mutual respect, and, frankly, common sense. But I know...common sense and reason are always trumped by ideology and fear.
__________________
Ormus is offline  
Old 12-02-2006, 07:51 PM   #41
Refugee
 
toscano's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 2,032
Local Time: 05:51 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by verte76


No, it's not. It's just that the criticisms of Ellison are way, way off base. He's doing something that's consistent with his values, and no doubt something his supporters are proud of. It should be a matter of choice, just like religion itself.
well, if they're all doing what is "consistent with their values" then the values of the atheist/jew who has stood in Ellison's place are sadly lacking; maybe they just rolled their eyes, sucked it up, said "whatever" and did the swearing on the bible thing, or maybe they're all hypocrites.
__________________
toscano is offline  
Old 12-02-2006, 09:01 PM   #42
Rock n' Roll Doggie
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Strong Badia
Posts: 3,428
Local Time: 12:51 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by verte76


Absolutely. The Christian holy book wouldn't mean anything to a Muslim. People seem to be forgetting that he's making a promise to do his job. He's only being consistent.
One would be hard-pressed to argue that the Koran formed any sort of influence on the formation of United States government (or, for that matter, any sort of democratic system of governance -- Turkey, the one democracy in the Muslim world, has succeeded because it functions as a purely secular society). One could, however, argue that Judeo-Christian principles as set down in the Bible informed the ideological and philosophical formation of this country.

Elected officials do not swear to uphold the laws of the Bible. They do however swear to uphold the laws of this country that were formed based on principles found in the Judeo-Christian Scriptures.
__________________
nathan1977 is offline  
Old 12-02-2006, 09:08 PM   #43
War Child
 
Ormus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Frontios
Posts: 758
Local Time: 08:51 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by nathan1977
Elected officials do not swear to uphold the laws of the Bible. They do however swear to uphold the laws of this country that were formed based on principles found in the Judeo-Christian Scriptures.
That entire premise, however, was formulated under 19th century romanticism. In other words, it never happened. Our nation was founded on the ideals of the Enlightenment, which were strictly secular. The entire notion of "religious freedom" is a secular construction, not a religious one.

And that gets to my point. We live in a pluralistic society, not a Christian theocracy. If Muslim officials want to swear on the Koran, that's perfectly in line with notions of religious freedom.

Contrary to the hype, the Bible has no legal standing in this country; so if an atheist wishes to swear on a copy of "The Fountainhead," who cares? The Bible probably has less credibility than that book to them anyway.
__________________
Ormus is offline  
Old 12-02-2006, 09:16 PM   #44
Blue Crack Addict
 
verte76's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: hoping for changes
Posts: 23,331
Local Time: 12:51 AM
The Founding Fathers were all deists who admired Voltaire and the French Enlightenment. The idea that the U.S. is a Christian country, based on Judaeo-Christian values is a Victorian fantasy. Nutjobs like Roy Moore use it for their political purposes. I'm so relieved he didn't win our gubernatorial election this year. Let me tell you, that guy had me petrified.
__________________
verte76 is offline  
Old 12-02-2006, 09:26 PM   #45
Rock n' Roll Doggie
 
BonosSaint's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 3,566
Local Time: 08:51 PM
Swearing in on a Bible or any other book isn't part of the official swearing in process, so assume that nonChristians don't have to suck up anything.

From The Washington Times:

"Rep.-elect Keith Ellison, the first Muslim elected to Congress, will take his oath of office on the Koran, not the Bible.
Although some have criticized the Minnesota Democrat's decision, his campaign manager cites historical precedent in describing it as a nonissue.
"Well, he will be the first to do it with the Koran," Dave Colling said. "But most members do not even take an individual oath with any book. Keith Ellison will be taking his oath in the chamber with the other members of Congress."
House members are sworn in en masse in the chamber, and no Bible or other religious document is used for the oath. However, several incoming House members use Bibles for their individual swearing-in, which is administered by the House speaker and takes place after the official group oath."
__________________

__________________
BonosSaint is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:51 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com