Who didn't see this coming? : The elected Muslim from Minn.

[Kerad]

YAY! I'm not crazy!

Let's not jump to wild conclusions.

 

[AK-74me]

What exactly is "American culture" with regard to religion? Isn't it ironic that our forefathers came here initially to escape forced religion, the founding fathers purpously included in the constitution that the federal government cannot show favoritism to, or perscribe a particular religion, yet we want to force a congressman to use a Christian Bible he clearly does not follow to take an oath?

Ok, but isn't true that tradtionally here, good or bad, we take an oath with a hand on a Bible, and as a society in general that pratice is accepted. Wouldn't that make it American Culture?

So even though what all you say is true, it is still "American Culture"?

Maybe I am just tired of making exceptions and my view is skewed but, how about he just take his oath like everyone else and shut the hell up!

 

[SmallTown]

Maybe I am just tierd of making exceptions and my view is skewed but, how about he just take his oath like everyone else and shut the hell up!

What would it mean to him and this country if he, a non-christian, took an oath on the bible? Does a he get a free pass to do whatever he wants? Kind of a religious form of "I took the oath, but my fingers were crossed?"

 

[Pete]

Ok, but isn't true that tradtionally here, good or bad, we take an oath with a hand on a Bible, and as a society in general that pratice is accepted. Wouldn't that make it American Culture?

So even though what all you say is true, it is still "American Culture"?

Maybe I am just tierd of making exceptions and my view is skewed but, how about he just take his oath like everyone else and shut the hell up!

And up until the mid 60's it was tradition that blacks had seperate water fountains, rode on the back of the bus, women had to take her husbands surname, could not vote, and dimmer switches for headlights were on the floor of a car and not on the turn signal handle.

Where do we as a smart reasonable nation depart from "traditions" that are in direct conflict with the spirit and intent of the constitution they are swearing to uphold?

 

[AK-74me]

I understand what you all are saying but I also see it as "I won't stand for the Pledge of Allegiance because it says "under God" in it" type arguments.

 

[FromTexas]

YAY! I'm not crazy!

I read the article and was like Then I read some of the posts on here and was even more I thought maybe there was something I missed about all this or wasn't understanding.

 

[Pete]

I understand what you all are saying but I also see it as "I won't stand for the Pledge of Allegiance because it says "under God" in it" type arguments.

Well those people are morons who are intent more on show than substance. Every religion has a "God" be it God, Allah, Zurg or L. Ron Hubbard. If they are agnostic or atheist they can just insert the word "sky" for "God" quietly and it is no skin off me.

To me there is a stark difference in an obstructionist shiat stirrer and a person of principles. There are ALWAYS going to be those who are contrary for the sake of being contrary, nothing can be done. You cannot make them stand and you cannot jail them for not standing just like you cannot jail or punish those who do not stand at a parade when the flag passes, which is a tradition that has faded BTW.

 

[itsbob]

What exactly is "American culture" with regard to religion?

Thats when you end all prayers with 'yo'..

In the name of the Father, the Son and the Holy Ghost yo..

 

[Vince]

And up until the mid 60's it was tradition that blacks had seperate water fountains, rode on the back of the bus, women had to take her husbands surname, could not vote, and dimmer switches for headlights were on the floor of a car and not on the turn signal handle.

Where do we as a smart reasonable nation depart from "traditions" that are in direct conflict with the spirit and intent of the constitution they are swearing to uphold?

I liked the dimmer switch on the floor.

 

[AK-74me]

Someone correct me if I am wrong because I know little about the Koran but isn't true that for Muslims, sharia must be sought after and placed above all other secular law, including the Constitution?

Isn't this a conflict of intrests?

 

[Pete]

STOP the insanity!!

Who didn't see this com... 12-01-2006 09:11 AM ~Kerad

I TAKE IT ALL BACK!

 

[Pete]

Someone correct me if I am wrong because I know little about the Koran but isn't true that for Muslims, sharia must be sought after and placed above all other secular law, including the Constitution?

Isn't this a conflict of intrests?

I dunno, I do know that in Christianity there are those than kneel, those that stand, those that roll on the floor and speak jibberish, those that play with snakes and those who grow beards, don't drive cars and don't watch TV.

That is not to say a snake handling, Amish, tongue speaking congressman is going to singlehandedly pass a law to turn off electricity to homes and make people swing snakes around while speaking in tongues every Sunday.

 

[PrchJrkr]

I liked the dimmer switch on the floor.

I just love my old chevy p/us.

 

[Makavide]

I read it on the internet so it must be true

From the article:

The article being used for this is an opinion piece, no where in it did I see any reference to what is legally required to take the oath

Oath of Office
I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter: So help me God.

The Constitution contains an oath of office only for the president. For other officials, including members of Congress, that document specifies only that they "shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation to support this constitution." In 1789, the First Congress reworked this requirement into a simple fourteen-word oath: "I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support the Constitution of the United States."

U.S Code Title 5, section 3331 now lists the requirements for the current oath.

It is my understanding that there is no legal requirement to use any book to take the oath of office. Tradtion has it that some people took the oath of office using a bible, but it is not always the case. There have even been instances of (gasp) no book what so ever being used. In my opinion, the article was just an opinion peice trying to incite fear, and from some of the responses it seems to be working.

 

[Vince]

The article being used for this is an opinion piece, no where in it did I see any reference to what is legally required to take the oath



The Constitution contains an oath of office only for the president. For other officials, including members of Congress, that document specifies only that they "shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation to support this constitution." In 1789, the First Congress reworked this requirement into a simple fourteen-word oath: "I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support the Constitution of the United States."

U.S Code Title 5, section 3331 now lists the requirements for the current oath.

It is my understanding that there is no legal requirement to use any book to take the oath of office. Tradtion has it that some people took the oath of office using a bible, but it is not always the case. There have even been instances of (gasp) no book what so ever being used. In my opinion, the article was just an opinion peice trying to incite fear, and from some of the responses it seems to be working.

Don't know where you got your quotes from, but they're not mine. I never quoted anything about the oath of office, etc. I quoted a piece from the article about people of other creeds taking the oath in the past using the Bible. If they can do it, why is this guy special. If everyone else were swearing in using the Constitution and he wanted to use the Koran, again, what makes him special.

 

[Makavide]

Don't know where you got your quotes from, but they're not mine. I never quoted anything about the oath of office, etc. I quoted a piece from the article about people of other creeds taking the oath in the past using the Bible. If they can do it, why is this guy special. If everyone else were swearing in using the Constitution and he wanted to use the Koran, again, what makes him special.

I was just trying to point out what the oath was, what was required by law. No where in the law did I find a Bible was mandatory. The article you are quoting implies, at a minimum, the Bible is a requirement.

What I get out of the article is that congress is a bunch of lemmings. Saying that if congressmen Johnny jumped off the bridge I should too. Me, I would question why someone who does not believe in the Bible would use it to take an oath. That says more about the person's character than anything. To me it says, I will take your oath on this Bible I don't believe, just to make you happy and will do what I want with out any convictions and that any promises I made during my campaign are out the window.

 

[Vince]

I was just trying to point out what the oath was, what was required by law. No where in the law did I find a Bible was mandatory. The article you are quoting implies, at a minimum, the Bible is a requirement.

What I get out of the article is that congress is a bunch of lemmings. Saying that if congressmen Johnny jumped off the bridge I should too. Me, I would question why someone who does not believe in the Bible would use it to take an oath. That says more about the person's character than anything. To me it says, I will take your oath on this Bible I don't believe, just to make you happy and will do what I want with out any convictions and that any promises I made during my campaign are out the window.

So have them take the oath on the Constitution, The Declaration of Independence, but the point is, if everyone else can do it, what makes this guy special that he needs to take his oath on the Koran?

Personnally, I believe in the Bible, but if taking an oath on it means nothing to someone else then have everyone take an oath with their hand on the flag. But everyone should be the same. Just because he's Muslim doesn't make him better than everyone else.

 

[SmallTown]

Just because he's Muslim doesn't make him better than everyone else.

Nobody is saying he is better?! You should WANT him to use the Koran, if for nothing else it gives a symbol of accountability which is something that seems to be currently lacking in political figures.

 

[Pete]

So have them take the oath on the Constitution, The Declaration of Independence, but the point is, if everyone else can do it, what makes this guy special that he needs to take his oath on the Koran?

Personnally, I believe in the Bible, but if taking an oath on it means nothing to someone else then have everyone take an oath with their hand on the flag. But everyone should be the same. Just because he's Muslim doesn't make him better than everyone else.

You cannot do that Vince. You cannot say "Do it on the Bible, and if that is not good for you then use a flag or a copy of the constitution from the gift shop, but you cannot use the Koran because that is icky." That gives the Bible preferential treatment by the government over the Koran.

Despite the way the "separation of church and state" is twisted by both secular and non-secular in regard to other issues the one principle is clear, the government is not to sanction or prefer one religion over another.

 

[Ponytail]

Nobody is saying he is better?! You should WANT him to use the Koran, if for nothing else it gives a symbol of accountability which is something that seems to be currently lacking in political figures.

Exactly.

And the thought that continually enters my mind is that this has another Separation of State and Religion Law Suit written all over it, if they do not allow the use of the koran...and there goes ANY references to the bible that may adorn the walls of congress or anywhere else that this man may be asked to serve. This has the potential to turn congress and this country upside down.