Religious Freedom? Not if you're a Muslim in Congress

[7960]

Originally Posted by Ardentfrost

So, check this out...

Urban Legends Reference Pages: Congressional Swearing-In on the Quran



So, him saying he was going to take the oath on the Koran could only mean that he planned to have the Koran in his hand during and after the oath. Some congressmen don't have a religious document at all during this process.

so it was someone carefully wording it to make seem like he was going to do something he was not.............. gee, wonder why... sounds like more muslim-bashing to me.

[ballz2wallz]

So what's he making a big deal for then?

[Ardentfrost]

Originally Posted by ballz2wallz

So what's he making a big deal for then?

It looks to me like it was just a talk show host that people thought knew who he was talking about. HE is the one that said "This guy's going to swear on a Quran and not a Bible!!! "

I have no idea why this is even an issue. It just looks like it was media outlets blowing it out of proportion.

[Publius]

Originally Posted by 7960

so it was someone carefully wording it to make seem like he was going to do something he was not.............. gee, wonder why... sounds like more muslim-bashing to me.

[RMNIXON]

Originally Posted by ballz2wallz

This is not an issue of Religious freedom. When everyone goes to court, don't they swear on the Bible, no matter what they believe? This isn't about religion, this isn't about true beliefs, it's about culture and the way this country was set up. It's symbolism to the founding of this country and what it was founded on, not personal beliefs.

I wouldn't force anyone to do that either Ballz. That seems to be the strawman that I had so much trouble knocking down in this post. That recognition of the Bible is being forced on someone. I was even called me xenophobic for the mere suggestion that this person elected to office obey our tradition or ignor it. There is no substitution right in the name of religion. So now I hate and fear Muslims?

[RMNIXON]

Originally Posted by Ardentfrost

So, check this out...

Urban Legends Reference Pages: Congressional Swearing-In on the Quran



So, him saying he was going to take the oath on the Koran could only mean that he planned to have the Koran in his hand during and after the oath. Some congressmen don't have a religious document at all during this process.

But that is not what the new congressman said. He implicated the Koran oath. I assumed they had a choice. Others protested he would have a bible forced on him. So thats three strikes by my count. I don't worry about what book he carries into congress. He is more than welcome.

[avsp]

Originally Posted by ballz2wallz

So what's he making a big deal for then?

why are were are you?

[Ardentfrost]

Originally Posted by RMNIXON

But that is not what the new congressman said. He implicated the Koran oath. I assumed they had a choice. Others protested he would have a bible forced on him. So thats three strikes by my count. I don't worry about what book he carries into congress. He is more than welcome.

All he said was that he planned on taking the oath while having his Quran with him, just as others have their Bibles with them and others yet have nothing with them. It was a conservative COMMENTATOR who made the big fuss over it and said he shouldn't be allowed to even carry his religious book in there, eventhough others are.

It makes the situation more assanine. I was picturing each congressman going up and taking an individual oath with their hand on a Bible. However, all they do is stand in the room and the speaker has them repeat after him with their right hands in the air. So his choice to have his Quran with him means nothing as far as the oath is concerned. The whole propagation of the story is misleading.

[motivez]

Well, that's pretty ..

However, I still have no problem with him using the Qur'an. I think that should apply to any public office or swearing in where it is used as the story originally told it..