Would you care if the President was sworn in using the Koran?

[ntdz]

Originally posted by: Craig234

Originally posted by: ntdz
Yes, and I'm agnostic.

The reason I care is that I honestly wouldn't want a Muslim to be the President, considering some of the problems we're having with people of that faith.

I understand that the vast majority of murderers, rapists, drug dealers, and other criminals in the US are Christian.

Your statement, considering that my impression is that the American Muslim community is exceptionally well behaved compared to others, is utter bigotry and ignorance.

So given a choice between two equal candidates, one Muslim and one Christian, you'd choose the Muslim?

 

[ntdz]

Originally posted by: compuwiz1

Originally posted by: Aimster

Originally posted by: compuwiz1

Originally posted by: Aimster

Originally posted by: pauldovi

Originally posted by: shadow9d9

Originally posted by: pauldovi
The fact of the matter is that there is a presidence in place to use the bible. It is not even the real swearing in, it is just the one for the media.

Would I mind if a Jewish President used the Torah? No.

So why do I care about the Koran?

Well the fact of the matter is, the Koran teaches intolerance. You can call me anything you want and you can deny it. But that doesn't change the fact that the Koran teaches intolerance. I do not want my President swearing allegiance to the Koran.

I will agree that the majority of Muslims are tolerant and peaceful. Therefore, I think that moderate Muslims need to reform the faith, just as the Catholics did hundreds of years ago.

The bible teaches intolerance.. gay marriage amendment to the constitution anyone?

Shadow9d9, the Bible does not teach us to decapitate homosexuals. The Bible does have violence in it, but it is not directed from Jesus to non-believers. In the Koran, Muhammad directs violence to non-believers.

The United States was founded on Judo-Christian beliefs, so it would not surprise me if the constitution models those. You do not have to be a Christian to acknowledge or live by such beliefs.

the words of Jesus are part of the Quran.

In fact almost all of the characters in the fictional book called the Bible can be found in the fictional book called the Quran.

Aimster, I thought you were Muslim. Was I wrong?

helllllll nooo

no offense to Muslims, but no way.

Cool, you've come up a notch or two in my book.

You'd be hard pressed to find many people on this board that are religious.

 

[Jaskalas]

Originally posted by: Vich
After Keith Ellison, D-Minn., the first Muslim elected to the United States Congress refused to be sworn in on the bible would you care if the president refused as well?

Yes, because their prophet?s call to fame was waging war against infidels, a tradition upheld to this day.

 

[Rainsford]

Originally posted by: Jaskalas

Originally posted by: Vich
After Keith Ellison, D-Minn., the first Muslim elected to the United States Congress refused to be sworn in on the bible would you care if the president refused as well?

Yes, because their prophet?s call to fame was waging war against infidels, a tradition upheld to this day.

Yeah, yeah, and the Bible was all kindness and puppy dogs.

 

[PrinceofWands]

I would MUCH rather the president be sworn in with no religious overtones at all, the way it was originally intended. If they insist on a holy text, any one is as good as another so whatever they would like is fine with me.

 

[Aimster]

I don't believe the Quran says stone anyone to death.
Show me where it says that please.

There is a difference between Quran and Islamic Laws which are not written in the Quran.
However, those who have called for reform should know all Islamic nations have outlawed the stoning law since the fall of the Taliban.

 

[Jaskalas]

Originally posted by: Rainsford

Originally posted by: Jaskalas

Originally posted by: Vich
After Keith Ellison, D-Minn., the first Muslim elected to the United States Congress refused to be sworn in on the bible would you care if the president refused as well?

Yes, because their prophet?s call to fame was waging war against infidels, a tradition upheld to this day.

Yeah, yeah, and the Bible was all kindness and puppy dogs.

Working strictly based on the prophets of each religion, yeah.

Letting oneself be brutally tortured due to passiveness isn?t the example of violence that Mohammad is. Both religions have a large number of misguided followers that use violence, but only one of them follows their prophet?s lead when doing so.

I find nothing to make equal about that.

 

[Craig234]

Originally posted by: ntdz

Originally posted by: Craig234

Originally posted by: ntdz
Yes, and I'm agnostic.

The reason I care is that I honestly wouldn't want a Muslim to be the President, considering some of the problems we're having with people of that faith.

I understand that the vast majority of murderers, rapists, drug dealers, and other criminals in the US are Christian.

Your statement, considering that my impression is that the American Muslim community is exceptionally well behaved compared to others, is utter bigotry and ignorance.

So given a choice between two equal candidates, one Muslim and one Christian, you'd choose the Muslim?

I would not give any weight to their religion between Christian and Muslim. I'd choose them on other issues, such as wanting to improve the nation with a liberal agenda.

 

[Craig234]

Originally posted by: Jaskalas

Originally posted by: Vich
After Keith Ellison, D-Minn., the first Muslim elected to the United States Congress refused to be sworn in on the bible would you care if the president refused as well?

Yes, because their prophet?s call to fame was waging war against infidels, a tradition upheld to this day.

How many foreign civilians have been killed in the last 50 years by Middle Eastern Muslim governments combined, and how many have been killed by the US?

 

[Jaskalas]

Originally posted by: Aimster
I don't believe the Quran says stone anyone to death.
Show me where it says that please.

There is a difference between Quran and Islamic Laws which are not written in the Quran.
However, those who have called for reform should know all Islamic nations have outlawed the stoning law since the fall of the Taliban.

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=iranian+girl+stoned&btnG=Google+Search

Still practiced, among Muslim communities world wide. From Europe to the Pacific.

 

[JEDIYoda]

Originally posted by: Craig234

Originally posted by: Jaskalas

Originally posted by: Vich
After Keith Ellison, D-Minn., the first Muslim elected to the United States Congress refused to be sworn in on the bible would you care if the president refused as well?

Yes, because their prophet?s call to fame was waging war against infidels, a tradition upheld to this day.

How many foreign civilians have been killed in the last 50 years by Middle Eastern Muslim governments combined, and how many have been killed by the US?

wow can we say way off topic...which is normal for craig

 

[Craig234]

Originally posted by: JEDIYoda

Originally posted by: Craig234

Originally posted by: Jaskalas

Yes, because their prophet?s call to fame was waging war against infidels, a tradition upheld to this day.

How many foreign civilians have been killed in the last 50 years by Middle Eastern Muslim governments combined, and how many have been killed by the US?

wow can we say way off topic...which is normal for craig

Jedi is wrong, which is normal. The accusation was made that Muslims are the violent religion, that a Muslim shouldn't be elected because of the 'problems' with that religion.

So, let's look at the facts, not the rhetoric, and see who is really the worse side at going and killing people.

What is the Muslims' counterpart to Viet nam, where 2 million Vietnamese were killed for no good reason, including with napalm and agent orange?

 

[daniel49]

Originally posted by: Craig234

Originally posted by: ntdz

Originally posted by: Craig234

Originally posted by: ntdz
Yes, and I'm agnostic.

The reason I care is that I honestly wouldn't want a Muslim to be the President, considering some of the problems we're having with people of that faith.

I understand that the vast majority of murderers, rapists, drug dealers, and other criminals in the US are Christian.

Your statement, considering that my impression is that the American Muslim community is exceptionally well behaved compared to others, is utter bigotry and ignorance.

So given a choice between two equal candidates, one Muslim and one Christian, you'd choose the Muslim?

I would not give any weight to their religion between Christian and Muslim. I'd choose them on other issues, such as wanting to improve the nation with a liberal agenda.

waiting for your proof on this one. :disgust:
What an ignorant statment.

 

[bamacre]

Originally posted by: bctbct
It might be more effective to swear them in using a lie detector test.

:thumbsup:

 

[bamacre]

Originally posted by: ntdz
Yes, and I'm agnostic.

The reason I care is that I honestly wouldn't want a Muslim to be the President, considering some of the problems we're having with people of that faith.

Further proof that we become what we fear.

 

[dmcowen674]

Why stop there?

Let's change the money too and the Pledge of allegiance.

 

[bamacre]

Originally posted by: sandorski

Originally posted by: pauldovi

Originally posted by: shadow9d9

Originally posted by: pauldovi
The fact of the matter is that there is a presidence in place to use the bible. It is not even the real swearing in, it is just the one for the media.

Would I mind if a Jewish President used the Torah? No.

So why do I care about the Koran?

Well the fact of the matter is, the Koran teaches intolerance. You can call me anything you want and you can deny it. But that doesn't change the fact that the Koran teaches intolerance. I do not want my President swearing allegiance to the Koran.

I will agree that the majority of Muslims are tolerant and peaceful. Therefore, I think that moderate Muslims need to reform the faith, just as the Catholics did hundreds of years ago.

The bible teaches intolerance.. gay marriage amendment to the constitution anyone?

Shadow9d9, the Bible does not teach us to decapitate homosexuals. The Bible does have violence in it, but it is not directed from Jesus to non-believers. In the Koran, Muhammad directs violence to non-believers.

The United States was founded on Judo-Christian beliefs, so it would not surprise me if the constitution models those. You do not have to be a Christian to acknowledge or live by such beliefs.

Decapitate, No. Stone to Death, Yes. Same difference, alternate methods.

Can you tell me where in the Bible it says to stone anyone to death?

 

[bamacre]

C

Originally posted by: Rainsford

Originally posted by: Jaskalas

Originally posted by: Vich
After Keith Ellison, D-Minn., the first Muslim elected to the United States Congress refused to be sworn in on the bible would you care if the president refused as well?

Yes, because their prophet?s call to fame was waging war against infidels, a tradition upheld to this day.

Yeah, yeah, and the Bible was all kindness and puppy dogs.

Can you show me where in the Bible it says that Jesus told his following to be violent toward anyone?

 

[sandorski]

Originally posted by: bamacre

Originally posted by: sandorski

Originally posted by: pauldovi

Originally posted by: shadow9d9

Originally posted by: pauldovi
The fact of the matter is that there is a presidence in place to use the bible. It is not even the real swearing in, it is just the one for the media.

Would I mind if a Jewish President used the Torah? No.

So why do I care about the Koran?

Well the fact of the matter is, the Koran teaches intolerance. You can call me anything you want and you can deny it. But that doesn't change the fact that the Koran teaches intolerance. I do not want my President swearing allegiance to the Koran.

I will agree that the majority of Muslims are tolerant and peaceful. Therefore, I think that moderate Muslims need to reform the faith, just as the Catholics did hundreds of years ago.

The bible teaches intolerance.. gay marriage amendment to the constitution anyone?

Shadow9d9, the Bible does not teach us to decapitate homosexuals. The Bible does have violence in it, but it is not directed from Jesus to non-believers. In the Koran, Muhammad directs violence to non-believers.

The United States was founded on Judo-Christian beliefs, so it would not surprise me if the constitution models those. You do not have to be a Christian to acknowledge or live by such beliefs.

Decapitate, No. Stone to Death, Yes. Same difference, alternate methods.

Can you tell me where in the Bible it says to stone anyone to death?

Just start reading it, there's quite the list of who should be stoned to Death.

 

[bamacre]

Originally posted by: sandorski

Originally posted by: bamacre

Originally posted by: sandorski

Originally posted by: pauldovi

Originally posted by: shadow9d9

Originally posted by: pauldovi
The fact of the matter is that there is a presidence in place to use the bible. It is not even the real swearing in, it is just the one for the media.

Would I mind if a Jewish President used the Torah? No.

So why do I care about the Koran?

Well the fact of the matter is, the Koran teaches intolerance. You can call me anything you want and you can deny it. But that doesn't change the fact that the Koran teaches intolerance. I do not want my President swearing allegiance to the Koran.

I will agree that the majority of Muslims are tolerant and peaceful. Therefore, I think that moderate Muslims need to reform the faith, just as the Catholics did hundreds of years ago.

The bible teaches intolerance.. gay marriage amendment to the constitution anyone?

Shadow9d9, the Bible does not teach us to decapitate homosexuals. The Bible does have violence in it, but it is not directed from Jesus to non-believers. In the Koran, Muhammad directs violence to non-believers.

The United States was founded on Judo-Christian beliefs, so it would not surprise me if the constitution models those. You do not have to be a Christian to acknowledge or live by such beliefs.

Decapitate, No. Stone to Death, Yes. Same difference, alternate methods.

Can you tell me where in the Bible it says to stone anyone to death?

Just start reading it, there's quite the list of who should be stoned to Death.

New Testemant? Just name any place where Jesus said to kill anyone.

 

[compuwiz1]

Originally posted by: bamacre

Originally posted by: sandorski

Originally posted by: bamacre

Originally posted by: sandorski

Originally posted by: pauldovi

Originally posted by: shadow9d9

Originally posted by: pauldovi
The fact of the matter is that there is a presidence in place to use the bible. It is not even the real swearing in, it is just the one for the media.

Would I mind if a Jewish President used the Torah? No.

So why do I care about the Koran?

Well the fact of the matter is, the Koran teaches intolerance. You can call me anything you want and you can deny it. But that doesn't change the fact that the Koran teaches intolerance. I do not want my President swearing allegiance to the Koran.

I will agree that the majority of Muslims are tolerant and peaceful. Therefore, I think that moderate Muslims need to reform the faith, just as the Catholics did hundreds of years ago.

The bible teaches intolerance.. gay marriage amendment to the constitution anyone?

Shadow9d9, the Bible does not teach us to decapitate homosexuals. The Bible does have violence in it, but it is not directed from Jesus to non-believers. In the Koran, Muhammad directs violence to non-believers.

The United States was founded on Judo-Christian beliefs, so it would not surprise me if the constitution models those. You do not have to be a Christian to acknowledge or live by such beliefs.

Decapitate, No. Stone to Death, Yes. Same difference, alternate methods.

Can you tell me where in the Bible it says to stone anyone to death?

Just start reading it, there's quite the list of who should be stoned to Death.

New Testemant? Just name any place where Jesus said to kill anyone.

He didn't. That's the Old Testament. The Muslims need to also write a new testament.

The killers and bombers are still living in the old testament of their ways, IMO.

 

[HomeAppraiser]

Yes, for the same reason why anyone named Barack Hussein Obama will never become president. Yes, I know he is a Christian.

 

[Siddhartha]

Originally posted by: slash196
I don't believe they should be using any holy books in a civic ceremony.

 

[ntdz]

Originally posted by: bamacre

Originally posted by: ntdz
Yes, and I'm agnostic.

The reason I care is that I honestly wouldn't want a Muslim to be the President, considering some of the problems we're having with people of that faith.

Further proof that we become what we fear.

Excuse me for saying what 90% of the people on this board feel deep inside, whether they want to admit it or not. I'm not saying I don't think they should be able to run, I'm saying I just wouldn't want to vote for them. Don't try to act all high and mighty like you'd really vote for a Muslim over someone else if they were equal candidates with the same points of view.

Edit: And on Barak Obama, I think he made a big mistake running this election. He's doesn't have enough experience. He's a very electable guy and a great speaker. Personally, I think he's the best Democratic candidate right now. We'll see how colorblind the Democratic party, and America possibly, is during this election cycle.

 

[kage69]

Would I care? Not really, but I would prefer religious texts of any flavor to be kept out of the issue entirely. If you're assuming the role of new deacon or imam or whatever for a place of worship, taking an oath over text of your religious preference makes sense.


Not so with the presidency. Swearing in over a copy of the Constitution or Declaration of Independence would be more appropriate. Don't really give a rat's @ss that some people are consumed with the tradition of it. Seems like a worthless, stagnant tradition if the people swearing in with a bible really don't even try to live their lives as "christ-like." Sorry folks, going to church once a week and rubbing elbows with televangelists doesn't cut it.


But I think a president blatantly violating his oath of office is a vastly more important issue than what he put his hand on when he recited it....