Jump to content

Congressman to use Koran for swearing in.


Parky
 Share

Recommended Posts

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2006/12/02/ucongress102.xml

 

 

"The man who will become America's first Muslim member of Congress has offended some conservatives with his plan to use a Koran during his ceremonial swearing-in.

 

The decision by Democrat Keith Ellison to use Islam's holy book for the ceremony instead of a Bible triggered an angry column by Dennis Prager on the authoritative website Townhall.com this week.

 

Mr Prager headlined the post, "America, Not Keith Ellison, decides what book a congressman takes his oath on." He argued that using the Koran for the ceremony "undermines American civilization."

 

 

 

Not a very tolerant bunch are they?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Surely it shows his commitment to the country. If he was sworn in on the bible it would mean nothing to him, he may as well be sworn in on a copy of the Beano. The Koran on the other hand is significant to him and therefore any oath he swears upon should be more binding upon him.

 

In reality though, it's all bollocks, both the idea of showing your commitment to something by having your hand on a book of religious mumbo-jumbo (any religious mumbo-jumbo), and that idea that a politician will keep his word anyway.

Link to post
Share on other sites

"You don't have to put your hand on any book, the article quietly points out that it is not part of the ceremony, just a photo opportunity." NoQ

 

 

It's is clear to all that he has chosen to make a point yes. I think it is a very good point he is making as there are some 2 million Muslims living in America. blueyes.gif

Link to post
Share on other sites

If he belives in Allah and not Jesus what is the point of him swearing on the bible?

 

Can I just correct this awful misconception about "the muslim God"?

 

Allah actually...literally means God in Arabic. A christian and a Jew also believe in Allah.

 

The difference is in the religions they follow. Jews: Torat and Moses, Christians: Bible and Jesus, Muslims: Koran and Mohamad.

 

Just to make things a little clearer for you lot  bluecool.gif

Link to post
Share on other sites

Surely it shows his commitment to the country. If he was sworn in on the bible it would mean nothing to him, he may as well be sworn in on a copy of the Beano. The Koran on the other hand is significant to him and therefore any oath he swears upon should be more binding upon him.

 

 

blueyes.gif

 

He's damned if he does, and damned if he doesn't. Imaging if he swore on the bible with people knowing full well of his religion, they'd lampoon him for taking this piss out of Christianity, and the whole swearing in ceremony.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest Invicta_Toon

I don't mind him being a Muslim, separating religion from Government is a conrerstone of the constituiton, and hence why swearing on any book is not part of the ceremony

 

what I want to know is, if he does feel it's necessary to swear on the Qur'an, how does he think that sits with most of his constituents?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest optimistic nit

If he belives in Allah and not Jesus what is the point of him swearing on the bible?

 

Can I just correct this awful misconception about "the muslim God"?

 

Allah actually...literally means God in Arabic. A christian and a Jew also believe in Allah.

 

The difference is in the religions they follow. Jews: Torat and Moses, Christians: Bible and Jesus, Muslims: Koran and Mohamad.

 

Just to make things a little clearer for you lot bluecool.gif

 

I think this is what he meant tbh.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest NSMagpie

Surely it shows his commitment to the country. If he was sworn in on the bible it would mean nothing to him, he may as well be sworn in on a copy of the Beano. The Koran on the other hand is significant to him and therefore any oath he swears upon should be more binding upon him.

 

In reality though, it's all bollocks, both the idea of showing your commitment to something by having your hand on a book of religious mumbo-jumbo (any religious mumbo-jumbo), and that idea that a politician will keep his word anyway.

 

It shows his commitment to the country in which the constitution clearly forbids introduction of any official state religion?  :lol: You must be joking.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Surely it shows his commitment to the country. If he was sworn in on the bible it would mean nothing to him, he may as well be sworn in on a copy of the Beano. The Koran on the other hand is significant to him and therefore any oath he swears upon should be more binding upon him.

 

In reality though, it's all bollocks, both the idea of showing your commitment to something by having your hand on a book of religious mumbo-jumbo (any religious mumbo-jumbo), and that idea that a politician will keep his word anyway.

 

It shows his commitment to the country in which the constitution clearly forbids introduction of any official state religion?  :lol: You must be joking.

 

So when the rest of them do it on a bible, what does that show?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest NSMagpie

If he belives in Allah and not Jesus what is the point of him swearing on the bible?

 

Can I just correct this awful misconception about "the muslim God"?

 

Allah actually...literally means God in Arabic. A christian and a Jew also believe in Allah.

 

The difference is in the religions they follow. Jews: Torat and Moses, Christians: Bible and Jesus, Muslims: Koran and Mohamad.

 

Just to make things a little clearer for you lot  bluecool.gif

 

Well, you are right up to a certain degree. All three religions are monotheistic, and they all have their holly scriptures. But, under if you go any deeper, the differences are vast.

 

For instance, being christian is a religion. Being Jewish has more to do with belonging to a certain ethnic grup, and it also includes religion, but not necessary. Everyone whose mother is Jewish is condidered a Jew, even if he or she is not initiated in a synagogue, or brought up in a religious spirit. Being moslem means a religion, bit also a culture that goes with it, and that culture is radically different from European culture, whether christian or atheist. Also, islam for centuries was a nation, as much as a religion. Christianity was never a nation.

 

Then, let's look at the teachings of religions we mentioned. Christians, the vast majority of them, believe Jesus Christ is the Son of God, and himself God as well, together with Father and the Holy Ghost. Moslems, on the contrary, beleive that Mohammad is just God's messenger. Jews beleive that Moses was the greatest man who lived, but for them he is just a prophet who guided them to the promised land (and BTW failed to succeed), and also the lawgiver. But, he is not God or son of the God.

 

So, there are vas differences between these three religions, and the fact they are all three monotheistic doesn't say much about them essentially.

 

If you wish, you may call the God of all three religions Allah, or JHVH, or God, that is not important, you're right. But, the content of the very concept of God is very different in judaism, christianity and islam. The perception of God of their followers is radically distant.

 

PS What you also failed to mention is that very important scriptures for molems is Sunna, for Jews Talmud, they both carry many everyday religious practices and strict rules. Christians (catholic and orthodox, at least) also deeply respect the writings of great church teachers, but they are not as important as Sunna and Talmud.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest NSMagpie

Surely it shows his commitment to the country. If he was sworn in on the bible it would mean nothing to him, he may as well be sworn in on a copy of the Beano. The Koran on the other hand is significant to him and therefore any oath he swears upon should be more binding upon him.

 

In reality though, it's all bollocks, both the idea of showing your commitment to something by having your hand on a book of religious mumbo-jumbo (any religious mumbo-jumbo), and that idea that a politician will keep his word anyway.

 

It shows his commitment to the country in which the constitution clearly forbids introduction of any official state religion?  :lol: You must be joking.

 

So when the rest of them do it on a bible, what does that show?

 

Well, it can show a number of things.

 

I 'll number a few, and you may choose whichever you like best.

 

1. Their electorate is christian, so they tend to win the favour of their voters by swearing on a christian Holly Book.

 

1. b) Laws are not important when you have the power. Winning votes again is prefered.

 

2. They do not know much about the constitution of their country.

 

3. In USA, they prefer established rituals to what they were meant to be.

 

4. The constitution is often neglected, even by officials who should do their best to introduce it to the public and keep its spirit alive.

 

5. Something essentially not christian can be deemed to be very important.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Surely it shows his commitment to the country. If he was sworn in on the bible it would mean nothing to him, he may as well be sworn in on a copy of the Beano. The Koran on the other hand is significant to him and therefore any oath he swears upon should be more binding upon him.

 

In reality though, it's all bollocks, both the idea of showing your commitment to something by having your hand on a book of religious mumbo-jumbo (any religious mumbo-jumbo), and that idea that a politician will keep his word anyway.

 

It shows his commitment to the country in which the constitution clearly forbids introduction of any official state religion?  :lol: You must be joking.

 

So when the rest of them do it on a bible, what does that show?

 

Well, it can show a number of things.

 

I 'll number a few, and you may choose whichever you like best.

 

1. Their electorate is christian, so they tend to win the favour of their voters by swearing on a christian Holly Book.

 

1. b) Laws are not important when you have the power. Winning votes again is prefered.

 

2. They do not know much about the constitution of their country.

 

3. In USA, they prefer established rituals to what they were meant to be.

 

4. The constitution is often neglected, even by officials who should do their best to introduce it to the public and keep its spirit alive.

 

5. Something essentially not christian can be deemed to be very important.

 

Which could be summed up like so:

 

 

 

In reality though, it's all bollocks, both the idea of showing your commitment to something by having your hand on a book of religious mumbo-jumbo (any religious mumbo-jumbo), and that idea that a politician will keep his word anyway.

 

;)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest Verlaine

I thought it said Korean. I could see why THAT would have upset the USA.

 

This annoys me, not what you said, but when people spell it Koran.  Meh, gits, it's Qur'an, and it's not hard to type!

 

I don't think swearing in with soya chicken would go down too well either.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest Ridzuan

Hes a Muslim and he has every right to use a Koran for his swearing process.I dont think it is right and I believe it is a sin under the rule of Islam to use a bible to swear in on something when youre a Muslim.This news is ridiculous.Wheres the freedom of American people? If the congress continue to resist in letting him using the Koran,then I think he should walk out of the party and take legal action.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...