Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 63 (9162 total)
6 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 916,402 Year: 3,659/9,624 Month: 530/974 Week: 143/276 Day: 17/23 Hour: 3/2


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Rep. Virgil Goode, R-Va. says a Muslum should not use Qur'an during swearing in
jar
Member (Idle past 415 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 16 of 32 (371889)
12-23-2006 8:16 PM
Reply to: Message 15 by Monk
12-23-2006 8:06 PM


Re: Let him not swear on
Goode is using the occasion of a Muslim being elected to a position in our government to push for legislative changes. The fact, that Rep. Ellison has nothing to do with immigration, is irrelevant for Goode's purposes. He is making the connection. He is doing it to arouse fear. Once aroused, fear can be used to push for changes in immigration policy regarding muslims.
Thank you.
I personally think that is exactly what the Republican Party relies on these days, FUD, Fear, Uncertainty and Doubt. That and the ignorance of the party base that doesn't see him palming the pea.

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

This message is a reply to:
 Message 15 by Monk, posted 12-23-2006 8:06 PM Monk has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 17 by nator, posted 12-23-2006 9:42 PM jar has not replied

  
nator
Member (Idle past 2190 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 17 of 32 (371901)
12-23-2006 9:42 PM
Reply to: Message 16 by jar
12-23-2006 8:16 PM


Re: Let him not swear on
quote:
I personally think that is exactly what the Republican Party relies on these days, FUD, Fear, Uncertainty and Doubt. That and the ignorance of the party base that doesn't see him palming the pea.
The other thing they rely heavily upon is what passes for domestic investigative journalism ignoring such shenanigans.
And I also think that the party base isn't all that ignorant. I think that many of them know exactly what's going on but will never criticize or stop supporting one of their own because their job is to "be part of the team".
There was a poll that came out a week or two after the November elections that showed that among Republicans, the support for the Iraq war had plummeted compared to a few weeks before that.
It think what happened among the general Republican population was exactly what Rush Limbaugh said happened to him, which was, in effect, that he was relieved to finally not have to "carry water" for the undeserving boneheads in Washington anymore, now that they shortly to be gone.
Edited by schrafinator, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 16 by jar, posted 12-23-2006 8:16 PM jar has not replied

  
subbie
Member (Idle past 1275 days)
Posts: 3509
Joined: 02-26-2006


Message 18 of 32 (371938)
12-24-2006 3:48 AM


O! The irony!
So, this pandering pissant is demanding that everyone be required to use a bible when swearing an oath to support the Constitution. Pity he's never apparently taken the time to actually read the document in question.
Article VI states in its entirety:
All debts contracted and engagements entered into, before the adoption of this Constitution, shall be as valid against the United States under this Constitution, as under the Confederation.
This Constitution, and the laws of the United States which shall be made in pursuance thereof; and all treaties made, or which shall be made, under the authority of the United States, shall be the supreme law of the land; and the judges in every state shall be bound thereby, anything in the Constitution or laws of any State to the contrary notwithstanding.
The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the members of the several state legislatures, and all executive and judicial officers, both of the United States and of the several states, shall be bound by oath or affirmation, to support this Constitution; but no religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office or public trust under the United States.
Emphasis mine.
Nuff said.
Edited by subbie, : No reason given.

Those who would sacrifice an essential liberty for a temporary security will lose both, and deserve neither. -- Benjamin Franklin

Replies to this message:
 Message 19 by Monk, posted 12-24-2006 2:56 PM subbie has not replied

  
Monk
Member (Idle past 3945 days)
Posts: 782
From: Kansas, USA
Joined: 02-25-2005


Message 19 of 32 (372030)
12-24-2006 2:56 PM
Reply to: Message 18 by subbie
12-24-2006 3:48 AM


Re: O! The irony!
subbie writes:
So, this pandering pissant is demanding that everyone be required to use a bible when swearing an oath to support the Constitution.
Actually, he is careful with his wording. He does not say that everyone must use the Bible for swearing in. Here is an excerpt from his letter:
Goode writes:
"..Thank you for your recent communication. When I raise my hand to take the oath on Swearing In Day, I will have the Bible in my other hand. I do not subscribe to using the Koran in any way. The Muslim Representative from Minnesota was elected by the voters of that district and if American citizens don't wake up and adopt the Virgil Goode position on immigration there will likely be many more Muslims elected to office and demanding the use of the Koran."
Notice he describes what HE uses, (the Bible) and that HE does not subscribe to using the Koran. Goode has been through the swearing in ceremony and is fully aware that in the private ceremony, elected officials can use whatever they want. He is not advocating that the Koran be excluded from those ceremonies, he just doesn't like having Muslims in congress.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 18 by subbie, posted 12-24-2006 3:48 AM subbie has not replied

  
Hyroglyphx
Inactive Member


Message 20 of 32 (372088)
12-24-2006 9:12 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by jar
12-21-2006 6:51 PM


Options: Not that difficult
So should we force Muslims to use the Bible instead or the Qur'an, a Jew to use the Bible instead of the Torah (although I imagine a Jew would prefer nothing)?
If someone wants to swear in using the Qur'an, the Bible, Bill Clinton's autobiography, or nothing at all, that should be their prerogative.
Personally I don't see what the big stink is about in either case. If the Muslim wants to swear in using the Qur'an, let him. If Goode wants to argue his point, let him.

"A man can no more diminish God's glory by refusing to worship Him than a lunatic can put out the sun by scribbling the word, 'darkness' on the walls of his cell." -C.S. Lewis

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by jar, posted 12-21-2006 6:51 PM jar has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 22 by Omnivorous, posted 12-24-2006 9:40 PM Hyroglyphx has replied
 Message 23 by jar, posted 12-24-2006 10:49 PM Hyroglyphx has not replied

  
Hyroglyphx
Inactive Member


Message 21 of 32 (372089)
12-24-2006 9:16 PM
Reply to: Message 6 by U can call me Cookie
12-22-2006 5:59 AM


Swearing and doing
I don't see why people need to swear an oath on anything in the first place.
Good point. Its just a dog and pony show. Even Jesus told us not to swear at all, but let our yes mean, yes, and our no mean, no. Simple enough. I mean, yes, there is some purpose to it. When you declare the oath, you are telling the world that you will fulfill your obligations in a professional manner and that going against it can indict you later on. Other than that, its just a show.

"A man can no more diminish God's glory by refusing to worship Him than a lunatic can put out the sun by scribbling the word, 'darkness' on the walls of his cell." -C.S. Lewis

This message is a reply to:
 Message 6 by U can call me Cookie, posted 12-22-2006 5:59 AM U can call me Cookie has not replied

  
Omnivorous
Member
Posts: 3985
From: Adirondackia
Joined: 07-21-2005
Member Rating: 7.1


Message 22 of 32 (372090)
12-24-2006 9:40 PM
Reply to: Message 20 by Hyroglyphx
12-24-2006 9:12 PM


Re: Options: Not that difficult
nj writes:
If someone wants to swear in using the Qur'an, the Bible, Bill Clinton's autobiography, or nothing at all, that should be their prerogative.
Personally I don't see what the big stink is about in either case. If the Muslim wants to swear in using the Qur'an, let him. If Goode wants to argue his point, let him.
I almost agree, nj.
I wonder, though, a little bit about the tone of "the Muslim"...
Though I agree that Goode has the right to speak his mind, his comments about immigration are patently dishonest, since they are irrelevant, and his remarks about how past swearing-in ceremonies have been conducted are patently dishonest because they lead folks to believe that Goode is planning something unprecedented and radical.
To the extent that his xenophobia confirms the strongest doubts about America's intentions among the world's Muslims, he has betrayed not just the ideals but also the best interests of his own nation.
The reasonable middle ground is not the mid-point between right and wrong: Goode is wrong. He is pandering to the worst of human impulses, the hatred and fear of difference.
No one has the right to stop "the Muslim" from taking his private oath as he pleases; no one has the right to stop Goode from speaking his mind. But everyone has the right to label Goode's un-American bigotry for what it is, and his constituents have the right to exact a price in the voting booth. I hope they do.

Drinking when we are not thirsty and making love at any time, madam, is all that distinguishes us from the other animals.
-Pierre De Beaumarchais (1732-1799)
Save lives! Click here!
Join the World Community Grid with Team EvC!
---------------------------------------

This message is a reply to:
 Message 20 by Hyroglyphx, posted 12-24-2006 9:12 PM Hyroglyphx has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 24 by Hyroglyphx, posted 12-25-2006 11:35 AM Omnivorous has replied

  
jar
Member (Idle past 415 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 23 of 32 (372098)
12-24-2006 10:49 PM
Reply to: Message 20 by Hyroglyphx
12-24-2006 9:12 PM


Goode has violated the oath of office and should be impeached.
If Goode wants to argue his point, let him.
No one prevented Goode from speaking his piece or even elaborating on it.
What is happening is that others are simply pointing out Goode's dishonesty.
What this is about is that Goode simply commits a sin of omission by only telling a half truth. He says that Ellison will be sworn in using a Qur'an. He neglects to say that is only during the unofficial private ceremony and that during the official ceremony, Ellison, just like Goode and every other Representative, will be sworn in simply by raising their right hand.
He then commits a sin of commission by bring in immigration. Since Rep Ellison's family have been US citizens since at least the 1700's, immigration is not an issue and is unrelated to anything involving Rep. Ellison.
He goes a step further and says that he will not uphold the very Constitution he swears to uphold.
That should be grounds for impeachment. There is no doubt that Rep. Goode has shown he will not uphold the Constitution of the United States and that he should NOT be allowed to take office.
As pointed out back in Message 18 by subbie, Article VI of the Constitution says that "no religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office or public trust under the United States." When Rep. Goode said
"The Muslim Representative from Minnesota was elected by the voters of that district and if American citizens don't wake up and adopt the Virgil Goode position on immigration there will likely be many more Muslims elected to office and demanding the use of the Koran."
and later expanded to say ...
"I am for restricting immigration so that we don't have a majority of Muslims elected to the House of Representatives."
he is advocating a religious test for holding office.
Rep. Goode should be barred from taking office. By his very words he has shown that he will not uphold his oath of office and so is not worthy of the position.

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

This message is a reply to:
 Message 20 by Hyroglyphx, posted 12-24-2006 9:12 PM Hyroglyphx has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 26 by subbie, posted 12-25-2006 6:32 PM jar has not replied

  
Hyroglyphx
Inactive Member


Message 24 of 32 (372167)
12-25-2006 11:35 AM
Reply to: Message 22 by Omnivorous
12-24-2006 9:40 PM


Re: Options: Not that difficult
I wonder, though, a little bit about the tone of "the Muslim"
Wonder til your hearts content. I wonder if you would wonder had it been a Christian and I said, "The Christian." I only said the Muslim because I don't remember his name.
Though I agree that Goode has the right to speak his mind, his comments about immigration are patently dishonest, since they are irrelevant, and his remarks about how past swearing-in ceremonies have been conducted are patently dishonest because they lead folks to believe that Goode is planning something unprecedented and radical.
Bringing up immigration in this instance is completely irrelevant. And citing how ceremonies have usually been conducted is pointless. I would feel like I was doing a disservice to everyone by obligating them to place an oath on something they don't believe in. Lets think about that for a moment. The whole point of placing your hand over the Bible was to convict you to take your oath seriously. If someone does not take the Bible seriously, then what purpose does it serve? Obviously this would be vice versa for non-Muslims asked to place their hand over a tome they don't feel convicted about.
To the extent that his xenophobia confirms the strongest doubts about America's intentions among the world's Muslims, he has betrayed not just the ideals but also the best interests of his own nation.
Most Americans are stuck between a rock and a hard place for two central reasons. First, we are taught that we are the great melting pot where Lady Justice says, "Give me your tired, give me your poor huddled masses yearning to be free." There was a time when that act of kindness was met with respect and gratitude. In today's time, there has been a bastardization of that philosophy because its no longer a virtue to be esteemed. Now its looked upon as a birth right to be trodden, abused, and disrespected. And the Lady who stands sentinel in New York harbor grows more and more weary with cynicism everyday. She wants to do the right thing but sure wished that those huddled masses would show an ounce of respect for her borders.
The reasonable middle ground is not the mid-point between right and wrong: Goode is wrong. He is pandering to the worst of human impulses, the hatred and fear of difference.
I agree that he is operating on possibly all of those notions and that its not only a stupid move politically, but its just distasteful as a human being. I agree that he probably has allowed hatred to fester in his heart, and he may have a fear of anything different; perhaps he grew up with such a Good 'Ole Boy mentality. But if he is anything like your average American, his fear is that his country is going to hell in a handbasket. He might be looking across the pond and watching how Europe's Politically Correct mentality does not coincide with radical Islam who entrenches itself more every day. Maybe he's just a stupid bigot or maybe he doesn't really want to live in Virginiastan. I can't say for sure. All I can say is that his move is politically unintelligent and socially taboo.
No one has the right to stop "the Muslim" from taking his private oath as he pleases; no one has the right to stop Goode from speaking his mind. But everyone has the right to label Goode's un-American bigotry for what it is, and his constituents have the right to exact a price in the voting booth. I hope they do.
It looks like if Goode could have his way he'd seal up the United States and force the nation to become more of an isolationist nation than North Korea.
Edited by nemesis_juggernaut, : typos

"A man can no more diminish God's glory by refusing to worship Him than a lunatic can put out the sun by scribbling the word, 'darkness' on the walls of his cell." -C.S. Lewis

This message is a reply to:
 Message 22 by Omnivorous, posted 12-24-2006 9:40 PM Omnivorous has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 25 by Omnivorous, posted 12-25-2006 4:48 PM Hyroglyphx has replied
 Message 28 by nator, posted 12-26-2006 9:01 AM Hyroglyphx has not replied

  
Omnivorous
Member
Posts: 3985
From: Adirondackia
Joined: 07-21-2005
Member Rating: 7.1


Message 25 of 32 (372204)
12-25-2006 4:48 PM
Reply to: Message 24 by Hyroglyphx
12-25-2006 11:35 AM


Re: Options: Not that difficult
nj writes:
I wonder, though, a little bit about the tone of "the Muslim"
Wonder til your hearts content. I wonder if you would wonder had it been a Christian and I said, "The Christian." I only said the Muslim because I don't remember his name.
You bet I'd wonder. I have defended even fundies on this board (and elsewhere), at some expense. And on the day Christians in the U.S. are a persecuted people, I'll stand with them.
As for the rest of your reply: it would've been shorter to say, "You're right."

Drinking when we are not thirsty and making love at any time, madam, is all that distinguishes us from the other animals.
-Pierre De Beaumarchais (1732-1799)
Save lives! Click here!
Join the World Community Grid with Team EvC!
---------------------------------------

This message is a reply to:
 Message 24 by Hyroglyphx, posted 12-25-2006 11:35 AM Hyroglyphx has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 27 by Hyroglyphx, posted 12-25-2006 10:02 PM Omnivorous has not replied

  
subbie
Member (Idle past 1275 days)
Posts: 3509
Joined: 02-26-2006


Message 26 of 32 (372209)
12-25-2006 6:32 PM
Reply to: Message 23 by jar
12-24-2006 10:49 PM


Re: Goode has violated the oath of office and should be impeached.
He then commits a sin of commission by bring in immigration. Since Rep Ellison's family have been US citizens since at least the 1700's, immigration is not an issue and is unrelated to anything involving Rep. Ellison
It is also irrelevant on another level. Ole Virgil says we need to keep Muslims out of the country to keep Muslims from getting elected. But I guarandamntee you that the district that Ellison represents is not mostly Muslim. He didn't win that seat because a bunch of Muslims voted for him. The fifth district probably has the highest percentage of minorites of any Minnesota district, but it is nonetheless a white and Christian majority. It may well also have the highest percentage Jewish population of any Minnesota district.

Those who would sacrifice an essential liberty for a temporary security will lose both, and deserve neither. -- Benjamin Franklin

This message is a reply to:
 Message 23 by jar, posted 12-24-2006 10:49 PM jar has not replied

  
Hyroglyphx
Inactive Member


Message 27 of 32 (372227)
12-25-2006 10:02 PM
Reply to: Message 25 by Omnivorous
12-25-2006 4:48 PM


Re: Options: Not that difficult
You bet I'd wonder. I have defended even fundies on this board (and elsewhere), at some expense. And on the day Christians in the U.S. are a persecuted people, I'll stand with them.
Everybody is persecuted in the U.S. That's what makes this country so great. We persecute our people equally. Well, at least the comedians do.
As for the rest of your reply: it would've been shorter to say, "You're right."
Then: You're right, on both counts. You're right that it would have been shorter and that no one should be forced to place their hand on any document our book if they don't feel convicted to do so.

"A man can no more diminish God's glory by refusing to worship Him than a lunatic can put out the sun by scribbling the word, 'darkness' on the walls of his cell." -C.S. Lewis

This message is a reply to:
 Message 25 by Omnivorous, posted 12-25-2006 4:48 PM Omnivorous has not replied

  
nator
Member (Idle past 2190 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 28 of 32 (372270)
12-26-2006 9:01 AM
Reply to: Message 24 by Hyroglyphx
12-25-2006 11:35 AM


Re: Options: Not that difficult
quote:
and he may have a fear of anything different; perhaps he grew up with such a Good 'Ole Boy mentality.
quote:
He might be looking across the pond and watching how Europe's Politically Correct mentality does not coincide with radical Islam who entrenches itself more every day.
So, the sexist, racist, often violent southern "Good Ol' Boy" system is fundamentally different from radical Islam how, exactly?
And what do you mean by Europe being politically correct? France probably has the most Muslims due to it's proximity to and history in Morocco and North Africa, and they do not allow the wearing of headscarves in it's schools.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 24 by Hyroglyphx, posted 12-25-2006 11:35 AM Hyroglyphx has not replied

  
subbie
Member (Idle past 1275 days)
Posts: 3509
Joined: 02-26-2006


Message 29 of 32 (374531)
01-04-2007 5:51 PM


Brilliant! Simply brilliant. And priceless!
The last chapter (hopefully) in this story:
Whose Quran?
Congressman to take oath on Jefferson's Quran
POSTED: 7:27 p.m. EST, January 3, 2007
WASHINGTON (AP) -- Rep.-elect Keith Ellison, the first Muslim elected to Congress, will use a Quran once owned by Thomas Jefferson during his ceremonial swearing-in Thursday.
The chief of the Library of Congress' rare book and special collections division, Mark Dimunation, will walk the Quran across the street to the Capitol and then walk it back after the ceremony.
Ellison, a Minnesota Democrat, contacted the library about the book last month, Dimunation said.
Some critics have argued that only a Bible should be used for the swearing-in. Last month, Virginia Republican Rep. Virgil Goode warned that unless immigration is tightened, "many more Muslims" will be elected and follow Ellison's lead.
Ellison was born in Detroit, Michigan, and converted to Islam in college.
Ellison spokesman Rick Jauert said the new congressman "wants this to be a special day, and using Thomas Jefferson's Quran makes it even more special."
"Jefferson's Quran dates religious tolerance to the founders of our country," he added.
An English translation of the Arabic, it was published in 1764 in London, a later printing of one originally published in 1734.
"This is considered the text that shaped Europe's understanding of the Quran," Dimunation said.
It was acquired in 1815 as part of a 6,400-volume collection that Jefferson sold for $24,000, to replace the congressional library that had been burned by British troops the year before, in the War of 1812.
"It was a real bargain," Dimunation said.
Copyright 2007 The Associated Press. All rights reserved.
Edited by subbie, : No reason given.

Those who would sacrifice an essential liberty for a temporary security will lose both, and deserve neither. -- Benjamin Franklin

Replies to this message:
 Message 30 by jar, posted 01-04-2007 5:58 PM subbie has replied

  
jar
Member (Idle past 415 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 30 of 32 (374537)
01-04-2007 5:58 PM
Reply to: Message 29 by subbie
01-04-2007 5:51 PM


Re: Brilliant! Simply brilliant. And priceless!
Yeah. We were talking about that in chat earlier.
I was surprised that folk did not know that TJ had a copy of the Qu'ran.

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

This message is a reply to:
 Message 29 by subbie, posted 01-04-2007 5:51 PM subbie has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 31 by subbie, posted 01-04-2007 6:09 PM jar has not replied
 Message 32 by Omnivorous, posted 01-04-2007 6:23 PM jar has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024