Thomas Jefferson's Qu'ran (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid



Message


Level -> Thomas Jefferson's Qu'ran (1/3/2007 4:30:35 PM)

Congressman to be sworn in using Quran



By FREDERIC J. FROMMER, Associated Press Writer1 hour, 51 minutes ago

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.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070103/ap_on_go_co/ellison_quran




CuriouslyKat -> RE: Thomas Jefferson's Qu'ran (1/3/2007 6:31:05 PM)

It's a nice touch and statement.....but if I recall that Koran is a very sucky translation. [;)]




WyrdRich -> RE: Thomas Jefferson's Qu'ran (1/3/2007 6:35:24 PM)

      As long as he remembers that the oath is to support and defend the US Constitution, he can take it on the Principia Discordia or the collected works of Anton Levay.

       If I remember my high school civics, Jefferson's personal library was a foundation of the Library of Congress.




CuriouslyKat -> RE: Thomas Jefferson's Qu'ran (1/3/2007 6:44:50 PM)

I agree with you WyrdRich, the oath is way more important than the book it is taken on. 




KatyLied -> RE: Thomas Jefferson's Qu'ran (1/3/2007 7:14:03 PM)

A related op/ed piece that some may find interesting:

http://news.yahoo.com/s/usatoday/20070102/cm_usatoday/uglyvoicestarnishdebutofcongressfirstmuslim




CalliopePurple -> RE: Thomas Jefferson's Qu'ran (1/4/2007 12:32:14 AM)

What will happen if a Congressperson with no religous beliefs is ever elected? They will have no book to place their hand on unless they do what most people do and mindlessly put their hand on a Bible. And the words "so help me God" are not in the oath of office listed in the Constitution. What happens if someone doesn't want to say it? I believe (can't say for sure because I forget where I read it) that George Washington added it to his oath and everyone's copied him.

Personally, I'm very happy for the election of a Muslim. We keep getting more diverse elected officials slowly, but progress is progress.




Archer -> RE: Thomas Jefferson's Qu'ran (1/4/2007 1:10:14 AM)

The actual swearing in ceremony from what I hear is done en mass (taken by all the newly elected reps at once in the chamber) with no hand on a book at all, and then the photo Ops are done afterwards with the books brought in as props.

Edited to add from the above linked article.

"...As Goode, who is starting his sixth term, surely knows, House members are officially sworn in without any religious book. They simply raise their hands in a mass ceremony in the chamber. In unofficial ceremonies later, they re-enact the oath, often with a Bible, for commemorative photos."




KatyLied -> RE: Thomas Jefferson's Qu'ran (1/4/2007 3:32:22 AM)

If you read the op/ed I linked, it talks about people using other books (such as law books) or no books for swearing in ceremonies.




Mercnbeth -> RE: Thomas Jefferson's Qu'ran (1/4/2007 9:28:31 AM)

Jefferson also owned slaves. One can only hope that this is just the start of more Jeffersonian era accepted behavior. CONSENSUAL of course!




OedipusRexIt -> RE: Thomas Jefferson's Qu'ran (1/4/2007 10:23:34 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: CalliopePurple

What will happen if a Congressperson with no religous beliefs is ever elected? They will have no book to place their hand on unless they do what most people do and mindlessly put their hand on a Bible. And the words "so help me God" are not in the oath of office listed in the Constitution. What happens if someone doesn't want to say it? I believe (can't say for sure because I forget where I read it) that George Washington added it to his oath and everyone's copied him.

Personally, I'm very happy for the election of a Muslim. We keep getting more diverse elected officials slowly, but progress is progress.



Excellent point!  What about Wiccans, for example? 





CalliopePurple -> RE: Thomas Jefferson's Qu'ran (1/4/2007 12:43:00 PM)

Thank you for pointing that out, Katy. I didn't have the time to read the link last night, but I will do so now.

And let's continue my hypothetical from yesterday one step further - let's say, at some point very far in the future, we elect an agnostic president. His swearing-in isn't en masse, like a Congressman. An entire nation will witness what he places his hand on and what he says."In 1825, John Quincy Adams reportedly used a law volume. News accounts say Theodore Roosevelt used no Bible in taking his first oath of office, in 1901." according to the article. But would that pass in a world continuing along the path it's going - with growing importance on religion?

I'm not saying religion's never been unimportant, but we're now talking about the possibility of electing a Mormon president. Personally, I don't care if the candidate is a practicing Satanist as long as I can believe what s/he's saying and think they're the best person for the job.




katzschen -> RE: Thomas Jefferson's Qu'ran (1/4/2007 12:51:58 PM)

I'm not even going to touch this one... I'll be here all day.

That second article was great, with a "oh yea? You want to be like that? Well make sure you've got your facts straight, Mister!" kind of attitude. I love it when people who think they're all high-and-mighty get shot down with nothing but good, pure facts. Thank you for posting the first artical, Level, as I definitely think this is something that needs to be brought to our attention (our meaning everyone in the United States of America), and thank you, KatyLied, for that second article, it was brilliant.




Level -> RE: Thomas Jefferson's Qu'ran (1/4/2007 4:38:29 PM)

You're quite welcome [:D]. I think the whole thing is interesting.




KatyLied -> RE: Thomas Jefferson's Qu'ran (1/4/2007 5:39:47 PM)

It is interesting.  And sad that people can't see the value in diversity and the higher value of showing the world that we can not only speak it, but embrace it as well.




katzschen -> RE: Thomas Jefferson's Qu'ran (1/5/2007 12:34:58 AM)

I'm trying to remember... help me out here... isn't there something somewhere in the Constitution... you know, the thing that is the BASIS OF THIS COUNTRY... that says we have... what's that thing called...? Oh yea... FREEDOM OF RELIGION. That's what I was thinking about.




Termyn8or -> RE: Thomas Jefferson's Qu'ran (1/8/2007 2:49:40 PM)

It doesn't actually say freedom of religion. The Constitution prohibits the formation of a national or state religion, and forbids interference with free expression of any religion unless it actually violates the law.

For years it was construed to allow Native Americans to smoke cannibas and injest peyote, but I do believe they have done away with that. Funny how they got away with burning witches.

In the Constitution you will not find the word God, Jehovah, Yahweh, Crist, Allah or Buddha. That finely crafted document does contain the word Creator. And I believe it is there for a good many reasons.

Nobody can be sure the founding Fathers were Christian. Masons are certainly not Christian in any normal sense of the word, and IMO neither are Catholics. I don't think there were that many Christians among landowners who hold slaves. Rich Men started this country and it is starting to look like they are going to finish it.

Far as I am concerned, they can take their oath on a roll of toilet paper. I would just like to see them uphold that oath. For ______'s sake, they bust a congressman and have him on tape shoving money into all his pockets and he says "What did I do wrong ?".

How far have we come ? From Men like David Crockett who, as a congressman voted against a relief measure for a townful of victims and gave the reason as "It is not our money to give". He had had a very interesting conversation with a Man named Horatio Bunch. He also offered to give a week's pay toward the victims, and urged that everyone in congress do the same. This he pointed out would amount to more than the amount of relief proposed. He, at the time was very likely the least wealthy in congress.

So we have come from a time when Men wanted to do right, and even learned as adults that they had made mistakes and corrected their behavior. Now they think it is their job to take money, and get enough pork barrelling done to get reelected.

So they might as well take their oath on a roll of toilet paper nowadays, it is what they do next that counts.

Actually I find it encouraging that someone has enough of some kind of faith to want to swear by the Koran, or Qu'ran rather than the old King James. Perhaps he is a Man of conviction and will actually work for us. Perhaps his conscience will refuse to get in the slaughterhouse line. Perhaps not.

Time will tell.

T




katzschen -> RE: Thomas Jefferson's Qu'ran (1/8/2007 2:58:37 PM)

Sorry, you're right. It's the Bill of Rights that says Freedom of Religion. Temporary blonde moment.




Archer -> RE: Thomas Jefferson's Qu'ran (1/8/2007 3:11:11 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: katzschen

Sorry, you're right. It's the Bill of Rights that says Freedom of Religion. Temporary blonde moment.


Where?????
I see Ammendment I saying "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;" but I see no section saying "Freedom of Religion".

You will find no section with the term "Freedom of Religion" in the Constitution including the Bill of Rights




ownedgirlie -> RE: Thomas Jefferson's Qu'ran (1/8/2007 10:36:53 PM)

An interesting letter from Thomas Jefferson to Dr. Benjamin Rush, in presenting a syllabus he prepared, comparing Jesus to other philosophers.  Another interesting read, The Jefferson Bible (along with the below reference syllabus), can be found here.

The Letter:



Letter To Dr. Benjamin Rush.
Washington, April 21, 1803.    
DEAR SIR,
In some of the delightful conversations with you in the evenings of 1798-99, and which served as an anodyne to the afflictions of the crisis through which our country was then laboring, the Christian religion was sometimes our topic; and I then promised you that one day or other I would give you my views of it. They are the result of a life of inquiry and reflection, and very different from that anti-Christian system imputed to me by those who know nothing of my opinions. To the corruptions of Christianity I am indeed opposed, but not to the genuine precepts of Jesus himself. I am a Christian, in the only sense in which he wished anyone to be: sincerely attached to his doctrines in preference to all others, ascribing to himself every human excellence, and believing he never claimed any other. At the short interval since these conversations, when I could justifiably abstract my mind from public affairs, the subject has been under my contemplation. But the more I considered it, the more it expanded beyond the measure of either my time or information. In the moment of my late departure from Monticello, I received from Dr. Priestley his little treatise of "Socrates and Jesus Compared." This being a section of the general view I had taken of the field, it became a subject of reflection while on the road and unoccupied otherwise. The result was, to arrange in my mind a syllabus or outline of such an estimate of the comparative merits of Christianity as I wished to see executed by someone of more leisure and information for the task than myself. This I now send you as the only discharge of my promise I can probably ever execute. And in confiding it to you, I know it will not be exposed to the malignant perversions of those who make every word from me a text for new misrepresentations and calumnies. I am moreover averse to the communication of my religious tenets to the public, because it would countenance the presumption of those who have endeavored to draw them before that tribunal, and to seduce public opinion to erect itself into that inquisition over the rights of conscience which the laws have so justly proscribed. It behooves every man who values liberty of conscience for himself, to resist invasions of it in the case of others; or their case may, by change of circumstances, become his own. It behooves him, too, in his own case, to give no example of concession, betraying the common right of independent opinion, by answering questions of faith which the laws have left between God and himself. Accept my affectionate salutations.
Th: Jefferson    




Level -> RE: Thomas Jefferson's Qu'ran (1/9/2007 2:46:22 AM)

owned, thank you for posting that, fascinating letter. I've heard of Jefferson's Bible, and intend of getting a copy of one. I have a feeling his and my views might be a bit closer than perhaps a Pat Robertson lol.




Page: [1] 2   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
0.03125