Politics 2008:The Caucuses and The Dem/Rep Conventions

mccoyred · #1 01-04-2007, 10:54 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by AKA2D '91

Congressman to use Thomas Jefferson's Quran during swearing in ceremony....

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

I guess the fact that the Book once belonged to Thomas Jefferson, a founding father and slaveowner, makes it different than any other Book?

I am glad that this is finally settled though, and the country can get on with the business at hand....

AlphaFrog · #2 01-04-2007, 11:08 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mccoyred

I guess the fact that the Book once belonged to Thomas Jefferson, a ...slaveowner

Alright, I'll bite...

WTF does that have to do with anything?

mccoyred · #3 01-05-2007, 07:08 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by AlphaFrog

Alright, I'll bite...

WTF does that have to do with anything?

Well, Ellison is BLACK...

Besides, I have SEVERAL issues with TJ and his ilk that I won't further go into.

ladygreek · #4 01-05-2007, 01:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by AlphaFrog

Alright, I'll bite...

WTF does that have to do with anything?

Maybe she is seeing it as ironic.

Drolefille · #5 01-05-2007, 01:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ladygreek

Maybe she is seeing it as ironic.

Perhaps, but I don't think anyone's views have changed, thus making her point invalid. If Virgil Goode went "oh it's TJ's Qu'ran? nm then thx" I'd see the concern. But no one seems to be changing their mind.

mulattogyrl · #6 01-05-2007, 02:02 PM

Kind of off topic, but I find it fascinating that Jefferson owned a Quran. Sure, it's naive, but at least I admit it, lol.

lovelyivy84 · #7 01-05-2007, 02:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Drolefille

Perhaps, but I don't think anyone's views have changed, thus making her point invalid. If Virgil Goode went "oh it's TJ's Qu'ran? nm then thx" I'd see the concern. But no one seems to be changing their mind.

It didn't seem to me that she was trying to change anyone's mind, just pointing out the irony of a black man being sworn into office by a koran owned by one of the most famous hypocrites of all time when it comes to race. Added of course to the fact that his ownership of the book seems to make the situation ok for some folks, it's actually pretty amusing.

What exactly is the issue you have with her pointing it out?

Drolefille · #8 01-05-2007, 03:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by lovelyivy84

It didn't seem to me that she was trying to change anyone's mind, just pointing out the irony of a black man being sworn into office by a koran owned by one of the most famous hypocrites of all time when it comes to race. Added of course to the fact that his ownership of the book seems to make the situation ok for some folks, it's actually pretty amusing.

What exactly is the issue you have with her pointing it out?

I haven't seen anyone say "OOOH it's TJ's then no big deal" The people who think that it's neat that it is TJ's Qu'ran are not the anti-Qu'ran swearing people. Those people don't care whose Qu'ran it is. Does that make sense?

Mr. Goode and his ilk aren't saying that ownership of the book makes it ok. Thus I think her concern is misguided.

mccoyred · #9 01-05-2007, 06:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Drolefille

I haven't seen anyone say "OOOH it's TJ's then no big deal" The people who think that it's neat that it is TJ's Qu'ran are not the anti-Qu'ran swearing people. Those people don't care whose Qu'ran it is. Does that make sense?

Mr. Goode and his ilk aren't saying that ownership of the book makes it ok. Thus I think her concern is misguided.

I think it IS a big deal simply because, unless I missed something, this swearing in wasn't going to happen on a qu'ran PERIOD. When this particular qu'ran was brought forth it happened right away. If I DID miss something, please inform me and I will adjust accoridingly. Thank you.

mulattogyrl · #10 01-04-2007, 11:12 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mccoyred

I guess the fact that the Book once belonged to Thomas Jefferson, a founding father and slaveowner, makes it different than any other Book?

I am glad that this is finally settled though, and the country can get on with the business at hand....

I don't understand what you mean either.

mccoyred · #11 01-05-2007, 07:10 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mulattogyrl

I don't understand what you mean either.

When he wanted to take the oath on the qu'ran instead of the bible, folks were all up in arms. Now that the specific qu'ran was owned by someone that 'they' can't argue with, it is somehow okay.

Drolefille · #12 01-05-2007, 10:33 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mccoyred

When he wanted to take the oath on the qu'ran instead of the bible, folks were all up in arms. Now that the specific qu'ran was owned by someone that 'they' can't argue with, it is somehow okay.

I don't think the fact that it is TJ's Qu'ran changes Virgil Goode's mind. The irony is really only evident for those who know that the founding fathers were more Deist than Christian although there was quite a range of beliefs.

Goode can ramble on about tradition etc. but when John Adams and Teddy Roosevelt didn't use a Bible, you can't really fuss about a Congressman.

ladygreek · #13 01-08-2007, 04:18 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Drolefille

The irony is really only evident for those who know that the founding fathers were more Deist than Christian although there was quite a range of beliefs.

THANK YOU!! And folx ask me why I am a Humanist, which is an outgrowth of Deism, rather than a Christian.

So I do see the irony.

UGAalum94 · #14 01-18-2007, 10:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ladygreek

THANK YOU!! And folx ask me why I am a Humanist, which is an outgrowth of Deism, rather than a Christian.

Random point: Humanism IS an outgrowth of Christianity if you look at its roots. In the late middle ages or early renaissance, depending on how you want to see it, Humanism was an attempt to reconcile Christianity with Classical/secular works and methods. I'm thinking Erasmus here, mainly. I'm also thinking of Humanism like "humanities" humanism, not "secular humanism," which in hindsight, I realize you might mean.

Certainly, today Humanism is closer to Deism than it is to Christianity, but I don't think it started out that way.

About Clinton/Obama, I was sort of joking about it in another thread. They do seem to complement each other.

Sorry for crashing your forum. I arrived here kind of accidentally. I was searching for a post on a similar topic.

AlphaFrog · #15 01-05-2007, 11:16 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mccoyred

When he wanted to take the oath on the qu'ran instead of the bible, folks were all up in arms. Now that the specific qu'ran was owned by someone that 'they' can't argue with, it is somehow okay.

This makes more sense then saying that he shouldn't use TJ's book because TJ was a slaveowner and Ellison is black. That's like saying a Jew shouldn't spend money that Hilter touched...it's just a functional object, regardless of previous ownership. But I can understand the concern in the quoted post.