Politics 2008:The Caucuses and The Dem/Rep Conventions

[ladygreek]

Originally Posted by AlphaFrog

Alright, I'll bite...

WTF does that have to do with anything?

Maybe she is seeing it as ironic.

[Drolefille]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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.

[Drolefille]

Originally Posted by mccoyred

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.

To my knowledge it was going to happen no matter what and here's why:

The official swearing in is a group thing where everyone raises their hand and swears the oath (no books, bible or otherwise).

Then, after that there are private ceremonies that are mostly just photo opportunities. This is where they swear on a book. He is not the first person to request a non-Bible. They've stated that not only have presidents chosen other books, John Q. Adams chose a law book for example, but that Senators and Congressmen have also chosen others or none at all.

Here's an article that talks about it. It refers to Ohio's state legislators as well as the national ones. Columbus Dispatch

There was never anything in the news about the Qu'ran not being allowed except in the sense that some prejudiced idiots think that the Bible is and should be the only option. Particularly Rep. Goode. However I've not seen anything stating that it wouldn't be allowed, he just thinks that it shouldn't be ok.

/But I've read his comments and he's also a grade-A idiot

[mccoyred]

Originally Posted by Drolefille

To my knowledge it was going to happen no matter what...

Everyone does not have your knowledge (at least on this subject). I appreciate being informed because I learn something new everyday but I don't appreciate your tone or how you speak to people, Ms Superiority.

Originally Posted by Drolefille

/But I've read his comments and he's also a grade-A idiot

So are you

[ladygreek]

Originally Posted by mccoyred

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.

That's not true. The real swearing in happens en mass without any hands on bibles or anything else. They just all stand and raise their hands and repeat what they are told. The hands on the bible, Qu'ran, etc. are privately done after the official swearing in, and are for photo-op, personal gratification purposes.

ETA: oops, should have read ahead.

[mccoyred]

Originally Posted by ladygreek

That's not true. The real swearing in happens en mass without any hands on bibles or anything else. They just all stand and raise their hands and repeat what they are told. The hands on the bible, Qu'ran, etc. are privately done after the official swearing in, and are for photo-op, personal gratification purposes.

ETA: oops, should have read ahead.

Thank you for the information on the process, soror.

So if the whole 'swearing/affirming on a book' thing is not the official process, why all the big deal? I swear, this country spends more time on extraneous stuff than a little bit.