Muslim congressman??

Question

Thursday, December 21, 2006

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- Congressman-elect Keith Ellison, a Democrat from Minnesota and the first Muslim elected to Congress, defended his choice Thursday to use the Koran during his upcoming private congressional swearing-in ceremony while brushing aside criticisms from Virginia GOP Rep. Virgil Goode.

In a letter released to CNN Wednesday, Goode wrote in part to a constituent, "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."



In your opinion, is there something wrong with this picture?

Iraqisax...thanks for the clarification. I knew one can't count on the American media.

I guess this is proof that even the American media journalist need some educating as well before publishing this article that Ellison is Muslim when he isn't...

OR
this is just another attempt by the US media to stir up hate against Muslims in America.
I hope this educates Americans instead.

Answer 1

sooo? a muslim in USA congress..!
there are jews in Irans(majlis) congress.

Answer 2

If I remember my history correctly, one of the reasons why the pilgrams risked thier lives is to be free of religious persecussion. Why is the Qu'ran being questioned? It's not the book but the people that have killed. I wonder how many who would question have seriously studied it. For example, why would christians have difficulty with it when it also speaks of Jesus? Is it because of who might claim ownership of those words? Is the problem with the Qu'ran a matter of faith or education? I've listened to Mr. Goode and he may well incorrectly speak a valid concern. The fact is that with the world growth comes new tests which includes faith. But it all isn't something to kill for or to die for. A book never killed anyone rather than the belief of that person who would kill in order to be right, justified by a faith blinded in ignorance. If we can only say that old white christians are the only people acceptable to be in office, how does that justify the years of work that was fought against our own government for our civil liberties? When will someone of a different race, religion or gender be elected or even try to be elected president? Oh yeah, Hillary Clinton. Okay, that's one. Who else? It seems that Mr. Goode is frightened and I wonder where this fear originates. Is he another who thinks world war three is around the corner? If so, answer this question, why do you think there are so many who are angry with us and why are they angry? History tells a sad story and if one wishes to do some work one may find some interesting answers. Ok, I'll limit this to Mr. Goode's problem with the Qu'ran. Who amoung us can say whether the Qu'ran is any more or any less valid than any other religious book? Perhaps someone will walk on water and let us know the real truth of it all. Until then, Mr. Goode should do his job rather than throw stones.

Answer 3

Yes, there's something wrong with this picture. An American who just happens to be Muslim can't be elected into congress and he doesn't want to take his oath on the Bible (which means nothing to him). Instead he wants to take his oath on the Koran, the book that means something to him, that holds his beliefs. The problem I see is the uproar that Rep. Goode is causing. America is a country built on the fact that people of all nationalities and religions can come together and make this country great. This country does not have an established religion, so I don't see the problem with Rep. elect Ellison taking his oath on the Koran.

Answer 4

Nothing wrong with the elected politician from swearing on his own belief. By swearing on a faith he/she has no belief in, makes it a false testiment, a false swearing of an Oath.

This is why I believe that in the court, swearing on bibles is silly. Instead, swear on the Oath of the people of the country which is a nationalist approach but fair approach.

As a pagan, swearing to tell the truth, nothing but the whole truth on the bible so help my God would be meaningless for me since I am not Christian.

Answer 5

Unfortunately, I think that there is some truth to this. It is all based on how are system is set up. We accept people in from almost anywhere, and we give them the right to vote, hold office, and freedom of speech.

According to the principle if it is not broken then dont fix it. Muslims will not seek office if they feel that the government is working towards their goals. The same is true for any majority or minority in our population. If a person sees a need that needs to be remedied then getting elected to office is a great way to accomplish that goal.

If Muslims feel that there is some thing off about our government according to their needs then they will try to remedy it. It is human nature and the nature of Democracy. We need to be responsive to every portion of our society.

Just my thoughts on the topic.

Answer 6

Goode's statements is the reason why religion DOES NOT belong government.


This fella is a total idiot to think that he himself is going to be forced to swear on the KORAN but yet wants to force Ellison to swear on a Bible?

And I thought the GOP was sposed to help protect the Constitution

Answer 7

The only thing wrong I see is Virgil Goode not being educated in the basic values of this country (religious and social freedom, in case you didn't know. You Should.)

Well, there is one other thing: Ellison is the first Islamic congressman when Muslims have lived here (in peace as US citizens) for many years.

Answer 8

It's depressing how many Americans are totally ignorant about their own Constitution--including Senator Goode.

The Senator should be impeached for violating his oath to defend the Constitution.

Answer 9

what is wrong is too many americans ignorant of america. there is no requirement for any book to be used during swearing in. those that use a bible do it in a private photo-op,just as he will do. those that oppose this must also oppose the constitution. freedom of religion ring a bell?

Answer 10

as straight away as returned, context could desire to be exceeded over of the image so as to color Beck the way Liberals desire. Context is the enemy of Liberalism. in case you incredibly pay interest to the clip, you will pay interest Beck making a remark on the anticipated a million% of Islamic terrorism. He says, "i unquestionably think of of it is closer to 10%" he isn't putting forward that 10% are terrorists. in actuality, you will pay interest that it is greater effective a play on words, pushing against the a million% declare than an truthfully actuality of a severe factor 5-10% of terrorists. additionally, in CONTEXT with what he replace into speaking approximately earlier, he seems to be questioning approximately people who help the objectives of terrorism besides to truthfully terrorists in those musings. If I even have been you, i could desire to be mad. no longer at Beck, yet at people who led you to have self belief that he replace into unquestionably putting forward that 10% of Muslims are terrorists to boot as all the various diatribe against Beck this gave them the excuse to throw in at no greater effective suited fee.

Answer 11

I fear that you people don't do much reading. You should pick up a copy of the Qu'ran. Or, better yet, just type in "Chapter Nine of the Qu'ran" and see what it brings you on your search engine. And when you find it, read it and take warning. Oh, it's a vile plot and the unenlightened are going to make us all pay. Try it, chapter 9 of the Qu'ran... I double dog dare you.