1 posted on
06/22/2005 6:11:14 AM PDT by
Puppage
To: Puppage
CAIR Asks N.C. Judges to Allow Use of Quran In Oaths Under penalty of what?
I'd rather go to jail, thankyouverymuch.
2 posted on
06/22/2005 6:15:32 AM PDT by
Publius6961
(The most abundant things in the universe are ignorance, stupidity and hydrogen)
To: Puppage
That has about as much integrity as swearing in on a Where's Waldo book, only not as much fun.
3 posted on
06/22/2005 6:15:59 AM PDT by
Zeppelin
(Keep on FReepin' on.....)
To: Puppage
The problem is not allowing Muslims to swear on the Koran.
The problem is that no matter what they swear on, their oath means nothing.
4 posted on
06/22/2005 6:17:55 AM PDT by
Alouette
(The only thing learned from history is that nobody ever learns from history.)
To: Puppage
Allowing the use of the korn will set a bad precedent. Witches will demand evil spell books, Atheists will demand Time magazine, etc. etc.
To: Puppage
CAIR, America's largest Muslim civil liberties group, has 31 offices and chapters nationwide and in Canada. Its mission is to enhance understanding of Islam, encourage dialogue, protect civil liberties, empower American Muslims, and build coalitions that promote justice and mutual understanding, disseminate hate speech, build schools for the training of killers, organize sleeper cells for act of mass murder, build arms depots... errr... ammo dumps... errrr mosques, collect funds to support mass murder world-wide.
6 posted on
06/22/2005 6:19:35 AM PDT by
Publius6961
(The most abundant things in the universe are ignorance, stupidity and hydrogen)
To: Puppage
It's optional, just like the Bible is. No big deal.
-Eric
9 posted on
06/22/2005 6:24:01 AM PDT by
E Rocc
(If God is watching us, we can at least try to be entertaining)
To: Puppage
"By stating that only one book qualifies as 'Holy Scriptures,' the court may be making an inappropriate endorsement of a single set of religious beliefs," Well, DUH!
"Christianity is part of the Common, or Natural Law.
Therefore it is Christianity that is the basis of our government.
Religion of any other type is not synonymous with the American experience of Liberty!"
Justice James Wilson, a signer of the Declaration, the Constitution, Original Justice on the U. S. Supreme Court, and the father of the first organized legal training in America.
How much longer are Americans going to allow the twisted 'separation of church and state' fallacy to destroy our country?
10 posted on
06/22/2005 6:32:44 AM PDT by
MamaTexan
(I am NOT a *legal entity* ......... Nor am I a 'person' as created by law!)
To: Puppage
"By stating that only one book qualifies as 'Holy Scriptures,' the court may be making an inappropriate endorsement of a single set of religious beliefs," said CAIR Legal Director Arsalan Iftikhar. "Eliminating the opportunity to swear an oath on one's own holy text may also have the effect of diminishing the credibility of that person's testimony."
Umm...I'm pretty sure that CAIR's position is to fanatically endorse a single set of religious beliefs, while not recognizing the sanctity of anyone else's beliefs. They are hypocrites. And as far as diminishing the credibility of testimony, I don't grant credibility to any member of the proposed religion of peace no matter what they lay their filthy hands on. Screw them, screw their proposed religion of peace and flush the koran!
11 posted on
06/22/2005 6:42:37 AM PDT by
FairfaxVA
(SELECT * FROM liberals WHERE clue > 0. Zero rows returned!)
To: Puppage
12 posted on
06/22/2005 6:47:14 AM PDT by
Unicorn
(Too many wimps around.)
To: Puppage
This is absolute crap..
Why?
Simple...
Islam is supposed to follow up on Christianity... the Bible new and old is accepted as holy word of God as well.
So no Muslim should have any problem swearing an oath on the Bible.
The problem with the Kuran is that it openly says LYING and CHEATING are perfectly fine as long as it furthers the aims of Islam.... The Bible does not.
To swear to tell the truth on the Quran is meaningless.
To: Puppage
Swearing on a Bible was supposed to increase pressure on the witness to tell the truth, because of their fear of God should they violate an oath taken on the Bible.
My opinion is that this is a non-christian concept. We are not to swear on anything, but simply to let our yea be yea and our nea be nea.
But in any case, surely having a non-christian swear on a bible serves no useful purpose. They don't respect the bible or the religion, why would they care? Even the "so help me God" would mean nothing to an Atheist.
The problem is, if a muslim WANTS to swear on a Quran, they should be able to do so. It would mean as much as an average christian swearing on a bible. It's just symbolic, and the symbol should have some meaning.
From the state perspective, we should find out for each witness what it is that they value most, and have them swear on it -- if we really want it to be meaningful. Of course, we couldn't do that.
Last thought -- is swearing on a Quran acceptable to muslims? Or is it a sacrilige? We certainly would have to take great care -- if a non-muslim chose to swear on a Quran, and put his hand on it, that would be "desecration" and maybe some terrorists might try to kill us. (HEAVY SARCASM ALERT, LIKE TERRORISTS NEED A REASON).
To: Puppage
Yeah, lets let more muslims immigrate here. We gotta be nuckin futs.
17 posted on
06/22/2005 7:20:55 AM PDT by
skeeter
("What's to talk about? It's illegal." S Bono)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson