Rep. Goode, R-VA, wants Muslims out of office and the US

I’m hoping to see condemnation of this prick from both sides of the aisle:

[quote=“the NY Times”]In a letter sent to hundreds of voters this month, Representative Virgil H. Goode Jr., Republican of Virginia, warned that the recent election of the first Muslim to Congress posed a serious threat to the nation’s traditional values.

Representative Virgil H. Goode Jr., left, said Keith Ellison’s decision to use a Koran in a private swearing in for the House of Representatives was a mistake.
Mr. Goode was referring to Keith Ellison, the Minnesota Democrat and criminal defense lawyer who converted to Islam as a college student and was elected to the House in November. Mr. Ellison’s plan to use the Koran during his private swearing-in ceremony in January had outraged some Virginia voters, prompting Mr. Goode to issue a written response to them, a spokesman for Mr. Goode said.

In his letter, which was dated Dec. 5, Mr. Goode said that Americans needed to “wake up” or else there would “likely be many more Muslims elected to office and demanding the use of the Koran.”

“I fear that in the next century we will have many more Muslims in the United States if we do not adopt the strict immigration policies that I believe are necessary to preserve the values and beliefs traditional to the United States of America and to prevent our resources from being swamped,” said Mr. Goode, who vowed to use the Bible when taking his own oath of office.[/quote]
full article here

He’s a prick and I for one condemn him.

BroonArlington

Making up titles to fit your slant? A thorough reading of the entire piece shows that isn’t exactly what he said.
And by the way he is correct, IMO. Multi-culti sucks.
Review definition of ‘melting pot’ and ‘assimilation.’

:roflmao:

And you never do this?

BroonAssimilation

[quote=“BroonAle”][quote=“TainanCowboy”]Making up titles to fit your slant? [/quote] :roflmao:
And you never do this? BroonAssimilation[/quote]
I am well known for using the exact titles the authors assign to their piece. When I do change it I give note that it is my title.
Using the original title prevents duplicate posting and allows internet searching to find the original article.
Questions?

Text of Rep Goode’s letter:

[quote]WASHINGTON — Letter written by Rep. Virgil Goode (R-Va.) in response to constituents commenting on Rep.-elect Keith Ellison (D-Minn.) using a Koran to take the oath of office:

Thank you for your recent communication.

When I raise my hand to take the oath on Swearing In Day, I will have the Bible in my other hand.

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.

We need to stop illegal immigration totally and reduce legal immigration and end the diversity visas policy pushed hard by President Clinton and allowing many persons from the Middle East to come to this country.

I fear that in the next century we will have many more Muslims in the United States if we do not adopt the strict immigration policies that I believe are necessary to preserve the values and beliefs traditional to the United States of America and to prevent our resources from being swamped.

The Ten Commandments and “In God We Trust” are on the wall in my office. A Muslim student came by the office and asked why I did not have anything on my wall about the Koran. My response was clear, “As long as I have the honor of representing the citizens of the 5th District of Virginia in the United States House of Representatives, The Koran is not going to be on the wall of my office.” Thank you again for your email and thoughts.[/quote]

He is a politician…nothing more.

He said: Americans needed to “wake up” or else there would “likely be many more Muslims elected to office and demanding the use of the Koran.” Clearly, he doesn’t want Muslims in office, as per my thread title.

He continues: “I fear that in the next century we will have many more Muslims in the United States…". Clearly, he doesn’t want Muslims in the US, as per my thread title.

The thread title is therefore a reasonable reflection of that particular bigot’s views. And such views are another good reason to vote Republicans out of office.

He sounds like a total dick to me. I don’t understand where the confusion lies.

So says you.
You have one vote, same as I do, same as Rep. Goode and the same as Mr.Ellison from Minnesota.
Use it wisely.

Is there any way to be sworn into office without reference to any “holy text” I wonder. If not there should be. This is one situation that I actually agree with TC in a way. The USA is in no need of “another” psychotic belief system.

Yes, it was discussed in another thread not long ago. The US Constitution explicitly states that no holy book is required and at least a couple of US presidents were sworn in with no holy book at all, and if one uses a holy book the law clearly specifies that it needn’t be a bible. On the other hand, Tricky Dick Nixon was sworn in on TWO Bibles (seriously) and look what good that did.

So domination by one “psychotic belief system”, as you put it, is better than tolerance of multiple belief systems?

I don’t believe that you really believe that. :stuck_out_tongue:

Bingo. Thanks MT.

[quote=“Dragonbones”] So domination by one “psychotic belief system”, as you put it, is better than tolerance of multiple belief systems?

I don’t believe that you really believe that. :p[/quote]

That is correct. I do not believe that domination by one psychotic belief system is better than tolerance of multiple psychotic belief systems. :laughing:

bob,

Here’s a good article on why one is not required to swear on the Bible and is permitted to swear on the Koran, if one wishes.
article.nationalreview.com/?q=MW … JmZDg3MDM=

Could a congressman swear on “Ethics for the new millenium” by the Dalai Lama if they wanted?

[quote=“bob”]Is there any way to be sworn into office without reference to any “holy text” I wonder. If not there should be. This is one situation that I actually agree with TC in a way. The USA is in no need of “another” psychotic belief system.[/quote]Bob -
And with what are you ‘agreeing’ with me?
In the other thread dealing with this matter, I posted that this swearing on the Koran brouhaha was much show with little substance.
There is nothing that says one has to make an oath on a Bible, a Qur’ran or Dr. Suesss’ Green Eggs and Ham if they don’t want to.
While I personally find it distasteful that in todays political climate an elected member of the US Congress would choose to make their priate office searing in on a book that openly condones lies and deceit, look it up - Qur’ran (3:28, 16:106), there is nothing legally which prevents this from being done.
And you’re little dig at religion is cute…hoo hum.

Yes, through “affirmation”. The Constitution guarantees this. Essentially, instead of saing “I do solemnly swear…” one says “I do solemnly affirm…”. One does not have to say “so help me God” or lay hands upon a holy book.

You must have a different Qur’ran than the one I looked at. When I read these passages, they don’t seem to openly condone lies and deceit to me

This one seems to say that one should not make friends with “unbelievers” or at least not only make friends with them.

This one seems to say that anyone who renounces Allah is in a bit of trouble.

Again, I don’t see much about condoning lying here. Are you sure that you quoted the correct passages? I assume that chapter and verse of the various korans are the same although the translations may differ. I’d like to see what actual verses you have so post them if you can, I’d be interested in seeing them.

It is not a little dig. I sincerely believe in the seperation of psychotic belief systems and state.