They let a Muslim senator get sworn in on the Koran, so we really cant expect too much from the lowlifes. If she didnt want to be sworn in on the Bible, she should have been sworn in with her hand on OUR CONSTITUTION!!!
I’m no scholar of Muslim teachings, but doesn’t the Qu’ran allow lying of Muslims to non-believers? Seems to me, if the Qu’ran advocates in any way that it’s teachings supersede those of a Muslim’s host country, then allowing a Muslim to be sworn into office on a Qu’ran would be tantamount to encouraging and empowering a Muslim not to be bound to upholding our Constitution where it conflicted with their mission of Muslim expansion of sharia law. Can anyone say conflict of interest?https://www.thereligionofpeace.com/pages/quran/taqiyya.aspx
As a Christian, I readily and heartily admit the Bible says “We must obey God rather than men.” Acts 5:29
But it also says, “Submit yourselves to every ordinance of man for the Lord's sake” 1 Peter 2:13.
I realize this superficially appears to be a contradiction, but in context it is not. In Acts, they were being told not to preach in Jesus’ name. There was no such ordinance, it was just jealous religious leaders whose false form of religion was being exposed by the light and truth of the gospel. Their command to the apostles to desist was an overreach by the leaders, much like libs try to deny our religious liberties in the practice of the Christian faith. Furthermore, the gist of the gospel’s commandments are to love:
“8Owe no one anything, except to love one another; for he who loves his neighbor has fulfilled the law. 9For the commandments, "You shall not commit adultery," "You shall not murder," "You shall not steal," "You shall not give false testimony," "You shall not covet," and whatever other commandments there are, are all summed up in this saying, namely, "You shall love your neighbor as yourself." 10Love doesn't harm a neighbor. Love therefore is the fulfillment of the law.” Romans 13:8-10
The point being, what the Bible is saying and commanding is that, if there are unjust laws or rules of man, Christians must hold themselves to a higher standard, that of loving their neighbor as themselves.
What American would advocate “obeying” an unjust law if it meant doing or justifying harm to someone else?
How does swearing on a Qu’ran compare?
Wouldn’t “swearing in” on a Qu’ran, then, actually be tantamount to neutralizing the very purpose of the ceremony?
Seems to me, Naïveté is not a good excuse to allow Trojan Horses into our country and government.