Texas Public Schools Must Offer Bible Course - Page 3

Slippery Slope · 09-09-08, 10:14 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The silenced majority

Doesn't that seem like the most logical solution?

People contest too much about who gets taught what & who's being indoctrinated how.

Education should be a State's rights issue, our Constitution was supposedly designed to allow for States to set the educational standards or decide to not force public funding for education at all.

Education is something that should be standardized, across the board for everyone. Leaving something like the education of our future generations to the whim of whatever a current state government looks like would be reckless and fruitless. Look around at the idiots we already have because of a failing education system.

danarhea · 09-09-08, 12:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Slippery Slope

I'm beginning to wonder if you are trying to be a Stephen Colbert or if you're just trolling.

American was being sarcastic. I am surprised you didn't see it, it was so obvious. Anyways, he was not trolling.

American · 09-09-08, 01:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Slippery Slope

I'm beginning to wonder if you are trying to be a Stephen Colbert or if you're just trolling.

Just demonstrating the liberals worst religous fears.

The silenced majority · 09-10-08, 06:53 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Slippery Slope

Where do you find information that Jefferson did so because they were muslim? Source please.

I never said that.

I stated that he had a copy of the Qu'ran to aid in understanding Muslim culture ~ ultimately his decision was war & "not one more penny for tribute!"

American · 09-10-08, 10:11 AM

I know it is surprising for many to hear that the Founders knew precisely what Islam was about. Yes, they were all well read, and not stupid like most of the politicians today. They don't teach you about that in school because they don't want you to know how you vote buffoons into office each year.

Slippery Slope · 09-10-08, 10:45 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The silenced majority

I never said that.

I stated that he had a copy of the Qu'ran to aid in understanding Muslim culture ~ ultimately his decision was war & "not one more penny for tribute!"

Yes you are, you're tying the two together, as if, he wouldn't have gone to war if he hadn't read the qu'ran. There is no evidence to support such an accusation... unless you can provide some.

I don't think I've ever read anywhere that Jefferson got a copy of the Qu'ran "to aid in understanding Muslim culture". As I understand it, he was trying to understand Islam in comparison to Judaism and Christianity because of his distaste for xianity. You're trying to paint a very different picture and I'd like to know your sources. I doubt you can provide any because this is nothing but your own hypothesis.

I suggest you actually try reading a little of the history you're trying to reinvent. You could start at the Library of Congress:

The Thomas Jefferson Papers - America and the Barbary Pirates - (American Memory from the Library of Congress)

Quote:

Ruthless, unconventional foes are not new to the United States of America. More than two hundred years ago the newly established United States made its first attempt to fight an overseas battle to protect its private citizens by building an international coalition against an unconventional enemy. Then the enemies were pirates and piracy. The focus of the United States and a proposed international coalition was the Barbary Pirates of North Africa.

Pirate ships and crews from the North African states of Tripoli, Tunis, Morocco, and Algiers (the Barbary Coast) were the scourge of the Mediterranean. Capturing merchant ships and holding their crews for ransom provided the rulers of these nations with wealth and naval power. In fact, the Roman Catholic Religious Order of Mathurins had operated from France for centuries with the special mission of collecting and disbursing funds for the relief and ransom of prisoners of Mediterranean pirates.

That's just the first two paragraphs and already you've been debunked. Let's not forget this little document:

Quote:

"As the Government of the United States of America is not in any sense founded on the Christian religion; as it has in itself no character of enmity against the laws, religion, or tranquillity, of Musselmen; and as the said States never have entered into any war or act of hostility against any Mehomitan nation, it is declared by the parties that no pretext arising from religious opinions shall ever produce an interruption of the harmony existing between the two countries."

Little-Known U.S. Document Proclaims America's Government is Secular - The Early America Review, Summer 1997

This might help you as well:
US Treaty with Tripoli, 1796-1797

Quote:

Authored by American diplomat Joel Barlow in 1796, the following treaty was sent to the floor of the Senate, June 7, 1797, where it was read aloud in its entirety and unanimously approved. John Adams, having seen the treaty, signed it and proudly proclaimed it to the Nation.
Annals of Congress, 5th Congress

Slippery Slope · 09-10-08, 10:46 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by American

I know it is surprising for many to hear that the Founders knew precisely what Islam was about. Yes, they were all well read, and not stupid like most of the politicians today. They don't teach you about that in school because they don't want you to know how you vote buffoons into office each year.

Your agreement with TSM exposes your ignorance of the subject as well.

The silenced majority · 09-10-08, 08:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Slippery Slope

Yes you are, you're tying the two together, as if, he wouldn't have gone to war if he hadn't read the qu'ran.

I never made such a claim. My claims:

The Barbary Pirates were Muslims.
Thomas Jefferson had a copy of the Qu'ran.
Jefferson was well read regarding Islam & Muslim culture.
Jefferson sent America's best warships to the Mediterranean to Bombard the Barbary coast.

My original statement was just an abridged version.

Besides, this was essentially the entire significance that the Qu'ran had in regards to American history, Civics, Law or traditional Society.

Quote:

There is no evidence to support such an accusation... unless you can provide some.

You are fully debating yourself at this point.

Quote:

I don't think I've ever read anywhere that Jefferson got a copy of the Qu'ran "to aid in understanding Muslim culture". As I understand it, he was trying to understand Islam in comparison to Judaism and Christianity because of his distaste for xianity.

Now were getting into some revisionism.

Quote:

Originally Posted by "How Thomas Jefferson Read the Qur’an" by Kevin J. Hayes

What may be the most chilling reference to the Qur’an in Jefferson’s writings occurs in a 1786 report he and John Adams submitted to John Jay, then secretary of foreign affairs. The two had been commissioned by the United States government to meet and possibly arrange a treaty with Abdrahaman, envoy of the sultan of Tripoli. Algiers, Morocco, Tunis, and Tripoli constituted the Barbary Coast, a land whose pirates had been terrorizing American merchant vessels and taking American merchant sailors prisoner and holding them for ransom.

The Muslim states of the Barbary Coast endorsed the practice of piracy- provided it was carried out against infidels in the name of Islam (Kitzen 1). In colonial times, American vessels were protected from the Islamic corsairs because Great Britain paid the Barbary States tribute- protection money to guard against piracy. With American independence, the Barbary pirates were free to attack the new nation’s merchant vessels because the American government refused to pay tribute to the nations of the Barbary Coast. Sanctioned by their government, the attacks of the Barbary pirates on American merchant vessels represent an early example of state-sponsored terrorism directed toward civilian American targets.

At their meeting, Adams and Jefferson asked the Tripoline ambassador on what grounds his nation made war upon other nations that had done their people no harm. They let him know that as representatives of the United States they considered friends everyone who had done them no wrong nor had given them any provocation.

The ambassador explained that the conduct of the Barbary Coast pirates "was founded on the Laws of their Prophet, that it was written in their Koran, that all nations who should not have acknowledged their authority were sinners, that it was their right and duty to make war upon them wherever they could be found, and to make slaves of all they could take as Prisoners, and that every Musselman who should be slain in battle was sure to go to Paradise" (Papers 9:358). Even today, especially today, the ambassador’s words have a chilling effect.

The encounter with the Tripoline ambassador gave Jefferson an object lesson regarding the profound danger that could come from relying on a single text without recourse to supplementary texts and alternative interpretations. Surely, if a religious text seemed to sanction war, its readers ought to research how others interpreted the text as a means of achieving some clarity before rushing into battle. Abdrahaman and the Muslim pirates whose behavior he sanctioned saw no need to consult other texts to justify their behavior. Everything they needed to know was in the Qur’an, and what was not in the Qur’an they did not feel a need to know.

As for himself, Jefferson recognized that he needed to know more, a great deal more, and he began reading deeply on the subject. After meeting with the ambassador, he acquired several books pertinent to the study of Islam including Yazdi Sharaf al-Din ‘Ali’s Histoire de Timur-Bec (Sowerby, no. 310); Sauveur Lusignan’s History of the Revolt of Ali Bey (no. 314), which contained detailed information regarding Egyptian politics and government; and Paul Rycaut’s History of the Present State of the Ottoman Empire (no. 324), a work whose stylistic excellence and scrupulous objectivity in describing Turkish politics prompted Rycaut to be "hailed as the new Tacitus" (Anderson 240).

Gradually, Jefferson developed an interest in learning Arabic. In the early 1770s, the friendship he developed with Samuel Henley, professor of moral philosophy at William and Mary, offered him a good opportunity to further his interests. Best known as editor and annotator of William Beckford’s Vathek, Henley was an expert Orientalist, and his copious notes to Vathek indicate that he was not only familiar with Sale’s translation but that he also knew the Qur’an in its original. In the late 1770s Jefferson expressed his interest in the languages of the Near East by acquiring a book entitled Poeseos Asiaticae Commentariorum, a Latin work by Sir William Jones containing a historical and critical survey of Arabic, Persian, and Turkish poetry (Papers 8:13).

How Thomas Jefferson Read the Qur'an

Quote:

Originally Posted by slipperyslope

You're trying to paint a very different picture and I'd like to know your sources. I doubt you can provide any because this is nothing but your own hypothesis.

It's kind of hard for me to cite a source for something that you made up in your debate with yourself...

Quote:

I suggest you actually try reading a little of the history you're trying to reinvent. You could start at the Library of Congress:

The Thomas Jefferson Papers - America and the Barbary Pirates - (American Memory from the Library of Congress)
That's just the first two paragraphs and already you've been debunked. Let's not forget this little document:
Little-Known U.S. Document Proclaims America's Government is Secular - The Early America Review, Summer 1997

This might help you as well:
US Treaty with Tripoli, 1796-1797

If you want to actually have a real debate on any of these irrelevant claims that you've made, I'm game.

The American Constitution was a document that set forth rights. The Constitution was a seed that sprouted from a universal order & moral ethic that was established by adherents of the Christian faith.

Although America was not founded as a Christian Nation as per our founding documents, that doesn't mean that the general order and desire for domestic tranquility of the era that spawned the Constitution, had nothing to do with a good deal of the populations adherence to the tenants of Christianity.

Start a thread.

Slippery Slope · 09-11-08, 12:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by American

Just demonstrating the liberals worst religous fears.

What makes you think "liberals" are the only ones concerned with separation of church and state? Do you think all liberals are atheists or that there are no conservatives concerned with this issue or that there are no atheist conservatives?

Slippery Slope · 09-11-08, 01:15 PM

[quote=The silenced majority;1057727472]I never made such a claim. My claims:

The Barbary Pirates were Muslims. irrelevant
Thomas Jefferson had a copy of the Qu'ran. irrelevant
Jefferson was well read regarding Islam & Muslim culture. not proven
Jefferson sent America's best warships to the Mediterranean to Bombard the Barbary coast. hypoerbole

It's going to be difficult to debate someone who won't recognize their own position. You conflated to things and now wish to deny that association.

Let's try some logic then to see if your own position makes any sense to you. Would Jefferson have acted any different having not read the qu'ran?

You see, the truth is that Jefferson wanted to protect American merchant ships from the pirates of the barbary coast. Which has nothing to do with the religion of said pirates. No war was declared and no "bombardment" of the barbary coast took place. We sent war ships to protect our merchants, not to kill muslims.

My original statement was just an abridged version.

Besides, this was essentially the entire significance that the Qu'ran had in regards to American history, Civics, Law or traditional Society.

What is "this" in the sentence above?

The American Constitution was a document that set forth rights. The Constitution was a seed that sprouted from a universal order & moral ethic that was established by adherents of the Christian faith.

How devout or dedicated to xianity the writers of the Constitution is a different debate. I understand that some have been identified as xian but the lack of religious language should serve to illustrate their desire to keep government out of personal religious choice.

Although America was not founded as a Christian Nation as per our founding documents, that doesn't mean that the general order and desire for domestic tranquility of the era that spawned the Constitution, had nothing to do with a good deal of the populations adherence to the tenants of Christianity.

I don't deny this, it's irrelevant to the subject however.