Secretly hiding a koran inside of them!!

Lots of heads going to go boom

eagles95: Secretly hiding a koran inside of them!!

That would require he believe in God...and I'm fairly certain it's one of the few things he waffles about, good or bad.

I can't wait for the photo my mother will forward me of Obama being sworn in on a stack of korans!!!

Barack "Two Bibles" Obama?

IIRC, the first time, he did not use a bible to get sworn in (which is not required) and the god botherers' heads exploded. I'm sure they'll object this time because he's still black and... um.. Jesus.

RG3 will assist.

UsikFark: TFA shows him placing his left hand on the bible.

Is that not how it's done??

"Please raise your right hand and repeat after me:"

If he doesn't immediatly immolate from skin to bible contact that is....

/ I keed, I keed

Contents Under Pressure: IIRC, the first time, he did not use a bible to get sworn in (which is not required) and the god botherers' heads exploded. I'm sure they'll object this time because he's still black and... um.. Jesus.

Ummm ... the caption on the photo FTFA of Obama with his hand on a bible: "During President Obama's swearing-in in 2009, Michelle Obama held the Bible used by Abraham Lincoln at his inauguration in 1861."

Contents Under Pressure: IIRC, the first time, he did not use a bible to get sworn in (which is not required) and the god botherers' heads exploded. I'm sure they'll object this time because he's still black and... um.. Jesus.

TFA says he used Lincoln's Bible to be sworn in, unless they're referring to the second swearing-in which was done to prevent any accusations that Roberts' flubbing the oath made Obama not president.

Contents Under Pressure: IIRC, the first time, he did not use a bible to get sworn in (which is not required) and the god botherers' heads exploded.

Wrong. He used the very same bible Abraham Lincoln used. That didn't stop the god botherers from saying he didn't use a bible, he used a Koran, or other such foolishness.

jackiepaper: hdhale: eagles95: Secretly hiding a koran inside of them!!

That would require he believe in God...and I'm fairly certain it's one of the few things he waffles about, good or bad.

and what is the basis for this assumption?

His stands on social issues, his claim not to know what his own pastor was preaching, among other details. I've always laughed at people who called him a Moslem, but rather clearly as Christians go...he ain't making it there either.

Should go to IHOP and swear on a stack of pancakes. A business friendly swearing in.

Doesn't matter. He's still black and smart and therefore a danger to all the southerners' way of thinking.

I'm sincerely surprised that no one's make a legitimate attempt on him that we've heard about. There have probably been attempts, but in an effort to keep away copycats or give any push to fence-sitters, we've been kept unaware. This is a good thing.

I could be wrong but I get the feeling Obama was holding back in his first term in office to make sure he got elected a 2nd term


It is my belief presidents should have to swear on a stack of bibles that they will uphold all election promises.

Hope it burns...

HeartBurnKid: Contents Under Pressure: IIRC, the first time, he did not use a bible to get sworn in (which is not required) and the god botherers' heads exploded.

Wrong. He used the very same bible Abraham Lincoln used. That didn't stop the god botherers from saying he didn't use a bible, he used a Koran, or other such foolishness.

He used an old Bible, so clearly the god-magic-battery ran out before it had a chance to give him his presidential superpowers.

spentshells: I could be wrong but I get the feeling Obama was holding back in his first term in office to make sure he got elected a 2nd term.

I will be very disappointed if he doesn't open up both barrels and take down the idiots that thwarted progress in our nation. There are plenty of people at the bottom half of the bell curve, and - although Democracy means they get a say - they need to be ignored in favor of people who can listen attentively, think clearly, and then express themselves.

/no one wake me up, please.

Flakeloaf: dmax: Doesn't matter. He's still black and smart and therefore a danger to all the southerners' way of thinking.

And associating him with MLK and Lincoln sends absolutely no message to these people.

Yup. I was thinking it, but hoping that it wouldn't become a thing.

spentshells: I could be wrong but I get the feeling Obama was holding back in his first term in office to make sure he got elected a 2nd term


It is my belief presidents should have to swear on a stack of bibles that they will uphold all election promises.

And why does swearing on a bible, much less a stack of bible, make it more likely that you'll now break the oath you took upon such a document?

Do you believe bibles hold magical powers that prevent people from lying?

Lionel Mandrake: Contents Under Pressure: IIRC, the first time, he did not use a bible to get sworn in (which is not required) and the god botherers' heads exploded. I'm sure they'll object this time because he's still black and... um.. Jesus.

Steve Douchey: "He does not have his hand on the Bible!"

Gretchen Carlson: "Is he really President??"

I can't wait to get the FOX News infromation on Inaugural Day.

The Kenyan Mooslem Userper refused to touch the Bible because he wants this country to fail and take all the guns!

It's not the bibles I worry about. It's the Constitution he keeps wiping his ass with that bothers me.

Does it count if you're a foriegn born 'murika hatin' secret moooooslim? Does anyone bite on this bait anymore? Does Fark have a direct dial phone number? It would be alot easier to phone this in. Hmmmm, I now claim all rights and ownership of the word "Tele-trolling". If I spin this right it could get me on the talk radio circuit. Oh wait never mind.

tkosh: It's not the bibles I worry about. It's the Constitution he keeps wiping his ass with that bothers me.

I see, and how has he not followed the constitution?

All this stuff done for show needs to go. Who cares that Lincoln used it? Does that make anyone who does so in their swearing-in more the president than someone who didn't? This symbolic stuff is a waste of time and only serves to puff up those who have been elected to serve, for a term, and then their time is up unless reelected. Then there's the whole "President X" or "Senator X" for those who used to be this, that, or the other. They're common citizens now, and should be treated as such.

hdhale: His stands on social issues, his claim not to know what his own pastor was preaching, among other details. I've always laughed at people who called him a Moslem, but rather clearly as Christians go...he ain't making it there either.

There's a difference between "I won't" and "you can't". Believing one, even for religious reasons, does not automatically include the other.

While the Bible does condemn a lot of things, it also says a lot about personal responsibility and not imposing one's rules onto another. (judge not, etc)

tkosh: It's not the bibles I worry about. It's the Constitution he keeps wiping his ass with that bothers me.

So he's in the Bush/Cheney club? Has anyone seen the sooperdooper secret hand shake yet?

Sgt.Zim: As an borderline-atheist agnostic, lowercase-ell libertarian, I have to ask: when are the usual suspects of "a cross put on public land almost 100 years ago by war vets is infringing my 1st Amendment anti-establishment rights"-type stupidity going to show up to protest all of this Bible-touching and prayer-making?

Just curious.

Well it is not required and a muslim senator has used a Koran before ... so, for these two reasons, it is not in violation of the establishment clause.

So never.

/but nice try at stirring up shiat with that strawman

Balder333: spentshells: I could be wrong but I get the feeling Obama was holding back in his first term in office to make sure he got elected a 2nd term


It is my belief presidents should have to swear on a stack of bibles that they will uphold all election promises.

And why does swearing on a bible, much less a stack of bible, make it more likely that you'll now break the oath you took upon such a document?

Do you believe bibles hold magical powers that prevent people from lying?

Not sure. Although Jesus was fairly specific about not swearing oaths on things. Just like how he was notbig on public prayer.

As a diehard Agnostic, and they were booking me in, I wonder if I could ask them to use a copy of An Enquiry Concerning Human Understanding by David Hume?

It still won't be enough for some.

feanorn: All this stuff done for show needs to go. Who cares that Lincoln used it? Does that make anyone who does so in their swearing-in more the president than someone who didn't? This symbolic stuff is a waste of time and only serves to puff up those who have been elected to serve, for a term, and then their time is up unless reelected. Then there's the whole "President X" or "Senator X" for those who used to be this, that, or the other. They're common citizens now, and should be treated as such.

Almost everything is symbolic.

Sgt.Zim: As an borderline-atheist agnostic, lowercase-ell libertarian, I have to ask: when are the usual suspects of "a cross put on public land almost 100 years ago by war vets is infringing my 1st Amendment anti-establishment rights"-type stupidity going to show up to protest all of this Bible-touching and prayer-making?

Just curious.

As long as he isn't required to use a Bible, I, as an atheist, don't give a flying fark what he chooses to put his hand on.

/within reason

Sgt.Zim: As an borderline-atheist agnostic, lowercase-ell libertarian, I have to ask: when are the usual suspects of "a cross put on public land almost 100 years ago by war vets is infringing my 1st Amendment anti-establishment rights"-type stupidity going to show up to protest all of this Bible-touching and prayer-making?

Just curious.

It's not the fact that the crosses exist, it's that such parks and municipalities often refuse to allow displays acknowledging non-Christian religious opinions.

Sgt.Zim: Farking Canuck: Sgt.Zim: As an borderline-atheist agnostic, lowercase-ell libertarian, I have to ask: when are the usual suspects of "a cross put on public land almost 100 years ago by war vets is infringing my 1st Amendment anti-establishment rights"-type stupidity going to show up to protest all of this Bible-touching and prayer-making?

Just curious.

Well it is not required and a muslim senator has used a Koran before ... so, for these two reasons, it is not in violation of the establishment clause.

So never.

/but nice try at stirring up shiat with that strawman

I'm aware of the Senator and his Koran. God for him.

Clearly you've never heard of the shiatstorms over *voluntary* prayers in schools...

Careful, your disingenuity is showing.

I've never heard of any such shiatstorms. Perhaps you can provide an example?

Farking Canuck: Sgt.Zim: As an borderline-atheist agnostic, lowercase-ell libertarian, I have to ask: when are the usual suspects of "a cross put on public land almost 100 years ago by war vets is infringing my 1st Amendment anti-establishment rights"-type stupidity going to show up to protest all of this Bible-touching and prayer-making?

Just curious.

Well it is not required and a muslim senator has used a Koran before ... so, for these two reasons, it is not in violation of the establishment clause.

So never.

/but nice try at stirring up shiat with that strawman


I don't know. It happened last time. This CNN article says:

A number of atheists and non-religious organizations want Barack Obama's inauguration ceremony to leave out all references to God and religion.
...
Newdow and other plaintiffs say they want to watch the inaugural either in person or on television. As atheists, they contend, having to watch a ceremony with religious components will make them feel excluded and stigmatized.

"Plaintiffs are placed in the untenable position of having to choose between not watching the presidential inauguration or being forced to countenance endorsements of purely religious notions that they expressly deny," according to the lawsuit.

I went to the FFRF's website to see if they'd started complaining yet, but no dice so far.