America, Not Keith Ellison, decides what book a congressman takes his oath on

[McBell]

Keith Ellison, D-Minn., the first Muslim elected to the United States Congress, has announced that he will not take his oath of office on the Bible, but on the bible of Islam, the Koran.


He should not be allowed to do so -- not because of any American hostility to the Koran, but because the act undermines American civilization.

First, it is an act of hubris that perfectly exemplifies multiculturalist activism -- my culture trumps America's culture. What Ellison and his Muslim and leftist supporters are saying is that it is of no consequence what America holds as its holiest book; all that matters is what any individual holds to be his holiest book.


Forgive me, but America should not give a hoot what Keith Ellison's favorite book is. Insofar as a member of Congress taking an oath to serve America and uphold its values is concerned, America is interested in only one book, the Bible. If you are incapable of taking an oath on that book, don't serve in Congress. In your personal life, we will fight for your right to prefer any other book. We will even fight for your right to publish cartoons mocking our Bible. But, Mr. Ellison, America, not you, decides on what book its public servants take their oath.
Source

For a Muslim, would an oath on the Bible be an oath at all?
I would think that unless the oath taker puts the value into the Bible that those who promote it do, that the oath would be rather empty.

 

[Djamila]

What a horrid man, the author of that article.

If swearing on the Bible was working out so well for America and its politicians, maybe he'd have a leg to stand on.

 

[Djamila]

"Devotees of multiculturalism and political correctness who do not see how damaging to the fabric of American civilization it is to allow Ellison to choose his own book need only imagine a racist elected to Congress. Would they allow him to choose Hitler's "Mein Kampf," the Nazis' bible, for his oath? And if not, why not? On what grounds will those defending Ellison's right to choose his favorite book deny that same right to a racist who is elected to public office?"

You're the one who should be swearing on Mein Kampf, my friend. And it's not his "favorite book". What an ignorant thing to say. It's his only holy book.

 

[Djamila]

"It is clear that we are losing are heritage. My forefathers died for the right to have only one Bible sworn on. Jesus was the 1st American. That guy was a patriot. He would surely desire to live in a land where only one book would be worthy of public office. That was His message, right? God Bless America, the greatest nation on God's (the God w/ Jesus attached!) green flat-universe centering earth."

Dear God... Get these people a passport and let them see more of the world than rural...wherever.

 

[nutshell]

What a horrid man, the author of that article.

If swearing on the Bible was working out so well for America and its politicians, maybe he'd have a leg to stand on.

America has the world's longest running constitution and when there was a dispute as to who the president should be it was settled in our systems not with tanks and snipers.

I'd say things are working just fine.

 

[McBell]

Pardon my ignorance on the subject, Djamila, but would such an oath on the Bible mean anything to a Muslim who much rather take the EXACT SAME oath on the Qur'an be anything other than an empty promise?

 

[Djamila]

Pardon my ignorance on the subject, Djamila, but would such an oath on the Bible mean anything to a Muslim who much rather take the EXACT SAME oath on the Qur'an be anything other than an empty promise?

The Bible has a lot of what we believe to be the word of God in it, but it also has many fundamental contradictions and what we believe to be... wrong... corrupted passages. I would personally not be comfortable taking an oath on the Bible.

 

[Scuba Pete]

This Dennis Prager guy is a real bigot. The name of the Book you make an oath on should reflect your religious prediliction. Atheists should not have to swear on ANYTHING if that makes them comfortable.

The whole concept of the Bible having a bigger role in our society than the Koran is exceptionally offensive.

 

[McBell]

This Dennis Prager guy is a real bigot. The name of the Book you make an oath on should reflect your religious prediliction. Atheists should not have to swear on ANYTHING if that makes them comfortable.

I agree.
If an oath taker takes an oath on something they believe has little or no value, what is the value of the oath taken?

And no, I am not saying that the congressman believes the Bible to hold little or no value.
I know not what value the congressman believe the Bible to have.

 

[Mathematician]

America is interested in only one book, the Bible.

America isn't interested in any religious book; people are. :areyoucra

 

[YmirGF]

I wonder how far a Christian would get in a predominantly Muslim country demanding to take an oath on the Bible and not on the Qur'an?

 

[Djamila]

Depends on the country. In Bosnia and Herzegovina, and Turkey, everyone swears on the constitution.

I assume in countries like Iran and Saudi Arabia, they swear on the Koran.

In both cases, a Christian wanting to swear on the Bible wouldn't get very far.

 

[Sunstone]

I suspect the hateful author quoted in the OP is over compensating for not having a life to speak of.

 

[Capt. Haddock]

In court, Muslims have been swearing on the koran and atheists on nothing for years already. It logically follows that the same would apply for people being sworn in as elected officials.

This is a total non-issue. Just more agitprop for the entertainment of bored provincials.

 

[dbakerman76]

As soon as I read the quote at the start of this thread I knew it came from a right wing talk radio host. I can spot them a mile away.

Personally, I don't think people should be taking their oath on any religious book. It demeans both the oath and the religious text being used.
Besides I'm a civil libertarian and I see some serious church and state issues in any use of a religious text in our political process.

 

[doppelganger]

I just read a debate between Sam Harris and Dennis Prager at Jewcy.com a few days ago. Harris ate Prager's lunch and stole his milk money.

I'll find it and post a link if anyone wants to read it.

UPDATE: Link.

 

[McBell]

I just read a debate between Sam Harris and Dennis Prager at Jewcy.com a few days ago. Harris ate Prager's lunch and stole his milk money.

I'll find it and post a link if anyone wants to read it.

UPDATE: Link.

I just read through the linked 'debate' and I have to say that what ever it was Prager was doing, 'debating' is not a word I would use.

 

[d.]

i'd prefer The Impetuous Duchess by Barbara Cartland.

 

[nutshell]

Given the values of much of Congress, they might as well be swearing on the latest issue of HUSTLER.

 

[McBell]

Given the values of much of Congress, they might as well be swearing on the latest issue of HUSTLER.

Ah man!

Now you have gone and given Hustler magazine a bad name!