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.
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?
I dunno, maybe Mr. Praeger is too busy to read the Constitution, but I thought there was no state religion in the United States.
Does anyone really care what book Mr. Ellison places his hand on? I don't. Frankly, we shouldn't have anyone place their hands on any holy book- our Federal officials are asked to uphold and defend the Constitution, not the Bible or the Koran or any other sacred text.
What's scary is that Mr. Praeger has lifted up the Bible to some kind of cultural text. The fact is that it holds special significance to a portion of the American population, but not all of it and it holds no political value.
Mr. Ellison's placing his hand on a Koran is not going to destroy our American values, but Mr. Praeger's chauvanism just might.
Posts
2 comments:
I agree that politicians should not be required to swear on any holy book, whether it be the Bible or the Koran. Then again, I'm a fan of religion/state separation who thinks the idea of keeping them separate benefits them both in the long run.
Mr. Prager neglects to note the following:
a. Ellison is a native-born American citizen.
b. Ellison is NOT requiring anybody else to take an oath of office on the Koran. He's doing it as his own personal choice.
c. There is NO rule or regulation anywhere that requires politicians to take the oath of office using a specific religious text. Any such law would violate the constitution.
d. Finally, what business is it of Prager's?
These so called "Christians" and their puppets like Prager are willing to cast off all Christians of the world for their own political agenda...
We are letting our service members die in Iraq in the effort to introduce a secular government in which the rule of law trumps the religous law. The Sunnis do not trust that, as a minority, they will be protected.
All they have to do is to look to the attempted tyranny of the Conservatives here in America to see this.
Now, if culture of the majority is predominant and must be adhered to by all in a society, the are the Muslims not right to tell all the Christians within their borders to swear a loath of loyality on the Koran? All the jews?
These people cannot see past the opportunity to divide and conquer, to denigrate and attack. Even if it means supporting a tenent that would subject people of their own faith to harassment, persecution and lack of freedom.
When they do meet God and God asks what have they done for their brothers and sisters they will have a lot of 'splaining to do.
Post a Comment