I'd Rather Be Called A Bigot

Frankly, I don't care if many civil libertarians and Liberals want to call me a bigot for opposing this below.

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.

Some of the purists who see themselves as Libertarians today need to have it pointed out to them that, as a group, they've done very little to build America into the great nation it has become. Whether they like it or not, Christan values and thought have done far more for America than their theoretical construct of a pure libertarian society has ever done. Increasingly, they're as  pretentious and self-serving as the extreme Left. And many of the precedents and principles they would point to in our history were undertaken by individuals well-grounded in Christian thought and values with no conception of anything else holding sway within our culture.

That there isn't a national outcry over Ellison's decision only tells you how far this nation has been pulled from its roots and left empty without much of a soul. The Left and extreme Libertarian wings aren't going to be satisfied until there is nothing left that means anything at all when it comes to values. And when that happens, they'll have a nation that amounts to and stands for the very same thing - nothing, nothing at all.

Meanwhile, Turkey wants into the EU and Christian churches aren't allowed to own land there and Christians, 1% of the population, are treated like third class citizens in the so-called secular state. That includes their being indiscriminately killed on occasion with no real public outcry over it at all.

Yet, here in America we must do what's "right" to the point of being sterile. In the grand scheme of things, this country is neutering itself and is going to end up well and truly screwed. All because it is beginning to stand for nothing at all beyond theories of political correctness that neither inspire nor motivate masses of individuals to survive and succeed.

Comments

[JD]

I don't give a rat's ass what Keith Ellison's favorite book is. He's here to serve America and should abide by the procedure that America has chosen. It's been good enough for Jews, Mormons and others so it's damn well good enough for him.

[carpeicthus]

OK, you win: You're a bigot.

[Night Rider]

Riehl

While on some of your points I do agree with but the swearing in there has been other Presidents and politicians who took the oath but not on the Bible, as we are swearing in a politician to take the oath to protect the constitution and defend against foreign and domestic threats so swearing in on the Bible is not required in fact it is unconstitutional to have someone use the Bible if they are of a different faith, while the Jews agree with much of the Old Testament most don't agree with what is written in the New Testament. What I am trying to say in a short phrase is that the words of the swearing in are the most important. President Herbert Hoover didn't swear in on the Bible he was a Quaker. How ever I do agree with you on the issue of political correctness. Yes Riehl I have always said that political correctness will be the down fall of a nation.

[MoleOnABull]

Sir, I salute you:

You are right on!

[salvage]

Maybe you can answer this question for me then; if America was founded as Christian nation why didn't the George tell Betsy to put a cross amongst the stars? The British flag had a cross on it as do a few other European nations so it certainly would be out of place for the time. Muslim nations have their mythical icons on their flags, why not America?

[michael]

It's his constitutional right NOT to put his hand on the bible. I'm a criminologist who testifies very frequently on ballistics and blood spatter. I'm also an atheist and would never put my hand on a bible and swear to anything. When I take the stand I affirm and don't ever put my hand on the bible. My colleague who's a conservative jewish man also refuses to use the bible, he's sworn on the torah/talmud. It's quite common here. It was investigated by the justice department who eventually said that it's against my constitutional right of religion to use the bible. Mr Ellison is absolutely right and he'll legally mop the floor with religious right if he has to. Legally, he doesn't have to take an oath at all. The xenophobes and crackpot christians will embarrass themselves with one. I can't wait.

[Dan Riehl]

When people start holding up the talmud as their justification for wanting to destroy America, I'll worry about it. Until then, I don't care if one uses the talmud, or a children's book. But the thought that a member of government is employing the Koran in this manner, given how it is being used by so many who wish us great harm, is a disgrace.

As for testifying at a trial, I couldn't care less. I'm tired of seeing lofty intellectual arguments strip this nation of every valuable tradition it ever had.

[jenny]

Don't people like Prager get tired of being wrong so often?

[Ed]

About as often as Dan Riehl get's tired of being wrong. I just wish some of these guys would bother to read the Constitution before they start bloviating and just making things up out of thin air.

Try Article VI, Paragraph 3 prohibiting any religious test. Ofice holders swear or affirm to support the Constitution, no bibles/korans/talmuds and/or playboy magazines required. They are used at the office holders request and pleasure.

[Tom]

"I'm tired of seeing lofty intellectual arguments strip this nation of every valuable tradition it ever had"

How about traditions like freedom from religious persecution? Isn't that why the Pilgrims came here? Many other public officials have opted not to swear on the bible. The only reason this is being made an issue is because Ellison is a Muslim.

Some traditions are more important than others, and sometimes it's appropriate to set aside tradition or modify it to better fit the circumstances.

Ellison is not a Christian. What point is there on having him swear an oath with is hand on the Bible?

[Tom]

"When people start holding up the talmud as their justification for wanting to destroy America, I'll worry about it. Until then, I don't care if one uses the talmud, or a children's book. But the thought that a member of government is employing the Koran in this manner, given how it is being used by so many who wish us great harm, is a disgrace."

The bible and other Christian symbols (like burning crosses) have been associated with some pretty horrible acts throughout history. It doesn't mean that all Christians are evil or that the bible itself is evil.

BTW, I recently heard a Christian member of the Palestinian Legislative Council (Palestinian Parliament)
speak at our Catholic Church. It's ironic that having a Christian holding office in a largely Islamic region is less controversial there than Ellison (a Muslim) is here.

[Pug]

...the thought that a member of government is employing the Koran in this manner, given how it is being used by so many who wish us great harm, is a disgrace.

Guilt by association is always such a fine argument to make.

[Purple Avenger]

"in fact it is unconstitutional to have someone use the Bible if they are of a different faith"

What's the cite on the case where this was established?

[Paul Dirks]

"I'm tired of seeing lofty intellectual arguments strip this nation of every valuable tradition it ever had."

Last time I checked, religious freedom was among our most valuable traditions. To think otherwise is to disrepect our nations founders.

[TS]

"I'm tired of seeing lofty intellectual arguments strip this nation of every valuable tradition it ever had."

I'm sorry, this is teh funny. Dan, in one sentence, refers to our legal system a "lofty intellectual argument" and manages to worry about the sactity of America's "valuable traditions."

Shakespeare couldn't have made shit like this up.

[larry]

this ellison fellow sounds like quite a sanctimonious, self-important asshole. ok for him to show disrespect to a bible, god help anyone else who shoes disrespect to HIS little pseudoreligion. (ellsion evidently defined "disrespect" as "removing noisy swine who seem to be making plans to blow up the plane" from a commercial airline flight.)whoops - forgot 'hypocritical'. ellsion seems to be quite the *hypocritical*. sanctimonious, self-important asshole, don't he.

say, what political party is he a member of? what useful information can we extrapolate from this knowledge?

[Seekeronos]

Islam is less a religion than it is an enemy ideology, much like communism was during the Cold War.

I mean, we never would have even heard of a congressman running on the Communist Party ticket, much less win and swear in on the Das Kapital or the Communist Manifesto.

But the damage is done. I say he either swears in on a nice copy of the King James Authorized Version of the Holy Bible, or he affirm his oath without a scriptural text.

If he swears by Allah on the Quran, then there is *NO* guarantee that he will abide by his oath: for Muslims are permitted to break oaths with non-Muslims as they see fit according to the Quran.

[Carol_Herman]

Turkey isn't being admitted to the basket-case status of the EU. They've been rejected, repeatedly. Even when they "halped" the europeans by telling Tommy Franks he had no landing rights for our troops. Many of our kids were left at sea for weeks on end. And, we still cut through Saddam's troops like a knife through butter.

What is so sad is to see Israel and the Kurds, coming forward, and backing the USA to the hilt! And, they get shat upon.

While the Kurds who live in Turkey are even more worse off than the Christians. Who are in terrible straights in Lebanon, too.

The easy answer? We should have used REAL FORCE. And, not a 3-week-swing into Baghdad. And, then Cheney's plan to "market" the country with the 2nd biggest oil reserves in the world.

THERE WAS NO PLAN!

Where's our Douglas MacArthur? Who ever heard of a war president as weak as this Bush? We've got two years more with Bush "reversing" course, here.

Kep planning on beating the democrats by calling them names. But you overlook what Bush is up to at your own peril.

Otherwise? Can Bush re-reverse his reversed course? And, he grow a pair and really let the military handle this thing in Iraq?

And, by the way, no sympathy from me to the Saudis. They've got no army. They've just got obscene profits from their oil. And, they've shoved this Wahhabi crap all over the globe! How can we fight that? Is it an infection, like AIDS, or the Black Death, that you hope runs through its cycles, and then disappears?

What was Bush and his co-president, condi, thinking, as they flew off to this stupid summit? (A summit we've seen before. When Thomas Friedman of the NY Times, said he was having an accidental conversation with the head prince in his tent, when the "document" of the Jews going back to the 1948 borders, would "work for him.")

How come Bush is the first president to say he sees a Palestinian state? Maybe, it's just me? But I'm not pleased with the job he's doing.

[Seekeronos]

Nah, you ain't the only one who finds Mr. Bush wanting in his recent foriegn policy decisions.

I dare say his game is now "compromise and bend as necessary to get the Donkey Kongress" to meet him somewhere in the middle.... and more importantly, as an oilman, he will forever be in bed to some degree with the Saudis.

What Israel should do is stop playing nicey-nice with the territories conquered in 1967, and push the Palestinians into the sea or at least out of the expanded territory. The Palestinians are as much of a Balfour-created nationality as Jordan and Iraq, and thier claim to the region is much more tenous than that of Israel.

I'd be happy to see Avigdor Lieberman and "Bibi" Netanyahu close the borders and aggressively resettle the frontiers with Israelis; trying to maintain those areas as buffer zones and/or placating the Hamas crazies is simply not working.

As for our occupation in Iraq, sadly, I only see Bush using stalling tactics to attempt to keep our forces deployed pending a Republican presidency and a shift back to at least a Republican Senate in 2008. In all likelyhood, if the "civil war" gets progressively worse with monthly death tolls over 100 GIs per month, I think the Donkey Kongress will eventually demand withdrawal.

Unless of course, by some miracle, something changes in the leadership, some "balls" get grown, and we do what should have been done from day one: exterminate the Islamist radicals centers of gravity with extreme prejudice.

[Magnolia]

The way I see it, Mr. Ellison choosing (and being allowed) to take his oath of office on the Koran is that first step toward the Islamification of America. It's a tiny step today, but I agree that our political correctness is a noose around America's neck.