Posted on 11/28/2006 3:17:38 PM PST by mmanager
Keith Ellison, 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 Quran instead.
The 43-year-old Minnesota Democrat, who converted to Islam as a 19-year-old college student, won the midterm election after a campaign calling for an immediate American pullout from Iraq. And his decision to forsake the Bible at his January 3 swearing-in troubles some.
"He should not be allowed to do so,” Townhall.com contributing columnist Dennis Prager writes on the Web site.
"Ellison's defenders argue that Ellison is merely being honest; since he believes in the Quran and not in the Bible, he should be allowed, even encouraged, to put his hand on the book he believes in . . .
"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.”
Prager, a radio talk show host and author, concludes: "When all elected officials take their oaths of office with their hands on the very same book, they all affirm that some unifying value system underlies American civilization. If Keith Ellison is allowed to change that, he will be doing more damage to the unity of America and to the value system that has formed this country than the terrorists of 9/11.
"It is hard to believe that this is the legacy most Muslim Americans want to bequeath to America.”
Sure, I agree all muslims are liars.
How will making them swear on the Bible (which they reject) make them tell the truth?
Obviously, it will not. Heck, it didn't work for Clinton and he purports to be a Baptist.
"People have chosen to take the oat without a hand on any book."
I know but that is not an answer to my question. I don't have a dog in this hunt I was just wondering about other current elected officials who are not Christian. My bet is that many just follow the traditional ceremony and not make a stink, which is what I would do personally. I was just curious.
Minnesotans voted in Jesse Ventura as Gov'r back in the 90s and look what a disaster that was...now they've gone further and voted in a Muslim traitor who refused to abide by the very laws he's been elected to uphold! RECALL! RECALL!
What if he was a Nazi and wanted to swear in on Mein Kampf?
Not much difference with the Koran for my money.
Don't apologize. Too many Americans simply don't get it because they don't understand the Koran and Islam and the ahte they preach.
Ilsam is like the Ku Klux Klan on steriods - without racism and with another religion as its product.
To my knowledge no book other than the Bible has been used. However, many have used no book.
The larger part of the Bible is of Jewish origin a.k.a the Old Testament.
I would argue that 100% of the Bible is of Jewish origin, but that probably not the point you were making.
:)
This is true. I suppose the obvious point is that when one chooses to swear an oath of office on the Bible, one is acknowledging the Judeo-Christina heritage of the nation. Swearing the oath on the koran signals something very different.
Atheists are allowed to affirm in a court of law that they will tell the truth without swearing on a Bible. I am not aware of an out-of-the-closet Atheist who has been elected on a national level.
However, I find it puzzling that Prager and some on FR are so surprised and outraged by Ellison's decision to take an oath of office on a Koran. Why should a man of faith swear on a holy book other than his own?
In the Koran, Sharia Law is supreme, period.
Know what? Let him go ahead and put his hand on the Quran when he's sworn in. Make it a nice big obvious Quran.
And then MAKE HIM SAY "so help me Allah" at the end. Not "so help me God." "So help me Allah." Make him use the word "Allah."
And televise it live nationwide.
Maybe it'll scare some people up there in Minnesota into realizing just what they've done...elect to Congress a worshipper of a religion that wants to destroy this, and every other, country that does not subject itself to it.
}:-)4
Hence, I couldn't care less what/how a person swears; but rather care deeply about what the person MEANS when he swears.
That said, I do believe we have Ellison's meaning HERE: http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/fr/1056450/posts
To become a citizen of US one has to take an oath of allegiance. Is it ok to take the oath?
The oath of allegiance is as follows: I hereby declare, on oath, that I absolutely and entirely renounce and abjure all allegiance and fidelity to any foreign prince, potentate, state, or sovereignty, of whom or which I have heretofore been a subject or citizen; that I will support and defend the Constitution and laws of the United States of America against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I will bear arms on behalf of the United States when required by the law; that I will perform noncombatant service in the Armed Forces of the United States when required by the law; that I will perform work of national importance under civilian direction when required by the law; and that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; so help me God. They also ask on the citizenship form the following questions: If the law requires it, are you willing to bear arms on behalf of US? If the law requires it, are you willing to perform noncombatant service in the US Armed Forces? If the law requires it, are you willing to perform work of national importance under civilian direction? My question is can we answer yes to these questions? is there anything wrong in doing that. what should the answer be: yes or no? could you please kindly give an urgent answer.
jazakallah.
Answer 8471 2003-04-25
As Muslims, we are duty bound to follow our lives strictly according to Shari’ah. Whatever Shari’ah allows us to do, we will abide by that and whatever Shari’ah has restricted us from, we will refrain from it. Hence, we are not allowed to obey anybody if it is resulting in the disobedience of the Creator, Allah. Nabi (Sallallaahu Alayhi Wasallam) said, ‘There is no obedience for the creation by disobeying the Creator.’ (Mirqaat vol.7 pg.217; Imdadiyyah).
Hence, keeping this in mind if one is forced to sign the above in order to become a citizen or the only way of attaining citizenship is by acknowledging the above, then one may sign it with the intention that Shari’ah and Deen will always be his yardstick and that he will never sacrifice any of the teachings of Deen.
and Allah Ta'ala Knows Best
Mufti Ebrahim Desai
From this, it is no great leap to conclude that Ellison's oath of office is totally meaningless, as we would understand the oath as administered, no matter how or upon what he swears.
I just wonder if the Sergeant-at-Arms will be allowed to hold the precious leather-bound toilet paper.
*snip*
Although called the Nation of Islam, Elijah Muhammad's religion had almost nothing in common with Islam. Rather, it was an original amalgam of animist and Christian themes elaborated by an extravagant imagination.
Islam stresses the absolute transcendence and unity of God. Elijah Muhammad said the Black Nation as a whole is God, and one person, the most powerful Black Scientist of the age, is the Supreme Being. Islam stipulated that the seventh-century prophet Muhammad was the last prophet sent to mankind; Elijah Muhammad claimed prophethood for himself. Islam condemns racism; Elijah Muhammad deemed blacks morally and spiritually superior to whites, and believed that if blacks convert to his religion, they will eventually destroy whites, who are devils. Therefore, while Islam calls on all people to accept the Qur'anic message, Elijah Muhammad permitted only blacks to join his religion. Islam imposes a great body of regulations on its followers; Elijah Muhammad cast these out entirely or altered them beyond recognition.
*/snip*
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.