I have very carefully read the Constitution: I see no requirement for an oath of office to be sworn on a Bible. Perhaps someone can point out where that requirement is stated.
As a matter of fact, Article VI, para 3 would appear to forbid such a requirement: "no religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office or public trust under the United States."
Ellison doesn't believe in the bible, forcing him to take an oath on a book he doesn't subscribe too makes the oath meaningless. If you don't like the idea of a Muslim serving in Congress (and I include myself as someone who doesn't like the idea), then your grievance lies with the voters. Next time, defeat him at the ballot box. The constiution does not discriminate on the basis of religion. Anyone duly elected that meets the consitutional requirements of the office can be sworn-in and seated without a bible, whether they are Christian, Jew, Muslim, Mormon, Hindu, Shinto, Druid, Atheist, Agnosistic, Jedi, worship the moon goddess Ra, are members of the cult of Vesssha, or even if they were openly Satanic.
Several U.S. presidents have NOT used a bible to take their oath (I guess some freepers would argue the Chief Justice should have thus refused to swear in Herbert Hoover), and I'm guessing several Congressmen and judges probably have as well. There are many people who have held high office without being devout Christians, or were devout Christians who simply opted not to use a bible.
This reeks of Katherine Harris' bozo statement in the GOP primary that Christians must be elected or its sinful. I guess the theocrats here think it's sinful that Norm Coleman (Jew) beat Walter Mondale (Christian)