Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

A Response To My Many Critics - And A Solution (Dennis Prager Responds Over Keith Ellison Alert)
Townhall.com ^ | 12/05/2006 | Dennis Prager

Posted on 12/04/2006 11:18:34 PM PST by goldstategop

To understate the case, my last column, "America, Not Keith Ellison, Decides What Book a Congressman Takes His Oath on," seems to have touched a national nerve.

It has caused a national discussion -- actually, more hate-filled attacks on me than civil discussion -- and has been covered by just about all major American news media. To their credit, CNN and Fox News both gave me ample time (in television terms anyway) to express my views on two of each network's major shows: "Paula Zahn Now" and Headline News on CNN, and "Hannity & Colmes" and "Your World with Neil Cavuto" on Fox News. And many American newspapers have covered it.

In addition, there was widespread coverage on left-wing blogs, which, with no exception I could find, distorted what I said, charging my column and me with, for example, racism (see below), when race plays no role at all in this issue or in my column. For the record, because I deem this a significant statement about most of the Left, I found virtually no left-wing blog that was not filled with obscenity-laced descriptions of me. Aside from the immaturity and loathing of higher civilization that such public use of curse words reveal, the fury and hate render the leftist charge that it is the Right that is hate-filled one of the most obvious expressions of psychological projection I have seen in my lifetime.

Clearly, many Americans, including some conservatives and libertarians, have no problem with the idea that for the first time in American history, a person elected to Congress has rejected the Bible for another religious text when taking his oath of office (whether ceremonial or actual -- more on this below). This includes some thoughtful colleagues in conservative talk radio (intellectual life on conservative radio is far more diverse than intellectual life at most American universities).

So, for those who do cherish dialogue, including those on the Left who have trained themselves to avoid thought by merely choosing from a list of epithets -- "racist," "bigoted," "homophobic," "Islamophobic," "sexist," "xenophobic," "fascist" -- here are my responses to the most frequently offered objections to my piece:

Accusation: I am advocating something unconstitutional by demanding that the Bible be included in oaths of office. I am reminded that Mr. Ellison has a right to practice the religion of his choice and that there shall be no religious test for candidates for office in America.

Response: I never even hinted that there should be a religious test. It has never occurred to me that only Christians run for office in America. The idea is particularly laughable in my case since I am not now, nor ever have been, a Christian. I am a Jew (a non-denominational religious Jew, for the record), and I would vote for any Muslim, Christian, Buddhist, Mormon, atheist, Jew, Zoroastrian, Hindu, Wiccan, Confucian, Taoist or combination thereof whose social values I share. Conversely, I would not vote for a fellow Jew whose social values I did not share. I want people of every faith and of no faith who affirm the values I affirm to enter political life.

My belief that the Bible should be present at any oath (or affirmation) of office has nothing whatsoever to do with the religion of the office holder. And it never has until Keith Ellison's decision to substitute a different text for the Bible. Many office holders who do not believe in the Bible at all or who reject some part have nevertheless used the Bible at their swearing-in (I noted this in my column). Even the vast majority of Jews elected to office have used a Bible containing both the Old and New Testaments, even though Jews do not regard the New Testament as part of their Bible. A tiny number of Jews have used only the Old Testament. As a religious Jew, I of course understand their decision, but I disagree with it.

I agree with the tens of thousands of office holders in American history who have honored the American tradition -- I am well aware it is not a law, and I do not want it to be -- of bringing a Bible to their ceremonial or actual swearing-in. Keith Ellison is ending that powerful tradition, and it is he who has called the public's attention to his doing so. He obviously thinks this is important. I think it is important. My critics think it isn't.

Why wouldn't Ellison bring a Bible along with the Koran? That he chose not to is the narcissism of multiculturalism that I referred to: The individual's culture trumps the national culture.

You don't have to be Christian to acknowledge that the Bible is the source of America's values. Virtually every founder of this country knew that and acknowledged it. The argument that founders such as Thomas Jefferson and Benjamin Franklin were deists, even if accurate (it is greatly exaggerated), makes my point, not my opponents'. The founders who were not believing Christians venerated the Bible as the source of America's values just as much as practicing Christians did.

America derives its laws from its Constitution. It derives its values from the Bible. We don't get inalienable rights from the Constitution; we get them from God. Which is exactly what the signers of the Declaration of Independence wrote: We are endowed with inalienable rights by our Creator, not by government and not by any man-made document. And that Creator and those inalienable rights emanate from the Bible. Keith Ellison's freedom to openly believe and practice Islam and to run for elective office as a Muslim is a direct result of a society molded by the Bible and the people who believed in it, a fact he should be willing to honor as he is sworn in.

I cannot name any Western European country that does not have a document similar to the American Constitution and something akin to our Bill of Rights. It is, therefore, not the Constitution that has made America unique and a moral beacon to the world's downtrodden. What has made America unique is the combination of Enlightenment ideas with our underlying Judeo-Christian values. (I have described 24 of those values in 24 columns in 2005, all available on the Internet through www.pragerradio.com.)

It was understood from the beginning of the republic that liberty is derived from God, not from man alone. That is why the Liberty Bell has an inscription from the Bible (from the Torah in the Old Testament) on it, not an inscription from any secular Enlightenment (or ancient Greek) source.

Accusation: Very many critics note the fact that members of Congress are not sworn in individually with Bibles but all together in the House chamber and without the Bible. The use of the Bible is a ceremonial act that takes place in private before family, friends and the press. My critics cite this fact as if somehow it invalidates my larger point.

Response: First, it was Keith Ellison who raised the entire issue of taking an oath on a Koran rather than a Bible. He did not make his announcement in the hopes that it would be ignored but to make a statement. I was responding to that statement. Critics who are unhappy with it becoming an issue should direct their ire at Mr. Ellison.

Second, the very fact that it is a ceremony makes my point far more forcefully. Obviously, Mr. Ellison will have already been officially sworn in. Therefore, the use of the Koran has absolutely nothing to do with taking an oath on the book he holds sacred. It is used entirely to send a message to the American people. So all the arguments that he must be able to swear on the book he holds sacred are moot. He will have already been sworn in.

Ceremonies matter a lot. As I told the Associated Press, ceremonies are essential to the continuity of a civilization. Therefore, the first time in American history that a congressman has decided to jettison the Bible for another text should not go unnoticed -- or elicit yawns, as it has from conservative and libertarian critics.

Accusation: My column and/or I are racist, bigoted and Islamophobic.

Response: "Racist": It is impossible to fully respond to absurdity. How is race possibly involved in my wanting the Bible to be present at swearings-in of American politicians? I wrote in my column that I apply the same standard to Jews, Scientologists and everyone else. Those who make this charge merely cheapen the word racism and therefore weaken the fight against it.

"Islamophobic": I wrote not a word against Islam or the Koran and made it clear at the beginning of my column that nothing I write is specific to Islam or the Koran. All those who write that I "compared" the Koran to "Mein Kampf" are lying -- deliberately lying to defame me rather than respond to my arguments. I simply offered a slippery slope argument that if we let everyone choose their own text at swearings-in, what will happen one day should a racist decide to use "Mein Kampf"? A slippery slope argument is not an equivalence argument. The Left regularly argues that vouchers to support Catholic schools can one day be used to support religious extremists' schools. Are they comparing Catholicism to religious extremism? Of course not. And no one on the Right has ever stooped so low as to make such a charge. Moreover, I not only mentioned "Mein Kampf," I mentioned "Dianetics," Scientology's most revered work, the works of Voltaire (for secularists) and other works.

"Bigoted": Bigoted against whom? Against non-Christians? I am a non-Christian. Am I bigoted against myself as a Jew? I happen to be one of the most active individuals in American Jewish life and co-author of probably the most widely used English-language introduction to Judaism of the last 30 years.

In fact, it is as a Jew that I am so aware of the fragility of all civilizations, including ours. I am therefore aware of how uniquely good America has been for all its citizens, including and especially its Jews. This uniqueness does not stem from secularism alone, but from an extraordinary Judeo-Christian value system that has been our civic religion. Europe is secular and is a failing civilization; one that is also increasingly judenrein [empty of Jews] because of its anti-Semitism.

I am for no law to be passed to prevent Keith Ellison or anyone else from bringing any book he wants to his swearing-in, whether actual or ceremonial. But neither I nor tens of millions of other Americans will watch in silence as the Bible is replaced with another religious text for the first time since George Washington brought a Bible to his swearing-in. It is not I, but Keith Ellison, who has engaged in disuniting the country. He can still help reunite it by simply bringing both books to his ceremonial swearing-in. Had he originally announced that he would do that, I would have written a different column -- filled with praise of him. And there would be a lot less cursing and anger in America.


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Culture/Society; Editorial; Government; News/Current Events; Philosophy; Politics/Elections; US: Minnesota
KEYWORDS: congress; conservatism; constitution; critics; dennisprager; judeochristianvalue; keithellison; oath; thebible; townhall
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041 next last
A long and thoughtful response over the l'affaire Keith Ellison by Dennis Prager to his critics. There's a reason ALL public servants swear on The Bible. We after all as Americans, have a national culture rooted in it and our concept of self-government derives among other things, from our Judeo-Christian understanding of human freedom and its relationship to God and earthly power.

"Show me just what Mohammed brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached." -Manuel II Paleologus

1 posted on 12/04/2006 11:18:37 PM PST by goldstategop
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: goldstategop
I cannot name any Western European country that does not have a document similar to the American Constitution and something akin to our Bill of Rights.

I can name two.

England and France.

L

2 posted on 12/04/2006 11:23:48 PM PST by Lurker (Giving money and power to government is like giving whiskey and car keys to teenage boys.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: goldstategop
Had he originally announced that he would do that, I would have written a different column -- filled with praise of him

I would never praise a person who holds to the Koran. If he brought a Koran and a Bible he would be a typical democrat. Say and act one way but do something different. Nothing would change if he brought both books. He is still a muskie adhering to the Koran.

3 posted on 12/04/2006 11:50:47 PM PST by taxesareforever (Never forget Matt Maupin)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: taxesareforever

What book did Barak Hussein Obama swear on?


4 posted on 12/05/2006 12:23:49 AM PST by bruinbirdman ("Those who control language control minds." -- Ayn Rand)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: taxesareforever

Agreed.
Our enemy which seeks our total destruction gets it's guidance from the koran.
If we allow a member of our government who is sworn to protect us swear his oath on the book that seeks our end is suicidal in the name of diversity.
I believe this is very serious.
You wouldn't allow a career crimunal into your house for dinner simply because he is a biped like you so he can see everything he wants to steal.


5 posted on 12/05/2006 12:39:19 AM PST by smoketree (the insanity, the lunacy these days)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: smoketree
"You wouldn't allow a career crimunal into your house for dinner simply because he is a biped like you so he can see everything he wants to steal."

Indeed!!

6 posted on 12/05/2006 12:47:04 AM PST by davisfh
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: goldstategop
I cannot name any Western European country that does not have a document similar to the American Constitution and something akin to our Bill of Rights.

England has no Constitution-style document enumerating specific rights such as the right to free speech or freedom of religion. And I could very well be wrong, but to my knowledge neither does Canada.

7 posted on 12/05/2006 1:01:10 AM PST by Zeroisanumber (Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: bruinbirdman
What book did Barak Hussein Obama swear on?

Senator Obama is a member of the Trinity United Church of Christ on Chicago's South Side. So a Bible, if anything.

8 posted on 12/05/2006 1:07:15 AM PST by Zeroisanumber (Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: goldstategop

This is more important than most seem to comprehend at the moment.


9 posted on 12/05/2006 1:30:34 AM PST by TheLion (We are not the health maintenance organization for Mexico)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: goldstategop

BUMP


10 posted on 12/05/2006 2:05:32 AM PST by kitkat (The first step down to hell is to deny the existence of evil.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: goldstategop

Excellant response; well reasoned and articulate. Too bad that the leftists mentioned on the referenced web sites will not read it; most could not understand it if they did. Prager's prose requires more than a fifth grade education to understand.


11 posted on 12/05/2006 3:03:15 AM PST by ByteMercenary (9-11: supported everywhere by followers of the the cult of islam.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Zeroisanumber
RE: "Senator Obama is a member of the Trinity United Church of Christ"

But wasn't his father and his grandfather Muslims? Don't the sons sign in as Muslims at birth -- whether they want to or not?

Call me a bigot.. please! but I have suspicions about young Mr. Obama.

How come he gets a pass from radical Muslims for leaving Islam? Do they say, "Aw, shucks. He was just a kid?"

Every radical Muslim nut-group in the world issues fatwas against some poor Ali Al Sixpack if he leaves Islam.

12 posted on 12/05/2006 3:59:32 AM PST by WilliamofCarmichael (If modern America's Man on Horseback is out there, Get on the damn horse already!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: goldstategop

I think it has probably already been pointed out, but the official swearing-in ceremony for members of Congress is given to all representatives at once, and there are no Bibles, Torahs, Books of Mormon, Dianetics, Kama Sutras, Allen Ginsburg Poetry, Lady Chatterley's Lover, or any other "holy books" of any religion or non-religion in sight.

All this uproar is over a private photo-op performed after the official ceremony.


13 posted on 12/05/2006 4:09:01 AM PST by Alouette (Psalms of the Day: 72-76)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: goldstategop

To me, Ellison swearing in on a Bible would be like a christian swearing to Zoroaster. What good is that?


14 posted on 12/05/2006 4:43:00 AM PST by TangoLimaSierra (Personal responsibilty; the remedy for PC.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Alouette
It is truly amazing that otherwise intelligent Freeper's and other's on talk radio still do not get this fact.

Thanks for bringing it to our attention again!
15 posted on 12/05/2006 5:20:16 AM PST by Coldwater Creek (The TERRORIST are the ones who won the midterm elections!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: goldstategop
A guy named Rosenberg over at TPM Cafe wrote one of the "racist" screeds Prager talks about. Read it...if you want to gag. The man is the most pompous, self-righteous, ignoramous I've ever encounted. A living advertisement for anti-semitism and the value of a nazi response.

I know how controversial this last sentence is. I do not post it thoughtlessly.

16 posted on 12/05/2006 5:57:57 AM PST by liberallarry
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: goldstategop
I generally like Prager, but he's not being honest.

I agree with the tens of thousands of office holders in American history who have honored the American tradition -- I am well aware it is not a law, and I do not want it to be -- of bringing a Bible to their ceremonial or actual swearing-in... I am for no law to be passed to prevent Keith Ellison or anyone else from bringing any book he wants to his swearing-in

Yet in his earlier column he said:

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...

The only way that we may disallow such an activity is by law. And it would be an unconstitutional law, at that.

17 posted on 12/05/2006 6:10:05 AM PST by Sloth (The GOP is to DemonRats in politics as Michael Jackson is to Jeffrey Dahmer in babysitting.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sloth
I am for no law to be passed to prevent Keith Ellison or anyone else from bringing any book he wants to his swearing-in

Praeger goes on to say

Why wouldn't Ellison bring a Bible along with the Koran?

This may seem like quibbling but it isn't. Praeger doesn't object to Ellison taking the oath on the Koran and the Bible. He objects to him taking the oath on Koran instead of the Bible.

He's not being dishonest. If he's at fault it's for not being careful. The issue is not exactly a strictly legal one...but it's not clear how to resolve it.

Also, one wonders how the Left would have responded had Ellison been white.

18 posted on 12/05/2006 6:29:33 AM PST by liberallarry
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Zeroisanumber

The Constitution, interestingly enough, does not assert any "right" to free speech nor freedom of religion. Read it carefully.


19 posted on 12/05/2006 7:39:45 AM PST by AmishDude (I coined "Senator Ass" to describe Jim Webb. He may have already used it as a character in a novel.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: goldstategop

People have seized on this and twisted Prager's words to mean that he thinks we should force a different religion on the man. That's not the point at all. But how do you argue with people who don't care what you actually said?


20 posted on 12/05/2006 8:00:26 AM PST by The Ghost of FReepers Past (Woe unto them that call evil good, and good evil; that put darkness for light..... Isaiah 5:20)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson