AFA calls on Congress to make Bible the exclusive book for swearing-in ceromonies.

Randalllord
Rational VIP!
Randalllord's picture
Posts: 690
Joined: 2006-04-12
User is offlineOffline
AFA calls on Congress to make Bible the exclusive book for swearing-in ceromonies.

November 29, 2006

Please help us get this information into the hands of as many people as possible by forwarding it to your entire email list of family and friends.

A first for America...The Koran replaces the Bible at swearing-in oath

What book will America base it's values on, the Bible or the Koran?

Please take a moment to read the following TownHall.com column by Dennis Prager, who is a Jew. After reading the column, take the suggest action at the bottom of this email. After you have read it, please forward it to your friends and family.

America, Not Keith Ellison, decides what book a congressman takes his oath on
By Dennis Prager - Tuesday, November 28, 2006

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 -- not because of any American hostility to the Koran, but because the act undermines American civilization.

First, it is an act of hubris that perfectly exemplifies multiculturalist activism -- my culture trumps America's culture. What Ellison and his Muslim and leftist supporters are saying is that it is of no consequence what America holds as its holiest book; all that matters is what any individual holds to be his holiest book.

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.

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?

Of course, Ellison's defenders argue that Ellison is merely being honest; since he believes in the Koran and not in the Bible, he should be allowed, even encouraged, to put his hand on the book he believes in. But for all of American history, Jews elected to public office have taken their oath on the Bible, even though they do not believe in the New Testament, and the many secular elected officials have not believed in the Old Testament either. Yet those secular officials did not demand to take their oaths of office on, say, the collected works of Voltaire or on a volume of New York Times editorials, writings far more significant to some liberal members of Congress than the Bible. Nor has one Mormon official demanded to put his hand on the Book of Mormon. And it is hard to imagine a scientologist being allowed to take his oath of office on a copy of "Dianetics" by L. Ron Hubbard.

So why are we allowing Keith Ellison to do what no other member of Congress has ever done -- choose his own most revered book for his oath?

The answer is obvious -- Ellison is a Muslim. And whoever decides these matters, not to mention virtually every editorial page in America, is not going to offend a Muslim. In fact, many of these people argue it will be a good thing because Muslims around the world will see what an open society America is and how much Americans honor Muslims and the Koran.

This argument appeals to all those who believe that one of the greatest goals of America is to be loved by the world, and especially by Muslims because then fewer Muslims will hate us (and therefore fewer will bomb us).

But these naive people do not appreciate that America will not change the attitude of a single American-hating Muslim by allowing Ellison to substitute the Koran for the Bible. In fact, the opposite is more likely: Ellison's doing so will embolden Islamic extremists and make new ones, as Islamists, rightly or wrongly, see the first sign of the realization of their greatest goal -- the Islamicization of America.

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. But if it is, it is not only Europe that is in trouble. (End Commentary)
Take Action

1. Send an email asking your U.S. Representative and Senators to pass a law making the Bible the book used in the swearing-in ceremony of Representatives and Senators.

2. Forward this email to your friends and family today!

Write your Representative and Senators Now

http://www.afa.net/aa112806_2.asp

Religion is regarded by the common people as true, by the wise as false, and by the rulers as useful. - Seneca


MattShizzle
Posts: 7966
Joined: 2006-03-31
User is offlineOffline
Fucking idiots. MAD magazine

Fucking idiots. MAD magazine is way superior to either book.


Ophios
Ophios's picture
Posts: 909
Joined: 2006-09-19
User is offlineOffline
Quote:A first for

Quote:
A first for America...The Koran replaces the Bible at swearing-in oath

And?

Quote:
What book will America base it's values on, the Bible or the Koran?

Neither.

Quote:
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.

And? If he did it on the bible, I would trust him. for what is the bible to him? I load of garbage. But he swore on the quran, now he has to be a good little muslim.

Quote:
He should not be allowed to do so -- not because of any American hostility to the Koran, but because the act undermines American civilization.

OMT, get off of your Jeedik sucking high horse.

Quote:
all that matters is what any individual holds to be his holiest book.

Unless I read you wrong:
so what? If you are going to swear on something, why not swear on something you consider holy, or just something you think represents you.
would you like it if you were forced to swear on "The Gospel of the FSM"?

Quote:
Forgive me, but America should not give a hoot what Keith Ellison's favorite book is.

Then SHUT UP!!

Quote:
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.

Hahah, no.

Quote:
and the many secular elected officials have not believed in the Old Testament either.

What will they swear on anyway?
...
*eyes copy of "Pale blue dot"*

Quote:
Nor has one Mormon official demanded to put his hand on the Book of Mormon. And it is hard to imagine a scientologist being allowed to take his oath of office on a copy of "Dianetics" by L. Ron Hubbard.

If they want to use thier book, it is thier choice!

Quote:
Ellison's doing so will embolden Islamic extremists and make new ones, as Islamists, rightly or wrongly, see the first sign of the realization of their greatest goal -- the Islamicization of America.

"OMJ a muslim, EVIL EVIIIILL!!
Oh look an extreme-right christian!"
*Bends down*
"I love you, unlike TEH 3V1L MVSL1/\/\!!!
Please change America into Jes-u.s.a."

Quote:
If Keith Ellison is allowed to change that, he will be doing more damage to the unity of America and to the value system

He is not changing it.

And what value system? You mean the one that CHRISTIAN George Bush lit on fire and stompped into a thousand charred pieces?

Quote:
1. Send an email asking your U.S. Representative and Senators to pass a law making the Bible the book used in the swearing-in ceremony of Representatives and Senators.

2. Forward this email to your friends and family today!

Why don't you mind your own people who are ripping this country apart, and making it a laughing stock for the world.
And stop this abusive Jeesdik sucking!

AImboden wrote:
I'm not going to PM my agreement just because one tucan has pms.


Tomcat
Posts: 346
Joined: 2006-10-24
User is offlineOffline
While Randall makes this

While Randall makes this look like "Attack of the Muslims!," I'm not too worried about this. I'm actually rather excited. I do think there needs to be a clash here because it causes discussion about religion, and we desperately need that. I much prefer the Bible to the Koran, but whatever, he's a moderate Muslim anyway and probably doesn't even know half the shit it says in there.

What I don't like about your rant Randall is that it is too nationalistic and fear-based. Sure, let him bring more diversity into congress, that's what we as atheists want too. Just don't let the Koran dictate our morality like the Christians are trying to get our bible to do.

So he puts his hand on a stack of paper and stammers out some words. wtf is that gonna do? Oh and you seem to be angry in that it "lets the muslims get closer to their goal." That just seems to me to be a cry of NO FAIR WAAH WAAH. This is a little bit of greying of the political environment, it is NOT as black and white as you put it. Just lets make sure we keep up our fight for secularism and we wont have to worry about people jibba-jabbing wither their hands on a book Puzzled

The Enlightenment wounded the beast, but the killing blow has yet to land...


Randalllord
Rational VIP!
Randalllord's picture
Posts: 690
Joined: 2006-04-12
User is offlineOffline
Tomcat wrote:While Randall

Tomcat wrote:
While Randall makes this look like "Attack of the Muslims!," I'm not too worried about this.

Tomcat, I simply cut and pasted the above article here to let everyone know what was going on. I did not mean this to be an attack on the Muslims. I will deal with them when they do and say irrational things (which is frequent). In this case it is the xian's that are extreme. Actually, I think that if the xian's are going to swear on their holy book, then others can be sworn-in on theirs too. I know this will upset the xian's as they live in a fantasy world where they created the USA. Frankly, I don't think public official should be sworn-in using any religious book as they were elected by the public and need to uphold the constitution, not their holy book.

Religion is regarded by the common people as true, by the wise as false, and by the rulers as useful. - Seneca


Tomcat
Posts: 346
Joined: 2006-10-24
User is offlineOffline
haha i just realized this.

haha i just realized this. I will make the appropriate corrections if i can. really embarrassed...

EDIT: looks like since you responded to my post i can't edit it. forgive me! i should read more carefully next time

The Enlightenment wounded the beast, but the killing blow has yet to land...


Randalllord
Rational VIP!
Randalllord's picture
Posts: 690
Joined: 2006-04-12
User is offlineOffline
Tomcat, I'll try to make it

Tomcat,
I'll try to make it clear the next time I post something stupid like the above article that this is not my opinion or article.

Religion is regarded by the common people as true, by the wise as false, and by the rulers as useful. - Seneca


V1per41
V1per41's picture
Posts: 288
Joined: 2006-10-09
User is offlineOffline
Randalllord wrote:Tomcat

Tomcat wrote:
...Frankly, I don't think public official should be sworn-in using any religious book as they were elected by the public and need to uphold the constitution, not their holy book.

I think it's safe to assume that every here agrees with you on that point.
What is so confusing here!? Seperation of church and state means that the government should be secular. Which means there should not be any holy book to put your hand when you are sworn-in to public office, or for testiying in a trial.

"It is far better to grasp the Universe as it really is than to persist in delusion, however satisfying and reassuring." - Carl Sagan


GlamourKat
GlamourKat's picture
Posts: 461
Joined: 2006-08-17
User is offlineOffline
I think they should be

I think they should be forced to swear on the Constitution, if anything.


Zhwazi
Zhwazi's picture
Posts: 459
Joined: 2006-10-06
User is offlineOffline
If I ever got sworn in as an

If I ever got sworn in as an elected official, I'd swear on a porn magazine. That'll show 'em.


MattShizzle
Posts: 7966
Joined: 2006-03-31
User is offlineOffline
I guarantee you'd never get

I guarantee you'd never get re-elected! Laughing out loud


ShaunPhilly
High Level ModeratorSilver Member
ShaunPhilly's picture
Posts: 473
Joined: 2006-03-15
User is offlineOffline
I received this in an email

I received this in an email earlier:

---

From americanprogressaction.org -- who sends a great daily email letter, we read:

CULTURE -- RIGHT-WING RADIO HOST FABRICATES CONTROVERSY TO ATTACK FIRST MUSLIM CONGRESSMAN: Right-wing radio host Dennis Prager wrote a column earlier this week claiming that Rep.-elect Keith Ellison (D-MN), the first Muslim elected to Congress, had "announced that he will not take his oath of office on the Bible, but on the bible of Islam, the Koran." Prager claimed this "act undermines American civilization," and compared it to being sworn in with a copy of Hitler's "Mein Kampf." Commentators on the left and right -- including Taylor Marsh, Steven Bennen, Eugene Volokh, Stephen Bainbridge -- have torn apart Prager's argument on constitutional grounds. But Prager's column is based on one other glaring error: the swearing-in ceremony for the House of Representatives never includes a religious book. The Office of the House Clerk confirmed to the Progress Report that the swearing-in ceremony consists only of the Members raising their right hands and swearing to uphold the Constitution. The Clerk spokesperson said neither the Christian Bible, nor any other religious text, had ever been used in an official capacity during the ceremony. (Occassionally, Members pose for symbolic photo-ops with their hand on a Bible.) Look at this picture of House Speaker Dennis Hastert (R-IL) being sworn in last year by Rep. John Dingell (D-MI) with his hand on the rostrum.

---

So, there's that.

Shaun

I'll fight for a person's right to speak so long as that person will, in return, fight to allow me to challenge their opinions and ridicule them as the content of their ideas merit.