A first for America...the Koran replaces Bible at swearing-in oath (1 Viewer)

StarLink
High Speed Internet
Available AnyWhere On Earth
Now $349


ProStockJunkie

Nitro Member
Joined
Jul 9, 2006
Messages
4,406
Age
79
Location
New Jersey, USA
November 29, 2006 (American Family Assoc)

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!

Thank you for caring enough to get involved.
Sincerely,

Donald E. Wildmon, Founder and Chairman
American Family Association
P.S. Please forward this e-mail message to your family and friends! (DELETE all names and addresses from this email first)
 
:mad: AS ONE OF MY DEAREST FRIENDS, A RETIRED AIR FORCE COLONEL, WHO HAS SINCE LEFT US ONCE SAID; "WE ARE ABOUT TO POLITICALLY CORRECT OUR COUNTRY OUT OF BUSINESS". IN LIGHT OF RECENT EVENTS, IT IS HARD TO BELIEVE ANYONE WOULD EVEN VOTE FOR A MUSLIM. IF HE WANTS TO USE HIS KORAN, LET HIM RIDE HIS CAMEL BACK TO WHERE HE CAME FROM.:mad:
 
I see nothing wrong with this. If it is important that people be "sworn in", and that is an "if", then it would seem appropriate the inspiration of their individual faith be utilized for that purpose. To do otherwise would diminish the importance of the swearing in process.

I would also like to see that people who choose their freedom of religion through being Atheist not have to use a religious symbol for a swearing in ceremony.

This isn't about being politically correct. It is all about using whatever mechanism to demonstrate allegiance to our country that ties the individual to their oath of office.

I think I would object if someone decided their moral compass was a garbage skow floating around NY harbor and asked the oath of office be administered at that location however... ;)
 
........is that not a double standard :eek:

No. They would have to relocate the ceremony... ;) I guess the point is that it shouoldn't matter what book, or no book, or maybe a statue, or whatever as the public servant can find that is appropriate for their beliefs as long as the taxpayers don't have to incure huge expenses...
 
Sorry. This is America. America was founded on a Christian foundation . We are the only country on the planet which bends over backwards to accomodate every single nationality, culture, ethnic background etc.

I do not subscribe to the Liberal theory that America must accomodate and adapt to everyone else's agenda.

Keep America, America. And people who feel the same must begin to fight back against the Liberal take over of our great country. If folks don't step up to the plate to stop the tide of accomodation for 'other' people, instead of 'others' adapting to America, please..... no complaints when you no longer recognize the United States of America. It will be the dis-united land of everyone else.
 
There's a process in place, which has been in place for many years and has served this country quite well until the PC police started to pick apart every vestige of America. Most people see no valid reason to change the process to fit the needs of a small number of people who wish to now make an issue out of the situation.
 
He'll be serving the country, how about swearing in on a folded U.S. flag?

Richard, your idea sounds like a "good alternative" to the Bible at least. I still kinda agree with Jackee though, in that our country was founded on Christian principles, beliefs, amd values, and has used the Bible for as long as I know of, possibly all the way back to colonial days, for swearing in, and if a citizen of the U.S. of A. does not want to adhere to these ceremonial standards, then they have no business leading our country. I believe in religious tolerance, but I'm not sure I believe in religions of other regions of the the world that are INTOLERANT of any religion other than ISLAM. That is the case in Saudi Arabia and many other Midde Eastern countries. Christians are not accepted and they are not open to allowing Christians to worship wherever they please or whenever they please. We are, possibly to our downfall.
 
Sorry. This is America. America was founded on a Christian foundation . We are the only country on the planet which bends over backwards to accomodate every single nationality, culture, ethnic background etc.

I do not subscribe to the Liberal theory that America must accomodate and adapt to everyone else's agenda.

Keep America, America. And people who feel the same must begin to fight back against the Liberal take over of our great country. If folks don't step up to the plate to stop the tide of accomodation for 'other' people, instead of 'others' adapting to America, please..... no complaints when you no longer recognize the United States of America. It will be the dis-united land of everyone else.

You're kidding right? :rolleyes:
 
Kurt,

After just spending some time in the middle-east, I feel I have to tell you that in my experience so far, the muslims that I have met whilst out there have been very tolerant and probably moreso than the average muslim living in the western world as portrayed by our media, and actually probably even more tolerant that your average Joe that maybe has/maybe hasn't any real religion.

Jackee,

Could you please let me know why that in a country that bends over backwards to accomodate everyone, of every nationality and ethnic background, why I have a very slim chance of gaining a work permit or visa to live over there although I am a highly trained graduate (equal to a masters degree in the US), with sound financial status that I would be willing to invest, and as a Brit am not even allowed to enter the Green Card Lottery?

CP
 
Last edited:
If you would read the whole story you would see it's not a big deal. The ceremony they are refering to is just a photo op. for the media. All the media has reported that the real ceremony is later and they do not swear on anything, its just a raise your hand thingy. I guess the koran is this mans bible so why should he have to use somebody elses religion and not his own. It does not matter what he swears on with all the crap he's caused already he wont last long anyway. How come all the fruitcakes have to come from my state:confused: , Damn!!!!
 
Since Mr. Ellison is a lawyer, I will assume that he has been sworn in a court of law at one time or another. Wonder what book he was sworn in with?
 
Remember when we all forced to take American History back during our high school years? What was the reason that the first American settlers left England in the first place? Does something to do with "freedom of religion" ring a bell? But why did they want religious freedom in the first place? In the early 1500's, England broke away from the Catholic Church, whereupon King Henry VIII (i am i am) established the Church of England and named himself the head of the church, and according to English law, all citizens had to belong to the Anglician Church and contribute to it's support regardless of their own beliefs. Of course plenty of people objected to having to support something they did not believe in, and after being persecuted for their beliefs, that prompted people to seek out freedom in the "new world". Years later when the constitution was being drafted, the founding fathers chose to create a democracy, not a theocracy, which is why the first amendment reads:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.

I'm no constitutional scholar, but that seems pretty self-explanatory to me. The government will not make any law favoring one religion over any other, nor will the government prohibit anyone from exercising their free will to believe (or not) in whatever way they see fit.

Seriously, I think we can alleviate the problem by having people swear on the constitution instead of the bible.

Just my .02

Peace to all,
Mike Cornelius
a.k.a NHRAMike
 
Sorry. This is America. America was founded on a Christian foundation . We are the only country on the planet which bends over backwards to accomodate every single nationality, culture, ethnic background etc.

I do not subscribe to the Liberal theory that America must accomodate and adapt to everyone else's agenda.

Keep America, America. And people who feel the same must begin to fight back against the Liberal take over of our great country. If folks don't step up to the plate to stop the tide of accomodation for 'other' people, instead of 'others' adapting to America, please..... no complaints when you no longer recognize the United States of America. It will be the dis-united land of everyone else.

Baloney. The US Constitution is the basis of our nation. Show me where it is written in the Constitution that this is somehow a Christian nation. And except in the date, show me anywhere in that document where the name of God, let alone Jesus Christ, is named. For that matter, of the Founders who attended the Constitutional Convention, tell me which ones you would describe as Bible believing Christians rather than Deists (ie Unitatians). Sorry, but despite the claim of American theocrats who distort history, what you say has no factual basis. Indeed, what I hear coming from you is only a different version of what we saw in Afghanistan under the Taliban or what we see today under the Mullahs in Iraq.
 
Last edited:
Baloney. The US Constitution is the basis of our nation. Show me where it is written in the Constitution that this is somehow a Christian nation. And except in the date, show me anywhere in that document where the name of God, let alone Jesus Christ, is named. For that matter, of the Founders who attended the Constitutional Convention, tell me which ones you would describe as Bible believing Christians rather than Deists (ie Unitatians). Sorry, but despite the claim of American theocrats who distort history, what you say has no factual basis. Indeed, what I hear coming from you is only a different version of what we saw in Afghanistan under the Taliban or what we see today under the Mullahs in Iraq.

Spoken like a true Liberal. You can try to spin it anyway you like, but I believe enough people have been sickened by what is happening to this country, to fight back. You can tweak the constitution until the cows come home, but most Americans understand the underlying principles on which this country was founded. Spin it to those who just gullibly believe what someone tells them because they have no understanding of the history of this country.

Perhaps you should brush up on some of the real history of America, not just what the ACLU may throw your way.

I sat on the fence about much of this stuff until I actually saw the direction this country is being dragged by people who believe all this nonesense.

Believe what you wish. I've been where you are, until one day, I woke up to face reality.
 
Remember when we all forced to take American History back during our high school years? What was the reason that the first American settlers left England in the first place? Does something to do with "freedom of religion" ring a bell? But why did they want religious freedom in the first place? In the early 1500's, England broke away from the Catholic Church, whereupon King Henry VIII (i am i am) established the Church of England and named himself the head of the church, and according to English law, all citizens had to belong to the Anglician Church and contribute to it's support regardless of their own beliefs. Of course plenty of people objected to having to support something they did not believe in, and after being persecuted for their beliefs, that prompted people to seek out freedom in the "new world". Years later when the constitution was being drafted, the founding fathers chose to create a democracy, not a theocracy, which is why the first amendment reads:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.

I'm no constitutional scholar, but that seems pretty self-explanatory to me. The government will not make any law favoring one religion over any other, nor will the government prohibit anyone from exercising their free will to believe (or not) in whatever way they see fit.

Seriously, I think we can alleviate the problem by having people swear on the constitution instead of the bible.

Just my .02

Peace to all,
Mike Cornelius
a.k.a NHRAMike


You don't have to be a 'constitutional scholar'. But a basic knowledge about every day life here in this country would help. Things taken out of context centuries later, do nothing to expose the entire picture of the foundation of this nation.

If you believe that this nation was not founded upon Christian principles, that is your right and you have the freedom to believe so. However, that does not change history.
 
Ways To Support Nitromater

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top