More Attacks On Christianity and American Traditions

My sister in law pointed this out to me. I had heard that the first Muslim had been elected to Congress, but I did not think of what ramifications that would hold.

Apparently, Keith Ellison D-Minn. will not be sworn into office by placing his hand on the Bible. He will be sworn in with the Koran.

From the article:

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.

Well, let me ask this.

Why do the 434 other members of Congress and 100 members of the Senate and the President and Vice President get sworn in on Bibles? Is it because they are all Christian? Is it because they all believe in God? Umm...no. I don't remember them ever being asked what their particular faiths were. They were just told to swear on the Bible.

How many of them now, will question swearing on a Bible?

Why does the Senate open with a morning prayer? Why does the Senate have a Chaplin? Is it because they are all extremely religious? No. It's because it's a tradition. Since the inception of our democracy we have had these religious symbols and practices. They are still in existence today because our fore fathers did them and we respect the practices of those that came before us. Of those that made decisions that still affect us today. We follow in their footsteps because it is right and respectful. It is reverent.

When the Cognress prays, will the good Congressman from Minnesota obstain? Will he sit as the members say the Pledge of Allegiance because of the words "Under God?" What other of our practices will he boycott?

He is meant to be a representative of his district and the people of his state. So far, I don't see him attempting to do anything except promote his own personal agenda. So far as I know, the people of Minnesota did not elect him because he was Muslim, but because of how his ideas regarding laws will help them in their lives. He should leave his particular beliefs to his private life, and be aware that his public life is no longer his own, but belongs to the United States of America. And we swear our Congressmen in with the Bible.