Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

Dakar² · Dec 1, 2006, 01:02 PM

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,233479,00.html

Rep.-elect Keith Ellison, D-Minn., the first Muslim-American elected to the U.S. Congress, is opting not to take his oath of office on the Bible on Jan. 3, instead wanting to pledge his loyalty to the U.S. and its Constitution on a Koran.

Does anyone have a problem with this? I don't.

You could claim he might be doing this for shock value -- I don't know anything about this guy really -- but what about it would be all that shocking?

OldManMac · Dec 1, 2006, 01:07 PM

As we supposedly practice separation of church and state, this shouldn't be an issue. IIRC, atheists don't have to take an oath on a bible.

Dakar² · Dec 1, 2006, 01:09 PM

Well, if this is article accurate, this is probably the most important fact:

The Koran is only being used for the ceremonial swearing-in, since the official swearing-in does not require any Bibles to be used.

olePigeon · Dec 1, 2006, 01:10 PM

I see no problem with it. I'm sure marden will somehow see this as supporting terrorists.

Dakar² · Dec 1, 2006, 01:13 PM

Originally Posted by olePigeon

I see no problem with it. I'm sure marden will somehow see this as supporting terrorists.

Sending the wrong message, perhaps, but let's wait till he actually weighs in.

MacNStein · Dec 1, 2006, 01:28 PM

Sounds fine to me.

OldManMac · Dec 1, 2006, 01:35 PM

Apparently, it isn't fine with Dennis Prager, but his response should be expected, as he quite obviously believes that Freedom of Speech only applies to his beliefs. Once again, it's sad how people are so afraid of those who believe differently, and how they're not so secure in their own beliefs after all.

http://www.usatoday.com/news/washing...lawmaker_x.htm

BRussell · Dec 1, 2006, 01:38 PM

Originally Posted by Dakar2

You could claim he might be doing this for shock value -- I don't know anything about this guy really -- but what about it would be all that shocking?

Shock value? Why in the world we he take his oath on the Bible rather than the Koran?

[edit] According to this, the whole story is bunk anyway.

Dakar² · Dec 1, 2006, 01:46 PM

Originally Posted by BRussell

Shock value? Why in the world we he take his oath on the Bible rather than the Koran?

Tradition, perhaps.

Originally Posted by BRussell

[edit] According to this, the whole story is bunk anyway.

Wonderful.

Dork. · Dec 1, 2006, 01:51 PM

I'm confused. Even if it's not for the official swearing in, but just for a photo-op ceremonial swearing in, why on earth would we expect a non-Christian to swear on the Bible?

Monique · Dec 1, 2006, 02:03 PM

It is silly to get out of shape because of the book he is going to use for his swear-in.

Presidents have used the Bible since the beginning of the United States.

I am more worried how he is going to govern; is it going to be according to the Koran or according to the laws of the land. After all far right Christians use the Bible as the law book not the criminal and civil code.

lpkmckenna · Dec 1, 2006, 08:48 PM

Originally Posted by Monique

I am more worried how he is going to govern; is it going to be according to the Koran or according to the laws of the land.

He's only a legislator. He doesn't actually govern anything.

marden · Dec 2, 2006, 09:29 AM

Originally Posted by MacNStein

Sounds fine to me.

Me too.

The people of Minnesota knew he was a Muslim and there is nothing wrong with being a Muslim and as a Muslim he reads the Koran the way Christians read the Bible. For him NOT to choose to be sworn in on the Koran would be a sell out, a betrayal of his beliefs and hypocritical.

Not to mention a needless token act of deference to our lowest common denominator. People need to get clear on the concept. Muslim ≠ Terrorist. And until or unless we change the Constitution, Muslims and Islam have every right to life, liberty, pursuit of happiness, religious freedom and all that as much as anyone else.

Period.

His connection to CAIR (and their ties to terrorism) and a reported position in support of cop killers is MUCH more worrisome to me than his being sworn in on a Koran.

Peace loving American Muslims could help this situation as well as the plight of ALL American Muslims by coming out against Islamic terrorism.

mitchell_pgh · Dec 2, 2006, 03:50 PM

I'm fine with it...

Millennium · Dec 3, 2006, 09:13 AM

Part of the issue is that the Bible used by members of Congress is not just any Christian religious text: that particular copy is also a historical artifact. That said, there's no reason that whatever Koran this man uses couldn't be used again for the next Muslim representative, and the next, and so on, establishing a similar line. It smacks uncomfortably of "separate but equal," but when the guy frickin insists on this for himself, I suppose it's difficult to argue.