A first for America...The
Koran replaces the Bible at swearing-in oath
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)
Chatboard (0)