Dennis Prager and the American Family Association are freaking out over Keith Ellison's decision to take his Congressional Oath on the Koran. Keith Ellison IS A MUSLIM! Doesn't it make sense for someone to take an oath on a book that means something to him?
To hear these right-wing Christians get their panties all in a knot over this is absurd, but typical. Bush took his oath to defend and uphold the Constitution on a Bible. How's that working out so far? Guess he's going to hell if that's what you believe.
The United States Constitution, Article VI:
The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the Members of the several State Legislatures, and all executive and judicial Officers, both of the United States and of the several States, shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation, to support this Constitution; but no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States.
Seattle's Only News Quiz
35 minutes ago
ShareThis
3 comments:
"...no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States."
That meant no Quakers, Catholics, Anabaptists, Anglicans...It didn't mean no Muslims, Buddhists, Hindus, Taoist, Pagans.
Why do you think it is THE BIBLE which has been used to swear onto since the founding of the Federal Government?
You have no serious knowledge of the history of the U.S. Constitution, its writers and the source of its greatness, which is no other religion but Christianity, with all its flaws included.
Take this foundation from under the Constitution and the country will finally, completely fall apart, as it ought to for infidelity.
OK "Anonymous", you're kidding, right? Even you can't be this stupid.
This nation was founded as a secular nation. Why do you suppose the founders explicitly put that provision in the CONSTITUTION? Perhaps you should read it before accusing me of not having "serious knowledge of the history of the US Consitution." Do you own a copy of the Constitution? I do. And no, if your copy says "King James version" on it, then it isn't the Constitution.
You do understand that Islam was around back then, don't you? Where in the Constitution does it state it "meant no Quakers, Catholics, Anabaptists, Anglicans...It didn't mean no Muslims, Buddhists, Hindus, Taoist, Pagans."
By your narrow-minded logic, Goober, I suppose we should abolish the 2nd Amendment and its citizens rights to bear arms. Because the whole amendment, states the following: "A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed."
Well, since we no longer need a well regulated militia because we now have the US Military and the National Guard, I suppose we don't need firearms anymore, do we? Is your head now exploding from the hypocrisy?
HERE'S 1st AMENDMENT, GOOBER:
"Congress shall MAKE NO LAW RESPECTING AN ESTABLISHMENT OF RELIGION, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances."
I don't see anything regarding what religion counts and what doesn't. So go snake handle somewhere else and leave the actual interpretation of the UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION to the educated... or at least to those who have actually read it.
That's pretty funny "Anonymous", but don't give up your Burger King job to start a career in comedy. I'm pretty sure the Bush administration has a job for you.
Your ridiculous straw man argument doesn't even warrant debate, since facts about history and the US Constitution are beyond you ken. Look over there Anon, something shiny!-->
Post a Comment