The New Ulm Journal vies with the Fairmont Sentinel for being the most conservative of the First District's daily newspapers. The Journal was the only daily to endorse Gil Gutknecht in 2006.
Thus claims of liberal media bias can't be used to explain away today's editorial: Ellison should swear by what’s sacred to him:
Minnesota congressman-elect Keith Ellison, the first Muslim member of Congress, has raised some conservative hackles by saying he will place his hand on the Quran instead of the Bible when he takes his ceremonial oath of office.
That’s outrageous, harrumphs conservative (and Christian) radio commentator Dennis Prager. The U.S. decides what congressmen should swear on, and the U.S. says it should be the Bible, he says,
Actually, say constitutional scholars, congressmen don’t really have to swear on anything. The Constitution’s First Amendment clearly says Congress shall pass no law respecting establishment of religion, and requiring someone to swear on the Christian Bible sounds sort of like the establishment of Christianity as the official faith of the Congress.
Besides, wouldn’t we expect someone taking an oath to swear by whatever is sacred to them? To Ellison, a Muslim, the Bible is just a bunch of old books. Swearing on the Bible would have no more moral claim on him than swearing on a copy of “Moby Dick.” If he holds the Quran to be sacred, he should swear on that.
What would happen in Prager, by some stretch of the imagination, found himself testifying in a Muslim court somwhere. If they asked him to swear on the Quran, what would he do?
Ellison should have the same rights to practice his religion.
Can we get an "Amen" to that sentiment?
One caveat, though. In our experience, our devout Muslim friends haven't been dismissive of the old testament, nor of the gospel of Jesus as just a "bunch of old books." They have said that the texts were divine revelations given to prophets, but the Qur'an is God's final revelation to humanity. We don't know Representative Ellison's personal view on the subject, but aren't inclined to think his respect for his chosen religion's sacred text is cause for outrage.
Like all Americans, he has the right to practice his faith of choice--or to chose no faith at all. Prager's outburst is a distraction; Minnesota's congressional delegation has real work to do, and the media would do voters a service by focusing on policy deliberations rather than flaps, fashion, and furniture.
Comments