Religious Tests on Politicians?!?!?! It's the Constitution, Stupid!

The indecent rhetorical onslaught against Congressman-elect Keith Ellison continues.  Dennis Prager has pretenses to being a leader in the American Jewish community -- one hopes that isn't true, given the ignorant hatred he is spewing.  American Jews continue to benefit from the tolerance of our Constitution, a tolerance that Prager loathes and about which he is objectively ignorant.

Minnesota Monitor:

In a recent Townhall article Conservative Talk Show Host and Columnist Dennis Prager states that Congressman-elect Keith Ellison (MN 5) should not be allowed to take the oath of office on the Koran because "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."

Besides playing on the racist fears of his readers by comparing taking the oath of office on the Koran to "a racist elected to Congress" being allowed to "choose Hitler's 'Mein Kampf,' the Nazis' Bible,"  Prager is completely wrong when he states that "all elected officials take their oaths of office with their hands on the very same book."

In our country's history, four presidents have been inaugurated without swearing an oath on the Bible.  Franklin Pierce was affirmed, and swore no oath, Rutherford Hayes initially had a private ceremony with no Bible before his public ceremony, Theodore Roosevelt had no Bible at his ceremony, and Lyndon Johnson used a missal during his first term.

Despite Prager's insistence that "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," it is clear that he is wrong.  Linda Lingle, Governor of Hawaii, took the oath of office on a Torah in 2001.  Madeleine Kunin, a Jewish Immigrant and Governor of Vermont "rested her left hand on a stack of old prayer books that had belonged to her mother, grandparents, and great grandfather" as "a physical expression of the weight of Jewish history."

And in North Carolina, the Notary Public has a written code for swearing in:

    "A person taking an oath should place one hand on the Holy Scriptures. This book will vary depending on the person's religious beliefs: Christians should use the New Testament or the Bible; Jews, the Torah or the Old Testament; Moslems, the Koran; Hindus, the Bhagavad-Gita; etc."

Perhaps Prager would be best benefited if he spent less time writing columns, and more re-reading Article VI of the Constitution:

    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.

Oh, and apparently Prager has a problem with Congresswoman Debbie Wasserman Schultz:

U.S. Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D-Fla.) made headlines earlier this month when she could not find a Hebrew Bible for her swearing in; she refused the Christian Bible proffered by House Speaker Dennis Hastert (R-Ill.) and eventually borrowed one from Rep. Gary Ackerman (D-N.Y.).

Prager's original piece can be found here, without any correction to acknowledge the blatant constitutional infirmity of his article.

Comments

[soccerdad]

Prager may be wrong, but I don't understand why you go all out to defend Ellison. Even if he's sincere about leaving the Nation of Islam, his ties to CAIR are troubling. CAIR isn't simply the the Islamic version of the ADL, it has a troubling tenedency to apologize for terror.

[Jeff Hauser]

Perhaps you will be persuaded by the Jewish version of the ADL -- the ADL itself, which has come out with an admirably strong statement in favor of the American values at issue here.

As the ADL notes, "as a newly-appointed member of the United States Holocaust Memorial Council, Prager and his views must be held to a higher standard." http://www.adl.org/PresRele/DiRaB_41/4934_41.htm

MORE:

Dennis Prager’s argument that Representative-Elect Keith Ellison, the first Muslim elected to Congress, should not be permitted to take his oath of office on a Koran is, intolerant, misinformed and downright un-American.

Prager is flat-out wrong when he asserts that Representative Ellison’s use of a Koran would be “damaging to the fabric of American civilization.” To the contrary, the U.S. Constitution guarantees that, “no religious test shall ever be required” to hold public office in America. Members of Congress, like all Americans, should be free to observe their own religious practices without government interference or coercion.

Prager’s patriotic prattling is misinformed on the facts, too. No Member of Congress is officially sworn in with a Bible. Under House rules, the official swearing-in ceremony is done in the House chambers, with the Speaker of the House administering the oath of office en masse. No Bibles or other holy books are used at all. Members may, if they choose, also have a private ceremony with family and friends. At these unofficial ceremonies, Members frequently solemnize the event by taking an oath while holding a personal family Bible.

Prager ridiculously asserts that permitting Rep. Ellison to take the oath of office would “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.” What he fails to understand is that what truly unifies all Americans is a value system built on religious freedom and pluralism, not dogmatism and coercion.

Prager presents intolerant, ugly views. His comparison of Ellison’s desire to “choose his favorite book” to that of the right of a racist elected to public office to use Hitler’s Mein Kampf is outrageous.

[soccerdad]

I wasn't trying to defend Prager. I was asking why you continously give a free ride to Ellison. Even if one believes, as you do (and I don't) that he's free from his Nation of Islam stigma, he still is quite close with CAIR, which has troubling ties and history.