Fresh perspectives on today’s news by: Whymrhymer
Columnist and radio talk-show host Dennis Prager is openly critical of Rep.-elect Keith Ellison (D-Minn.) because Ellison, a Muslim, plans to bring a Quran to his House swearing-in ceremony in January. Prager’s contention, expressed here in an interview with the Jewish Journal, is that Ellison’s use of a Quran would “break a 200-year tradition.”
The Journal article also quotes Prager as making the incredibly bold and unbelievably presumptuous statement: “If you are incapable of taking an oath on [the Bible], don’t serve in Congress.”
Since Prager, a regular contributor to the conservative forum, Townhall.com, published his article at TownHall titled America, Not Keith Ellison, decides what book a congressman takes his oath on, on November 28th, he has been under attack by both the Left and the Right; in my opinion, a fully justified attack.
Following is a snippet from Prager’s 11/28 TownHall column:
“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.”
That is Dennis Prager at his self-righteous best!
From that quote one would assume that Dennis Prager was a Christian Conservative, he’s not! Prager is certainly a no-holds-barred Conservative but he is a Jewish Conservative with a very high regard for America and all it stands for — or at least what he feels it stands for. His dedication to what he feels is right is admirable in some respects but, at least in this case, far off the mark.
“America” does not hold any religious text as its holiest book; the U.S. Government does not have a religion — it is a government “of the people” and is, Constitutionally, a secular government.
“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, …” — from Amendment 1 to the U.S. Constitution
Yes there are traditions but who is Dennis Prager to say that there is no room for change. And, yes, the majority of Americans are Christian and hold their Bible to the high standard of being the only “true” word but being the majority does not make them the ultimate arbiters of right and wrong nor does it automatically turn our secular government into a Christian government.
The main point, however, beyond Dennis Prager’s hysteria, is that Keith Ellison is not a Christian and his oath of office with his hand on a Christian bible would be meaningless — steeped in 200 years of tradition perhaps, but totally meaningless. Ellison should take his oath on a Quran because doing that will mean something to him personally and it will signify that he means what he says when he swears to “support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign or domestic.”
Links:
The Jewish Journal: Dennis Prager won’t apologize for attack on Quran’s use in Congressional swearing-in ceremony
Washington Post: Group Asks Removal of Koran Swearing-In Critic
Prager’s Response at World Net Daily: A response to my critics — and a solution
From the blogosphere:
Progressive Muslima News: Prager: Keith Ellison Must Use Bible for Oath of Office
Piece of Mind: On Ellison and the Qu’ran
Whymrhymer’s fresh perspectives on today’s news, as published here, also appear at My View from the Center and at The American Chronicle Family of Journals. Your visit is always welcome!
powered by performancing firefox
3 users commented in " The Dennis Prager/Keith Ellison War "
Follow-up comment rss or Leave a TrackbackWhile I think the points being made deserve reasonable debate, it seems like the best resolution to the problem would be both to remove Prager from the governing board AND deny Ellison the position he seeks as well. The real problem is not in the debate, is in the infectious nature of the argument that is NOT needed. The stronger lesson should be that we won’t tolerate the argument in this lime-light, and that if you plan to bring contention into this arena, all parties will be shown the door. For these two people to incite this disturbance marks them both unworthy of their positions. Anything less says that we are willing to allow this argument to take precedence over everything else, and we should not.
I would have to question Whymrhymer’s self-proclaimed statement of having “fresh perspectives on today’s news” as being somewhat incredulous. Based on your comments, I would have to conclude that your perspective is very shallow to the point of being predictable—not to mention myopic in scope.
You have stated, “The majority of Americans are Christian and hold their Bible to the high standard of being the only ‘true’ word.” Basically, Mr. Whymrhymer, your views have put yourself in the minority. As the minority, do you believe that you are the arbiter of right and wrong, since you believe the majority has no such right in this case? The decision to use the Bible during the swearing-in ceremony has less to do with the question of “right or wrong,” but based on, “the body that moves into the direction determined by the majority of the forces.”—Locke. It is by this force of the majority that creates the traditions and ceremonies that are important to our American culture and way of life.
We are a secular government based on Judeo-Christian ideals. The Constitution would not exist, at least in its current verbiage, if it weren’t for the existence of the Bible. It is the Bible that has introduced the principle of respect for individual rights. The Quran flies in the face of individual rights because of its intolerance to religious freedom. If one does not convert to Islam, than one is labeled an infidel condemned to servitude or death. Also, I don’t believe “NOW” is a big fan of the Quran when it comes to women’s rights. Are these the principles that Mr. Whymrhymer believes Ellison is pledging his allegiance to by taking his oath on the Quran.
We are not asking Mr. Ellison to convert to Christianity, but what we are asking is for him to be respectful of the ideals that represent American culture which are steeped in the teachings of the Bible. This is America not Saudi Arabia; it is by these ideals that differentiate us by another other nation on planet earth. It is in this Judea-Christian culture in which Mr. Ellison has chosen to live and abide by.
The bottom-line to this argument comes down to those who accept the Bible and those who reject the Bible. Those who reject the Bible are disingenuous in not recognizing the significance the Bible has had on our American culture, and more importantly in the formation of our existing government.
My last comment to Mr. Whymrhymer is, “Do you believe Mr. Prager as an American citizen is afforded the First Amendment right of free speech?” The tone of your blog doesn’t seem to support Mr. Prager’s right to free speech. And so, let us use this forum to address the issues, and not for personal attacks and name calling.
Get a life…a real one!
Leave A Reply