POL/REL: Taking the Oath of Office on the Koran
 

And it goes on like this . . .
http://www.townhall.com/Columnists/D...es_his_oath_on


Two quick points. First, nothing in the laws of the United States nor the rules of Congress indicates what, if anything, someone should do with their hands when they take the oath of office.

Second, sometimes I like to pronounce hyperbole "HYPER-BOWL" in order to shake things up.

I think we should pronounce "Super Bowl" as "Su-PER-bol-lee".

Let's start doing it and see if we can get it to catch on.

Wow. That guy's got his head so far up his ass he's about to turn inside out.

I'm assuming the oath has been taken on the Torah a number of times?

According to the article/rant, no. But I wouldn't exactly look to that guy for actual facts.

I think some people don't understand what Freedom of Religion means.

Just in case anybody wonders (like I did) exactly what the Cong. Oath of Office says:

http://clerk.house.gov/members/oathoffice.html
Source: Congressional Record (House) - Updated March 10, 2005

OATH OF OFFICE MEMBERS, RESIDENT COMMISSIONER, AND DELEGATES

The oath of office required by the sixth article of the Constitution of the United States, and as provided by section 2 of the act of May 13, 1884 (23 Stat. 22), to be administered to members, Resident Commissioner, and Delegates of the House of Representatives, the text of which is carried in 5 U.S.C. 3331:

"I, AB, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter. So help me God."

has been subscribed to in person and filed in duplicate with the Clerk of the House of Representatives by the following Members of the 109th Congress, pursuant to the provisions of 2 U.S.C. 25

The most obvious question, I guess, is that if this is required as indicated, what does/would an atheist do?

Laugh as he or she says it?

I believe that atheists have sworn on the Bible before. From my perspective, I don't know why you would want someone who doesn't believe in Christianity to swear on the Bible - if the book is seen as a symbol of something that's important to the person, doesn't a Bible defeat the purpose for an atheist or a Jewish/Muslim person? Hell, do Christians really want non-believers swearing on it if it means nothing to the latter?

I like to pronounce epitome as "Ep-ih-tome". I think it was sounds more like the meaning of the word.

For me, this is just another example of how Islam is being forced upon the U.S., much the way it has been in France and England. While I realize this nation has freedom of religion, it also was "one nation found under god" and has always traditionally been a judeo-christian society. My biggest problem with what is happening here is the America has been losing it's identity little by little each day...namingly it's borders, language, and culture.

I'm going to try and tread very softly here and keep this discussion under as much control as I can.

What harm does it do to the American identity and/or culture for a Muslim to say the oath on the Koran?

Is your issue that he's saying his oath on the Koran or that he's Muslim in the first place?

He's not asking you to do it -he's asking that if he's supposed to swear on a symbol of faith, it ought to be his faith - it means nothing if he's swearing on a religion he doesn't believe in. Seriously - you'd prefer a fake promise on something he doesn't believe in?

I'd just say the words. The last sentence wouldn't have any meaning to me, but if it's required, so be it. I mean, at Thanksgiving dinner last week and made the "sign of the cross" and said grace before dinner with my family. The gesture and words were meaningless to me personally, but easy enough to do and say and made my grandma happy.

It doesn't appear as if the bible is required, so I might ask to do without that aspect of it.

No Muslim, Jew, or Atheist should swear on the Bible. Pointless.

A good point indeed, I for one however see it as another step away from "the way things have always been". I fully admit I am an American traditionalist. I also beleive that part of the plan of Islam is take over democracies little at a time through cultural, and law changes over a long peroid of time. Islamic clerics know they cannot defeat us militarily, so this is what we are getting. What is happening in this instance is one small example of what I am talking about. Ask yourself this: Is this being applauded by our enemies in the liddle east?

I seem to recall phrases like "pains and penalties of perjury" being used for courtroom swearings-in of those requesting a non-biblical method. I always thought that was a real leap of faith... that the pains and penalties of perjury were equally foreboding to a non-religious person as the almighty would be to a believer.

An "American Traditionalist"? What does that mean? How traditional are we talking? What values does an "American Traditionalist" adhere to?

Are you upset about emancipation? Do you miss the Three-Fifths Compromise? What about women's right to vote? Segregation? Do Amendments 11-27 offend you?

It means I am more likely to adhere to the status quo, rather than be an agent for change. It doesn't mean I am against change, it just means I am more likely to be very careful about change, and watch how is progresses on a day to day level, and even be mindful of it's potential consequences/benefits.

Ah, I think what you really mean is "conservative."

Check it out:
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/conservative

No, he means he doesn't recognize hip hop as part of American culture.

Yes, I am a conservative...great now that we've established that. Jeeezsh.

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.

would anyone have even noticed if the representative hadn't chosen to "announce" his intent?

Wait until a Hindu gets elected to office.. or a shintoist, or buddhist, etc...

Can i swear on a statue of Ganesh, Kali, Shiva, Sita, etc?

Maybe this should be another discussion, but what is American culture really? Isn't it a melting pot of other cultures?

You still have not said what is harmful about this specific change.

And I'm still curious as to whether it is the swearing on the Koran that bothers your, or if it is that a Muslim is going into office.

Right... and christianity being forced upon the U.S. is better?
You don't think that Allah isn't the same God as YHWH, Yahweh, Jehovah, etc? Muslims revere Abraham, Mary, and other biblical figures.

That is a terribly untraditionally American Article!!! It has no place in our Constitution!

Thats what I was thinking as well. Let's remember that this guy was voted in by the American public. Are you suggesting he duped the voters?

Apparently so long as that culture does not include hip hop, yes.

Hey, don't blame me for this. I'm not the one who started throwing around that "American Traditionalist" nonsense.

It seems to me the point of having your hand on the Bible when taking the oath is that you are swearing to your god as represented by the Bible. So if that isn't your god, it makes sense to do something else. And since it's not specified in law that you have to swear on the Bible, what difference does it make?

Considering the oath and Article VI seem to be at conflict, I doubt an atheist would be denied office if the left So Help Me God off the end of the oath.

You should hear the Masonic oaths. If they don't scare the bejeezus out of you, nothing ever will.

dola...

I'd tell you what those oaths are, of course, but then I'd have to kill you. Or kill myself. I don't remember exactly.

I'm curious - I'm a non-practicing Hindu. If I'm elected, my faith (if it was practiced) is less deserving in some way?

I'm a non-practicing guitarist.

I also beleive that part of the plan of Islam is take over democracies little at a time through cultural, and law changes over a long peroid of time. Islamic clerics know they cannot defeat us militarily, so this is what we are getting. What is happening in this instance is one small example of what I am talking about. Ask yourself this: Is this being applauded by our enemies in the middle east? In other words, I beleive our enemies are using our own freedoms against us, and that we are sitting there on the sidelines saying "good for you".

I for one am still pissed they stopped burning witches and putting scarlet A's on slutty women.

I guess I'll ask again... You realize he was elected by the American public, right? Are you suggesting he duped everybody into believing he was a Christian?

I don't know whay so many of you sit there and make light of this when history has clearly told us what many of the Islamic leaders in the world want to do to western society.

He will not be denied entry to his position, and I would be dissapointed if the atheist did say any allegiance towards God. I would think it's in an atheist's best interest to remain mute at that point or change what he says to better reflect his faith than to get through a swearing in by lying.

I totally agree, especially now that Drive-Ins are starting to disappear. It's like the fabric of our society is unraveling before our eyes.

I'm really pissed about that - the slutty women were easier to find back then.

No doubt. Now you have to drive all the way down to the skating rink to find the slutty women.

Seriously - and that whole owning people bit - why not, I say?

I'm trying my best to subscribe to your newsletter here, so just confirm for me please. Are you saying that this guys thinking is in line with Islamic clerics and that he wants to destroy the US, but if we make him swear on the Bible we'll all be ok?

Pfft. My wife has owned me for 13 years. I don't know what gave you the impression that this ever went away.

So if he swears on the Bible, you're ok with him being in Congress? All of your other concerns go away right?

You're trying to drive to the same point as me here that I don't think PSU has answered yet, he's danced around the question here.

Would you be happy if this same Muslim electee swore on the Bible? Would you only be happy if he was a non-Muslim swearing on the Bible? Maybe a Christian swearing on the Koran?

I'm not sure that I understand what would make you ok with this situation.

That, to some extent, is why Prager's column had me scratching my head.

On the one hand, I think I see what he's getting at -- basically trivializing the general tradition of swearing on a Bible by replacing it with another book (under the current circumstances, the Koran just adds insult to injury, but I don't get the impression that his overall point is meant to be specific to the Koran either).

But on the other hand, since having him use a Bible (or having an atheist use a Bible, or whatever) wouldn't really carry the traditional meaning, then I'm not sure why it would be a point for discussion.

Although if I'm right in my interpretation of what he's really getting at, then this isn't about the one guy & this one case, rather it's just a symptom of a larger & more serious issue.

Then again, there's also a possibility that the guy cut Prager off for a parking space or something.