By Chad Groening and Pat Centner
December 4, 2006

(AgapePress) - A pro-family activist and conservative political pundit says he has more of a problem with what the first Muslim member of Congress will do in regards to national security, than whether he wants to take the oath of office with his hand on a Koran.

Keith Ellison will represent Minnesota's Fifth Congressional District when he takes office next month. But he has already created a stir with Christian leaders like the American Family Association's Dr. Don Wildmon with his announcement that he wants to take the oath of office with a Koran, rather than the Bible.

Gary Bauer

Gary Bauer of American Values, a Washington, DC-based advocacy group, says carefulness is needed in this situation – especially in light of the fact that one of the first things Ellison did after being elected was "to go speak to a number of very questionable radical Islamic rights organizations. So I think we're going to find a lot of things about him very disturbing.

"I must admit, I've got mixed emotions about it," continues Bauer. "I think this new Muslim congressman is going to be trouble because of what he believes -- not his Islamic faith as much as his radicalism on key issues and the fact that he will, I think, be a vote against any kind of serious war against Islamofascism."

While Bauer's primary concern focuses on what he terms Ellison's radicalism, Dennis Prager, a radio talk-show host and author, takes great exception to Ellison's decision to use the Koran, and not the Bible. Prager blasted Ellison in a recent column on the Townhall.com website.

With a column headline of "America, Not Keith Ellison, decides what book a congressman takes his oath on," Prager wrote, "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." He maintained that using a book other than the Bible "undermines American civilization."

Fox News reports that Kari Moe, Ellison's incoming chief of staff, dismissed the matter as "brouhaha." She noted in a telephone interview that the tradition is for all members of Congress to be sworn in together on the House floor. It is in the photo-op ceremony that congressmen typically have their photos taken with their hands placed on the Bible -- or in Ellison's case, the Koran.

But Prager argued back that the ceremony was just as important as the actual swearing-in. "Oh, that's the whole point," he declares to Fox News. "It's exactly because it's ceremonial that it matters to me .... Ceremonies are exceedingly important. That is the way a society states what is most significant to it."

The columnist, a Jew, also argues that this issue was not about freedom of religion. Instead, he maintained that whatever religion a person about to hold a political office may (or may not) be, the Holy Bible should be the book used in connection with that person's taking an oath of office.

"I want Jews like myself to take the oath on the Bible, even though the New Testament is not our Bible," he says. When asked if it would be a problem for a Jewish lawmaker to take the oath on a Bible that included only the Old Testament, Prager replied, "Yes, it would, because the point is to honor the Bible of this country."

© 2006 AgapePress all rights reserved.

E-mail this page to a friend

Printer-Friendly Version

Read all of our current headlines