Recently, Keith Ellison was elected to the U.S. House of Representatives, by Minnesotans. Even more recently, he announced that he wanted to take the oath of office on the koran (or Qur'an), instead of the bible, or nothing at all. Right now, those are the two choices: The bible, or just an oath without a holy book.
Of course, my (not at all religious) husband decided to see where I stand on the topic (like I'd even heard of it before he mentioned it...). He sucked me in! ARGH! He posed it as such, that it was a totally terrible thing, because the koran teaches violence against those who don't share the same beliefs. I had to mention that the bible also teaches anti-gay and slavery, but most Christians don't exactly share those beliefs. I BEGGED him to just let us agree to disagree, but of course he kept sending me things and telling me things to try to see "the light". Gosh, I hate those kinds of disagreements! I had done SO well avoiding the whole election thing...I was so proud! But now this. Oh well, I think I have thwarted things for now. I gave my opinion, said we'll just disagree, and have ignored him since. *whew*! That was a close one! (P.S. It's only been 10 minutes--it'll blow over soon, once he sees a bright shiny object to re-focus his attention!)
My thoughts are this:
*TOTAL separation of church and state would have completely avoided this topic. If nobody took oath on any type of holy book, then there would be absolutely no issue. Separation of church and state should have happened decades ago. Period.
*IF the only current options are the bible or nothing, then that is wrong in itself. Who cares if the current "founding" of our country was based on Christianity? To me, it was more founded on freedom of religion. People fled here from Europe to be able to practice any religion they chose. My point being, there are many religions practiced here, so each person should have the option of whatever they choose. Even if they choose to take oath on their grandmother's dirty socks, they should be able to do so. Why just the bible or nothing?
*Again, the point I made earlier was that there are extremists in all religions. Just because a person takes an oath on their own holy book (or their dog's bag of Beggin' Strips), it doesn't mean that they believe and practice every single thing that is written in said holy book (or agree with the contents or ingestion directions on the back of the bag of said Beggin' Strips). The extremists are the ones who are making the world all crazy and violent (or all dog-breathed by eating canine treats).
Do I think Keith Ellison is a wack-job? Yes, I do. I did not vote for him. Of course, that is probably because my daughter didn't like his name as well as someone else's, but I digress. He IS a nut case. That withstanding, the topic is whether or not he should have a choice of what he takes an oath on. I say yes...since right now the choices are ridiculous. Until they change things to a proper separation of church and state, he should be able to take oath on whatever he wants. Even the rabbit that he found in the stew pot on the stove last Thursday evening.
Recent Comments