Religion of Peace update: CAIR pushes dhimmitude (again)
This week, regular commenter DJ directed us to a column written by Dennis Prager about Congressman-elect Keith Ellison – the guy who made the news by demanding that his oath of office be done while holding a Qur’an. Well now, as might be expected, the Council on American-Islamic Relations has overreacted by trying to intimidate Prager (and any other critic of Islam) into silence by having him removed from the United States Holocaust Memorial Council. Big shock: Islamists trying to strong-arm anyone who doesn’t agree with an Islamic overhaul of our society.
An Islamic civil rights group said Monday that a columnist who criticized Rep.-elect Keith Ellison’s decision to use the Quran during his ceremonial swearing-in should be removed from the United States Holocaust Memorial Council.The Council on American-Islamic Relations said the comments by Dennis Prager, a columnist and conservative talk radio host, displayed an intolerance toward Islam that make him an inappropriate person to serve on the council.
Intolerance, indeed! If you read Prager’s column, you’ll see that he never takes issue with Islam, never even criticizes the religion at all. He simply makes the case for the upholding of American tradition and culture.
… 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, and the many secular elected officials have not believed in the Old Testament either. Yet those secular officials did not demand to take their oaths of office on, say, the collected works of Voltaire or on a volume of New York Times editorials, writings far more significant to some liberal members of Congress than the Bible. Nor has one Mormon official demanded to put his hand on the Book of Mormon. And it is hard to imagine a scientologist being allowed to take his oath of office on a copy of “Dianetics” by L. Ron Hubbard.
So why are we allowing Keith Ellison to do what no other member of Congress has ever done — choose his own most revered book for his oath?
When I first read Prager’s column, I actually didn’t agree with him. I thought Ellison should be allowed to take his oath on the holy scripture of his own religion. But the more I thought about it, the more I came to see Prager’s point. It’s about the culture of America, and upholding our official traditions. We’re a free country and we allow all forms of religious expression, but we should also be allowed to maintain our standards as well.
Turns out, nobody has to swear on the Bible to take the oath of Congress. No book is used at all. This whole thing is a made-up issue. Congresspeople are sworn in with their right hand in the air, their left hand is not placed on any book. The House speaker administers the oath to members en masse on the floor of the House of Representatives, and it’s up to individual members if they want to hold religious texts.
Bottom line, if Ellison wanted to hold a Qur’an while he is sworn in, he could have done so without telling a soul. He could have done what so many Leftists demand of Christians – keep religion a private matter. But he chose to make it a public issue. So that poses an obvious question: Why did Keith Ellison announce that he would eschew the Bible for the Qur’an? To stir up shit. To stick it in the faces of every “infidel” in America. And to show every jihadist that they are making progress at converting and dhimmifying America.
Dennis Prager speaks out against this stunt and incurs the ire of CAIR who, ironically, call him intolerant. Disagreeing with Prager is one thing, but CAIR is way out of line by trying to bully another organization into removing him due to their own disagreement with his views. This should not be allowed to stand.
12th gen. American, Constitutionalist, Harley-riding Texan, gun owner & NRA member, blogger, illustrator, Florida Gator alumnus. #TCOT
