
Observations and inanities by a second-shift assistant supervisor in the Puppy-Grinding division of the Evil Atheist Conspiracy® (our motto: "Sure it's cruel, but think of the jobs!"), your host, Brent Rasmussen.
Dennis Prager And The Dominionists
Dennis Prager, the right-wing radio talk show host, has started some spirited discussion across the nation. In a recent column, "America, not Keith Ellison, decides what book a congressman takes his oath on," he suggested that even though it's not a law, and even though the U.S. Constitution specifically forbids religious tests for office, and even though the tradition of taking the oath of office by "swearing on" a holy text from the individual's own faith tradition is not a requirement - that newly elected Congressman Keith Ellison, who is a Muslim, should bring not only the Koran to his ceremonial swearing-in, but also a Christian Bible - a religious text he does not believe in and does not follow.
Why?
Well, apparently because Dennis Prager doesn't want to piss off the schoolyard bully, the Christian Dominionists.
Prager responds to the critics of his original column in a new column entitled "A response to my critics – and a solution".
His "response" is laughable. A weird mish-mash of wishful thinking, stuttering indignation that anyone would dare question his opinions on the matter, paranoid claims of "hate filled attacks" from left-wing bloggers, backed up by smoke and mirrors and assertions as to how things "ought to be". No evidence, no law, no statistics, nothing to confirm that it would be the end of American Civilization, as Prager claims, if - *gasp!* - the First Amendment and the U.S. Constitutional guarantees of Freedom from a religious test for office and freedom of religious expression were extended to a newly-elected American Congressman who doesn't happen to be - *double gasp!!* - Christian.
His "solution" is to bow to the bullying and to have Ellison voluntarily give up his own civil rights because if he doesn't, the Christians will be really mad at him. That's it. Nothing else.
*sigh*
[Dennis Prager] I am for no law to be passed to prevent Keith Ellison or anyone else from bringing any book he wants to his swearing-in, whether actual or ceremonial. But neither I nor tens of millions of other Americans will watch in silence as the Bible is replaced with another religious text for the first time since George Washington brought a Bible to his swearing-in. It is not I, but Keith Ellison, who has engaged in disuniting the country. He can still help reunite it by simply bringing both books to his ceremonial swearing-in. Had he originally announced that he would do that, I would have written a different column – filled with praise of him. And there would be a lot less cursing and anger in America.
Yes, yes. I am fully aware that Dennis Prager is not a Christian either, but he insists on asserting the moral superiority of Christians and seems to be advocating for nothing less than a Christian Theocracy to be installed in this country.
In short, he's a very strange, very confused individual.
Dennis Prager - I am speaking directly to you. The Constitution applies to everyone - not just to Christians. That means that you, me, and Keith Ellison can confidently practice our religion, or choose not to practice any religion at all, without fear of reprisals or punishment by our government. Christianity has held a privileged place in American society for so long that it's adherents - and deluded folks such as yourself - seem to think that it's traditions and ceremonies are akin to law. And that to go contrary to them is "disuniting America".
This is an abysmally ignorant position to hold, Dennis. You have made the classic blunder of considering the traditions and superstitions of your tribe to be laws of nature. They're not.
Our strength as a country comes from our fierce desire to protect our fellow citizen's civil rights. This desire forms the basis of, and is codified into the Constitution. In other words, we all have to watch each other's backs.
What you're doing is throwing a brave fellow American to the wolves to kowtow to the strongest bully in the tribe, the Christian Dominionists.
It makes me sick.
Grow a spine, for goodness' sake, and stand up for what's right for a change.



















Ironically...
he isn't considering "the traditions and superstitions of YOUR tribe to be laws of nature" since he is, in fact, Jewish. He's also unaware of how many Jews have chosen the Hebrew Bible to use in their photo-ops.
Because that is the final irony. Congressmen are sworn in en masse, and don't use ANY 'book' in the ceremony. The 'hands on the Bible' (Qur'an or whatever) is a totally unofficial 'photo-op' and nothing more.
I entirely agree that a person has the right to his beliefs or lack of same -- but I'm in so pedantic and argumentative (oh, just say grumpy) a mood I have to argue that a person's beliefs and religion ARE a legitimate concern for voters, if only because I refuse to give up my right to vote against a Fundie, a Dominationist, or a Moonie like Curt Weeldon -- and I doubt if I could vote for a Scientologist either.
The U.S. Holocaust Memorial Museum responds....
http://gaelicstarover.blogspot.com/2006/12/message-from-holocaust-museum.html
How about the Constitution?
Were I ever to be elected to Congress (yeah, right), I would bring the Constitution as my book. What would Prager say to that?
Undoubtably...
...he'd call you a "godless heathen".
Me, I'd take it as a compliment.
Jim Downey
"Sometimes I think we're alone. Sometimes I think we're not. In either case, the thought is staggering."
- R. Buckminster Fuller
alternate religious "text"
This set of stories caused me to wonder, what would happen if a person legally elected to office decided to swear on another text (whether because they solumnly believed it or just for fun). So, what would the reaction be if I decided to swear on Darwin's "Origen of Species", Square-Enix "Dragon Quest VIII" (yes, I know it's a video game, not a book, but there's no rule it says it has to be a book), a copy of Harry Potter, or just about any other non-religious text would be.
Debateable. America hasn't traditionally been good to non-Christian religions. That Jews made out relatively well is more due to the fact that all the radicals were focused on "dealing with" Native Americans and that by that point Jews had learned to keep quiet and avoid being noticed. That second part, that Europe is secular and therefor targets Jews in particular (not Christians, Jews and to some extent Muslems) is the surest sign that it's problem is decidedly religious in nature. It's also a prime example of fundamentalists setting up Athiesm as a strawman to take the beating for crimes Christianity committed (seriously, they claim that Hitler was an Athiest, or maybe a Jew).