Muslim elected to Congress

United States
December 6, 2006 3:00pm CST
Keith Ellison, D-Minn., the first Muslim elected to the United States Congress, has announced that he will not take his oath of office on the Bible, but on the bible of Islam, the Koran. My question is how do you feel about this congressman being sworn in with the Koran and not the Bible? Please give your reasoning for or against this.
3 responses
@Idlewild (6094)
• United States
6 Dec 06
If that's his faith, he should be allowed to do it. When people are sworn into trial, they can choose to "affirm" rather than "swear" if they are not religious and don't want to swear an oath on a Bible.
@srhelmer (7027)
• Beaver Dam, Wisconsin
6 Dec 06
Most courtrooms don't even use Bibles any more.
@Force_Fed (748)
• United States
6 Dec 06
I'm not a big fan of politicians taking oaths on ANY religious book. My reason is this; what's wrong with a man's(or woman's" word being worth something. Why can't they let their "yes" be yes and their "no" be no? To me, the need for a man to place his hand on the Bible or Koran or any other religious text tells me his word is worth very little. As if he could otherwise renig on his word by saying" sure I promised to do good, but I didn't swear on the Bible" Also, and I'm not a Christian mind you, but I believe Christ has been credited as saying something to the effect of "don't swear at all, but if you must do so not on the name of God. Let your yes be yes and your no be no." I know I completely botched that verse but I think it gets the drift of what I'm saying. Force
@srhelmer (7027)
• Beaver Dam, Wisconsin
6 Dec 06
The United States Constitution protects religious freedom in this country. If he is Muslim and feels he should swear on his religious book then let him. Congressmen don't take an oath on the Bible anyway. Any pictures you see of that is more for publicity than anything.