America, Not Keith Ellison, decides what book a congressman takes his oath on

[mattskramer]

This explains why discrimination agaist Christians is so accepted by the liberal media.

So now, this nation needs to bend over backwards to appease the minority of non Christians

Sorry to disagree with you, I am waiting for BP to right about one thing

Let’s try to use some intellectual consistency. Should private industry be free to discriminate against people for any reason? Should landlords discriminate against homosexual couples? Should businesses be allowed to discriminate against Blacks? Should businesses be free to discriminate against Satanists? Then shouldn’t businesses be free to discriminate against Christians?

 

[Bullypulpit]

If this is not a Christian conutry, why does 95% of the people celebrate Christmas?

Because it's become more of a secular holiday that a religious one I should think.

And why does the ACLU and kook libs have the annual war on Christmas to appease the 5% of morons who want to ruin Christmas for the rest of us?

The 'war on Christmas' exists only in the fevered imaginations of the likes of Sean Hannity, Bill O'Reilly, James Dobson, and others of their ilk, who are totally off their nut and can't think of anything better to bitch about

Left to kook libs, America would not be a Christian country. The fight still rages

No, America is not, nor should it be a "Christian country" in the sense you mean it. A theocracy would, I think, be more to your liking. An America where Christians, Jews, Muslims, Hindus, Buddhists, Sihks and all the other religions of the world, and those claiming no religion, can exist side by side with none claiming supremacy over any other is the ideal.

 

[red states rule]

Because it's become more of a secular holiday that a religious one I should think.



The 'war on Christmas' exists only in the fevered imaginations of the likes of Sean Hannity, Bill O'Reilly, James Dobson, and others of their ilk, who are totally off their nut and can't think of anything better to bitch about



No, America is not, nor should it be a "Christian country" in the sense you mean it. A theocracy would, I think, be more to your liking. An America where Christians, Jews, Muslims, Hindus, Buddhists, Sihks and all the other religions of the world, and those claiming no religion, can exist side by side with none claiming supremacy over any other is the ideal.

Libs would rather imnpose nothing on the 95% who celebrate Christmas to appease the 5%.

Now War on Christmas? You ignore the obvious and stick to the DNC talking points

Here is only one example of the ACLU (the legal wing of the DNC) trying to remove Christmas from public view

Schools wrestling with holiday concerts

Anne Ryman
The Arizona Republic
Dec. 7, 2005 12:00 AM

Teachers call it the "December dilemma."

Holiday decorations appear in the classrooms, and choruses and bands prepare for their annual winter concerts.

Educators then must wrestle with a question that has grown thornier in recent years: How much of the music and decorations can have a religious theme?

Can the chorus sing Silent Night? Can the Christmas tree have a star? Can there be a creche or a Menorah?

From a legal standpoint, the guidelines are fairly clear: It's OK to have religious motifs if they're for educational purposes. But the details can get tricky.

And that has given rise to a patchwork of approaches across Arizona and the rest of the nation. It also has generated lawsuits in some states and caused parents and advocacy groups to press for changes.

This year, the Scottsdale-based Alliance Defense Fund,a Christian legal group, has lined up 800 attorneys nationwide to be ready to sue if a school prohibits religious Christmas songs in its concerts. It needs a complaint from a parent to intervene. The group contacted more than 9,000 school districts this year reminding them that the U.S. Supreme Court has never ruled that public schools must ban religious songs.

On the other side, the American Civil Liberties Union also is poised to act. In 2004, it sued a Louisiana school district for displaying a nativity on campus and including religious songs in its holiday program. The suit was later dismissed.

The skirmishes are part of the continuing war over separation of church and state. But unlike other battles, such as the Ten Commandments in a courthouse, this one hits people close to home, as parents feel their kids are being denied or subjected to affirmation of a particular faith.

Schools often fall into two camps: They quietly avoid religious songs in favor of more generic tunes such as Frosty the Snowman and Jingle Bells. Or they offer a sprinkling of songs from different religions and fill much of the concert with secular holiday songs.

"Some years it works out better than others," said Judith Durocher, choral director at Pinnacle High School in northeast Phoenix. She expects criticism this year because the winter concert has more religious songs than usual. The concert will feature a Hanukkah song and Benjamin Britten's A Ceremony of Carols, which features several religious old English songs.

In contrast, Yavapai Elementary School in Scottsdale avoids religious Christmas music altogether.

This year's concert will include It's Beginning To Look a Lot Like Christmas, Jingle Bells and Santa Claus, You Are Much Too Fat.Others are a Hanukkah song, a Spanish song and an African song.

"We don't do Silent Night," Principal Wendy Cohen said. "You have to be real sensitive you don't infringe."

Schools that offer a mix of music tend to weigh the numbers carefully.

Julia Kelly, principal of Las Sendas Elementary in Mesa, said most of its concert must be non-religious tunes along the lines of Rudolph the Red-nosed Reindeer or Santa Claus is Coming to Town.

"It doesn't mean you can't have a piece of religious music thrown in there," she said.

The upcoming orchestra concert features a Christmas hymn, O Come, All Ye Faithful, and an Israeli folk song, Dreidel.

Arizona School for the Arts in Phoenix takes a more direct approach.

Parents are told up front that students will study religious music because much of vocal music is religious text, said Mark S. Francis, the school's founder and executive director. This year's concert will not include any overtly religious songs, but past concerts have included pieces from Handel's Messiah.

Some parents say it's unfortunate that schools feel the need to ban Christmas songs.

"They should feel free to sing any songs that are pretty," said Linda Gomillion, whose daughter attends Pinnacle in the Paradise Valley Unified School District.

Schools in the district don't ban religious Christmas songs. But they're advised that if they include one, they should balance it with songs from other cultures, said Jeff Smith, Paradise Valley's director of curriculum and instruction. Principals should use "winter concerts" or "holiday concerts" instead of Christmas concerts.

Scottsdale parent Jody Stachel, who is Jewish, said she doesn't mind if schools leave out religious songs entirely and have children sing holiday songs about snow and winter. But if a school decides to perform a Christmas song, it's a good idea to include a Hanukkah song, she said.

Holiday decorations also can be a minefield for schools.

In the Paradise Valley district, schools cannot prominently display a Christmas tree with ornaments and a star.At Mesa's Las Sendas, Christmas trees, wreaths and garlands are allowed, but not nativity scenes.

In the Yavapai school office, there is a small pine tree, snowmen, a Menorah, reindeer, Spanish greeting cards that say "Feliz Navidad," a Kwanzaa brochure, a sign that says "Peace" and a stuffed Grinch.

Principals say the shift away from religious themes began in the mid-1980s out of respect for children who don't celebrate Christmas. Schools walk a fine line: The First Amendment prohibits public schools from promoting religion, but also prohibits them from inhibiting religion.

The U.S. Supreme Court has never ruled explicitly on religious songs in schools. Attorneys often rely on a 1980 appeals court decision that upheld the use of religious songs in schools for educational purposes.

That has given advocacy groups a basis on which to attack any bans.

Mike Johnson, senior legal counselor for the Alliance Defense Fund, calls concerts such as Yavapai's, which excludes religious Christmas songs, "political correctness run amok."

Johnson said it's legal to perform religious songs such as O Little Town of Bethlehem and to call concerts Christmas concerts. It's also OK to have Christmas trees, he said, because the symbol is viewed as non-religious.

The organization has intervened in several cases to press its cause.

In Texas last year, it sued the Plano Independent School District in federal court after the district prohibited students from wearing red and green to winter parties and banned students from exchanging candy canes with religious messages on them.

The group also intervened in an uproar last year when an Oklahoma City-area school banned a nativity scene and the hymn Silent Night from the holiday play. Lakehoma Elementary School also removed Christmas references and symbols but kept ones for Hanukkah and Kwanzaa. Silent Night was later added back in.

Arizona has not had a similar high-profile case in years.

The law is also fairly clear on decorations in public schools. The U.S. Supreme Court has ruled a nativity scene is constitutional if displayed for a non-religious reason such as to celebrate the holiday. But attorneys advise schools that it's best to display a variety of holiday symbols just to be safe.

There is no magic formula for schools to follow, said Jeremy Gunn, director of the ACLU's Program on Freedom of Religion and Belief in Washington, D.C. But schools can avoid problems if they respect all religions and not single out or promote one, he said.

Charles Haynes, senior scholar with the First Amendment Center in Arlington, Va., said some schools try to duck the issue completely by avoiding religious songs or displays.

"A lot of people are frustrated that there are a lot of schools that haven't worked this through." Haynes said.
http://www.azcentral.com/arizonarepublic/news/articles/1207nocarols.html


Libs have no problem with Jews, Muslims, Hindus, Buddhists, or Sihks openly showing their faith - but Christians? No way!!!!

Today, libs have no problem with discrimination against Christians.

 

[Gunny]

This shouldn't be ALLOWED....NO IFS, ANDS OR BUTS!

By Dennis Prager
Tuesday, November 28, 2006

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.

He should not be allowed to do so -- not because of any American hostility to the Koran, but because the act undermines American civilization.

First, it is an act of hubris that perfectly exemplifies multiculturalist activism -- my culture trumps America's culture. What Ellison and his Muslim and leftist supporters are saying is that it is of no consequence what America holds as its holiest book; all that matters is what any individual holds to be his holiest book.

Forgive me, but America should not give a hoot what Keith Ellison's favorite book is. 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. If you are incapable of taking an oath on that book, don't serve in Congress. In your personal life, we will fight for your right to prefer any other book. We will even fight for your right to publish cartoons mocking our Bible. But, Mr. Ellison, America, not you, decides on what book its public servants take their oath.

Devotees of multiculturalism and political correctness who do not see how damaging to the fabric of American civilization it is to allow Ellison to choose his own book need only imagine a racist elected to Congress. Would they allow him to choose Hitler's "Mein Kampf," the Nazis' bible, for his oath? And if not, why not? On what grounds will those defending Ellison's right to choose his favorite book deny that same right to a racist who is elected to public office?

Of course, Ellison's defenders argue that Ellison is merely being honest; since he believes in the Koran and not in the Bible, he should be allowed, even encouraged, to put his hand on the book he believes in. But 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?

The answer is obvious -- Ellison is a Muslim. And whoever decides these matters, not to mention virtually every editorial page in America, is not going to offend a Muslim. In fact, many of these people argue it will be a good thing because Muslims around the world will see what an open society America is and how much Americans honor Muslims and the Koran.

This argument appeals to all those who believe that one of the greatest goals of America is to be loved by the world, and especially by Muslims because then fewer Muslims will hate us (and therefore fewer will bomb us).

But these naive people do not appreciate that America will not change the attitude of a single American-hating Muslim by allowing Ellison to substitute the Koran for the Bible. In fact, the opposite is more likely: Ellison's doing so will embolden Islamic extremists and make new ones, as Islamists, rightly or wrongly, see the first sign of the realization of their greatest goal -- the Islamicization of America.

When all elected officials take their oaths of office with their hands on the very same book, they all affirm that some unifying value system underlies American civilization. If Keith Ellison is allowed to change that, he will be doing more damage to the unity of America and to the value system that has formed this country than the terrorists of 9-11. It is hard to believe that this is the legacy most Muslim Americans want to bequeath to America. But if it is, it is not only Europe that is in trouble.

Dennis Prager is a radio show host, contributing columinst for Townhall.com, and author of 4 books including Happiness Is a Serious Problem: A Human Nature Repair Manual.

http://www.townhall.com/Columnists/...des_what_book_a_congressman_takes_his_oath_on

Who the Hell elected a Muslim to Congress any-damned-way? An obviously activist Muslim?

There a some really STUPID people out there ....... and don't think I missed the "(D)" after his name.

 

[Gunny]

What other non-illegal factors do you think should disqualify a person from public service?

The fact that he is an activist Muslim, and our current enemies our Islamofascists works for me. I wouldn't think of voting for him and consider anyone that did to be pretty damned stupid.

 

[Gunny]

Another tempest in a teapot fomented by right wing-nuts because they are intellectually bankrupt. America is NOT a Christian country. It is a nation of Christians, Jews, Muslims, Hindus, Buddhists, Sihks, Taoists, Zoroastrians, Wiccans and any ohter religion one might care to name.

<blockquote>Congress shall make no law <b>respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof</b>; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances. - 1st Amendment, U.S. Constitution</blockquote>

Mr. Ellison, in choosing to be sworn in on a copy of the Q'uran, is exercising his right to religious freedom. Get over it.

Wrong. Einstein. The US IS a Christian nation, no matter how many times you turn yourself in circles with your eyes shut claiming otherwise. It is also irrelevant to this discussion.

In case it hasn't gotten through to your self-proclaimed intellectual level, Muslims do not separate their religion from government. If any of you lefties would pull your heads out of your asses and open your eyes, you would know THAT, and that Islam is much bigger threat in regard to theocracy than Christianity ever has been or will be in this nation.

You're just blindly agreeing with a person whose belief system cannot coincide with the freedoms our government represents becuase he's got a "D" behind his name, and he goes against the status quo.

Your equal blindness to the war on Christmas being waged by secular progressives is just MORE partisan bullshit on your part.

It is my fervent hope that you SP's receive your just due for all your efforts to undemine and destroy this Nation. When people like this idiot are shoving it up your ass, just smile and thank yourself. You'll have no one else to blame.

 

[mattskramer]

The fact that he is an activist Muslim, and our current enemies our Islamofascists works for me. I wouldn't think of voting for him and consider anyone that did to be pretty damned stupid.

That is like saying that if someone is a devout fundamentalist Christian, he is not qualified. There are some “Christian” organizations that still think that they are justified in harassing and assaulting homosexuals and abortion providers. They think that it is okay to block and vandalize abortion clinics. These Islamo-facists are probably merely a very small part of the large community of Muslims.

 

[Annie]

That is like saying that if someone is a devout fundamentalist Christian, he is not qualified. There are some “Christian” organizations that still think that they are justified in harassing and assaulting homosexuals and abortion providers. They think that it is okay to block and vandalize abortion clinics. These Islamo-facists are probably merely a very small part of the large community of Muslims.

Interesting, even the 'very liberal' are beginning to get it. To clarify, I meant the mere possibility that 'moderate Muslims' may not be moderate.

 

[Gunny]

That is like saying that if someone is a devout fundamentalist Christian, he is not qualified. There are some “Christian” organizations that still think that they are justified in harassing and assaulting homosexuals and abortion providers. They think that it is okay to block and vandalize abortion clinics. These Islamo-facists are probably merely a very small part of the large community of Muslims.

I wouldn't vote for an idiot who believes blowing up clinics and murdering people in the name of preserving life either.

So what exactly is your point?

 

[Gunny]

Interesting, even the 'very liberal' are beginning to get it.

He's just defending allowing a person whose religion stands in direct opposition to our culture to encroach in our government.

What REALLY slays me is if you were to define Islam on the accepted political spectrum of today, they would be further right than anyone from the US; yet, there's a "D" behind his name. How stupid is THAT?

 

[Annie]

He's just defending allowing a person whose religion stands in direct opposition to our culture to encroach in our government.

What REALLY slays me is if you were to define Islam on the accepted political spectrum of today, they would be further right than anyone from the US; yet, there's a "D" behind his name. How stupid is THAT?

The district that elected him has a high Muslim population, I would assume they turned out to vote. (See post 5 and scroll down.)

 

[mattskramer]

I wouldn't vote for an idiot who believes blowing up clinics and murdering people in the name of preserving life either.

So what exactly is your point?

Then you better not vote for Christians. Don’t you recognize your prejudicial attitude here? I seriously and strongly doubt that this activist Muslim is truly an Islamo-facist enemy of America.

 

[Gunny]

Then you better not vote for Christians. Don’t you recognize your prejudicial attitude here? I seriously and strongly doubt that this activist Muslim is truly an Islamo-facist enemy of America.

Congratulations. You have just gone from pointing a finger at fringe-element extremist Christians to generalizing all Christians as the same while at the same time being willing to give a Muslim the benefit of the doubt that he is not extremist; even though, his first action is of an extreme nature.

Don't you recognize YOUR prejudiced attitude?

The difference is that I support the values and morals that created and have sustained this Nation while you denigrate them while supporting values that hold a fundamental belief of destroying all oppostion to that belief.

 

[mattskramer]

Congratulations. You have just gone from pointing a finger at fringe-element extremist Christians to generalizing all Christians as the same while at the same time being willing to give a Muslim the benefit of the doubt that he is not extremist; even though, his first action is of an extreme nature.

Don't you recognize YOUR prejudiced attitude?

The difference is that I support the values and morals that created and have sustained this Nation while you denigrate them while supporting values that hold a fundamental belief of destroying all oppostion to that belief.

Please. I was being sarcastic. I didn’t really mean what I said. I was demonstrating the attitude that you are exhibiting toward Muslims.

What values made this country great? - Slavery and the taking of land from “native Americans”. I would include religious freedom as a value that made this nation great.

Because of that, I don’t think that someone should be disqualified for being a Muslim any more than I think that a young handsome Democrat from several years ago should be disqualified for being Catholic.

 

[Gunny]

Please. I was being sarcastic. I didn’t really mean what I said. I was demonstrating the attitude that you are exhibiting toward Muslims.

What values made this country great? - Slavery and the taking of land from “native Americans”. I would include religious freedom as a value that made this nation great.

Slavery has not been legal in this nation since 1865.

The Native Americans we pushed out with our expansion had previously pushed out other civilizations. Pretty-much the same way the entire world has been populated over time.

Because of that, I don’t think that someone should be disqualified for being a Muslim any more than I think that a young handsome Democrat from several years ago should be disqualified for being Catholic.

I already pointed out the difference between Christian and Muslim beliefs in this regard. The first thing that will go if Muslim get any kind of control while you turn a blind eye toward them is separation of church and state -- supposedly a big issue with you lefties.

You need to open your eyes, dude.

 

[mattskramer]

1. Even though slavery ended years ago, it was something that made America great. Two wrongs do not make a right.

2. The way that the Indians were treated was still wrong.

3. Yeah. People were so concerned that Kennedy was going to destroy America if he got elected. A Catholic president – would he impose all sorts of Catholic stuff on us?
I’m sorry (and a tiny bit fascinated) that you have such a prejudicial attitude. If I have a friend who happens to be a moderate Muslim, would I be shunned? Where is McCarthy?

 

[Bullypulpit]

Wrong. Einstein. The US IS a Christian nation, no matter how many times you turn yourself in circles with your eyes shut claiming otherwise. It is also irrelevant to this discussion.

In case it hasn't gotten through to your self-proclaimed intellectual level, Muslims do not separate their religion from government. If any of you lefties would pull your heads out of your asses and open your eyes, you would know THAT, and that Islam is much bigger threat in regard to theocracy than Christianity ever has been or will be in this nation.

You're just blindly agreeing with a person whose belief system cannot coincide with the freedoms our government represents becuase he's got a "D" behind his name, and he goes against the status quo.

Your equal blindness to the war on Christmas being waged by secular progressives is just MORE partisan bullshit on your part.

It is my fervent hope that you SP's receive your just due for all your efforts to undemine and destroy this Nation. When people like this idiot are shoving it up your ass, just smile and thank yourself. You'll have no one else to blame.

Ahhh....You've been watching Bill O'Reilly again. The "war on Christmas" is but the product of the fever dreams of Billo, Sean Hannity, James Dobson, and others of their ilk, because they're so intellectually bankrupt they can't find anything better to bitch about.

 

[manu1959]

100 bucks says...if muslims gained congress they would vote islam the national religion and outlaw christianity.....

any of you secularist or christians been to mecca to the great mosque?

 

[insein]

100 bucks says...if muslims gained congress they would vote islam the national religion and outlaw christianity.....

any of you secularist or christians been to mecca to the great mosque?

They wouldnt be able to unless the SCOTUS was all muslim as well. It would be overurled at the first court ruling that would be possible to bring up. There are many obstacles in the way of totalitarians. Thats why its important for Americans to not hand over too many of them to the people that want that goal.

 

[mattskramer]

100 bucks says...if muslims gained congress they would vote islam the national religion and outlaw christianity.....

any of you secularist or christians been to mecca to the great mosque?

All of this paranoia about the consideration toward Muslims is laughable. Don’t worry. Muslims are not going to be majority in congress for a very long time, if ever. Besides, we still have to executive and judicial branches of government to veto or rule out any unconstitutional abuse of power. Wow. One two-bit politician who happens to be Muslim get into some government office and wants to be sworn in on his religious book and you think that the sky has fallen. Take a chill pill.

America has its rules. The middle east has its rules.