So what? The article, which does not come from a reputable source, is headlined that she "refused" to be sworn on the bible, but the article also states that she has not specified that she follows a particular religion, so her taking the oath on the bible would be implausible. It also states that the books she used came from the Library of Congress, so they must have been ordered in advance.Democrat Sen. Kyrsten Sinema Refuses to Take Oath of Office on Bible
I guess this is what Democrats would call "progress", electing a bisexual who refused to take the oath of office on a Bible.
I don't think that any "refusal" occurred here. If one did, the person who made the order, demand, request of her was way out of line in the first place.
Fake headlines are nothing new unfortunately, and the source is indeed ---- Dimbart. Par for their course.
What's also interesting though is this line:
>> There is at least one other reason Sinema refused to place her hand on the Bible. According to the Pew Research Center for Religion and Public Life, the Arizonan is the only member of the Senate who does not identify as a member of a religion. <<
Gotta wonder who the **** is requiring Senators to "identify with a religion" and what their agenda is. Because I'm gonna need their shoe sizes, their astrological signs and the maintenance records of the car they owned in 1997.
Look at you....crying foul because someone you don't like won.
