| Friday, December 22, 2006 |
| Am I *that* liberal? |
So all this pissed-offedness about the Minnesota Representative-elect and his intent to use the Koran for his swearing in rather than a Bible? First of all, the entire POINT of swearing on a book is that the person doing the swearing BELIEVES in that book. It's not so that everyone ELSE feels better about it. We should have people swear on a copy of Merriam-Webster in court rather than a Bible, then. I would be good with that.
To bring up another point, why should a person have to swear on a holy book in the first place? Why not a copy of the Constitution, or the Declaration of Independence, or even the Bill of Rights? Keith Ellison is Muslim. He was fairly elected by the people in his district - he's not there because of some teenage prank or a machine malfunction. His constituents KNOW he's Muslim. Why should it matter to anyone else? Gah.
The local mullet wrapper actually has a poll up about whether there should be a LAW stating the Bible is the only book to be used for swearing in. The HELL?! In my personal and apparently far-left-wing opinion, the man should be able to take his oath of office on a vintage copy of Playboy if he so chooses. Whatever he believes in.Labels: politics |
posted by Jen @ 4:40 PM  |
|
|
|
| who's here: |
|
|
| jen reads: |
Blogroll Me!
|
| where's jen: |
|
| photo album: |
| Click here to go to my online album. Registration required to view images! |
| relatively current: |
|
| the 'previouslies': |
|
|
| Template by |
|
|
