http://www.afa.net/aa112806_2.asp

I don't like this and should not be allowed. This guy should be made to just hold up his right hand and swear to protect and defend the constitution. I don't think replacing the bible is a right thing. My opinion.

Hmm. Tough question, IMO. I come at this from a different angle. I'm an atheist. Always have been, always will be. I, personally, find it ludicrous when I'm asked to "swear in" in court to be able to testify by saying "I do" when asked if I swear to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help me God. Well, I amend that statement: It's not ludicrous--it's offensive to me. It is not my God, I don't believe such a being exists, and swearing "so help me God" in no way holds me to the truth. I swear to tell the truth because it's the right thing to do, not because of God, and I do find it offensive that I should have to be sworn in under some other person's idea of what is right and what I'm supposed to believe in.

So I understand Ellison not wanting to swear in on someone else's version of "the Good Book." The Bible has no meaning to him. And let me turn the question around: How would any of us feel if we had to swear in on the Koran?

I'm no fan of political correctness. And I don't like seeing our American traditions tossed aside. But our country is NOT based on the Bible or religion. In fact, if memory serves, we came here specifically to get religious freedom? Religion and the Bible have no place in government, and no one should be sworn in on a Bible or Koran or other religious book. But if people feel that you need to swear in on a book of God in order to make things "Kosher," then they should be allowed to swear in on a book of their God, not someone else's.

I see no problem at all with Ellison taking an oath to uphold the US Constitution by placing his hand on the Koran.

Christians can place their hands on the bible, Jews can use the Torah, Muslims can use the Koran. What's the big deal?

Atheists or agnostics or free-thinkers can just raise their hand and promise to protect and defend the Constitution

I don't see a problem anywhere :o

nor do I but only in the last sense Wayne. it is a tradition there in DC this swearing in thing oathie. I think singling out one book or another violates the constitution. these are our reps and this is a part of the constitution not a individual right issue. so therefore the elected ones should merely " affirm " and not swear on the bible or koran or any other book that is singling out a religion. IMO

The Presidential Oath of office detailed in the Constitution does not contain “so help me God” nor is there any requirement to swear on the bible. The American treaty with Tripoli of 1797 clearly declares “the government of the United States is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion.” This treaty was made and signed by President George Washington and received positive approval along with John Adams as a member of the Senate agreeing with it in form and content. In fact the first Europeans to come to the new world were ruthless fighters in search of fortune and traders. When the Mayflower effectively found its way here less than ½ of the 120 on board were of a religious nature.

I agree Earthman, but it's not the kind of thing I would choose to pick a fight about.

Denying officials to be sworn in by placing their hand on the Bible would give a ton of ammunition to the Religious Right. You remember the silly attack about a year ago about the "liberal war on Christmas". I don't want to see that again, and more.

To me it's kind of like having "In God We Trust" on US currency. Strictly speaking, it may not be appropriate, but it would be poor strategy IMO to try and get it removed. What's important is that public schools don't promote one religion over another or provide tax money to support religious groups.

well I sort of agree but still thing this placing on the bible or koran or any other book is not correct. maybe we should have something like this : " I swear to uphold and defend the constitution of the United States of America" and thats it.
just holding up you hand and not placing it one a book. on a side bar....lol this issue of pledge to our flag bothers me as well. I remember as a youngster saying it before we had the "under god" clause and nothing was wrong with it then. it is IMHO not correct especially in this 21st century to include 'under god' because we are so diverse in beliefs. same thing on the floor of the Senate or the House. I think it violates the constitution period. well at least one person agrees with me .....laughing. :laugh: