Pragner motivated me

As mentioned in my first post, I gained the motivation to start a blog during my recent vacation but I didn't follow through till I was motivated by Dennis Pragner's recent article. His post is a great example of how people's judgments can be biased by their religious beliefs. Here's my issues with his post.

He should not be allowed to [take his oath of office on the Koran] -- not because of any American hostility to the Koran, but because the act undermines American civilization.

Is he serious? Do we really want a country based on religious freedom to be based on religious biases? I'm confused. Maybe he'll explain in the rest.

... all that matters is what any individual holds to be his holiest book.

There, he figured it out. Wait. I took that quote out of context? He means that each individual should share a common holy book? That doesn't sound like religious freedom to me.

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

I think that he meant "I'm interested in only one book", because he isn't in the position to speak for Americans and I wish he would avoid it. He has one question that is pretty easy to answer.

Would they allow him to choose Hitler's "Mein Kampf," the Nazis' bible, for his oath?

If people elected somebody to office that would prefer to swear on Hilter's book, then I'm also sure that they wouldn't mind him using it as a testament to his being the best senator he can be. Hopefully, our country won't come to that.

Pragner talks about how countless Jews have taken their oaths on the bible while not believing in it as the holy book. For a long time people believed that the earth was flat but when a person stood up and said "it's round" it wouldn't make sense to argue "but other people think it's flat". Showing that people have made a mistake (or approved of an error) before does not mean it should continue, or the person who points it out should be chastised.

He also does a good job of adding in some scare tactics at the end of his writing. I'm not sure how he knows that using the Koran will likely "embolden Islamic extremists" but it sure sounds scary. The decision should be made based on the reasons behind the request, not anything else.

I love that Ellison was elected. Having a country of religious freedom ruled by a single religion seemed a bit odd to me. If Ellison wants to show his dedication to his new job by swearing in on the most important book in his life then I'd rather him do that then swear in on a book that means little to him.