Re: The Virgil Goode/Koran Controversy

1. I have been in courtrooms hundreds of times over the past five years, and I have never seen anyone swear on a Bible. Not once. Literally, not once.

2. Many judges have stopped using the phrase "so help you God" in the oath, "do you solemnly swear to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, [so help you God]?"

3. New Hampshire statute doesn't even require an "oath," technically; you can also "attest" that you will tell the truth.

4. The purpose of swearing an oath, in a legal setting (or, when being sworn in as the first Muslim Congressman in U.S. history) is one thing and one thing only: to ensure that the person swearing takes an oath they will stand by, and that when they swear they really mean it. Swearing on a Bible is in no way required by the Constitution (in fact, the "no religious test" clause would militate against any such requirement), and in fact the only reason it became something which seemed like a tradition is that for more than two hundred years most people in this country refused to vote for anyone who wasn't Christian or (more recently) Jewish.

5. Insisting someone swear an oath on a book that isn't a sacred document in their faith is akin to insisting that someone swear a false and/or meaningless/toothless oath; I can't imagine why, when the purpose of swearing is to actually and genuinely swear, you would ask someone to swear a oath that means nothing to them.

[Frankly, if you despised Muslims as much as Goode does, wouldn't you want him to swear on the Koran instead of the Bible, so that you could hold him to his oath? Sheesh. These bigots disgust me. It's enough to make you feel sour about going to school in Virginia; idiots like Goode make the entire Commonwealth look foolish, if only because they could never survive as politicians anywhere in New England. At least, not these days; I'll admit that, back in the days of busing in Boston, just about any sort of bigotry was possible here].

6. Ergo, those who claim that [Muslim] Rep. Ellison (D-MN) must swear on a Bible, rather than the Koran, when he takes his oath of office are a) ignorant of the tenets of the Constitution; b) ignorant of, or in opposition to, one of the most explicit and easy-to-understand tenets of that document ("no religious test"); c) ignorant of the legal traditions of this country and their origins; d) ignorant of modern legal practice.

So, how can you be so stridently ignorant of all these basic American values, and yet refuse to, as Goode has, withdraw your words suggesting that a) Ellison must swear on a Bible, b) Muslims are dangerous if/when elected to Congress, and c) we should change our immigration policies explicitly to make it harder for any Muslim to enter the U.S.?

Well, if you're a virulent bigot, that's how. And that's exactly what Goode--who's fairly powerful in the Republican Party--is.

Thankfully, our President saw fit to immediately denounce...

...oh, wait, my bad, he hasn't said anything about it. "We're aware of the situation but no judgment has been made," said his spokesman. Well, that seems fair. I could see why it would take more than a week to make a "judgment" on statements such as Goode's. Particularly when you carry the heavy burden of being the "decider."