IN THEORY:On what should leaders swear?

Rep. Virgil Goode, R-Va., recently criticized Democratic Rep. Keith Ellison’s decision to use a Koran when taking his oath of office during the Minnesotan’s private swearing-in ceremony. Goode said that unless there’s a crackdown on immigration “many more Muslims” will be elected and follow Ellison’s lead. Conservative radio talk show host Dennis Prager ignited the furor over Ellison’s decision, calling it “an act of hubris … that undermines American civilization.” Now, Faithful America, an ecumenical group that’s part of the National Council of Churches USA, is calling on Goode to apologize. Should an elected official be restricted to taking an oath on just the Bible?

We are constantly echoing the declaration that this nation is based on separation of church and state, but in practice, it is everywhere. We put our “trust in God” in every dollar we spend. We pledge that America is “one nation under God.” We take oaths in our courts to “tell the truth, so help me God.”

It is important to note that elected officials do not swear on any doctrine or book when sworn in. In private ceremonies, officials have been known to swear on their book of religion. Jewish officials have been known to personally swear on the Old Testament while Christian officials personally swear on the New Testament. Why would a Muslim official be criticized for taking an oath in a personal ceremony on the Koran?

With that said, if we are to continue to build and strengthen this nation — as intended by the forefathers (since they were seeking freedom of religion or freedom from religion) — then absolutely not, because the Bible should not be imposed on any citizen, public or private.

SAYED MOUSTAFA AL-QAZWINI

Imam

Islamic Educational Center

of Orange County

The idea of requiring a Muslim to take an oath of office by placing his hand on a Christian Bible is ridiculous. But there should be a way to emphasize that no imported — or even homegrown — religious dogmas can take precedence over our secular laws and rights, as spelled out in our Constitution and Bill of Rights.

Some Muslims in Europe have apparently insisted that their religious rules take precedence over the secular laws of their adopted lands, which has caused significant problems — including murder — in otherwise intelligent, cooperative and easygoing populations.

Thus, there is some reason to be concerned about any influx of those who come from areas where theocracies rule, since they are used to honoring religious dogma over all else. Unfortunately, even here in the United States, some religious fundamentalists support such views, since they also claim that their particular religious laws should supersede any secular laws that might be in conflict.

It is imperative for a civilized future that Jefferson’s separation of church and state be maintained, and that secular rules take precedence over religious dogma.

There is no requirement that the Bible be used during any swearing-in ceremony. It would actually make more sense to have all political appointees swear-in using the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. The United States is not supposed to be a theocracy.

There is not, and should not be, any requirement to belong to, or support, any particular religion.

But there should be a requirement to support our Constitution and Bill of Rights, since that is what our government is all about. Using those documents, the ceremonies would be far more appropriate than using the Bible, which obviously would be objectionable to many.

Religious freedom has been an important cornerstone of our country from the very beginning, and must be maintained.

And of course, that also means freedom from religion, if desired.

JERRY PARKS

Member

Humanist Assn.

of Orange County

I support the action taken by Congress to allow a Muslim to serve his American government by taking an oath based on his faith and his holy Koran. I say this for the following reason.

Such an example occurred in England more than 150 years ago to a prominent Jew. Most of our American laws our based on English law. When Baron Lionel de Rothschild was elected as representative of London, a bill to confirm his election failed to get support for four years from 1847 to 1851.

After passing the House of Commons with a majority, it was thrown out by the House of Peers. Although their opponents conceded that Jews were worthy of admission into Parliament, they were excluded by the process of taking an oath on the Christian Bible.

Finally in 1852, the High Court of Appeal confirmed the wishes of the Liberal party in England that a Jewish Bible be substituted instead of the Christian Bible. In fact, a few years later, a resolution was passed in the House of Peers that Jews should be admitted into Parliament without taking the prescribed oath, and this vote was immediately approved by Queen Victoria in 1858.

Since that time, the election of Baron Lionel de Rothschild was followed in the same office by Baron Nathaniel M. de Rothschild, and Sir George Jessel, master of the rolls in English Parliament.

Thus, Judaism has made major progress in European history. Centuries before all over Europe, Jews were held as property of the king and not allowed to own their own land, or even a weapon.

In order to bring peace to a troubled world, we need understanding and more Muslim leaders, who will fight politically side by side with other Americans in favor of Jewish and Christian interests that will benefit America, Israel, Iraq and the world at large.

RABBI MARC RUBENSTEIN

Temple Isaiah

Newport Beach

I guess I didn’t get the memo about canceling freedom of religion. I’m not surprised by Rep. Goode’s reaction to Rep. Ellison’s, and although I think it is appropriate for Goode to apologize, I doubt he will.

America is powerful because it is not a religious state. It is a country that recognizes the importance of religion and encourages all of its citizens to practice as they choose.

It’s a mistake to impose one religion as the state religion.

This is what polarizes and separates us, and God knows we’ve had too much separation.

Besides, I would rather see Ellison swear allegiance on the book he believes in, instead of a book he doesn’t.

PASTOR JIM TURRELL

Center for Spiritual Discovery

Costa Mesa

This contretemps is much ado about nothing. No religious text is used at the official swearing-in ceremony on the House floor, when members of Congress raise their right hands and affirm loyalty to the Constitution.

Following this oath of allegiance, it is repeated by each freshman in the presence of the speaker as a photo opportunity. It is then that a member may choose to use a Bible, but there is no mandated book that accompanies oath-taking.

After all, Article 6 of the Constitution concludes “but no religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office or public trust under the United States.”

John Adams said it was axiomatic that political constitutions were secular ventures, bearing no tinge of divine participation: “The United States marks the first example of governments erected on the simple principles of nature.”

The architects of American government, he continued, “never had interviews with the gods or were in any degree under the inspiration of Heaven. Government is contrived merely by the use of reason and the senses.”

If I opted to hold a Scriptural text, should I swear on the Christian Bible, even though I foreswear its tenets? Would that not violate the commandment against bearing false witness?

Perhaps lawmakers should hold a book that influenced the Founders far more than the Bible — Locke’s “Second Treatise of Civil Government” — whose philosophy forms the underpinning of American political faith.

As the democratically elected representatives make a symbolic statement with a Bible, we should inquire as to the type of government advocated in its verses. Is the Bible a brief for democracy? Hardly!

It upholds the theocratic model. Moses and Aaron were appointed, quite undemocratically, by God. David and Solomon were not candidates on a ballot. Did Moses ask the Israelites what they thought of the Ten Commandments? Were the Apostles elected?

Democracy is the legacy of ancient Greece, not of the Hebraic spirit. The notion of democracy is largely foreign to Biblical teachings. Right and wrong, the Bible affirms, cannot be adjudicated by the consent of the masses. The Bible rejects the arbitrary standards of majority decisions.

If a document is to be affirmed at a congressional oath-taking, let it be the Constitution of the United States. And before our lawmakers so swear, let them do something they probably have never done: Read it!

Better yet, let representatives swear on the heads of their children, and if childless on the heads of colleagues’ children. Let each take up the nation’s business in the solemn awareness that their decisions will affect the next generation.

Let them look into the eyes of their young, who will inherit the consequences of their votes, and vow to labor in the best interests of a blessed future.

RABBI MARK S. MILLER

Temple Bat Yahm

Newport Beach

It is inspiring to see that Congress is becoming more diverse and better representing American society. The election of a Muslim representative shows that freedom of religion and tolerance of religious traditions are alive and well.

For the first time, two Buddhists have also been elected. Rep. Mazie Hirono of Hawaii came from Japan when she was 8 and was raised in her mother’s Jodo Shu tradition. Rep. Hank Johnson of Georgia was a convert to Soka Gakkai. Both say religion is a private matter and have declined to comment.

At a private ceremony, anyone should be able to use whatever scripture he or she prefers.

In contrast, elected officials take the following public oath together in Washington, D.C.: “I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter: So help me God.”

A Bible is not used.

The Constitution requires only that senators and representatives affirm that they support the Constitution. It also says that “no religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office or public trust in the United States” (Article VI, clause 3).

The 110th Congress will be 29% Roman Catholic and 6% Jewish. There are six who are unaffiliated. There are five Christian Scientists, 15 Mormons, two Unitarians and one Quaker. In all, there are 32 faiths represented.

Our immigration policies should be fair and humane, and certainly should not discriminate against people on the basis of religion.

Rep. Goode should be censured or reprimanded by the House for his remarks.

REV. DR. DEBORAH BARRETT

Zen Center of Orange County

Costa Mesa

Our representative, John Campbell, provided information about Rep. Ellison’s decision that I find most helpful.

Campbell, in a recent newsletter, wrote “members of the House are sworn in by the new speaker at one time. We simply stand in front of our seats, raise our right hands, and say ‘I do’ after the oath is read by the speaker. There has been much controversy over the new member Keith Ellison who was going to swear on the Koran. Looking around me, I did not see a single person with a Bible, Koran, or book of any kind. It’s just not how the official oath is done. “The controversy regarding the Koran was actually related to an unofficial ceremony done for purposes of a photo opportunity. In the past in similar situations, I have held a 140-year old family Bible for historical family reasons.”

That a public servant’s official oath of office is taken with no book and a simple “I do” seems right to me.

And, as Campbell says, it’s just the way it’s done. For “private ceremonies” and “photo ops,” are we not free to be with whomever we love most and have in hand whatever we hold holy and most sacred?

Both a 140-year-old family Bible and a more than 200-year-old Koran — which once belonged to Thomas Jefferson, principal author of the Declaration of Independence, founding father and our third president — seem to me to be excellent choices.

(THE VERY REV’D CANON)

PETER D. HAYNES

Saint Michael & All Angels

Episcopal Church

Corona del Mar