First, let’s get up to speed in case you have not heard.
In November, Keith Ellison of Minneapolis was elected to represent the Fabulous Fifth District of Minnesota in the United States Congress. The Honorable Representative-Elect Ellison is a Muslim, a fact that may or may not have had much to do with his election. Most likely his overall progressive political stance was the most important factor in his election by the citizens of the very progressive Fabulous Fifth District. There are a lot of Muslims in the Fifth, but then again, there are also a lot of African Americans (not to mention citizens recently of African Origin … mainly from the Horn of Africa … who also happen to be Muslims), and Ellison’s African-American-ness does not seem to have come up as a factor. I’m pretty sure that he was elected, by a very wide margin, because the voters simply found him to be the best representative.
It is true, however, that there was a bit of “baiting” during the election by some supporters of at least one other candidate. However, the Fifth District is loaded with highly educated intelligent liberal activists, such a strategy could only backfire.
But now that Ellison is elected, he is national. He has been transformed by pundits and the press into “Muslim Guy.” He is, after all, supposed to be the first Muslim elected to Congress. What I find a bit disturbing about this is that he really isn’t a “Muslim Congressman” but rather, the representative of the Fabulous Fifth who happens to be Muslim.
Now, most people have heard that Ellison has suggested that he would prefer to take the oath of office on the Quran rather than the Bible. I have not actually been able to run down the origin of this story or to verify it. Hey, I’m an evolutionary biologist, not a journalist. If it is exactly true as stated, it is a little embarrassing for Representative Ellison because members of Congress do not take the oath on any particular book. They all stand in formation and raise their right hand and swear to protect and defend the Constitution of the United States of America.
Here is a picture of a bunch of Congressmen-Elect getting sworn in en masse
So maybe Mr. Ellison did not know that. There are probably 10,000 things that a new Congressman does not know before they actually go to Washington. Of all those things, this is probably one of the least important. Ellison seems like a smart guy, I’m sure he’ll hit the learning curve at a run.
In fact, some of the more experienced members of congress have re-enactment photos taken of themselve “getting sworn in” to put in their newsletters. After a term in the House, Representative Ellison will know all these tricks too.
Here is a picture of a Congressman getting a picture of himself “getting sworn in”
In this picture, I think the congressman is the one on our left. The woman on the right is his wife. I think the guy in the middle is another congressman who jumped into the photograph at the last minute so he could get into the picture too.
Anyway, even though the representatives-elect do not put one hand on a book and the other in the air, I believe it is traditional for them to carry a book, like maybe in their pocket, and maybe sqeeze it for good luck while they are getting sworn in. Perhaps we are talking here about what book a representative-elect is going to have in their pocket.
I swear, this is insane…
I won’t give credit to those who have said the dumbest things about this issue. I’d rather passively avoid adding linkage in the blogosphere to the likes of them. But I will say that it has been suggested that it — the swearing on the Quran — should not be allowed. It should be against the rules, or against the law, for a Congressman to take the oath on anything other than the Bible. Considering that they don’t take the oath on any document, normally, merely underscores the dumbosity of those particular pundits.
Even though this is not really an issue at all, I will express a what-if opinion. What if Congressmen normally placed their hand on a document such as a Bible while taking their oath? Other’s do, after all (such as the President). First, I’m pretty sure, but I may have heard this on the West Wing so I’m not swearing to it, that even where it is typical to place one’s hand on a Bible, there is generally no requirement to do so. It is just one of those things added in at some point (very early) in our history. I’ve read that not all U.S. presidents have sworn on the bible. At least one, I believe it was John Quincy Adams, oathed on a law book. (Aha! Yes, let me be the FIRST to verb that noun…)
It’s like having stuff about god written all over our money, official seals, state flags, etc. To me, this sort of thing is like ads on the web. You don’t go to a particular web site to read the Google Ads, you go there for some other reason. But they are there. Swearing on Bibles, writing “In God We Trust” on everything, and so on, is like pushing an ad for god, or perhaps religiosity in general, into places where people have to go for other reasons. It is insipid and offensive, especially so because at least the Google Ads help pay for the medium. I don’t think god or any particular religion is paying to have these ads on the money.
But here is the point I really want to make: If you are going to swear on something, or in the case of a member of Congress, carry a document in your pocket while you stand in the formation for the group oathing, make it a copy of the United States Constitution. That is, after all, the document you are swearing to protect and defend. Having a copy of it on your person would make the point more strongly. And if some other member of congress, say the one standing next to you, questions the fact that you are not swearing on the Holy Bible, whip out your copy of the United States Constitution and read him this part:
“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.”
A few related posts:
The Caucus: Interview with Ellison
The opinion of one outsider (me) is that it seems to be about using religion to establish Congress.
You’re saying that a photograph of an actual swearing-in would not have a book to put your hand on?
I wonder if they do other things to new members, such as telling them that to get a traditional doorstop for their office they should go down to the maintenance department and ask for a long weight, or getting them drunk and handcuffed to a lamp-post between lanes on the freeway, with no pants.
Yes, my understanding is that the photograph of the group (above) is an actual swearing in, which leads me to believe that the photograph of the two men and the women (from a representative’s web site) is a staged action.
I’ve also heard that freshmen members of congress are routinely asked to “go find a bucket of steam.”
I live in the ‘Fabulous Fifth District’ of Minnesota. Ellison was elected because he was the nominee of the democratic party. That is the only reason. I hardly think a district progressive if all its takes to get elected is to have a (D) after your name. The only person who had an issue with him being muslim was the republican nominee (who also happens to be Jewish - how is that for progressive?) who brought it up every-time a microphone was put in front of him.
But in your note you mentioned something that is wraps this whole thing up - “its the least important thing”. This whole “controversy” was fabricated. Ellison made a random comment in one form or another and a right wing nut pounced on it.
Like many things the whole hand on the bible is a tradition as is the president elect saying “so help me god” at the end of this swearing in. There is no law there is just what the previous person did. Ellison or everyone else is not required to follow it but everyone gets real nervous when you don’t.