Detroit Free Press Niraj Warikoo January 5, 2007
Detroit native Keith Ellison, the first Muslim Congressman, told the Free Press Friday that he used the Quran during his oath of office because the Islamic holy book helped influence the founding fathers of America.
Ellison, a Minnesota Democrat, garnered international attention Thursday when he used a Quran once owned by Thomas Jefferson during his ceremonial swearing-in ceremony for the House of Representatives.
The Quran is “definitely an important historical document in our national history and demonstrates that Jefferson was a broad visionary thinker who not only possessed a Quran, but read it,” Ellison said in an interview with the Free Press. “It would have been something that contributed to his own thinking.”
Ellison was criticized by some commentators for using the Quran during his oath off office. Ellison said he decided to use Jefferson’s Quran after receiving a letter from someone who told him about the copy, which is with the Library of Congress. U.S. Rep. Virgil Goode, a Virginia Republican, slammed Ellison for using a Quran.
But Ellison said Friday that Jefferson’s Quran “shows that from the earliest times of this republic, the Koran was in the consciousness of people who brought about democracy.”
Contact Niraj Warikoo at nwarikoo@freepress.com and 248-351-2998
Copyright © 2006 Detroit Free Press Inc.
I can understand Ellison wanting to swear his oath on a Koran. He shouldn’t have to take an oath on the Christian Bible any more than a Protestant using a Douai version or a Catholic having to use the King James Vesion, or an Orthodox having to swear on either book. Even Jews are allowed to use their Scriptures.
On the other hand, Ellison goes so far as to suggest he might be moonlighting as a salesman peddling (real) bridges to Mecca. Hope he doesn’t succeed as some nut in Saudi Arabia with more (oil) money than brains might take Ellison seriously.
What next, the first bill Ellison introduces will make the final day of Ramadan a Federal holiday?
Note 1. Steve, you last point is the cogent one. And the answer is yes, sooner or later he will.
As Jim and Phil busy themselves arguing for gay marriage, Ellis and the Christians understand that their moral relativism weakens the character of the culture and introduces great vulnerabilites. Ellis is presenting a challenge unthinkable twenty years ago: rewrite the founding narrative of a people (which is always religious at its foundation) in Islamic terms. In other words, change the thinking and behavior will follow.
Europe is the example. Western Europe is so riddled with moral relativism that it has completely lost its religious/cultural moorings and is in danger of Islamic conquest from within. Unless it rediscovers it Judeo/Christian roots, it will collapse because it does not have the moral courage to resist the Islamic crusaders.
If Jefferson did read the Koran, that may be the genesis of the “wall of separation between Church and State”
Note 3. Jefferson’s letter to Danbury Baptist argued that the separation was to keep government out of religion, not use governmnent to keep religion out of the public square.
Gosh, we learn new things about American history constantly!
It’s like that old Soviet saying: “The future is known. It’s the past that’s always changing.”
Qur’an?
In the in the “Bill of Rights”, quotes in the “Constitution”, where in the debates or the oratory of the time and the numerious mentions of God in discussions over brandy (no Alla here) do we find Muhammad’s enlighten words? Does Shafi, Sunna or Hadith law and customs underlie the common law and our current jurisprudence? Does Mr. Keith Ellison plan a total revision of our history and our historgraphy? Maybe yes!
When can we expect to have a bill introduced to have the Sunna and Sharia code and laws passed as family law? That would constitute a state within a state which is illiegal; but then, of course, only Sharia law is of any value. The sura of the sword in now implanted within our land.
Sincerely, J R Dittbrenner
I am impressed with the judiciousness of Ellison’s comments. He says that the quran was “on the consciousness” of Jefferson and others. No doubt, for Jefferson and probably others had read at least some of this book and were at least dimly aware of “Islam”. Of course, we are supposed to expand from this that the quran had a more philosophical or religious influence on their thinking. Still, you can’t really pin this on Ellison, as his comments are so limited. Slippery fellow…
[quote]“on the consciousness” of Jefferson and others.[/quote]
This is indeed newspeak by Ellison. I wish I could point out to Ellison that just because something might be ‘on the consciousness of’ someone, it doesn’t translate to a embrace of those values. Israel and Palestine are very much on the consciousness of one another, but so what? The ‘consciousness of’ their differences is the cause of their enmity.
Right after the war of 1812, another event was on the consciousness of Americans and Europeans. An American ship ran aground on the coast of western Africa. The stranded crew was picked up and enslaved by Muslims. The crew was broken up and put on a forced march across the Sahara desert. The captain of the crew lied to one of his captors that he knew a rich man in the north that would pay ransom for his crew. Luckily, they came across a friendly British consul who paid the charge. A few of the crew members wrote narratives of their experience. Search for Shipwreck of the Commerce, Captain Riley, Sidi Hamet, Skeletons on the Zahara. That experience was very much on the ‘consciousness’ of Americans, and it reflected very poorly on Islam and the teachings of the Koran.
The theme that keeps arising in my studies of Islam is, from Medina to Constantinople to Morroco to Mogadishu to Afghanistan to Iraq, the one thing Islam respects is strength. Strength of will; strength of conviction; strength of arms. Does the West have these? Arms, yes. Will and conviction? Most certainly not. To quote Homer’s Iliad, of all things in a man, nothing matters so much as heart. Perhaps that is why Martin Luther worried so over the Muslims to the east.