Tuesday, January 09, 2007

It's A Question Of Loyalty


I was thinking the other day how muslim religion and culture seem to take precedence over their nationality. It seems they most always will put their religion and culture before their nation, so one may have to question the loyalty of a devout muslim. Then Vilmar sent this piece about Congressman Keith Ellison(D-MN), recently elected to the US House of Representatives, who was sworn-in using a koran and refuses to answer questions about his loyalty to the Constitution.

He was given unprecedented permission during this week's swearing-in ceremonies to place his hand on a piece of the nation's archival history – the Quran once owned by Thomas Jefferson – for his photo-opportunity with family and friends.

The two-volume edition, published in London in 1764, was brought to him in a special case sent by messenger from officials at the Library of Congress.

(snip)

Rick Jauert, a spokesman for the congressman, was reached at his campaign headquarters in Minnesota two weeks ago, and confirmed that the congressman does not believe there will be a conflict between his religious beliefs and his duty under the U.S. Constitution.

But when asked which would take priority if there is a conflict, or to describe how the congressman will resolve the differing philosophies provided by the U.S. Constitution and the Quran, which calls for beheading "infidels," he said he could not answer immediately.
If he can't answer that question immediately, then, Houston, we have a problem.

It seems that in most Western, Christian-based nations religion reinforces a sense of nationalism, whereas in most of the Middle East it seems to be all about islam, regardless of the country. And that makes sense given that many Mid-East nations - Iraq and Jordan to name just two - are less than 100 years old. The hierarchy of "loyalty" goes: islam, tribe, nation.

I guess you could say that Ellison would be loyal to the US, not based on what it already is, but what Ellison and those like him would like the US to become. If they can make the US an islamic nation, then they can be loyal to both islam and the nation. Until then, they will remain loyal to islam and mount the jihad.

6 Comments:

Anonymous OINK said...

I dunno.
I recall the problems raised about JFK being a Catholic. And the jokes about Eisenhower tripping over the Pope's suitcase.
He's only one congressman. Maybe this will be the test to see if Islam can be made compatable with a pluralistic modern state.

1:36 PM GMT+13  
Blogger BobF said...

He's only one congressman but the fact that he's following a religion that says it wants to dominate all others and he also got elected is what is scary. Followers is Islam believe in it with their whole mind, heart, soul, and being. They will and have killed family members for disgracing Islam. The majority of Catholics will not follow the Pope or their religion to the letter...if they did, both Kennedy and Kerry would be staunch against abortion. But, a Muslim will follow the dictates of their Iman and the Koran to the letter.

If I remember right, JFK said he would put the United States over his religion.

2:40 PM GMT+13  
Anonymous OINK said...

Exactly so. The idea of separation of church & state is a bewildering concept to Muslims.

The same could be said for the West until ... when? 300 years ago? The Divine Right of Kings stuck around longer in some countries.

If an Enlightenment /Renaissance /Reformation is going to happen to Islam, it'll start here. If.

3:59 PM GMT+13  
Anonymous GumbyAnne said...

For most of us living in Minnesota who are actually familiar with Ellison's record, all of this outrage seems a little over-the-top. It seems that in all the discussion about what we think about Islam, we lose sight of Ellison as an individual with a record of political leanings which are not at all mysterious.

Before anyone gets bent out of shape, I hope they take the time to look into Rep. Ellison's record and some of the other details of his life.

You can't pin him with "Muslims want to convert or kill everyone." The biggest piece of evidence for this is that his wife is not even a Muslim. Nor are his siblings or parents. It is pure alarmism to say that someone who won't force is religion on his wife is going to force it on the rest of us.

The fact that some Muslims are oppressive of women, homosexuals and Jews is undisputed, but you cannot possibly implicate Rep. Ellison in this. In fact, he has made his name here in Minnesota politics by standing up for gay rights and women's reproductive rights at every opportunity in the state house of representatives. Also, he received the endorsement of the biggest Jewish newspaper in MN, even though his republican opponent was a Jew.

You can disagree with his politics and that is fine, but to try to portray him as a screaming reactionary jihadist who wants to hurl us back into the 7th century is just dishonest.

7:08 PM GMT+13  
Blogger Joe said...

Gumby, make excuses for him all you want, but at the end of the day, do you trust him? You sound like a tolerant liberal, so I'm guessing you do.

Given Minnesota's historically liberal leanings, I wouldn't expect Ellison to have gotten very far up there with a conservative agenda. I could give a shit about any special rights for gays, women who want to kill their unborn children (reproductive rights, that's rich), or anybody else. The fact that he's a convert is all the more a strike against him as converts are usually the most militant about whatever it is they converted to. As for a Jewish newspaper backing him, liberal Jews are their own worst enemy sometimes. Like you, they want to tolerate, appease, give the benefit of the doubt. And of course he's not going to come out as a radical extremist; that would make it that much more difficult to bamboozle folks like yourself. The way I see it, it's up to the muslims to go out of their way to prove they are not what they have done a very good job of trying to convince us they are. The onus is on them, not the other way around.

I guess you missed the part about me having no use for muslims or liberals/leftists, so if he is a true liberal or a true muslim, either way I don't like him. I am neither fair nor balanced, and have never claimed such. The bottom line is that more muslims in positions of power is not a good thing.

8:12 PM GMT+13  
Blogger BobF said...

"he has made his name here in Minnesota politics by standing up for gay rights and women's reproductive rights"...

For me, that's enough reason to be against him.


Liberal Jews tolerated Hitler all the way to the gas chambers. When Jews in Poland fought back, a small group of them held off the mighty SS for days, armed with only a few rifles and pistols.

1:25 AM GMT+13  

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home