i love email
Dec. 8th, 2006 12:06 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
rktI'm on the american family association mailing list. they told me to forward this. so i am. because i love it when fox looks liberal. again, emphases and lower case comments are mine.
-----
Please take a moment to read the following TownHall.com column by Dennis Prager, who is a Jew i want to insert something south parkesque here, bu i don't want it to be misunderstood, either. so, yeah.. Afte reading the column, take the suggest action at the bottom of this email. After you have read it, please forward it to your friends and family. might i suggest the edited version?
original source*
By Dennis Prager - Tuesday, November 28, 2006
Keith Ellison, D-Minn., the first Muslim elected to the United States Congress, has announced that he will not take his oath of office on the Bible, but on the bible of Islam, the Koran. OMGz! the bible of Islam! we can't have that!
He should not be allowed to do so -- not because of any American hostility to the Koran, but because the act undermines American civilization. !!!!!!!!! ok. can someone call the onion? because, seriously. also, they forgot the words "christian" and maybe "white". oh, wait, it was written by someone who is "a jew". this entire column must be valid.
First, it is an act of hubris that perfectly exemplifies multiculturalist activism -- my culture trumps America's culture. seriously, what is this "American culture" of which he speaks? What Ellison and his Muslim and leftist supporters are saying is that it is of no consequence what America holds as its holiest book does this mean i am not "America"?; all that matters is what any individual holds to be his holiest book well, actually, yes.
Forgive me, but America should not give a hoot what Keith Ellison's favorite book is "favourite" isn't what's in quesiton here.... Insofar as a member of Congress taking an oath to serve America and uphold its values is concerned, America is interested in only one book, the Bible. If you are incapable of taking an oath on that book, don't serve in Congress. In your personal life, we will fight for your right to prefer any other book. We will even fight for your right to publish cartoons mocking our Bible. But, Mr. Ellison, America, not you, decides on what book its public servants take their oath. do i really want to know whom this "America" of which he speaks is?
Devotees of multiculturalism and political correctness who do not see how damaging to the fabric of American civilization save your babies! save your marriages! it's the end ofthe world! America! the world! as we know it! it is to allow Ellison to choose his own book need only imagine a racist elected to Congress. yes. imgaine that. a racist elected to congress ... Would they allow him to choose Hitler's "Mein Kampf," the Nazis' bible, for his oath? and godwin's for the win! And if not, why not? On what grounds will those defending Ellison's right to choose his favorite book deny that same right to a racist who is elected to public office? a sphincter says what?
Of course, Ellison's defenders argue that Ellison is merely being honest; since he believes in the Koran and not in the Bible, he should be allowed, even encouraged, to put his hand on the book he believes in would those defenders stop it with their "logic" already?. But for all of American history, Jews elected to public office have taken their oath on the Bible, even though they do not believe in the New Testament, and the many secular elected officials have not believed in the Old Testament either. Yet those secular officials did not demand to take their oaths of office on, say, the collected works of Voltaire or on a volume of New York Times editorials, writings far more significant to some liberal members of Congress than the Bible oh them rascally liberals!. Nor has one Mormon official demanded to put his hand on the Book of Mormon. And it is hard to imagine a scientologist being allowed to take his oath of office on a copy of "Dianetics" by L. Ron Hubbard.
So why are we allowing Keith Ellison to do what no other member of Congress has ever done -- choose his own most revered book for his oath? didn't we establish this already? TO DESTROY AMERICAN CIVILIZATION!
The answer is obvious -- Ellison is a Muslim:insert collective gasp. And whoever decides these matters, not to mention virtually every editorial page in America, is not going to offend a Muslim because, clearly, the US in general has been soooooo constitutionally fair to those identifying as muslim. In fact, many of these people argue it will be a good thing because Muslims around the world will see what an open society America is and how much Americans honor Muslims and the Koran.
This argument appeals to all those who believe that one of the greatest goals of America is to be loved by the world, and especially by Muslims because then fewer Muslims will hate us (and therefore fewer will bomb us). because that's what muslims do at their "muslim churches" when they're not reading "muslim bibles" - is sit around and plot to bomb "us".
But these naive people do not appreciate that America will not change the attitude of a single American-hating Muslim by allowing Ellison to substitute the Koran for the Bible. In fact, the opposite is more likely: Ellison's doing so will embolden Islamic extremists and make new ones, as Islamists, rightly or wrongly, see the first sign of the realization of their greatest goal -- the Islamicization of America um. um. yeah. ok..
When all elected officials take their oaths of office with their hands on the very same book, they all affirm that some unifying value system underlies American civilization tell me more about this "value system" of which you speak. If Keith Ellison is allowed to change that, he will be doing more damage to the unity of America and to the value system that has formed this country than the terrorists of 9-11i thought that was the job of anti-marriage baby-killing feminazis. now i'm officially jealous. It is hard to believe that this is the legacy most Muslim Americans want to bequeath to America. But if it is, it is not only Europe that is in trouble. oh lord, help us.
-
stop shaking your head.
-
*clicking the link will take to you to a page that includes this caption next to a picture
-----
Please take a moment to read the following TownHall.com column by Dennis Prager, who is a Jew i want to insert something south parkesque here, bu i don't want it to be misunderstood, either. so, yeah.. Afte reading the column, take the suggest action at the bottom of this email. After you have read it, please forward it to your friends and family. might i suggest the edited version?
original source*
By Dennis Prager - Tuesday, November 28, 2006
Keith Ellison, D-Minn., the first Muslim elected to the United States Congress, has announced that he will not take his oath of office on the Bible, but on the bible of Islam, the Koran. OMGz! the bible of Islam! we can't have that!
He should not be allowed to do so -- not because of any American hostility to the Koran, but because the act undermines American civilization. !!!!!!!!! ok. can someone call the onion? because, seriously. also, they forgot the words "christian" and maybe "white". oh, wait, it was written by someone who is "a jew". this entire column must be valid.
First, it is an act of hubris that perfectly exemplifies multiculturalist activism -- my culture trumps America's culture. seriously, what is this "American culture" of which he speaks? What Ellison and his Muslim and leftist supporters are saying is that it is of no consequence what America holds as its holiest book does this mean i am not "America"?; all that matters is what any individual holds to be his holiest book well, actually, yes.
Forgive me, but America should not give a hoot what Keith Ellison's favorite book is "favourite" isn't what's in quesiton here.... Insofar as a member of Congress taking an oath to serve America and uphold its values is concerned, America is interested in only one book, the Bible. If you are incapable of taking an oath on that book, don't serve in Congress. In your personal life, we will fight for your right to prefer any other book. We will even fight for your right to publish cartoons mocking our Bible. But, Mr. Ellison, America, not you, decides on what book its public servants take their oath. do i really want to know whom this "America" of which he speaks is?
Devotees of multiculturalism and political correctness who do not see how damaging to the fabric of American civilization save your babies! save your marriages! it's the end of
Of course, Ellison's defenders argue that Ellison is merely being honest; since he believes in the Koran and not in the Bible, he should be allowed, even encouraged, to put his hand on the book he believes in would those defenders stop it with their "logic" already?. But for all of American history, Jews elected to public office have taken their oath on the Bible, even though they do not believe in the New Testament, and the many secular elected officials have not believed in the Old Testament either. Yet those secular officials did not demand to take their oaths of office on, say, the collected works of Voltaire or on a volume of New York Times editorials, writings far more significant to some liberal members of Congress than the Bible oh them rascally liberals!. Nor has one Mormon official demanded to put his hand on the Book of Mormon. And it is hard to imagine a scientologist being allowed to take his oath of office on a copy of "Dianetics" by L. Ron Hubbard.
So why are we allowing Keith Ellison to do what no other member of Congress has ever done -- choose his own most revered book for his oath? didn't we establish this already? TO DESTROY AMERICAN CIVILIZATION!
The answer is obvious -- Ellison is a Muslim:insert collective gasp. And whoever decides these matters, not to mention virtually every editorial page in America, is not going to offend a Muslim because, clearly, the US in general has been soooooo constitutionally fair to those identifying as muslim. In fact, many of these people argue it will be a good thing because Muslims around the world will see what an open society America is and how much Americans honor Muslims and the Koran.
This argument appeals to all those who believe that one of the greatest goals of America is to be loved by the world, and especially by Muslims because then fewer Muslims will hate us (and therefore fewer will bomb us). because that's what muslims do at their "muslim churches" when they're not reading "muslim bibles" - is sit around and plot to bomb "us".
But these naive people do not appreciate that America will not change the attitude of a single American-hating Muslim by allowing Ellison to substitute the Koran for the Bible. In fact, the opposite is more likely: Ellison's doing so will embolden Islamic extremists and make new ones, as Islamists, rightly or wrongly, see the first sign of the realization of their greatest goal -- the Islamicization of America um. um. yeah. ok..
When all elected officials take their oaths of office with their hands on the very same book, they all affirm that some unifying value system underlies American civilization tell me more about this "value system" of which you speak. If Keith Ellison is allowed to change that, he will be doing more damage to the unity of America and to the value system that has formed this country than the terrorists of 9-11i thought that was the job of anti-marriage baby-killing feminazis. now i'm officially jealous. It is hard to believe that this is the legacy most Muslim Americans want to bequeath to America. But if it is, it is not only Europe that is in trouble. oh lord, help us.
-
stop shaking your head.
-
*clicking the link will take to you to a page that includes this caption next to a picture
"A Palestinian woman holds the Koran during a Hamas rally against Israeli troops operation in northern Gaza strip November 3, 2006. Israeli troops shot and killed two Palestinian women acting as human shields between Israeli soldiers and Palestinian gunmen during a clash at a Gaza mosque on Friday, witnesses said, before the gunmen escaped. REUTERS/Mohammed Salem "
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2006-12-10 04:50 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2006-12-11 04:52 pm (UTC)this just might make for a good poll idea...
no subject
Date: 2006-12-10 05:16 pm (UTC)Again, feeling dirty by association. Damn you.