Tim Wildmon

AFA president

February 2007 – What kind of person do you consider to be a bigot? If you believe the words of people like Johnathan Turley, you may very well be accepting the words of a bigot. Turley is the Shapiro Professor of Law and Public Interest at George Washington University and writes often for the USA Today newspaper. He wrote recently citing radio host Dennis Prager and me for being bigoted against Muslims and having an unconstitutional view on matters of church and state.

There have been several stories in the news the past few months about the place of Islam in America. One of the stories had to do with newly elected U.S. Congressman Keith Ellison of Minnesota, the first Muslim elected to Congress. Mr. Ellison decided he wanted to use the Koran instead of the Bible when he took his oath of office. Allow me to quote substantially from Prager’s November 28, column:

Forgive me, but America should not give a hoot what Keith Ellison’s favorite book is. 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.

Devotees of multiculturalism and political correctness who do not see how damaging to the fabric of American civilization it is to allow Ellison to choose his own book need only imagine a racist elected to Congress. Would they allow him to choose Hitler’s Mein Kampf, the Nazis’ bible, for his oath? 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?

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. 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. 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.

I happen to agree with Prager. When a reporter called about this situation I said this: “If calling the Bible superior to the Koran in American tradition and culture is intolerant then I’m guilty.”

There, I stated the obvious. But that statement took the reporter aback. He was shocked I would be so blunt, and more stunning to him was that I would say the Bible was superior. By that, I mean the Bible has been revered through our history more than any other book, and its influence has been profound. But today, people are afraid of being called judgmental or bigoted if they state the obvious.

The Bible and the Koran are two different books of religion and they promote two different worldviews. They are not morally equal. Islam has proven itself over and over again to be the enemy of freedom, democracy and tolerance. These are Western values whose roots are in the Christian value system and the Christian value system comes from the Bible, not the Koran. Look around the world at Muslim countries and see what you find. Take time to study what happens when Islam takes over a society. This is something to be concerned about if you care about the very Western values mentioned above.

In conclusion let me say this. All Muslims are not terrorists, but almost all the world’s terrorists are Muslims. Why is that? We should not be afraid to publicly ask this question. Is it coincidental or is there something inherent in the teachings of Islam that makes it incompatible with Western values?