| Submit your comments on this article |
| Home Front: Culture Wars |
| US Judge: I Swear By Allah On My Holy Quran |
| 2007-01-12 |
Oath of Office or Religious Test? By Hassan A. El-Amin Associate Judge 5th District Court of Maryland Thursday, January 11, 2007 On Jan. 4, the Honorable Keith Ellison became the first African American from Minnesota, as well as the first practicing Muslim, to be sworn into the Congress of the United States. The first of these two “firsts” – that Ellison is Black and is representing Minnesota – has gone relatively unnoticed. But the second, relating to Ellison’s identity as a Muslim, has garnered headlines all over the world. The Quran (Pig Crap Be Upon It) is a fiction, concocted by Mohammad The Pedophile for the purpose of getting more wives (including a 6 year old girl) and creating a band of thieves who would deliver him the "prophet" tax (khums 20%) of all booty. The Quran is a record of the deranging effects of power, and a manual of terror. The story exploded exponentially into a full-blown controversy when Rep. Virgil Goode of Virginia fatuously declared that for a congressman to be sworn into office in America using a Qur’an instead of a Bible was un-American and downright dangerous. Goode warned that unless immigration laws are tightened, more Muslims might be elected to office, threatening Americans’ entire way of life. A plethora of mouthy zealots joined the chorus. Muslims are cleansing members of minority religions out of their own pig pens, while expecting the West to take in the human shells of their homeland junk piles. The Quran is not a source of justice; it is the vomit of tyrants. Never mind that America’s founding fathers, speaking specifically on oaths of office in Article VI of the Constitution of the United States provided, in pertinent part, that “no religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office or public trust under the United States.” How fitting it was, then, that in a fateful bit of irony (the kind that seems to happen only in the good ol’ U.S.A.) a senior staff member of the Library of Congress invited Ellison to use a translation of the Qur’an from the private library of Thomas Jefferson, third president of the United States and author of the Declaration of Independence, for Ellison’s swearing-in. It was a master stroke, a coup de grâce. Ellison’s detractors were dashed – cut to the quick, their bigotry and irrational fear of Islam exposed for all to see. No such controversy swirled around me when I was sworn into office in July 2000 as the first Muslim judge in the history of the state of Maryland, and one of only three Muslims in the United States who had ever so served. Near the conclusion of that memorable occasion, my wife proudly held our Yusuf Ali translation of the Qur’an as I placed my left hand on it and raised my right hand to take the long oath of office prescribed for Maryland judges. My choice to use the Qur’an was strictly a private one, as it should have been. My investiture was certainly historic, but no one seemed to notice or care that I was using the Muslim holy book. And what’s the big deal? As Ellison’s experience clearly shows, what matters is not which book the left hand is placed on but the words one utters when he or she takes the oath... |
| Posted by:Sneaze Shaiting3550 |
| #8 my wife proudly held our Yusuf Ali translation of the QurÂ’an BZZT, sorry Judge. There is no such thing as a translation of the koran. What your wife was holding was a transliteration of the koran, not a koran. |
| Posted by: Parabellum 2007-01-12 17:29 |
| #7 He probably doesn't have many opportunities to write opinions. MD district courts deal with ash'n'trash like traffic tickets, misdemeanors, and small claims. Unless he refuses to issue protective orders against abusive Muslim men or blows off female witnesses, I think shari'a is mostly silent on the matters he deals with. Besides, this "what's the big deal" business? The fact that he's a Muslim would seem to be less important that the fact that he's just a dick. |
| Posted by: exJAG 2007-01-12 11:54 |
| #6 An Islamic oath may not mean quite what an infidel might think for example (from the Bakhari hadith collection) ----------------- Narrated Aisha: Abu Bakr As-Siddiq had never broken his oaths till Allah revealed the expiation for the oaths. Then he said, "If I take an oath to do something and later on I find something else better than the first one, then I do what is better and make expiation for my oath." -------------------------- expiation typically means giving to charity or setting a slave free or equivalent |
| Posted by: mhw 2007-01-12 11:18 |
| #5 So will the testimony of an infidel be worth 1/2 that of the master religionists in Judge Amin's court? |
| Posted by: ed 2007-01-12 10:27 |
| #4 Interesting. He was born (1949) in Charleston, WV (not exactly a hotbed of terror). Yale undergrad, Univ. of Maryland law school. Member of Blue Knights Int'l Law Enforcement Motorcycle Club! |
| Posted by: BA 2007-01-12 10:26 |
| #3 No such controversy swirled around me when I was sworn into office in July 2000 as the first Muslim judge in the history of the state of Maryland, and one of only three Muslims in the United States who had ever so served. Uh, two things here...(1) 9/11 happened between this guy's swearing in and Ellison's, and (2) he was a STATE judge...not exactly something that'll make National News, like Ellison did. It would be interesting to look into Judge El-Amin's rulings. Maybe ExJAG or someone in the legal realm can investigate? And, in the meantime (Chuck Darwin), I'll google him. |
| Posted by: BA 2007-01-12 10:22 |
| #2 The Quran (Pig Crap Be Upon It) Amen to that. |
| Posted by: Excalibur 2007-01-12 09:52 |
#1 I am reminded of the old "loyalty oaths" that many people had to sign as a condition of employment even back in the 1960s. Typically, they were something like this:"I further swear (or affirm) that I do not advise, advocate or teach, and have not within the period beginning five (5) years prior to the effective date of the ordinance requiring the making of this oath or affirmation, advised, advocated or taught, the overthrow by force, violence or other unlawful means, of the Government of the United States of America or of the State of California and that I am not now and have not, within said period, been or become a member of or affiliated with any group, society, association, organization or party which advises, advocates or teaches, or has, within said period, advised, advocated or taught, the overthrow by force, violence or other unlawful means of the Government of the United States of America, or of the State of California. I further swear (or affirm) that I will not, while I am in the service of the City of Los Angeles, advise, advocate or teach, or be or become a member of or affiliated with any group, association, society, organization or party which advises, advocates or teaches, or has within said period, advised, advocated or taught, the overthrow by force, violence or other unlawful means, of the Government of the United States of America or of the State of California..." However, there is no reason in the world that a loyalty oath cannot be expanded to include renouncing activities that are clearly illegal in the United States. Things beloved of Islam, like slavery, polygamy, honor killing, unlawful discrimination, utterance of threats, forced marriage, and membership in organizations that promulgate these things. |
| Posted by: Anonymoose 2007-01-12 09:13 |