Prager can’t stop digging

About a month ago, right-wing talk-show host and writer [tag]Dennis Prager[/tag] became something of a laughing stock by arguing that Rep.-elect [tag]Kieth Ellison[/tag] (D-Minn.), Congress’ first Muslim, will literally “undermine American civilization” and “embolden Islamic extremists” if he takes the oath of office on a Koran instead of a Christian Bible. Prager’s Townhall piece, despite its historical and legal inaccuracies, was quickly embraced by the religious right, picked up by the cable networks, and became a real news story.

As a rule, when you fall in a ditch, you should stop digging, but Prager couldn’t help himself. A week after his first column sparked widespread criticisms, Prager followed up with yet another column, blaming Ellison for the “controversy.” As Prager saw it, if Ellison would just go along with using a Christian Bible, right-wing critics wouldn’t feel compelled to attack him.

This week, Prager, shovel in hand, digs a little deeper.

That a belief or lack of belief in the divinity of a book dating back over 2,500 years is at the center of the Culture War in America and between religious America and secular Europe is almost unbelievable. But it not only explains these divisions; it also explains the hatred that much of the Left has for Jewish, Protestant, Catholic and Mormon Bible-believers. For the Left, such beliefs are irrational, absurd and immoral. […]

This divide explains why the wrath of the Left has fallen on those of us who lament the exclusion of the Bible at a ceremonial swearing-in of an American congressman. The Left wants to see that book dethroned. And that, in a nutshell, is what the present civil war is about.

I’m actually left feeling a little sorry for Prager. After all of his other arguments were debunked and rejected, this is the best he could come up with.

Prager started a month ago arguing that there should be a religious test for public office. The Constitution says otherwise. Prager went on to argue that every member of Congress has used a Christian Bible during their ceremonial photo-ops, and Ellison is ending the “tradition.” That’s wrong, too; plenty of lawmakers have used other books, while others have used no book at all.

Having already been proven wrong on the subject, Prager is left to argue that liberals want the Bible “dethroned.” Why? Because some wacky civil libertarians believe a member of Congress should be free to use any book he or she chooses during the ceremonial swearing-in ceremony, just as it’s been for decades.

As Prager explains it, to support the right of religious minorities to incorporate their religious texts in personal ceremonies is to be necessarily hostile to Jews and Christians. Indeed, he characterizes it as a “civil war.”

The mind reels.

Prager is getting more publicity and noteriety than he has ever had before in his career. He sees himself as surging ahead of Rush Limbaugh. He’s as happy as a pig (which he is) in shit (which he is). Why would he stop if he keeps getting all this left-wing blog space?

Ignore him. He’ll stop.

  • “That a belief or lack of belief in the divinity of a book dating back over 2,500 years … Mormon Bible-believers.”

    First, the New Testiment is actually about 1500 years or so old, so drop a millenium there.

    Second, the Book of Mormon, which I suspect is what most Mormon legislators would hold in their left hands, is less than 200 years old (though I suppose they would claim it’s a translation of a rather old work).

    Third, is Prager actually suggesting that divine inspiration ended 2500 years ago (before Jesus, I might point out)?

    I suppose he’s tying to suggest there is nothing about the Qur’an that is divinely inspired because it’s only about 1400 years old, having been compiled from the recitations of the Prophet by the Caliph Abu Bakr after his death.

    He is really confused about liberalism and religious tolerance. The willingness to tolerate Islam and Muslims does not constitute intolerance of Christianity and Christians, only of Theocratic Reactionarism. It is wingnut evangelicalism which is the intolerant strain in this country, and a whiny one at that.

  • Prager IS referring to the Torah–the Old Testament in Christian parlance. Prager allegedly, is Jewish. Prager also fails to point out, or is confused by, the fact that most christian groups believe the New TEstament replaced the Old Testament. He also seems to think that none of the principles outlined in the Koran are based upon or follow the Torah and some christian teachings. Wrong again. The man truly is an ignorant, bigoted asshole.

  • ***And that, in a nutshell, is what the present civil war is about.***

    Whoa, people. Hold on here a minute. Is this Prager nitwit actually saying—for the record, mind you—that there’s a Civil War right here in the United States? He can’t be talking about Iraq; they’ve little need for Prager’s “divine book”—that was created on a sheepskin by a bunch of cranky old men in fancy clothes, huddled inside a smoke-filled tent (the tent of Aaron—the “original Tammany Hall….”)

    Is he really saying it? Is he openly declaring that a state of War exists?

    Hmmm. I seem to recall something in a federal statute about “fomenting rebellion….”

  • Good point about the Book of Mormon, Lance. Does anyone know what book, if any, Harry Reid uses in swearing-in ceremonies? I wouldn’t be at all surprised if it’s the Book of Mormon rather than the Bible. Of course, Prager would probably argue that Senator Reid is also out to undermine American civilization, so the fact that the senator may have used a different book in his ceremony likely wouldn’t count for much in Prager’s eyes.

  • “Prager allegedly, is Jewish.” – bubba

    Ah, that special brand of wingnuttery that says that anyone who suggests that Israelis might want to get out of Gaza and the West Bank for their own good is an antisemite while the Evangelical Rapturists who want Israel to stay there so that all but 144,000 Jews can go straight to Hell is a “Good Friend of Isreal”.

    “this Prager nitwit actually saying—for the record, mind you—that there’s a Civil War right here in the United States?” – Steve

    I was noticing that one too. But than with Ann (the Bitch) Coulter calling for the assasination of Supreme Court Justices and other wingnut Pundits calling for the detention without charge of anti-war liberal commentators, we seem to be on the verge. What exactly are we going to do when BG2 decides that an election in 2008 is just not possible in the middle of a war that has seen 6,000 Americans killed (oh My!)?

    “Good point about the Book of Mormon, Lance. Does anyone know what book, if any, Harry Reid uses in swearing-in ceremonies? I wouldn’t be at all surprised if it’s the Book of Mormon rather than the Bible. Of course, Prager would probably argue that Senator Reid is also out to undermine American civilization, so the fact that the senator may have used a different book in his ceremony likely wouldn’t count for much in Prager’s eyes.” – James Dillon

    Orin Hatch probably uses the book of Mormon too. Is he too out to undermine American Civilization? (actually, I wouldn’t be surprised if Hatch ended up on our side of the Civil War).

    And of course all my points are good 😉

  • I think that Prager is being inclusive by judging people on the first five books of the bible–the Torah. So he lets Jews, Mormons and Christions into the club but excludes Muslims. I don’t know if Evangelicals officially believe that the New Testament “replaces” the Old Testament, but almost all their worst beliefs rely on Old Testament sources.

    God is like a stubborn child. Silent for 2500 years. Wondering if he is holding his breath until he gets his way.

  • To my knowledge the New Testament has never been “enthroned” in this country except in the pompous and preposterous realities of religious fools. To that extent it cannot be “dethroned”. Evidently Prager sees himself as a warrior. He is, as it turns out. He’s fighting the twin demons of Irrelevancy and Ineptitude. And he’s losing.

  • I guess since Ellison has decided to take the high road and not respond in the manner Prager was hoping, he looks more like the bully. So now he has to go after that Goldstein of the Right, the hated Liberal.

    Who exactly are those specific liberals that are trying to “dethrone the Bible”? That’s not imporatant, because They know who they are, and we know who They are.

  • Point of order:
    “Evangelical Rapturists who want Israel to stay there so that all but 144,000 Jews can go straight to Hell is a “Good Friend of Isreal”.”

    it’s a doozie. According to revelations.. it is not, as evangelical reapturists think, that all ‘good’ people go to heaven with jesus.
    It’s 144k who will ‘come to the throne’ or some such. I read it recently.
    In short, the rapture is never mentioned in the book of revelations, and what the rapturists point to as ‘the rapture’ is limited to 144 thousand rightous jews…

    in short, they’re idiots and don’t read thier own holy book.

  • Art K #1 and I agree. The nutcases gain power through our outrage. Laugh at them. Ignore them.

    I would like to see someone take his points and carry them further into madness…. Wait – he’ll probably do that next week and not see the absurdity.

  • Prager is an idiot. The whole purpose of an “oath” is for the individual to swear under pain of eternal damnation upon something sacred to him/her – not necessarily upon what is sacred to other people. If I was a Christian, I would swear upon the Bible because I would consider it holy and if I break the oath I would be going against something that I consider holy. But what if I was made to swear on a Koran or a Hindu holy book or whatever? Since I don’t believe in those religions, or the holiness or sacredness of their scriptures, there is nothing in that particular “oath” that would be personally binding to me such that I feel be personally compelled to keep the oath. It’s been like that in English and American jurisprudence since like forever. And, as stated in the Constitution, you can always “affirm” rather than give an oath – an affirmation is a statement to abide by the truth by those who don’t hold any holy books sacred to give an “oath” on. Permitted in the Constitution, but obviously oblivious to the historically challenged bigoted idiot Prager.
    Nothing to do with a liberal holy war against the Bible – and everything to do with what an “oath” really is.

  • I thank Jefferson and the rest of the Founding Fathers for separating church from state. Nearly all bloodbaths in history have had religion as an important component. We’ve been spared that until the arrival of today’s GOP.

  • The five books of Moses didn’t even exist 2,500 years ago. The Jews had nothing written down until after the Babylonian captivity, which is why there is so much of Babylonian mythology in Genesis – the whole creation story is a Chaldean creation myth. One has to ask even here how much was “divine creation” and how much was “human perspiration.” Divine inspiration? I’m not even sure about that. And the Jews – very smartly – used these myths they found in Babylonia because they worked and no writer ever wants to “reinvent the wheel.” They were allegories that worked.

    “God said it and I believe it.” This is why I know fundies are idiots.

    God had nothing to do with any of it. Judaism is a religion of ethics from my understanding of it as a non-Jew from my friends. Humans can figure that out. But you don’t want to say “these are Joe Schmoe’s ethics, so use them.” Nobody would listen. You say “these are God’s ethics,” and they listen up. It was as simple as that.

    As to Prager, he has all these billboards all over Los Angeles advertising his show. He’s got a “soup bowl” haircut that would look bad on a kid who had no voice in choosing it – and this is an adult who thinks it’s cool (why do all rightwingers have such terrible personal style choices?). He’s got this halfwit beatific smile and the copy is “Dennis Prager – Just Right”. How bad does it get???

  • Prager dropped a quick reference to “secular Europe” as if it is a bastion of lefty hippiedom. Europe has, over the centuries, witnessed firsthand the needless death and destruction wrought by fools like Prager over what is the one true divinity that all the subjects of a country must bow to. It’s knuckleheads of Prager’s ilk who haven’t learned the lessons of millenia past and don’t realize we’re walking down the same well-trod trail of religious persecution that fomented many a war. I can’t believe Prager and others keep using the term “war” when referring to their religious misunderstandings. Why would he so proudly want the same violence we’re seeing in Iraq about religion to visit us here?

  • Why would he so proudly want the same violence we’re seeing in Iraq about religion to visit us here? -petorado

    Hey, nothing like a war OK’d by the Big Guy to permanently smite your enemies.

  • Having spent several of my adult years living in a predominantly Muslim country(Turkey), the relative ignorance of Americans about Islam is beyond description. The overwhelming majority of people in this country have no idea that all three of these contending religions–Judaism, Islam, and Christianity–are Abrahamic, that is they trace their origins to a common patriarch, Abraham. The Muslims, though of course not the Jews, recognize Christ as a prophet(and an important one as well–just behind Mohammed in importance), the Muslims, notably unlike the Christians, are religiously tolerant. There is in Turkish a word, kitapli, that means “with a Book”, meaning if you have a divine text, like the Koran, or the Bible, you are entitled freedom to practice your religion. With this dispensation, the Patriarch of the Greek Orthodox church has ALWAYS had his Basilica in modern day Istanbul. When Mehmed conquered Byzantium, the church was allowed to remain. Imagine that! Religious tolerance from THOSE people.

    My point is that Prager’s idiocy is born of the same ignorance most of us labor under. Ignorance breeds terrible things(of course the greatest tragedy may be that television and radio, which could be instruments of spreading knowledge and enlightenment, seem to have been co-opted by people wanting to spread ignorance and hatred. Aint technology grand?

  • “…in short, they’re idiots and don’t read thier own holy book.” – pharniel

    Please, the coming of the Kingdom of God is nearly 2000 years late anyway. They can’t figure out why it hasn’t happened (because it’s not going to guys!) and they are desperate to make it happen in their lifetimes (dying and waiting to be reborn being such a painful bore after all).

    “There is in Turkish a word, kitapli, that means “with a Book”, meaning if you have a divine text, like the Koran, or the Bible, you are entitled freedom to practice your religion.” – carwinrpc

    Which might explain why in America we were appalled at the destruction of two giant statues of Bubba in Taliban controlled Afghanistan and in the Muslim world they were….
    …????

    Who’s not tolerant?

  • Lance – aren’t all Muslims alike?
    I mean, all Christians are alike, are they not? We all handle snakes & speak in tounges, right?

  • “…and they are desperate to make it happen in their lifetimes…”

    Which may explain why the holy foreskin has disappeared. They are against cloning, unless it is their Savior who is being cloned.

    “Which might explain why in America we were appalled at the destruction of two giant statues of Bubba in Taliban controlled Afghanistan…”

    That troubles me too!

  • I don’t know BuzzMon. When Mohammad Omar, the Taliban leader of Afghanistan, blew up the statues, he appologized for not getting them compleletely destroyed. I don’t remember any Muslim leader saying: “Hey, the Buddists are all right, you shouldn’t be blowing up statues of the Budda.”

    Believe me, there was more outrage in America about the blowing up the Golden Mosque in Sumaria then there was outrage about the Buddas.

  • Lance,

    So, because a bunch of madmen in Afghanistan display intolerance toward statues, all Muslims are intolerant. Thanks for making my point.

    In the first place, don’t confuse the fact that YOU were appalled with the notion that a lot of Americans were appalled. Just. Ain’t. So. Americans routinely ignore–no, support–the destruction of the remnants of ancient cultures. Please don’t make me describe it to you–if you want a treatment of western behavior toward antiquities in central Asia–read Hopkirk’s “Foreign Devils on the Silkroad.” In fact, anything about Hopkirk would teach you why Afghanistan is a terrible example to use when talking about the Muslim world.

    My point was that Muslims have a BELIEF that other religions have a right to exist. We don’t seem to in this country. Thinking that Islam is monolithic, as your comment on my post seems to imply, is really part of the problem.

  • “Thinking that Islam is monolithic, as your comment on my post seems to imply, is really part of the problem.” – carwinrpc

    Oh, no. Believe me I don’t see Islam as monolithic. In fact the centuries long and ongoing bloody sectarian warfare between the Sunni and the Shi’a over whether Mohammed’s son-in-law or his first male convert should have succeeded him is a vast source of schudenfreude (sp) to me 😉

    People like to cite the fact that there are 1,300,000,000 Muslims in the world. I just laugh. There are 1,000,000,000 Roman Catholics in the world. There are 400,000,000 Shi’a and until the Sunnis have taken care of them, at which point there will be far fewer than 800,000,000 Sunnis in the world, I’m not going to worry about numbers. Especially not when all we have to do to get the Hindus on our side is stop Evangelical missionaries from trying to convert in India.

    And even when the Sunnis are done with the Shi’a, we can cite the genocide in Dafur to show that they’ll still be killing each other. Apparantly being a “People of the Book” doesn’t matter so much when the wells start to run dry and the Arab herdsmen want the same land as the African farmers.

    As for the Orthodox Church in Constantinople (Istanbul if you insist), I’d suggest to you that the Russian Empire has had a lot to do with keeping it in existence. Diplomacy does work sometimes you see.

    You’re certainly right about most Americans not caring about the lose of two historic Buddas which were rather beaten up already (some of it by earlier Muslim Extremists). But could you cite ANYWHERE where Muslim leaders or scholars said this destruction should NOT be done? I certainly can’t.

    “My point was that Muslims have a BELIEF that other religions have a right to exist. We don’t seem to in this country.” – carwinrpc

    That might be because in this country it is not a question of some religion’s right to exist. Religions don’t have rights. People do. In America we have a right to worship as we wish (pretty much, human sacrifice is out but we are still litigating the narcotic drugs thing). Prager is one deluded idiot who would scream bloody murder if we tried to close his temple.

    And my point, as you might have missed, is that Mohammed said that Christianity and Judaism have a right to worship in Islamic countries. He and Islam today don’t seem quite so willing to extend that right to Budism or Hinduism. Seems that Muslims, not Americans, are the ones making more conditions (I’d like to see some freedom of Religion in Saudi Arabia sometime too)!

  • I no longer understand the point of this exchange–I had no wish to say anything other than to observe that Islam has a tradition of tolerance. I certainly have no belief that Muslims are uniformly saints–or that they are uniformly evil. As to citing the awful genocide in Darfur–no westerner–NONE has a right to judge any other culture about genocide and holocasts–the list of atrocities Europeans have inflicted is simply too much. The Congo, the Herrero’s, the list of extinct peoples is really too long. Nor is this to argue that Islam is somehow BETTER than any other group. We are all human, we can all find lots to be ashamed of.

    One final point–the quibble about a religion having a “right to exist” is just that–a quibble. Surely there’s more here to be concerned about than splitting hairs over linguistic rigor. I accept your correction, pity you thought it was germane.

  • One final question that I have to ask–who was the Russian Tzar in 1453 when Constantinople fell? You know, the feller whose diplomacy was so instrumental in the preservation of the Orthodox Church? Just like to know.

  • “One final point–the quibble about a religion having a “right to exist” is just that–a quibble. Surely there’s more here to be concerned about than splitting hairs over linguistic rigor. I accept your correction, pity you thought it was germane. ” – carwinrpc

    But it is entirely germaine. If you claim that “religions” have a right to exist you can deny the status of “religion” to any damn cult or sect you like. Sunnis might suggest that Judaism and Christianity have a “right to exist” but Shi’asm doesn’t. A “right to worship” is a lot different. It puts the decision in the hands of a person, and not the state, of what is a religion and whether they will follow it. That matters a lot.

    “As to citing the awful genocide in Darfur–no westerner–NONE has a right to judge any other culture about genocide and holocasts…” – carwinrpc

    Sure I do! Don’t be asinine! If I can’t judge another culture about genocide how exactly am I supposed to help stop it in Cambodia, Rwanda or Dafur? Don’t throw history into my face trying to defend a culture of female genital mutilation and “honor killings” much less the crimes occuring in Dafur or the persistence of the practice of Slavery in your own “Holy Lands” of Saudi Arabia.

    “I had no wish to say anything other than to observe that Islam has a tradition of tolerance.” – carwinrpc

    The Roman Catholic Church as an official policy of tolerance of Jews and Judaism that is centuries old. That didn’t stop Catholics from murderous pogams or the Church from ignoring the Holocast. Islam’s “tradition of tolerance” doesn’t impress me when under Sharia they kill any Muslim who converts to another religion.

    Going back to #23 “So, because a bunch of madmen in Afghanistan display intolerance toward statues, all Muslims are intolerant. Thanks for making my point.” – carwinrpc

    What point? That Muslims are more tolerant that Christians or Americans? How does the fact that I point out that the Taliban, practicing strict Sharia law under Wahhabist interpretation, destroys religious symbols of other major (though not Abrahamic) religions show that Christians are less tolerant than Muslims?

    Or are you trying to say that I’m more ignorant of the Islamic world than you are of Christianity? You think you are winning that argument?

  • This post makes it seem as though the whole argument was a clash of facts that can easily be refuted and “debunked.” This is not the case. In fact, Prager’s second article if anybody bothered to read it, was designed to clear up some misunderstandings (of course Ellison has a right. of course it’s just a ceremony). How can you debunk what is obviously true, however: that people on the left support Ellison because they both want to diminish the Bible’s importance in American history? This is an opinion.

    Asymmetric

  • “One final question that I have to ask–who was the Russian Tzar in 1453 when Constantinople fell?” – carwinrpc

    Truely, there was none. I was rather thinking about all those years later when the Tsars were trading off their claims to Constantinople to keep the Orthodox Church happy, healthy and alive in a Turkish Muslim state.

    “This period saw the creation of a formal Ottoman government whose institutions would remain largely unchanged for almost four centuries. In contrast to many contemporary states, the Ottoman bureaucracy tried to avoid military rule. The government also utilized the legal entity known as the millet, under which religious and ethnic minorities were able to manage their own affairs with substantial independence from central control.” – Wikipedia article

    Seems like an Imperial policy, doesn’t it?

    “How can you debunk what is obviously true, however: that people on the left support Ellison because they both want to diminish the Bible’s importance in American history?” – Nelson Guirado

    Ask you to cite one instance of a liberal actually trying to “diminish” the Bible’s importance? Not wingnut fantasies, but real evidence.

  • You said something like “your own holy lands of Saudi Arabia”. I wonder if you thought you were speaking of me. I am most certainly NOT Muslim–just because I don’t subscribe to the belief that all Muslims participate in some sort of vast Muslim sin by virtue of their religion doesn’t mean I have to BE one. I’m not.
    Finally, I don’t know how Russian Imperial Policy got into this. It’s a bit like Mr. Dick in David Copperfield–he couldn’t get King Charles’s head out of his mind. If the Sultans had wanted to suppress the Orthodox church in Istanbul, they doubtless wouldn’t have waited for the creation of a Russian Imperial Court to persuade them not to do it. Do you see that? Talk of not germane. Yikes!!

  • Sorry Carwinrpc, you were giving me the impression of defending your own faith.

    But back to your original point: “Having spent several of my adult years living in a predominantly Muslim country(Turkey), the relative ignorance of Americans about Islam is beyond description.”

    Relative – to – what? Your knowledge of Islam or Muslims’ knowledge of Christianity or the West? These are people who seem to think every Western soldier in the Middle East is nothing more than a Crusader, and not a very nice image of one either.

    Are you saying that Americans should know more about the Muslim world? If so what, other than the fact that Islam is an Abrahamic religion (version 3.0 as someone once put it 😉 ) and that it “tolerates” the previous versions (1.0 and 2.0) do you want us to know? ‘Cause the more I learn the less I’m impressed.

    Yes, Americans should know a lot more about the world.

    They should know that when George W. Bush walks hand in hand with a Saudi Prince that Prince is the first cousin of men who fund Osama bin Laden to murder thousands of Americans.

    Americans should know that the Taliban are the Afghan orphans taught in Madrasses funded by Wahhabist Saudi Princes to who (the Taliban, not the princes) went into Afghanistan to end a civil war in that country after the Soviets left and we (George H.W. Bush, extactly) dropped the country from our attention. Said Taliban then imposed a strict interpretation of Islamic law that outlawed such dangerous practices such as Kite Flying!

    Americans should know that Iran, one of only two Shi’a majority countries (Iraq being the other) is actually run by Persians who are only 51% of the population but who occasion to call minorities like the Azeris “Cockroaches”.

    Americans should know that “honor killings” of Muslim women is practiced and ignored by authorities in numerous “Muslim” countries.

    Shall I go on?

  • Americans should know that Iran, one of only two Shi’a majority countries (Iraq being the other

    Actually I was reading an article today in the Economist from about 4 weeks ago (I’m behind in my reading) where they discussed Bahrain – and it seems that that is another country with a local Shi’ite majority population ruled by a Sunni ruling family.

  • re #32,

    Sigh! I stand corrected. There is something about the Muslim psyche that seems to require the minority sect to be the ruling group. In Syria Sunnis are a majority but the government is Shi’a dominated.

    I suppose it’s the only way to prevent genocide…

    As seems to be happening in Iraq now the Shi’a are both a majority and the government. (no I’m not being serious)

  • Comments are closed.