The recently trounced before the American electorate Conservatives have hit an all-time low. Keith Ellison (D-Minn.) is set to become the first Muslim member of Congress next month. He has stated that he intends to be sworn in on the Quran, not the Bible. These same critics, led by the idiots at Townhall.com, took offense, writing that this "undermines American civilization," and that "America, Not Keith Ellison, decide[] what book a congressman takes his oath on." These critics also added that "If you are incapable of taking an oath on that book, don't serve in Congress."

What is it about diversity that threatens such Christians? Guess what, most of the world is NOT Christian. It is a fact of life. Therefore, it is just common sense that Christians have to respect other religions and other faiths, or even those that choose no faith. Otherwise, the only other road is that of the Nazis in World War II: isolation, hatred, and ultimately, extermination. Could it be the specific faith in question here? is it the association of Muslims with terrorists in contemporary times that terrifies some people? Those that understand Islam know it is not by nature a violent faith. Nor is Christianity. Yet horrible violence has been done over the millennia in the names of both. Thus, that is not a logical conclusion.

This fear is the same thing that makes some cling to the scientific farce known as "Intelligent Design," or insist that the 10 Commandments have more to do with the legal history of this country than the philosophy and law school educations of our Founding Fathers. And for all those who think those Founding Fathers were all Christian, well most were. But some, notably Jefferson, were outright hostile to organized religion. Nonetheless, they all knew full well of Jews and Muslims, and even the Hindus. And it was with all this in mind that they crafted the 1st Amendment to the Constitution, an integral part of the U.S. Bill of Rights, which guarantees the freedom of religion and that the state will be separated from religion, such that it endorses no one faith or even faith over non-faith. This is the basic principle of America's religious roots: freedom to pursue the dictates of each individual person's conscience, not a forced rote recitation of faith dictated from above.

Truth be told, the kind of blind obedience that some in the Religious Right would demand would more resemble the "Papist" mandates of the Catholic Church over which the Protestant Revolution was fought. The Founders of America engaged in an intellectual revolution, as well as a physical one, and were those that believed in an individual's right to choose one's one path in life. To insist otherwise, for example that an incoming congressperson must swear an allegiance to any religion, let alone a specific brand of faith, is just plain unamerican.