The recent swearing-in of the 110^th Congress marked a couple of momentous events in the history of our republic. To begin with, Nancy Pelosi was sworn in as the first female Speaker of the House of Representatives. Who would have ever thought that our nation’s first female Speaker of the House would be a left wing radical feminist from the gay Mecca of San Francisco devoted to using her Speaker’s gavel to hammer: (1) The sanctity of human life by championing abortion, infanticide, and federal funding for stem-cell research (2) Traditional marriage by championing same-sex marriage (3) Religious freedom by championing hate-crimes legislation that would outlaw Biblical preaching (4) Border security by championing amnesty for illegal immigrants, and (5) National security by championing surrender to insurgents in Iraq, negotiations with rogue nations like North Korea, and appeasement of terrorists devoted to our destruction?

In addition to Pelosi being sworn in as our nation’s first female Speaker, Keith Ellison was sworn in as our nation’s first Muslim congressman. Ellison, an African-American from Minnesota, was sworn in separately at a private-ceremony following the official swearing-in of the 110^th Congress.  Refusing to be sworn-in with his hand on a Bible, as has ever elected member of congress from our nation’s founding, Ellison insisted upon being sworn-in with his hand on a Koran.

Ellison’s swearing-in ceremony drew more media attention than Capitol Hill staffers had ever seen in the history of the U.S. House.  Applauded by liberals for the diversity that it adds to our nation, Ellison’s swearing-in has been repeatedly praised in the press as the dawning of a new and glorious day in America.

Contrary to popular opinion, diversity is not always virtuous. For instance, if everyone was law-abiding would we complain about the absence of criminals in our society? Would we hope for an outbreak of disease if we were all perfectly healthy? Or would we want some scoundrels to move into our neighborhood if everyone living there was upright and moral? Of course not; in each of these instances diversity would be a bad thing not a good thing.

According to liberals, any concern we may have over the election of America’s first Muslim congressman should be readily dismissed. So what if Ellison refused to be sworn-in with his hand on a Bible and demanded instead to take his oath of office with his hand on a Koran? Such a thing only adds to our country’s diversity. Yet, the same shallow argument liberals use to justify Ellison’s swearing-in ceremony could be used to justify a Nazi being sworn-in to office with his hand on a copy of Adolf Hitler’s Mein Kampf; after all, this too would add to our country’s diversity.

Allowing Ellison to set a new precedent with his swearing-in ceremony has paved the way for all kinds of future scenarios. Will we soon see atheists being sworn-in to office with their hands on nothing? How about New Agers being sworn-in while chanting and clinging to crystals? And if presidential hopeful Mitt Romney makes it to the Oval Office, will he insist upon being sworn-in with his hand on the Book of Mormon?

Far more disturbing to me than any precedent set by Ellison’s swearing-in ceremony is the fact that Ellison’s Koran teaches that all people are to be fought until they are converted to Islam and under the control of the Islamic state (Surah 2:193). In addition, Ellison’s holy book also teaches that no opposition to the Islamic state is to ever be permitted (Surah 4:59; 42:10). Obviously, such teachings are diametrically opposed to our Constitution; therefore, it is safe to say that Ellison swore to uphold our Constitution with his hand on a book that contradicts it.

Much has been made of the fact that the Koran Ellison used in his swearing-in ceremony was Thomas Jefferson’s. What has not been properly propagated, however, is that Jefferson, our nation’s third president, advocated war against Muslims as the only solution to militant Islam.

When America’s colonists rebelled against Great Britain in 1776, American merchant ships lost the protection of the Royal Navy. With no navy of its own, American ships became easy prey for Muslim pirates off the Barbary Coast. Operating under the control of the “Dey of Algiers”—a Muslim warlord who ruled Algeria—these Muslim pirates repeatedly attacked American ships, stole their cargos, and enslaved their crews.

Without any ability to protect its own ships, America’s fledgling government attempted to appease Muslim pirates by paying them tribute for safe passage through Mediterranean waters, as well as ransom for the retrieval of seized ships and enslaved sailors. However, then, as today, there was no appeasing of unappeasable Islamists.

Following the Revolutionary War, John Adams and Thomas Jefferson met in London with the “Dey of Algiers” ambassador to Britain. In that meeting, Adams and Jefferson asked the Dey’s ambassador, Sidi Hajj Abdul Rahman Adja, why Muslims held such hostility towards America. According to a report on the meeting submitted to congress, both Adams and Jefferson testified that the Dey’s ambassador explained to them that “Islam was founded on the Laws of their Prophet, that it was written in their Koran, that all nations who should not have acknowledged their authority were sinners, that it was their right and duty to make war upon them wherever they could be found, and to make slaves of all they could take as Prisoners, and that every Musselman (Muslim) who should be slain in Battle was sure to go to Paradise.”

Facing the fact that Muslim pirates in the Mediterranean were unappeasable, and having learned firsthand about the militancy of the Muslim religion from the Dey’s ambassador, Thomas Jefferson, upon becoming our nation’s third president, advocated war against the Islamic “Barbary” states of Morocco, Algeria, Tunisia and Tripoli. Dispatching a group of frigates to the Mediterranean to defend American shipping, Jefferson declared to congress that America would spend “millions for defense but not one [more] cent [to Muslims] for tribute.” During Jefferson’s presidency, the Islamic “Barbary” states crumbled, thanks to intense naval bombardments and daring raids on shore by United States Marines. This early American victory over Muslims is memorialized today in the following well-known line of the Marine Hymn: “From the halls of Montezuma to the shores of Tripoli, we will fight our countries battles on the land and on the sea.”

The incredible irony of America’s first Muslim congressman being sworn into office with his hand on a Koran that belonged to a former president who firmly believed that the only solution to the problem of militant Islam was to go to war against Muslims is but one of several ironies surrounding Keith Ellison’s swearing-in ceremony. For example, consider the following:

Ø       Ellison was sworn-in to office by Nancy Pelosi—a radical feminist—with his hand on a book that teaches: (1) The superiority of men over women (2) That it takes the testimony of two women to equal that of one man, and (3) That all insubordinate wives should be beaten by their husbands (Surah 2:21-22; 4:34; 2:282).

Ø       Ellison’s use of the Koran in his swearing-in ceremony was defended by Minnesota Senator Norm Coleman, despite the fact that the Koran refers to Jews like Coleman as apes, swine, mischief-makers, liars, and those who serve the devil (Surah 5:59-60, 64, 59:11).

Ø       Ellison, an African-American with former ties to the Nation of Islam—a black supremacist cult that teaches white people are devils and less than fully evolved human beings—took his oath of office with his hand on a book attributed to the Prophet Mohammed, who not only owned numerous slaves, but also justify slavery and called blacks “raisin heads” and “pug-nosed slaves.”