TAPPER: "Judge Moore has also said that he doesn't think a Muslim member of Congress should be allowed to be in Congress. Why? Under what provision of the Constitution?"
CROCKETT: "Because you have to swear on the bible -- when you are before -- I had to do it. I'm an elected official three terms. I had to swear on a bible. You have to swear on a bible to be an elected official in the United States of America. He alleges that a Muslim cannot do that ethically swearing on the bible."
TAPPER: "You don't actually have to swear on a Christian bible, you can swear on anything, really. I don't know if you knew that. You can swear on a Jewish bible."
CROCKETT: "I swore on the bible. I've done it three times."
TAPPER: "I'm sure you have. I'm sure you've picked a bible but the law is not that you have to swear on a Christian bible. That is not the law. You don't know that? All right. Ted Crockett with the Moore --"
CROCKETT: "I know that Donald Trump did it when he -- when we made him president."
TAPPER: "Because he's Christian and he picked it. Ted Crockett with the Moore campaign. Good luck tonight. Thank you so much for being here."

Perhaps that Muslim teaching about being able to lie to their enemies would be more relevant. But there's a huge difference between there being a religious test that bars people (Constitutionally not allowed) and a community reluctance to embrace a candidate of a certain belief system.

This is EXACTLY why God told us several thousand years ago to not "intermarry" with those who worship other gods (Ex. 34:11-15; Deut. 7:3; 1Kings 11:2)lest we turn against THE one true God. Looks like that train has loonngg left the station, to the point most people don't even think He (or the god of this world{2Cor. 4:4})exists. Looks like sharia has an easier path to dominance of a once great Christian nation.

Ignorant jerk, Tapper, wouldn't mind a bit if a muslim swore on the Qur'an, and pushed for Sharia to replace our Constitution. Nothing but a Left-wing pustule.

I would say that the fact that they swear to "uphold and defend the constitution" is more of an issue, regardless of what they swear on. Sharia prohibits such allegiances, so their oath is a fraud from the git-go.

1

kanthonyb, you are right. If someone takes an oath of office, that oath should be binding, with consequences for violating it. Congress could legislate this, and should. We should have a law saying that the oath of office is binding, and that violation WILL result in loss of the office as well as its benefits. Not "may" but "shall". This would address the problem of people lying when they take the oath, as violating the oath would result in losing the position and all its benefits, such as retirement and insurance. It would affect not only members of Congress but governors, mayors and law enforcement officers as well as all military, all groups which are infested with people who flout the law and refuse to honor the Constitution. If the mayor of a sanctuary city will lose his or her job for violating the oath of office, we won't be seeing all this posturing and defiance of the law. A law without a penalty is the same thing as a no law at all, and an oath without consequences is merely an empty symbol with no real meaning.

1

It's also in the constitution that no religious test can be administered for federal office

It isn't whether they swear on a bible or the koran, they have pledged to uphold the laws of this country. So the very first time someone tries to invoke Sharia Law they should be immediately deported.

1

@ekay It should be on every application to register to run for an office in the US. In Minnesota we have a Muslim rep and now one in the state leg. There are a TON of them here. They need to pledge that the US Constitution is the one & only basis for laws in this country. Waiting till they are sworn in with their fingers crossed behind their back or in their hearts, is too late.

1