Shakes here...
Dennis Prager just can't help himself. First, he went off on one about newly-elected Congressman Keith Ellison being sworn into office on a Quran, claiming the act "undermines American civilization" and accusing Ellison of being unfit to serve in Congress if he would not swear on a Bible. Then, when people had the temerity to criticize him for holding such an absurd position, Prager blamed Ellison for the controversy: "[I]t was Keith Ellison who raised the entire issue of taking an oath on a Koran rather than a Bible. He did not make his announcement in the hopes that it would be ignored but to make a statement. I was responding to that statement. Critics who are unhappy with it becoming an issue should direct their ire at Mr. Ellison." His latest column goes one step yet further, saying the "Culture War" is about the Bible's authority, and its two sides are delineated by the answer to this question: "Does the person believe in the divinity and authority of the Five Books of Moses, the first five books of the Bible, known as the Torah?"
[Christians and Jews, who do believe in the divinity of the Torah] line up together on virtually every major social/moral issue.
Name the issue: same-sex marriage; the morality of medically unnecessary abortions; capital punishment for murder; the willingness to label certain actions, regimes, even people "evil"; skepticism regarding the United Nations and the World Court; strong support for Israel; or a willingness to criticize the moral state of Islamic societies. While there are exceptions -- there are, for example, secular conservatives who share the Bible-believers' social views -- belief in a God-based authority of the Torah is as close to a predictable dividing line as exists.
…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.
It's interesting that Prager used "capital punishment for murder" as an example for his (presumably non-comprehensive) list of "major social/moral issues" instead of, say, "murder." But just saying "murder" would have complicated his point a bit, considering that most secular progressives are, ya know, against murder, too.
