Congressman Bill Sali (R-Idaho) recently criticized the attempted opening of a session of the U.S. Senate with a Hindu prayer (which did not go well for reasons having nothing to do with him: see Anna’s post). He also openly lamented the presence of a Muslim Congressman, Keith Ellison. As Sali puts it, “Those are changes, and they are not what was envisioned by the Founding Fathers.” Now he’s made another statement clarifying the earlier remarks to the Nampa Press Tribune:
Friday, Sali said multiculturalism is in conflict with the national motto “E Pluribus Unum,” or “out of many, one.” He said multiculturalism would mean “out of the many, the many.”
“The question is, is multiculturalism good or not?” Sali said. “I don’t think the Founding Fathers were multicultural. Multiculturalism is the antithesis of (the motto).” Sali said the United States was founded on principles derived primarily from the Scriptures. And he said drifting away from those principles could put the country in danger.
“If we’re going to move away from those principles … we better consider the blessings of God that have been bestowed on this country and the protective hand of God that’s been over this country,” Sali said. (link)
Wow, he just gets wronger and wronger. Sali is confusing, in a fundamental and embarrassing way, the idea of religious freedom, which is unambiguously written into the Constitution, and the fuzzy contemporary concept of multiculturalism. For Sali, a Muslim Congressman or a Hindu prayer in the Senate can be sneered at as “multiculturalism,” when in fact it is simply Americans exercising their First Amendment rights to freedom of religion.
Relatedly, Sali is dead wrong when he says that the Founding Fathers were operating on “principles derived from the Scriptures.” (He’s trying to pull a fast one with that sneaky word, “derived.”) Like other conservatives who want to impose their idea of “God’s law” on us, Sali is flagrantly ignoring who Thomas Jefferson was and what he believed.
(For even more painful wrongness try this: last year Sali argued that the rate of breast cancer in the U.S. is linked to abortion — in a speech he gave on the House floor.)
Fortunately, not all Republicans are like Sali. Yesterday I stopped by the India Day celebration at Penn’s Landing, Philadelphia. It was a perfect August day, and the bright saris and salwar kameezes were flapping in the breeze — while massive rusty barges moved down the Delaware, headed for China. On stage, the endless array of high school girls doing Bollywood dance numbers was briefly interrupted by Al Taubenberger, Republican nominee for Mayor. In front of a crowd of 300-400, including a number of non-desis, Taubenberger patted Indian Americans on the back for “working hard and playing by the rules.” Amidst the sipping of mango lassis and the many voices whispering “who’s this guy again?” in at least a dozen Indian languages, there was a smattering of applause.
I think they need to change some things with the way law and government is practiced in the US. I think stuff like the swearing on the bible confuses politicians and people into thinking that the US is a christian nation.
I’ve also heard “americans” talking about how the USA wasn’t built for hindhus and wasn’t built so that asians can come here and become rich. I can see how it must be frustrating to have been in a nation for generations and not have it as good as recent immigrants but it seems like the redneck agenda is so advanced that there are even redneck politicians, college professors, professionals and apparently Bill Sali is one of them.
“For Sali, a Muslim Congressman or a Hindu prayer in the Senate can be sneered at as “multiculturalism,†when in fact it is simply Americans exercising their First Amendment rights to freedom of religion.”
I don’t think this is correct. While I definately believe in religious freedom, allowing any kind of prayer in a government facility is dangerously close to violating the separation of Church and State. It is in essence closer to multiculturalism…i.e. the idea of allowing different cultures to flourish. Of course this doesnt change the fact that this Sali character sounds like a bigotted moron.
I think stuff like the swearing on the bible confuses politicians and people into thinking that the US is a christian nation.
Gerhard Schroeder refused to put his hand on the Bible and say ‘By God’ when he took his oath of office for becoming Germany’s Chancellor. This shows the maturity of the German population too which is far more tolerant of ‘lack of faith’ in comparison to the nitwits who vote in US elections. No American President of course would have the gumption to pull a similar stunt in the US if they had any desire of running for any public office again.
I don’t think refusing to swear by Bible and tolerance for other cultures are same. One can be atheist and still be intolerant.
From what I have heard and the news that I read Germany is far more intolerant than America. Compare immigration policies and treatment of minorities in both countries, I suspect US will come out ahead.
From what I have heard and the news that I read Germany is far more intolerant than America.
I am not suggesting that Germans are more tolerant of other cultures. Germans however are more tolerant of ‘lack of faith’ in their politicians.
Yes, I misread it.
As the Daily Kos post pointed out, Founders got it wrong in a number of areas. so they are infallible right? Why is it that current US policy is examined by original intent of the founders? Looks like everyone who wants to discriminate or has bias against other cultures & other ideas are big on Original Intent.
Not to digress too much, but Mango lassis which have come to become quintessential Desi here was something I had never seen in most common restaurants in India. Lassi was always sweet with malai or salty, but recently the idea seems to be catching on in the des too – another CTM maybe.
That is the title for this NYTimes magazine article
gets me a lot of ladies..
amardeep,
Slate’s run a few articles mentioning him; but the best has been by a native of his home state, Bruce Reed.
I think we should consider whether the celebration of your culture leads you to an adopt an illiberal politics/ideology–i.e. does it cause you to not pay taxes, commit domestic violence, pull your kids out of school, teach them that everyone outside the home is the devil incarnate, etc. (but determining such a causality would be prohibitively difficult, so a dialogue is really the best one can do)
I don’t think Bill Sali is thinking of the same test–he’s pushing the very weak idea that there is a singular, monolithic American culture (of which he would be hardpressed to define the boundaries) and that the mere acknowledgement of a muddying of such a ‘pristine,’ singular, monolithic culture would serve to make the polity automatically illiberal and anti-american.
Hello,
My name is Larry Grant and I am the Democratic challenger to Bill Sali in Idaho’s 1st Congressional District. I lost to him last time by only 5% of the vote in a state that gave Bush 68% of the vote in 2004. Check out my website, http://www.grantforcongress.com. If you want to help me get Bill Sali out of Congress, contributions are always welcome.
Guys, remember that swearing on the Bible is optional — you can also always give a solemn affirmation, either in court or when you’re sworn into public office.
These are ceremonial marks of religion, and they don’t have any substantive effect on the way the country is run. While it’s true that dunderheads like Bill Sali can’t tell the difference, most of us can.
I think we should consider whether the celebration of your culture leads you to an adopt an illiberal politics/ideology–i.e. does it cause you to not pay taxes, commit domestic violence, pull your kids out of school, teach them that everyone outside the home is the devil incarnate, etc. (but determining such a causality would be prohibitively difficult, so a dialogue is really the best one can do)
Murali, that seems like a good way of thinking about it. In the U.S. very few immigrants end up going “illiberal” as you put it. Problems of extreme self-segregation are worse in some European countries.
In fact, the kind of multiculturalism which is expressed as symbolic expressions of cultural identity (i.e., parade or festival) tends to go hand in hand with some measure of acculturation. You want the mainstream to recognize you because you are becoming a part of it…
This is an interesting question to come up on the heels of the debate over Robert Putnam’s “diversity” dilemma. I think that celebration of “multiculturism” and “diversity” ought to be an exercise in graciousness and not the “in your face” bludgeon that it often is. Especially prickly is the issue of religion. I wish we could leave this aspect of private practice out of the public square.
The swearing on the Bible/Quran/Gita is optional as Amardeep pointed out. But when that prerogative is exercised, perhaps we could require that our elected officials take the oath for public office on the US Constitution? After all that is what we expect them to uphold in government and not their individual religious beliefs and superstitions.
He has since apologized for his remarks. Of course, as I expected, the apology is only to Muslims not Hindus.
Gujjubhai, to be precise, he apologized to Keith Ellison, not to Muslims in general.
It’s also not clear to me that it’s really a substantive apology, especially since he hasn’t made the text public, and he’s gone on to say that multiculturalism is somehow anti-Christian and un-American. The AP report printed in various papers says only that he told Ellison he “meant no harm or disrespect.” There’s no indication that he’s retracted the statement, even in the private email.
Don’t make this into a Hindus vs. Muslims thing. In the eys of Bill Sali, we are all the same.
Sadaiyappan, desis have been in the USA since the 19th century. It’s something a lot of Americans, even desis, don’t seem to realize.
Amardeep, it wasn’t my intention to make it Hindu vs Muslim. As I happen to be a Hindu myself and it chafed me that Bill Salil chose to make no amends with Hindus, particularly given how vulgar and disrespectful the protest against the prayer was. The argument that we are all the same in his eyes doesn’t wash though : why did he specifically differentiate between Hindu prayer and the Muslim congressman when he made the statement in the first place? There is at least some sign of cognitive ability in giving offense, why not expect the same in the apology? Anyway, don’t mean to threadjack, just thought I’d point to that sorry excuse of an apology as it’s relevant to this discussion.
i give it another say 30-50 yrs before this country becomes tolerant of atheism in politicians as a whole. gotta wait for those older generations to pass on.
15 Ruchira
The swearing on the Bible/Quran/Gita is optional as Amardeep pointed out. But when that prerogative is exercised, perhaps we could require that our elected officials take the oath for public office on the US Constitution? After all that is what we expect them to uphold in government and not their individual religious beliefs and superstitions.
–> Karunanidhi and some DMK members in tamilnadu might be intolerant of some things but they seem to have this down pat. Everytime they are sworn in by the governor, they take their oath on indian constitution which is even more surprising given this is a set of people who “made their bones” demanding secession from India.
The swearing on the Bible/Quran/Gita is optional as Amardeep pointed out. But when that prerogative is exercised, perhaps we could require that our elected officials take the oath for public office on the US Constitution?
John Quincy Adams swore on the Constitution and a book of laws. Theodore Roosevelt also did not swear on the bible in his first term. I believe these are the only two Presidents who did not put their hands on the Bible. Quakers like Herbert Hoover used the bible but chose to affirm instead of taking an oath.
Yes, of course Germans are so much more tolerant and understanding of other religions like this German judge ‘s culturally sensitive decision shows…
Sali is not only a racist moron- he’s a dangerously stupid public official. I think Arjun has hit the nail on the head – the questioning of the use of any religious text to open a session of a public body in the interest of the separation of Church and State. That said, however, if we are going to accept such practices, then religious plurality should be the watchword.
I have a HUGE problem with people like Sali whose narrow definition of who and what is American is based on some idealized, skewed version of the Founding Fathers’ etc.
In the case of Ellison, his constituents have spoken- a concept that Sali seems to be ignoring. As for plurality in religion- the colony of Pennsylvania was founded on precisely that principle- the respect for all religions – and the fear that that might not be possible led to the statement “embued by their Creator” – who remained undefined and unnamed- as well as the principles expressed in the 1st Amendment. Sali needs to go back and get a clue.
As for complaints about multi-culturalism- the possibility of its expression is our saving grace. The flattening of identity into one sort of beige version should not be tolerated any longer because of how we were founded in the first place and the philosophy that allows us to continue to be. Yes, there are basic “American” values and cultural tolerance in one of them. Sali and his ilk need to go.
And is Sali wants to get all religious on people, here’s one for him: ” In my Father’s house, there are rooms enough…John (14:2)
Sali is not only a racist moron- he’s a dangerously stupid public official. I think Arjun has hit the nail on the head – the questioning of the use of any religious text to open a session of a public body in the interest of the separation of Church and State. That said, however, if we are going to accept such practices, then religious plurality should be the watchword.
I have a HUGE problem with people like Sali whose narrow definition of who and what is American is based on some idealized, skewed version of the Founding Fathers’ etc.
In the case of Ellison, his constituents have spoken- a concept that Sali seems to be ignoring. As for plurality in religion- the colony of Pennsylvania was founded on precisely that principle- the respect for all religions – and the fear that that might not be possible led to the statement “embued by their Creator” – who remained undefined and unnamed- as well as the principles expressed in the 1st Amendment. Sali needs to go back and get a clue.
As for complaints about multi-culturalism- the possibility of its expression is our saving grace. The flattening of identity into one sort of beige version should not be tolerated any longer because of how we were founded in the first place and the philosophy that allows us to continue to be. Yes, there are basic “American” values and cultural tolerance is one of them. Sali and his ilk need to go.
And is Sali wants to get all religious on people, here’s one for him: ” In my Father’s house, there are rooms enough…John (14:2)
Vivo: Don’t hold your breath. I am of the older generation and all my adult life I have waited for the Godot (or the god) of rationalism to prevail in public discourse. It hasn’t happened – not in India nor unfortunately in the US, where a non-believer cannot aspire to elected office, no matter what her / his qualifications. I agree with Zazou that our distinct identity should not be a bland “beige” pablum of acceptable uniformity and with Arjun that official display of religiosity can only spell disaster, freedom of religion and separation of Church and State notwithstanding. The religious debate, where there is never going to be a “last word” acceptable to all, “equal time” is not going to solve anything. Religion must be kept meticulously apart from government function.
In the current atmosphere of global turmoil, religion unfortunately has once again been pushed to the forefront of “identity politics. It is a natural human tendency to highlight and circle the wagon around that one aspect of our identity (among the many other facets of our selfdom) which we feel is under assault. The French-Lebanese author Amin Maalouf has written a long, plaintiff and utopian appeal in his book, In The Name Of Identity where he examines this very issue. (If you don’t have the time to read Maalouf’s book, see my review here.) Amartya Sen has said something very similar in Identity and Violence.
With racist religious bullies like Tom Tancredo, Bill Sali and (now the dear departed) Tom DeLay, defining multiculturism and diversity in light of their hate filled xenophobia, it is not a surprise that others too will increasingly become hardened in their own faith based stance in public matters. More is the pity.
Not so. Nehru was agnostic and the “Dravidianist” parties are hostile to religion in general and the Vedic subsection of Hinduism in particular. I completely agree that this has not stopped the exploitation of identity politics in horrific ways in India though.
Bill Sali trashed the Hindu religion. He fired at a Muslim Congressman from Minnesota. I wonder if he is reserving some venom for the Budhist Congresswoman from Hawaii.
This shows the ugly side of America and some backward states like Idaho.
dis old guy proly wont b stayin in office long in a couple generation wen da more tolerant generations r in power i hope dis shit will change rite now evn tho most of america has moved on da ppl in power r da old 1z who cant c us ppl of color as der equals
also i dont get it ppl h8 ppl of color yet dey go geta tan n get bigger lips WTF?
who the hell cares what kind of prayers they say? why are they saying prayers at all? some Leonard Cohen lyrics are in place here, ” I can’t hang with this godless crowd, while the killers in high places say their prayers out loud.”All prayers sound the same–remarkably the same.
“dis old guy proly wont b stayin in office long in a couple generation wen da more tolerant generations r in “power i hope dis shit will change rite now evn tho most of america has moved on da ppl in power r da old 1z who cant c us ppl of color as der equals also i dont get it ppl h8 ppl of color yet dey go geta tan n get bigger lips WTF?”
Who knows, Shakespeare. Same stupid reasons you have artificially blond black people and Chinese with surgically rounded eyes, yet they all say they’re proud of what they are. So many of us are just never satisfied with what we’ve got. But it’s good for the economy. However, cosmetics are not the major angle here. I believe it is one of those cultural things. btw, never let it be said with prose like this that the American educationa system is dumbed down.
i think prayers in congress make people think that religion is not insane. not a good direction to head in.
Darn! We thought we saw something that said “India” on the PECO building but it scrolled through at such a rate that we kept missing it. I would’ve loved to check that out, I still have no idea where the Indians hang out in the Philadelphia area and where to go to get my Indian on (I have found a grocery store or two, actually).
Amreekan post #31, I think there are good examples to use regarding black people, but I don’t think artificial blondeness is one of them. Because you might as well have said “artificially blonde white people” -most people of any race are naturally dark-haired.
do desi chicks with red highlights in the hair count?
“artificially blonde white people” -most people of any race are naturally dark-haired.
True enough, but I’m not sure why you don’t think my example is appropos. It is question of “likelihood” of occurrence. Unless you’ve seen some sights I haven’t, blondness au naturel (kindergarten might be the best testing ground for this experiment) happens a bit more frequently among descendents of, say, Latvians, than of, say, Nigerians.
amreekan, what a weird question-
The answer, of course, is – most people. Don’t you live in this country?
i think when the revolution comes, ill be the first one up agaisnt the wall…
amreekan said, “who the hell cares what kind of prayers they say” and kurma said…”most people…don’t you live in this country?” well, yes and no. But I really think most people DON’T care; it’s just a few loudmouths that make a stink. Most people are very polite in the presence of solemn intonations addressed to the deity (perhaps emphasis is on THE), ESPECIALLY when they don’t understand the words. But I confess to having been raised Catholic at a time when the latin mass was still in vogue. This I believe. No intent to trivialize the trouble.
inothernews, welcome to Philly! I think the main Indian shopping area is in Upper Darby, just west of the city itself, have you checked that out? Not much of a scene, though, two of my desi friends have been living here for more than a year and are still asking that question.
But feel free to email me if you want to talk Philly! 🙂
Inothernews, I would second what Sarah said. Upper Darby is there, but it’s a bit of a disappointment — especially compared to Iselin or Parsippany. A better place to go (especially for you — coming from the Jersey Shore) would be Bensalem. The Sabzi Mandi there is pretty huge; you can get pretty much anything you want. It’s right off of the PA Turnpike.
But that’s just shopping. Sadly, there’s no real ‘hang out’ place except for the occasional desi night at Cafe Spice. (And personally, my clubbing days are over — having a baby will do that to you.)
I am part of a once-monthly super informal Desi book club that meets in Chestnut Hill — email me if you’re interested in stopping by sometime. (That goes for you too, Sarah.)
Amardeep, I am interested!
There is just one word to describe these christian chauvinists: LIARS. The prominent Founding Fathers of America were secularists who were mostly Deists and Unitarians. In other words they were “infidels”, which is what they were actually called by their opponents. Here are some quotes that prove that the Sali, Pat Robertson and their numerous ilk are desperately trying to fool the american people and the world in general:
THOMAS JEFFERSON:
“an amendment was proposed by inserting ‘Jesus Christ,’ so that it would read ‘A departure from the plan of Jesus Christ, the holy author of our religion;’ the insertion was rejected by the great majority, in proof that they meant to comprehend, within the mantle of its protection, the Jew and the Gentile, the Christian and Mohammedan, the Hindoo and Infidel of every denomination.” [Is that multicultural or what?]
“I have recently been examining all the known superstitions of the world, and do not find in our particular superstition (Christianity) one redeeming feature. They are all alike founded on fables and mythology.”
BENJAMIN FRANKLIN:
“Some books against Deism fell into my hands. . . It happened that they wrought an effect on my quite contrary to what was intended by them; for the arguments of the Deists, which were quoted to be refuted, appeared to me much stronger than the refutations; in short, I soon became a thorough Deist.”
“Lighthouses are more helpful than churches.”
GEORGE WASHINGTON:
“Religious controversies are always productive of more acrimony and irreconcilable hatreds than those which spring from any other cause. Of all the animosities which have existed among mankind, those which are caused by the difference of sentiments in religion appear to be the most inveterate and distressing, and ought most to be depreciated”
Paul F. Boller states in is anthology on Washington: “There is no mention of Jesus Christ anywhere in his extensive correspondence.” [Dallas: Southern Methodist University Press, 1963, pp. 14-15]
“Gouverneur Morris had often told me that General Washington believed no more of that system (Christianity) than did he himself.” -Thomas Jefferson, in his private journal, Feb. 1800
JAMES MADISON (Father of the Constitution):
“Religious bondage shackles and debilitates the mind and unfits it for every noble enterprise.”
” During almost fifteen centuries has the legal establishment of Christianity been on trial. What has been its fruits? More or less, in all places, pride and indolence in the clergy; ignorance and servility in the laity; in both, superstition, bigotry and persecution.”
JOHN ADAMS:
“As I understand the Christian religion, it was, and is, a revelation. But how has it happened that millions of fables, tales, legends, have been blended with both Jewish and Christian revelation that have made them the most bloody religion that ever existed?”
“The divinity of Jesus is made a convenient cover for absurdity. Nowhere in the Gospels do we find a precept for Creeds, Confessions, Oaths, Doctrines, and whole cartloads of other foolish trumpery that we find in Christianity.”
“Have you considered that system of holy lies and pious frauds that has raged and triumphed for 1,500 years?”
“This would be the best of all possible worlds, if there were no religion in it.”
THOMAS PAINE:
“Whenever we read the obscene stories, the voluptuous debaucheries, the cruel and torturous executions, the unrelenting vindictiveness, with which more than half of the Bible is filled, it would be more consistent that we call it the word of a demon than the word of God. It is a history of wickedness that has served to corrupt and brutalize mankind.”
“What is it the New Testament teaches us? To believe that the Almighty committed debauchery with a woman engaged to be married; and the belief of this debauchery is called faith.”
“We do not admit the authority of the church with respect to its pretended infallibility, its manufactured miracles, its setting itself up to forgive sins. It was by propagating that belief and supporting it with fire that she kept up her temporal power.”
“All national institutions of churches, whether Jewish, Christian or Turkish, appear to me no other than human inventions, set up to terrify and enslave mankind, and monopolize power and profit.”
ETHAN ALLAN:
“I have generally been denominated a Deist, the reality of which I never disputed, being conscious I am no Christian”
So many desis like to put down other races, in particular africans and chinese, thinking foolishly that it will somehow lift their own low status in the world.
Desis are more uncomfortable in their skins than any other race. Funny how amreekan neglected to include the reality of how very much in thrall desis are to fair caucasian skin, which is rare in India. Hence the desperate use of “Fair and Lovely” skin-lightening cream by those desis who can afford it.
Prema, you rock.
I don’t subscribe to negative desi exceptionalism. I don’t think desis “are more uncomfortable in their skins than any other race”. I’m sure in some area or another desis do worse “than any other race”, but I doubt this true regarding phenotypical comfort. Also, I doubt desis put down africans or chinese any more than african or chinese put down desis. In the intragroup construction of heirarchy, those at the top generally perform being the least racist -that seems to be true for most affinity groups. However, most affinity groups have a faction, constructed heirarchcially lower, that perform narrow group advocacy. I think this is true for africans, for chinese, for whites, and it would be oddly exceptionalist if desis didn’t have a similarly constructed dynamic.
“So many desis like to put down other races, in particular africans and chinese, thinking foolishly that it will somehow lift their own low status in the world.” ok, I should have included desis, especially considering where I am. We’re all guilty. Nobody is “uplifted” by these activities, that was my point. Usually if I can’t say something intelligently I restrain my fingers from contact with the keyboard. Mea culpa. btw, very interesting comments from the Founding Fathers. I’d forgotten their inclusion of Mohammedans and Hindus in the mix of potential players in the new experiment. The 18th century brought Europeans into close contact with India and the middle-east, and “orientalism” was gearing up to full swing. I think they were actually more worried about Catholicism than about Islam at time.
I don’t subscribe to negative desi exceptionalism. I don’t think desis “are more uncomfortable in their skins than any other race”. I’m sure in some area or another desis do worse “than any other race”, but I doubt this true regarding phenotypical comfort. Also, I doubt desis put down africans or chinese any more than african or chinese put down desis. In the intragroup construction of heirarchy, those at the top generally perform being the least racist -that seems to be true for most affinity groups. However, most affinity groups have a faction, constructed heirarchcially lower, that perform narrow group advocacy. I think this is true for africans, for chinese, for whites, and it would be oddly exceptionalist if desis didn’t have a similarly constructed dynamic.
I totally agree with you. But I’ve read Prema’s comments for a couple of months now and she, I think, feels she has to quell desi pride or arrogance, and will always give inflammatory, stereotypical generalizations that try to put down desis and therefore she loses any credibility. I wouldn’t put too much account into her inflammatory, self-hate comments.
Brown_Rexdale, it pains me to see your typing. And here’s some facts for ya: fairness creams account for 60% of the Indian GDP. So obviously many Indians do want to look lighter.
Oh, and also, am I the only brownie laughing at Bill Sali’s last name?
i can barely read this.
this is openly nakedly wrong. ot shows a lack of understanding of the scale of economic variables. please provide a source that isnt crap.