So help me, Allah?

The American Civil Liberties Union is suing the state of North Carolina, which prevents those swearing oaths in the courtroom from using the Quran.

North Carolina law calls for laying one's hand on the "Holy Scriptures," which clearly refers to the Bible.

TRENDING: Is America having a near-death experience, or is this the end?

The ACLU claims this represents religious discrimination.

However, what the ACLU doesn't tell you is that North Carolina law includes a provision for allowing non-believers to simply affirm they are telling the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth – without laying their hand on the Bible or any other text.

So, there is no legal discrimination of any kind taking place in North Carolina.

The ACLU is hell-bent on eradicating any vestige of America's Christian and Judeo-Christian heritage. That's its game plan. It seeks to pit groups of people against each other in an effort to promote a brand of hyper-secular multiculturalism that would forever change the very character and soul of this country.

The executive director of the ACLU-NC, Jennifer Rudinger, claims: "The government cannot favor one set of religious values over another and must allow all individuals of faith to be sworn in on the holy text that is in accordance with their faith."

Where is that written? What law is she citing? Is this just her personal opinion?

If, indeed, the government cannot favor one set of religious values over another, then, by definition, the American people have been disfranchised from making any laws even influenced by their own religious views.

Think of the implications that.

Are not laws against murder influenced by our religious values?

Are not laws against speeding on highways influenced by our religious values?

Are not laws against stealing influenced by our religious values?

Are not laws against environmental polluting influenced by our religious values?

In fact, isn't Rudinger's belief that government cannot favor one set of religious values over another influenced by her own religious values?

We all have religious values – even atheists. They shape our worldview and our opinions and our thoughts about the actions of government whether we acknowledge it or not. All laws are based on someone's view of morality – and our notions of morality stem directly from our religious or irreligious views.

The ACLU and other groups like it like to pretend they are somehow immune to religious influence. They are not. They, too, are very much involved in a religious crusade. Their religion is the religion of secular humanism – acknowledged by the U.S. Supreme Court as an actual religion.

By promoting the Quran as an appropriate text on which to swear an oath in a courtroom, the ACLU wants to draw a moral equivalency between the Quran and the Bible. It is part of a multicultural agenda that is ripping America from its very moral foundations. It would render oaths in the courtroom virtually meaningless.

Some religions countenance lying. Some religions countenance moral relativism. Some religions countenance situational ethics. And that's why the texts of those religions should not be used to administer oaths.

Once again, the ACLU is finding problems where none exist.

If a non-Christian or non-Jew takes a courtroom oath in North Carolina, they have the option of a simple affirmation that their testimony will be true.

What's wrong with that?

Doesn't that make more sense than introducing into the courtroom perhaps dozens of new religious texts to be used for the administering of oaths?

Shall Satanists be granted the opportunity to use the Satanic Bible for their oaths?

Shall believers in witchcraft be granted the opportunity to use Wiccan texts for the administering of oaths?

Shall believers in Gaia be granted the opportunity to use Al Gore's "Earth in the Balance" for the purpose of administering oaths?

If you'd like to sound off on this issue, please take part in the WorldNetDaily poll.