Seldom is an Ethics Dunce able to squeeze more than one ethics fiasco into a single ignorant act, but Rep. Virgil Goode (R) of Virginia's 5^th District was equal to the task.

In a letter to a constituent that managed to fall into the hands of the press, Goode criticized the decision of Minnesota representative-elect Keith Ellison (D), the first Muslim ever elected to Congress, to take his oath of office with his hand on the Koran rather than the Bible. He then attributed Ellison's election to illegal immigration and suggested that Muslims should not be allowed to immigrate to America, legally or illegally:

"…I fear that in the next century we will have many more Muslims in the United States if we do not adopt the strict immigration policies that I believe are necessary to preserve the values and beliefs traditional to the United States of America and to prevent our resources from being swamped." 

Not surprisingly, Goode's comments have provoked considerable criticism, all of it appropriate but still less vociferous than he deserves, for his letter was a tour-de-force in ethical incompetence.

Goode didn't check his facts before making accusations, or even think, to the extent that he is capable of coherent thought. Ellison is not an illegal immigrant or even the product of recent legal immigrants; his family has been in America since 1742. He converted to Islam in college, just as you or I or Goode, for that matter, could convert to Islam tomorrow. Goode's letter implies that Ellison was elected by a mob of newly-minted voters courtesy of the lenient Clinton immigration policies. This is absolutely untrue, for Ellison represents Minnesota, which isn't a particularly diverse state, only an unusually open-minded one. Thus his accusations are irresponsible and reckless, disrespectful to Minnesota voters and possibly dishonest, if he was aware that his allegations were contrary to the facts.

This conduct is the least of the ethics idiocy on display in Goode's letter, however. Contrary to Goode's assertions in his letter, the "values and beliefs" of the United States are clearly set out in the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution, and they include religious freedom and the inherent rights of every human being, Christian, Muslim, or Scientologist, to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. Those official American values do not include bigotry, group hatred, discrimination and intolerance…or even Christianity. The essence of ethics ignorance is not knowing what your culture's ethical values are. That describes the Honorable Congressman from Virginia to a tee.

Now here's the topper, the frosting on Goode's unethical cake, the cherry on his ethics-free sundae. An oath is a solemn promise, and officials swear their oaths of office with their hand on the Holy Bible to demonstrate that the words they utter are not merely words, but a promise before their God. If the official is a Muslim, however, he or she might as well swear the oath of office on "The Joy of Cooking" or "Goodnight Moon" as the Bible. If the book isn't meaningful to them, it serves no purpose in the ceremony. Ellison's insistence that he be sworn in with the tome he holds sacred, the Koran, is his only ethical course as a Muslim if he is serious about taking the oath and abiding by it. Goode's criticism of Ellison is therefore not just insulting and disrespectful; it is wrong. He has the ethical issue exactly backwards. Ellison is acting honorably, and Goode can't comprehend it. He is an Ethics Dunce times three.

The Republican Party does not have to examine public polls regarding the Iraq war to explain why it just lost its majority in the House of Representatives. It only has to examine the words and actions of the astonishing number of crooks, liars, frauds, bigots and fools that came into the halls of power waving the banner of the GOP. Goode may not be the worst of them, but a party that endorses such an ethically obtuse individual for office has a lot to answer for---almost as much as the Virginia 5^th District voters who elected him.