Ben Carson: No Muslims as President

After reading todays news Carson is pretty much out of the running.

Shame though he was the one I had the least problems with.

a reply to: Spiramirabilis

Spare me your condescension marg - you have nothing to teach me - I've known a lot of Muslims. More than you I'm guessing

Spare me yours, ive known more than a few, more than you im guessing, considering I spent the better part of 2001 to 2007 in the middle east........

For people like you who think they separate their religion from their politics...

I need only direct you to Iran, Afghanistan, Saudi Arabia, and The Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt, along with many other countries who are predominantly Islamic

In traditional Islam there IS NO SEPARATION between the religion and how the country is governed........those in the middle east and those who practice Islam as its traditionally practice, do not feel that those who practice here in the US and are NOT for Sharia, are practicing Islam, they are as bad to them as apostates......

Hence the "Morality police" in places like Iran and Saudi Arabia

So you can get high and mighty as you want and condescending but youre absolutely WRONG......

The only way to have a Muslim president in the US is if they are pro reformation of Islam, and that includes separating the tenants of Islam that dictate Ruling Policiy, to be done away with.....

I realy dont care who agrees with me or who doesnt, Ive been there, Ive been on the ground, I have spent time in those countries, and I know this to be true.......

And that is EXACTLY what Ben Carson is speaking to........

You can be as PC as you want......doesnt make a difference

All that being said there are plenty here in the US who do not believe this way, Charliespiers is a prime example of the type of reformation Islam needs to under go in certain areas..........That dude gets it , and i would venture to say Most in north America who practice have the same views

a reply to: Boeing777

Nope, you're wrong. The Quran advocates the freedom of religion, there are no death sentences. This "convert or die" or "do it my way or you go to hell" mentality are nowhere to be found in the Quran either.

You obviously havent read the Hadith in conjuction with the Quran

a reply to: Brainiac

Ignorance? lol
If the President of the United States is sworn in he has to put his hand on the bible, are they going to bring out a Quran at the swearing in?

actually thats optional, they can swear in on whatever they want

originally posted by: neo96
After reading todays news Carson is pretty much out of the running.

Shame though he was the one I had the least problems with.

He has no reason to be out of the running at all. America's Islamic population is somewhere between 1% and 3%... not exactly a key demographic and likely not a demographic the GOP would win without BS pandering anyway. I also highly doubt any of Carson's supporters lost any respect for him after his honest statement. Hell, next week's polls should show him getting a bump from it.

a reply to: burdman30ott6

He gave his critics some massive ammunition to beat him over the head with.

We all know how the political game works.

It's relentless.

I really don't see Carson in 2016.

a reply to: neo96

Eventually a candidate is going to get smart, come back out with both middle fingers waving, and focus on the voters, telling the media and their detractors "pound it." Carson might be unconventional enough to bust that membrane and be the first to rub the media's face in it.

ETA: Clinton has mastered this art. www.cnn.com... While every "rule of the game" dictates she should be at the very least placing her campaign on hold, while having already dropped out and cowering in her mansion on the other end of reaction, she's treated all of it as a non-story, non-event. It's working, too. Her lead over Bernie Sanders just keeps growing and will soon be back to pre-crisis numbers.

I'm telling you, I'm onto something here. It is the same with celebrities accused of bad behavior. Micheal Richards takes racial taunts and heckling from a pair of jackasses for 5 minutes, hits his breaking point, and responds in kind... then makes an ass out of himself crying on camera and tearfully apologizing, gets thoroughly raked over the coals and mocked to his face. When was the last time he got a job in Hollywood or received any coverage? Charlie Sheen goes totally insane over a stretched out period of time, tells his critics afterward exactly where they could shove it, is downright venomous against Hollywood and the machine... dude signs a contract worth up to $200 million for a new series before the ink is even dry on his "you'll never work in this town again" letter from Hollywood.

If you're going to make a likely to criticized, bold public statement, STAND BY IT! Live it! Love it! Defend it with equally unconventional vitriol and a ruthless "I don't give a damn" attitude. It works.

a reply to: ManBehindTheMask

You are right, is not separation because they are mostly theocratic governments.

Something that most people here in the US can never experience when they have been born in a nation that have laws on separation of state and church among other laws none existing in other countries that their laws are base on religion.

Thanks for bringing this issue.

Anyone who has a problem with what he said needs to think about it. Would you pause before voting for a potential President Louis Farrakhan? And if so, why?

And some of you know that certain people would obviously never dream of voting for a potential President Ted Cruz because they'd be absolutely convinced he would usher in a new American Christian Theocracy. Likely they'd feel the same about a potential President Mike Huckabee.

Louis Farrakhan would be in the same boat, but for him it would be his Muslim faith getting him in trouble.

And if you get that far, then understand that for candidates coming from certain schools of the Islamic faith, you'd have the exact same issue.

a reply to: buster2010

Ignorance comes with the believe that Islam and their laws are compatible with American laws.

The constitution is the law of the land, very clear on that, Islam is the law of the land for worshiping Muslim that follows Islam, Plain and simple, you can believe in whatever you think is right, depending on what you believe, I will not call you ignorant either just misinformed.

At the end the best president is one that have not links to any system of religious believes but still can be considered spiritual, so we don't get in the silly debacle of what religion is best for us.

We don't need neither fundamentalist in positions of power, that goes for any religion.

Carson made a big mistake on calling for one particular religion he should have call for all types of religion.

No government should put their personal religious believes over the needs of a nation. when that happen is call favoritism,.

For those who seem confused, there exists in the Christian Bible the following:
1 Peter 2:13-17

13 Submit yourselves for the Lord’s sake to every human institution, whether to a king as the one in authority, 14 or to governors as sent by him for the punishment of evildoers and the praise of those who do right.

15 For such is the will of God that by doing right you may silence the ignorance of foolish men.

16 [Act] as free men, and do not use your freedom as a covering for evil, but [use it] as bondslaves of God. 17 Honor all men; love the brotherhood, fear God, honor the king.

bible.org...

The Constitution is an institution, the established law of America. Christians are taught to submit themselves to as much.
Does the same command exist in the Quran?

For general info

The Quran says explicitly

“Let there be no compulsion in religion. Truth has been made clear from error.

(Quran 2:256)

DO I have to again, as I have don’t many times, bring up Muhammad telling Muslims to protect the Christian monks....

The Quran actually gives to Christian monks praise for their humility.

ALL religions have and always will produce the Good, the Bad, and the Ugly as is the nature of humans!

Carson's statement was ugly

a reply to: Willtell

Does the Quran directly order Muslims to subject themselves to non-Islamic civil authority?

originally posted by: burdman30ott6
a reply to: Willtell

Does the Quran directly order Muslims to subject themselves to non-Islamic civil authority?

I have read the entire Quran years ago when I was more devout but in terms of a verse that calls on Muslims to submit to authority other than Muslim in that direct language I’m not sure but the Hadith is clear that Muslims are to maintain peace in non Muslim societies and obey those laws

Though there are versus, something like the Bible and Paul telling Christians to obey authority, enjoining Muslims to keep to their obligations and oaths.

Muslims suppose to follow the example of the Prophet

In 628 C.E. Prophet Muhammad (s) granted a Charter of Privileges to the monks of St. Catherine Monastery in Mt. Sinai. It consisted of several clauses covering all aspects of human rights including such topics as the protection of Christians, freedom of worship and movement, freedom to appoint their own judges and to own and maintain their property, exemption from military service, and the right to protection in war.

www.cyberistan.org...

This is a message from Muhammad ibn Abdullah, as a covenant to those who adopt Christianity, near and far, we are with them.
This is a message from Muhammad ibn Abdullah, as a covenant to those who adopt Christianity, near and far, we are with them.
Verily I, the servants, the helpers, and my followers defend them, because Christians are my citizens; and by Allah! I hold out against anything that displeases them.
No compulsion is to be on them.
Neither are their judges to be removed from their jobs nor their monks from their monasteries.
No one is to destroy a house of their religion, to damage it, or to carry anything from it to the Muslims' houses.
Should anyone take any of these, he would spoil God's covenant and disobey His Prophet. Verily, they are my allies and have my secure charter against all that they hate.
No one is to force them to travel or to oblige them to fight.
The Muslims are to fight for them.
If a female Christian is married to a Muslim, it is not to take place without her approval. She is not to be prevented from visiting her church to pray.
Their churches are to be respected. They are neither to be prevented from repairing them nor the sacredness of their covenants.
No one of the nation (Muslims) is to disobey the covenant till the Last Day (end of the world).

edit on 21-9-2015 by Willtell because: (no reason given)

originally posted by: Sremmos80
a reply to: Christosterone

Wiki is fine, saying it is a poor source is used by those that just don't want to agree with what is said.


OFF TOPIC - However you may find this of interest. I'd suggest your statement is incorrect and dismissive.
isites.harvard.edu...

originally posted by: St Udio


Muslim followers of Islam are dedicated to a Ideological, political, social, militaristic model of government... the theology is an unlimited war-battle against non Islamists.... that is not a 'religion' .... Article VI Does NOT Apply

Actually, that is the very definition of religion and purpose of religion, so yeah, the article still applies.

a reply to: Brainiac

Yes, but the Constitution wasn't written in a time of Muslim Jihad against Americans, Christians, etc... If it was written during a period of Christian beheadings and whatnot, I'm sure it would have been written differently.

There is no Muslim jihad against America. Just some po'd radicals.

Would you really want a President in office with Muslim/Islamic views? Every move you made would have Islamic beliefs in mind.

Would it be any different that the Christian Presidents we have had that just wants to kill everyone?

Whenever you see a woman wearing all black from head to toe they want to do this because they are not allowed to show skin because they are female, they have to walk around hiding from the world, because? They are a woman?

Orthodox Jewish women do the same thing. Do you want some kind of fashion police state?

That is only the tip of the iceberg, there are many restrictions in the Islamic faith, and none of them are similar to freedom.

The same can be said of many religions do you want to get rid of them also?

originally posted by: marg6043
a reply to: buster2010

Ignorance comes with the believe that Islam and their laws are compatible with American laws.

The constitution is the law of the land, very clear on that, Islam is the law of the land for worshiping Muslim that follows Islam, Plain and simple, you can believe in whatever you think is right, depending on what you believe, I will not call you ignorant either just misinformed.

Ignorance come from the people that don't understand that the Constitution would stop Sharia from being enacted.

originally posted by: Skadi_the_Evil_Elf

originally posted by: St Udio


Muslim followers of Islam are dedicated to a Ideological, political, social, militaristic model of government... the theology is an unlimited war-battle against non Islamists.... that is not a 'religion' .... Article VI Does NOT Apply

Actually, that is the very definition of religion and purpose of religion, so yeah, the article still applies.

so, you are saying that religious experiences are more accurately just behaviors of a Soldier ?
Muslims feel they are born into a soldier-for-Islam life...a life of duty to the voice of authority here in the world of flesh after all all Muslims are told their calling is to 'Submit' i.e. follow orders from the Imam (and hope for a moderate Imam instead of one bent on 'your' martyrdom and being an obedient Jihadist..(hopefully sans a custom tailored suicide vest)


Skadi_the_Evil_Elf, I am shocked at your position, shocked (in my best Casa Blanca dialect)