Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: madison10

Yes, he is correct; it would be unconstitutional to prohibit a muslim from being president. On the other hand, it would be stupid to elect one.

As we have found out.


11 posted on 09/21/2015 7:26:25 AM PDT by henkster (Liberals forget Dickens' kids forged an Empire on which the sun never set.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies ]


To: henkster
Yes, he is correct; it would be unconstitutional to prohibit a muslim from being president. On the other hand, it would be stupid to elect one.

On what basis would it be unconstitutional to prohibit a Muslim from being president?

My general rule of thumb for dealing with whether or not something is constitutional was to ask myself if this argument would have worked in 1787. If it wouldn't work then, then it ought not be considered valid in the present.

18 posted on 09/21/2015 7:30:10 AM PDT by DiogenesLamp ("of parents owing allegiance to no other sovereignty.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies ]

To: henkster

It would be unConstitutional to prohibit a National Socialist, or a fascist, or a Communist from running for President in this country. The only requirements, that the person be a “natural-born” citizen, attained at least 35 years of age, and has resided in the US at least 14 years.

Apparently that “natural-born” clause has become pretty elastic, with some grave misunderstanding of just exactly what it means. Born on US soil? Born elsewhere of US citizen parent of parents? Born of non-citizen parents who have no intention of becoming citizens?


36 posted on 09/21/2015 7:37:17 AM PDT by alloysteel (If Stupidity got us into this mess, then why can't it get us out? - Will Rogers.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson