Posted on 09/26/2015 7:19:50 AM PDT by DWW1990
Ben Carsons recent statements about Islam and the U.S. presidency have garnered a wide array of commentary. Most of the remarks have been quite critical, with even some conservatives taking Carson to task. Predictably, many of those critical of Carson point to the Constitutions no religious test clause. Also predictably, many who are making this argument completely ignore that Carson was not advocating for such a religious test.
Interestingly, every one of the American Colonies did have such a religious test. Whats more, these tests continued long after the United States was formed. The U.S. Constitution went into effect on June 21, 1788. An excerpt (Article 7, Section 2) from the 1796 Tennessee constitution reads, No person who denies the being of God, or a future state of rewards and punishments, shall hold any office in the civil department of this State.
(Excerpt) Read more at trevorgrantthomas.com ...
Nothing in the constitution limits individuals. The constitution limits the government. Every citizen is allowed to determine his own criteria for choosing for whom to vote.
Trevor reads sound bites about what Ben Carson said as he obviously didn’t read the question and answer to what Ben said. Ben does not talk in sound bites.
It seems clear to me that Islam, in addition to being (possibly) a religion, is also very much a social and political entity. It appears that the two are inseparable.
It’s the social/political part that could and should be banned. Since they are inseparable, Islam should not be considered a religion at all.
Borrowing from an old U.S. Supreme Court case involving independent tribes of Native Americans.. (no insult to Native Americans intended) I suggest this.
Sharia Camps,
If only Carson’s critics understood such.
Did you read the piece?
We have to get our act together on this issue. Because it is going to determine our chances with respect to national survival.
We have free speech and free access not limited by religious belief. Well and good. How about the guy whose religious belief is to kill all white Christians; and to replace the Constitution with his own views about how he can run the country?
Where and how do we draw the line.
You would like to force these marginal refugee quasi citizens to publically subscribe to some element of citizenship—support the Constitution to the exclusion of some other document claimed to be religious; if they fail to subscribe, you revoke their citizenship and kick them out.
Really same for the Hispanics. They have to give up the claim to Azatlan or other territorial rights inconsistent with the domain of the United States government and the various states. Also need to speak English.
""Islam, Christianity, and Electoral Discrimination"
We have to get our act together on this issue. Because it is going to determine our chances with respect to national survival.
Check out article and # 2 , # 4 , # 6 , and esp # 9 .
Thanks, David.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.