Posted on 09/21/2015 12:54:46 PM PDT by BlatherNaut
Republican presidential hopeful Ben Carson is standing by his view that a Muslim should not be president of the United States, telling The Hill in an interview on Sunday that whoever takes the White House should be “sworn in on a stack of Bibles, not a Koran.”
This is one of those wonderful moments when the too-cute-by-half media cynically sets up a gotcha journalism moment to trip up the GOP candidates in order to knock them down. It’s a media art form at this point.
Not. this. time.
This time it backfired, and beautifully. Because finally, we are having a much-needed conversation about jihad and sharia, subject matters verboten by the sharia-compliant gatekeepers of the American media.
We must vocally and unequivocally stand by Ben Carson. This is a critical moment. The media is going to go after Carson like ISIS on a Christian.
Ben Carson stood by his comments concerning the threat posed by a sharia-compliant commander-in-chief. Further, he elaborated on them brilliantly. Instead of a gotcha moment, this became a teachable moment.
Sharia law and the Constitution are incompatible. Our system of governance is based on individual rights and equality for all before the law. This does not exist under the Sharia. Non-Muslims are not equal to Muslims.
And as Robert Spencer points out:
Islamic law infringes upon the freedom of speech, forbidding criticism of Islam. Islamic law denies equality of rights to women. Islamic law denies equality of rights to non-Muslims. If a Muslim renounced all this, he or she could be an effective Constitutional ruler, but in today’s politically correct climate, no one is even likely to ask for such a renunciation. Instead, no one even acknowledges that these really are elements of Islamic law.
No one, that is, except the Muslim clerics who agree with Carson. Syrian Islamic scholar Abd Al-Karim Bakkar said in March 2009: “Democracy runs counter to Islam on several issues…. In democracy, legislation is the prerogative of the people. It is the people who draw up the constitution, and they have the authority to amend it as well. On this issue we differ” — because in Islamic thought, only Allah legislates.
Carson is right. He was not talking about the religious component of Islam. Islam is not just a religion. It is a comprehensive system which deals with all aspects of human life and behavior; legal, religious, dietary, political, et al. It is political Islam that poses a threat to our national security. It denies the freedom of speech, the equality of rights of women, and the equality of rights of non-Muslims, and contains other principles that contradict core Constitutional principles. A Muslim could not adhere to Sharia and take the Oath of Office honestly. If he doesn’t adhere to Sharia, he is not a Muslim, and if he doesn’t take the Oath honestly, he would be a traitor.
“Carson doubles down on no Muslims in the White House,” By Jonathan Easley, The Hill, September 20, 2015
Republican presidential hopeful Ben Carson is standing by his view that a Muslim should not be president of the United States, telling The Hill in an interview on Sunday that whoever takes the White House should be “sworn in on a stack of Bibles, not a Koran.”
Carson ignited a media firestorm in a Sunday morning interview with Chuck Todd on “Meet the Press,” in which he said he “would not advocate that we put a Muslim in charge of this nation.”
“I absolutely would not agree with that,” Carson said.
In an interview with The Hill, Carson opened up about why he believes a Muslim would be unfit to serve as commander in chief.
“I do not believe Sharia is consistent with the Constitution of this country,” Carson said, referencing the Islamic law derived from the Koran and traditions of Islam. “Muslims feel that their religion is very much a part of your public life and what you do as a public official, and that’s inconsistent with our principles and our Constitution.”
Carson said that the only exception he’d make would be if the Muslim running for office “publicly rejected all the tenants of Sharia and lived a life consistent with that.”
“Then I wouldn’t have any problem,” he said.
However, on several occasions Carson mentioned “Taqiyya,” a practice in the Shia Islam denomination in which a Muslim can mislead nonbelievers about the nature of their faith to avoid religious persecution.
“Taqiyya is a component of Shia that allows, and even encourages you to lie to achieve your goals,” Carson said.
Pushing back at the media firestorm over his remarks, Carson sought to frame himself as one of the few candidates running for president willing to tell hard truths.
“We are a different kind of nation,” Carson said. “Part of why we rose so quickly is because we wouldn’t allow our values or principles to be supplanted because we were going to be politically correct. … Part of the problem today is that we’re so busy trying to be politically correct, that we lose all perspective.”
Carson told The Hill that the question of a Muslim president is largely “irrelevant” because no Muslims are running in 2016. He said the question, which Todd is posing to all of the Republican presidential hopefuls who go on his show, “may well have been” gotcha journalism meant to trip the candidates up.
However, he acknowledged the question “served a useful purpose by providing the opportunity to talk about what Sharia is and what their goals are.”
“So often we get into these irrelevant things, because obviously if a Muslim was running for president, there would be a lot more education about Sharia, about Taqiyya,” Carson said.
The issue burst onto the scene last week when GOP front-runner Donald Trump declined to correct a questioner at a campaign rally who declared that President Obama is a Muslim.
Carson said that if put in the same situation, he would have corrected the person at the rally.
“I certainly would not have accepted the premise of a question like that,” Carson said.
However, the retired neurosurgeon declined to criticize Trump, saying those kinds of on-the-spot moments can be difficult to handle in the heat of the moment.
“[Trump] may not have been ready for that,” Carson said. “I can tell you from experience a lot of these things are much easier when you’re quarterbacking from the armchair the next day.”
Islam is not a religion,
It is a ideology based on world domination masquerading as a religion.
No other religion requires total submission or death. Islam does.!
ISLAM IS TERRORISM BY IT'S VERY NATURE
We need to post this everywhere we can
Carson said that the only exception he’d make would be if the Muslim running for office “publicly rejected all the tenants of Sharia and lived a life consistent with that.”
the argument is moot......
since america is christian nation, there will not be a Muslim president
(except now)
Muslin Brotherhood? Are you referring to Val Jarret and the WH?
According to reports, The only exception Carson would make would be if the Muslim running for office “publicly rejected all the tenets of Sharia and lived a life consistent with that,” Carson told The Hill.
MY TAKE:
That still would not solve the problem of TAQQIYA.
Once you make LYING in order to achieve the greater goal of your religion’s supremacy acceptable, once you make LYING an inherent part of your tenet, anything you say ( even your oaths ) becomes suspect.
They may try to displace Carson, but he's too intelligent by a mile, getting more politically savvy by the day and unafraid to step in the ring right now.
Every attempt to knock some issue off to focus on a gotch'a has turned on the left and exemplified the one they attemped to assasinate.
America has turned one and a half steps short of violently opposing obama and his administration, away from the PC of 'religion' (the USSC decision on same sex was the first turnabout for the right),more people actively involved in discussion and (as I'VE experienced of late ..) people that ordinarilly would be non committal or even anti Conservative are admitting they really DO want a Conservative form of government
America might not be too far away from aligning herself with "Christian"
He will be called a racist in 5...4...3...
As I have posted many times before:
Islam is not a religion,
It is a ideology based on world domination masquerading as a religion.
No other religion requires total submission or death. Islam does.!
ISLAM IS TERRORISM BY IT’S VERY NATURE
We need to post this everywhere we can
*****************************
Plus 1 for that!
No Moslem U. S. presidents for me.
Too late for that
Maybe from here on out we can stop it.
Agree.
Yes, I agree with you on both your points.
The MSM is really making big use of their go to guy Lindsey Graham to obtain critical statements concerning Dr. Carson’s remarks about a possible Muslim president.
bkmk
I'm seeing some real backbone here and really like what I see.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/3339478/posts
Ali al-Ahmed, a leading Saudi scholar and the director of the Institute for Gulf Affairs, put it bluntly in Foreign Policy magazine. “Blacks, who make up around 10 percent of the population, are banned from judgeships — as are women and Muslims who observe a different version of the faith — because the monarchy’s religious tradition still views blacks as slaves, other Muslims as heretics, and women as half human. There is only one word to describe such a system: Apartheid.”
Is this what the media and Ben Carson’s “conservative” critics want him to endorse? Islamic Apartheid? Racial inferiority? Sharia slavery?
Is this what tolerance looks like today.
Carson is not afraid to speak out. His one flaw - and it’s a major one - is his stand on amnesty.
It is a political system masking as a religion.
“Tolerance” is just a liberal code word for “submission” and “surrender”.
When asked would he support a Muslim for president, I would have said...”Are you referring to Obama? Why would you call him a Muslim?
Self ping
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.