One would hope that those who are not going to vote for Barak Obama aren’t going to vote for him merely because he may or may not have been a Muslim. And I expect that those who are going to vote for Obama are going to vote for him even if he had been a Muslim. Since the Constitution says there is no religious test for office holders then that’s the way it should be.
You would think so.
Let’s not vote stupid.
If people who vote for him without putting his childhood islamic teachings into the mix when considering him, then as Jeff Head said,.... “then we deserve what we get as a people as a whoile.”
We are at war with radical Islam. IMHO, radical islam is much more an ideology and political system than it is a religion. Even if it is both, the fact that it is also an ideology and political system means it MUST be considered when voting. Obama has ties to Islam...it should be a concern for us particularly at this point in history.
During World War II, having ever been, or born into a family that was a devoted, religiously dedicated Imperial Japanese, who considered their Emperor their God, or into a Nazi one would have certainly diqualified one for consideration...if not legally, than clearly practically and with common sense.
At this point in or history, I believe the same holds. But, with all of the other reasons to discount Obama, ie. he is an unbelievably left-leaning, socio-marxist, it is just anther in the mix...but one that is worth consideration and thought IMHO.
Nonsense.
Our Constitution was written by a group of men comprised entirely of Judeo-Christian background, who came from similar cultural and ethnic backgrounds. If I may say, they comprised a VERY non-diverse bunch.
I fully believe that their intent by stating that there could be "no religious test" for the presidency, was based on their assumptions that the presidency would always be occupied by someone from the Christian faiths, or - at the very boundary of their imaginations - by a Jew.
I also daresay that at the time the Constitution was written, none of the founders - NOT A SINGLE ONE - could envision a United States in which a Muslim might someday stand for the office of the presidency, or that the country might someday harbor a growing Islamic population.
I will go further and state that the founders were probably quite aware of the dangers that Islam posed, even then, to the Enlightened West. Seems that I recall reading right here on Free Republic that Thomas Jefferson kept a copy of the quran to further learn about Islamic philosophy.
Islam is more than merely a religion; it is a political system that cloaks itself behind a burqha and thus masquerades as a "religion". As such, we cannot accord to it the same privileges that we automatically grant to other religions. They, at least, do not seek to slaughter, dhimmify or convert everyone who is not one of them.
Who was the Supreme Court Justice who stated that the Constitution was not a suicide pact?
That same Constitution also codified and embodied slavery. Do you still think it is/was correct and should not have been changed in that regard, as well?
- John