I see you are having delusions of competence.
“Mitt Romney has already been governor of Mass. without governing as a Mormon. If a politician advocated Sharia Law, they couldn’t be president, since Sharia Law would overrule the constitution. That doesn’t mean a Muslim can’t be president. Also, Sharia Law violates the First Amendment.”
What happened, did romney quit mormonism during that period? NO, but many principles of mormonsim governed his decisions without open advocation of mormonism.
Depending upon the president - laws tend to be selectively enforced or ignored - 0bama and holder have done it a lot. Fact is a moslem president WOULD be inclined to support Sharia - by the very nature of the belief system he holds. So come on and get your head out of a hole in the ground.
Yes it is different, because Religion is protected by the Constitution.
Yet the same constitution does NOT prohibit the individual citizens from using what ever criteria for judging the worthiness of a candidate to hold office - in fact the constitution PROTECTS that right.
BTW, currently abortion has constitutional protection as well - again, are you going to call a person un-american who opposes abortion? Sorry politics, you are flaming out. Spare us your lame version of political correctness saved for the inhabitants of DU.
What happened, did romney quit mormonism during that period? NO, but many principles of mormonsim governed his decisions without open advocation of mormonism.”
You are advocating a state run religion, which is unconstitutional. Romney didn’t have to quit his religion, and the people were not affected by him being a Mormon in Mass.
“Depending upon the president - laws tend to be selectively enforced or ignored - 0bama and holder have done it a lot. Fact is a moslem president WOULD be inclined to support Sharia - by the very nature of the belief system he holds. So come on and get your head out of a hole in the ground.”
We are talking about what a candidate advocates before being elected, and not all Muslims advocate Sharia law in America.
Yes it is different, because Religion is protected by the Constitution.
“Yet the same constitution does NOT prohibit the individual citizens from using what ever criteria for judging the worthiness of a candidate to hold office - in fact the constitution PROTECTS that right.
“BTW, currently abortion has constitutional protection as well - again, are you going to call a person un-american who opposes abortion? Sorry politics, you are flaming out. Spare us your lame version of political correctness saved for the inhabitants of DU.”
But we know there is no right to an abortion in the constitution. You compared evaluating a candidate’s views on abortion to their views on religion, and religion is clearly stated in the constitution, something you don’t value very much, bigot.