Replies

Has anyone asked?

Spoken like an ignorant unAmerican bigoted troll. Article 6 of the U.S. Constitution ensures there will be no religious test for any office or public trust.

There are plenty of reasons to oppose Brennan but his faith would not be one. Ditto Romney, Obama or whoever else doesn't fit your particular religious inclination.

There are plenty of reasons to oppose Brennan but his [Muslim] faith would not be one.

Oh, absolutely, because there is no reason for any American to be concerned about Islam. /SARCASM

The Constitution, as awesome as it is, is not the Bible. I'm sure it never occurred to the Founders that Islam might ever get a sizeable foothold in the USA, otherwise, they might have excluded Islam from the protected religions list.

The main problem with Islam, and the reason it SHOULD pose a concern for all Americans, is that it is not just a religion - it is also a political ideology, with its own designs for governmental structure. In that sense, it should not be viewed as merely a religion, and therefore the "no religious test" rule should not apply.

I'll give you an example: In our past, we tried to keep communists out of government because its political ideology was incompatible with a republic. Now, let's say some enterprising individual decides to add a religious aspect to Marxism. He says that God, or some god, commands a dictatorship of the proletariat, that this god says that the way to serve him is for each to give according to ability and each to receive according to his need, and that this god demands that a single party be set up to rule all men without restraint, and that this party can kill indiscriminately if they judge it useful, and that the peons have no rights.

Would we be then obligated to avoid excluding communists from government because communism is now a religion? It's the same ideology either way, but now we are suddenly obliged to welcome it because someone added the word "god" or "allah" or "flying spaghetti monster" or whatever?