Posted on 09/20/2015 1:49:44 PM PDT by VinL
It would be unconstitutional to disqualify a Muslim from the presidency because of religion, Republican presidential candidate Ted Cruz said Sunday.
“You know, the Constitution specifies there shall be no religious test for public office and I am a constitutionalist,” the Texas senator said during the taping of “Iowa Press” at Iowa Public Television.
Cruz was about Ben Carson’s televised statement that Islam is inconsistent with the U.S. Constitution. “I would not advocate that we put a Muslim in charge of this nation. I absolutely would not agree with that,” Carson said on NBC’s “Meet the Press.
”
Cruz also referred to the ongoing controversy raised in the media over whether Donald Trump should have corrected a man who incorrectly stated at a rally that President Obama is a Muslim and not an American. “My view, listen. The president’s faith is between him and God. What I’m going to focus on is his public policy record,” Cruz said.
One area in which Cruz did not mind excluding Muslims, however, was from the ranks of refugees from Syria seeking asylum in the United States. He said they should settle in other Middle Eastern countries, citing concerns that some of the purported refugees may actually be terrorists.
“I think the Christians are a very different circumstance because Christians are being persecuted, they are being persecuted directly for their faith and the Obama administration has abandoned Middle East Christians,” Cruz said.
Several other Republican presidential candidates weighed in on the issue of Syrian refugees Saturday during a forum in Des Moines. Mike Huckabee agreed with Cruz that the U.S. should exclude Muslim refugees but accept Christians. Rick Santorum argued that even the Christians should be assisted in the region so they can return home when the violence ends.
Following his visit at Iowa Public Television, Cruz visited with restaurant-goers at the Machine Shed Restaurant in Urbandale for more light-hearted discussions while Iowans enjoyed their morning brunch.
“The Constitution does prohibit religious tests for office.”
The problem is that dumb Dems hired a Muzzie who hid the fact from the voting public. A Manchurian candidate.
I don’t agree.
Cruz showed that he knows the Constitution.
Obama lied about his religion and didn’t run as a mozlum.
Mozlums can run for POTUS all day long.
They wont be elected if they tell the TRUTH about their religion, and Carson is correct that they shouldn’t be.
This entire episode is a win for the Hard Right, Trump, Cruz, and Carson.
Carson showed some balls today, he needs to be unleashed on the Washingtonians in some capacity to search and destroy the Apparatchik.
Sometimes a guy just can’t restrain himself from showing everybody that he knows more about it than anybody else, and as the Good Book says, “Pride goeth before a fall....” Even Ted isn’t immune to that. Why did he have to go there?
Catholic Oath of Obedience— unconstitutional?
I believe that the teaching of the Holy Catholic Church is God’s teaching, without exception.
I believe that the Pope is the supreme teacher and leader chosen by God
to have authority over the entire Universal Church and over each individual Christian.
I promise the Most Holy Trinity,
I promise Jesus Christ suffering on the Cross,
I promise the Blessed Virgin Mary and all the angels and saints,
to always believe and follow the teaching of the Roman Catholic Church,
and to never fail in true obedience to the teaching and leadership of the Pope.
I promise to pray for, defend, and obey the Pope and the Roman Catholic Church.
Yeah, the “queen” cockroach is in the White House and now we are infested with them.
Look at Europe and that is what the “queen” is going to do to us.
Not even Orkin can help
I wish Cruz did not answer the way he did.
Elections in which the general public participates are un-Islamic.
Sorry Jane- too many comments- tying too past— more appropriate to say, the issue originated with Donald—
and I don’t disagree with him that he wasn’t constrained to correct or admonish the questioner.
If you think an islamist belongs in the WH I guess I won't change your mind.
I can’t believe some posters who I considered to be a cut above normal intelligence, are missing the point.
Muslims can satisfy the eligibility part of the presidency.
Period...Perfectly constitutional.
No one is advocating voting for a Muslim, for Heaven’s sake.
When one is called a reactionary, I believe this is what they mean.
Unconstitutional....possibly, wise, definitely..., their “religion” and sharia law allows them, in good conscience, to lie and deceive infidels which we all are....they may take the oath of office, but some jackass federal judge would rule that they may not be held legally responsible for upholding it. A very dangerous precedent would be set.....
Does this not mean that to truly win and end the War on Terror all Islamic scripture must be eradicated?
Thanks Godebert. Those who have read the cases know that you have spoken the truth, confusing though the issue has been made. Thus far you appear still able to post at FR, though I know many knowledgeable people who have stayed away from the clear threat on 1st Amendment rights by "Free" Republic monitors, who also must like Cruz' active defense of issue we care about, but who don't believe Article II Section 1 Clause 5 important enough to disqualify Cruz.
Charles Evans Hughes, running against racist Woodrow Wilson, and a former Supreme Court Jusice, was born to British Subject Parents who had never naturalized. He was exposed by FDR Attorney Breckenridge Long, who explained the definition of natural born citizenship in the largest legal journal in 1916. Hughes later became Chief Justice, and ruled that Minor v. Happersett was correct when he wrote Perkins v. Elg in 1939. He had been Governor of New York, and probably held allegiance to our Constitution, but could not have prevailed over the Constitution and Minor v. Happersett had he beaten Wilson. Hughes would almost certainly have been a better President than Wilson. Natural Law is not a guarantee, but would have protected us from Obama had we respected the Constitution.
Cruz has said many of the right things, but when his campaign manager invoked the 14th Amendment, which explicitly does not change the "never doubted" definition of natural born citizenship, a fact of which Cruz can have no doubt, Cruz lost my support. To be precise, I have not heard or read Cruz making that claim, but he needed to correct his campaign manager, and explain why he is not an eligible candidate for me to consider him qualified for any federal office. Lawyers are "Officers of the Court", and sign an oath in respect of the Constitution, and of honesty. Cruz' candidacy is itself dishonest, but not illegal. Many have campaigned for the presidency who were clearly ineligible. Socialist Workers Party Candidate Roger Calero was not even a citizen when he was a presidential candidate in 2008.
Of course Cruz is not alone. Rubio, Jindal, and Nikki Haley (who has never announced an intent to be a candidate for the presidency) are all naturalized citizens, as Obama has told us with legal clarity, but a bit of legal obfuscation, that defines his class of citizenship.
Jesus Cruz
With Muslims there won’t be any constitution dumbass
I would agree with you.
It’s amazing, really.
Never thought I’d see the day we would have a muzzie supporting group of FReepers, wow.....
******************
I agree with Ted Cruz on such matters as radical Islamic terrorism, not allowing Iran to have a nuclear weapon, but, at the same time, I have no problem with Trump’s statement that he would appoint a Muslim-American to his cabinet.
Muslim American citizens have constitutional rights in this country, and what I’m supporting in this thread, is the primacy of our constitution.
And the Rosa Parks love
How is he that much better than Thrump?
Sorry for the delay- 300 posts, eh?
“I love the Muslims. I think they’re great people.”
http://www.cnn.com/2015/09/19/politics/donald-trump-muslims-controversy/
I just don't understand why so many so-called 'conservatives' choose to ignore the issue. Particularly here, where the mission statement includes defending the Constitution.
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.