http://apnews.myway.com/article/20150920/us--gop_2016-trump-homecoming-6af1f975d1.html
Correct. The Constitution prohibits a religious test for office.
That doesn’t mean we should vote for one.
Our Forefathers never thought in their wildest dreams America would elect a Muslim to ANY office, let alone POTUS.
Can someone please clarify: if the president on inauguration day places his hand on the BIBLE and makes an oath to uphold the constitution, it is clear that the Bible is the authoritative document that gives the constitution its authority. A Muslim president cannot make an oath on the Koran, it would render his oath meaningless. And if he does agree to take the oath on the Bible, it is a meaningless gesture leading to the lawlessness we have already been subjected to.
They not be able to take the oath of office. Not allowed by their Koran.
Of course he’s right.
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.....
Jesus Cruz
With Muslims there won’t be any constitution dumbass
I though Carson said he wouldn’t support a Muslim for President, not that a Muslim would be banned from running. What, Ted?
I have no problem with Ben Carson’s statement. In fact, more than a few of our founders believed that the constitution was based on Christian truth and the Christian men should be favored over others who were not.
It’s unconstitutional for the GOVERNMENT to have a religious test. It’s not unconstitutional for the VOTERS to have any test they please.
Bookmark
Well, Ted you have two choices, begin legislation to make it unconstitutional*, or forget any hope of this vote for president.
* There is a clear and irrefutable argument that any religion which requires and demands that it supersede civil authority is by definition incompatible and irreconcilable with the US Constitution.
Disappointed. It’s not a question of whether a Muslim should be allowed to run, but whether a Muslim is someone Americans should vote for. Cruz’ comment is what I’d expect from a ‘rat.
Is this supposed to be a slap at Cruz? If so, I guess the next questions is whether or not you believe in the Constitution and think the next president should be beholding to it. Cruz is absolutely correct. The are no "Noble Cause" clauses in the Constitution and there are some aspects than may be disconcerting to those with pet issues.
Why is Ted Cruz pandering to the corrupt media?
I remember 9/11, does Ted Cruz?
Wow, amazing how ridiculous the criticisms on this thread are about his answer. What he did was accurately and deftly avoid stepping into a “gotcha” trap of the media. He’s 100% correct in his answer. The Constitution allows a Muslim to run for president. We just have to be smart enough to know better than to vote for one, and nothing in the Constitution requires us to.
He didn’t need to sabotage himself by giving the media a baseball bat with which to beat him up, as Carson has done (this lack of savvy by Carson is a reason that, while I like him, I don’t have a lot of confidence in his ability to navigate the treacherous campaign waters ahead).
Nothing in Ted’s answer suggests in the slightest that he disagrees with Carson, but Ted knows that, just as when you’re on the witness stand in a courtroom, you elaborate at your peril. This answer should win him respect, not criticism from people thinking that a cultural foodfight at this stage of the game is a good idea.