Posted on 09/21/2015 7:19:23 AM PDT by SeekAndFind
Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX) did not back up his fellow Republican presidential candidate Ben Carson when asked about the retired neurosurgeon's comment that Muslims should not be president of the United States.
"You know, the Constitution specifies there shall be no religious test for public office and I am a constitutionalist," Cruz said at a Sunday taping of Iowa Public Television's "Iowa Press," according to the Des Moines Register.
Carson on Sunday morning told NBC's "Meet the Press" that he would "not advocate that we put a Muslim in charge of this nation." In an interview with The Hill later on Sunday, Carson stood by his remarks.
"I do not believe Sharia is consistent with the Constitution of this country," he told The Hill. "Muslims feel that their religion is very much a part of your public life and what you do as a public official, and that’s inconsistent with our principles and our Constitution."
Although Cruz weighed in on Carson's comments, he would not criticize Donald Trump for failing to correct a town hall audience member who said President Obama is a Muslim.
"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 when asked about Trump's comments on "Iowa Press," according to the Des Moines Register.
(Excerpt) Read more at talkingpointsmemo.com ...
it is unconstitutional to deny some one the right to run because of there religion. With voting there is a responsibility and that responsibility is to decide your own personnel criteria of who should be president. I would never vote for a practicing Muslim because that religion is EVIL in its doctrine. But I believe that if you use the religion as a legal qualifier we loose a lot of the freedom we are trying to protect.
Yep, this is Cruz responding to his own straw man. Carson never said one was constitutionally prohibited from being President for being moslem - merely that it would be a horrible idea.
“Infiltrated” makes it sound like they did something clandestine. They were invited and appointed. Not a secret.
Lets ask the same question after the massive influx of SYRIAN refugees have lived in the USA for a while. Lets see how they act. Will the views change?
Two bases:
First, the Constitution specifically prohibits the use of a religious test for any office.
Second, the Constitution also sets forth the qualifications for President (natural born citizen, age 35+, 14+ years residence in the United States), and does not grant Congress the power to add additional qualifications/restrictions.
Sadly, it’s a question Cruz didn’t have to answer. Unforced error on all of their parts.
He could have turned it back on the questioner.
“I think its the wrong question. The right question is whether Muslims believe upholding all of the Constitution is compatible with adhering to all of the tenets of Islam. In fact, that’s the right question no matter what religion you are considering in terms of who should hold the office.
A Quaker, for example, might find it very difficult reconciling total pacifism with the notion of ‘peace through strength’ Unfortunately, it’s not enough to have force. Your enemies have to be convinced there are lines they can’t cross.
Mr. Obama’s got that issue now with Mr. Putin. Obama will allow Putin to do just about anything Putin wants. God help us if Putin ever starts thinking a nuclear war with the US is winnable.
And to whom does an Atheist answer as the highest moral authority? Himself? Isn’t that as dangerous as a religion that calls for the forced conversion of any people worshiping a different god than they do?”
Reporter: “So, you ARE saying President’s should not be Muslim.”
Cruz (in a perfect world): “No, you just did. I said any religion that held forced conversion as a tenet of their faith, and you said ‘Islam’. There are likely others, but any religion that held that as a tenet and you’d have to ask whether you’d vote for that person or not.”
Reporter: “You weren’t referring specifically to Islam?”
Cruz: “No, but you seem to be. You were asking me a hypothetical, right? Hypothetically, any religion that held forced conversion as a tenet would have a tough time with the First Amendment, right? You singled out Islam. I didn’t. Have a good day.”
RE: Did CARSON EVER SAY he wanted to take away the Constitutional right of a Muslim to run?
I think the right and thoughtful answer would be:
1) The Constitution Does not Bar Muslims from running for President
2) That said, it is important to determine whether or not the Muslim in question believes in Sharia law. Sharia is the Islamic legal system derived from the religious precepts of Islam, particularly the Quran and the Hadith. The term sharia comes from the Arabic language term SHARIAH which means a body of moral and religious law derived from religious prophecy, as opposed to human legislation.
The question then becomes — Can one be a Muslim and believe in a legal system that IS NOT DERIVED from the Koran and Hadith?
Let me remind everyone that as recently as October 2010 the people of Oklahoma passed a referendum that amended the state constitution (via State Question Number 755) to forbid Oklahoma’s courts from applying international law or Sharia law (also known as Islamic law) in any case before them. In other words, the People of Oklahoma decided that Sharia is INCOMPATIBLE with Oklahoma’s laws.
The result: IT WAS STRUCK DOWN BY A FEDERAL JUDGE.
Chief District Judge Vicki Miles-LaGrange of the Western District of Oklahoma, ruled that the amendment’s references to Sharia, or Islamic law, violated the Establishment Clause of the U.S. Constitution.
“How are they going to take the oath of office?”
Taqqiya.
I think the religious liberty clause of the First Amendment would also solve any debate. But since Article VI is so clear I didn't bother mentioning it.
The day there’s a sufficient number of Moslems or fools to elect a Moslem president, were finished anyway, so why worry whether it’s Constitutionally permitted?
The one in there now is just an open door for more. There are already others in the WH appointed by this one. When America becomes so populated, they will have no problem. The Constitution, like everything else will have become null and void.
Yeh, good luck with that ‘voting’ thing!
He is correct. The solution is never vote for a muslim. Again.
The words "so help me God" are not part of the presidential oath as laid out in the Constitution. George Washington is thought to have began the practice of including the phrase, and every president in modern days - including Obama - have used it. Teddy Roosevelt did not, neither did Herbert Hoover.
Seems like a communist *was* elected President.
Cruz is correct on the Constitution, but wrong on Carson’s comment. Carson never said a Muslim should be legally barred from being president, he said he would not advocate it and gave an excellent explanation of why.
A neo-Nazi, schizophrenic, child molester is eligible to be president, but nobody in his right mind would want one to be president. The same goes for Muslims.
I am disappointed in Cruz for not backing Carson.
That's the way I read it. But we live in such bizarre times that no one ever takes a person's words at face value; everything has to be parsed and interpreted. If, for example, I say I like chocolate ice cream, everyone will take that to mean that I hate vanilla. Crazy trends for crazy times.
I don’t see any difference between the Cruz and Carson position. Carson didn’t say they shouldn’t run, he said they shouldn’t be elected. I support what both said.
Then amend the Constitution and put in an exception prohibiting any Mohammedan from holding public office.
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.