I’m pretty sure he said “I would not advocate that we put a Muslim in charge of this nation. I absolutely would not agree with that,”
If he meant to say the sharia law thing and rejecting the Constitution thing, maybe he should have said those things, instead of what he actually said.
His problem is that he believes the default position of Islam is contrary to the constitution. That is, anyone who is a Muslim has the added burden of publicly announcing his willingness to put the US Constitution about his religion. JFK had to do that 50 years ago. That should have been the last time it was necessary.
nitpick - According to your linked article, it stated, “The following are excerpts from the Meet the Press transcript:”. An “excerpt”, not the entire transcript. When Chuck Todd said:
CHUCK TODD: Let me ask you the question this way:
it suggests that Todd had already asked a similar question, and was now going to rephrase the question in order to further clarify Carson’s OPINION on the subject matter.
Why should the voters be forced to assume a candidates position on any subject matter because you believe, “That should have been the last time it was necessary”?
As I recall, the preceding question was about Carson’s faith.
By the way, it’s a minor point perhaps, but I was troubled by the way he phrased this (not just the Muslim part)
The President is not “in charge of this nation.” He or she may be considered in charge of the government, but the President is not a ruler who is in charge of all of us.
Maybe I worded that poorly. I don’t think it should have been “necessary” at the time for JFK to have to do that, but a lot of folks thought it was, and there’s no changing the past. We should have learned from that.
That said, yes, it’s entirely valid and necessary to question a candidate who seems to put his religious beliefs above the Constitution he’d be sworn to uphold. That includes Carson, but probably would not include Keith Ellison.
It’s better/safer to have a political candidate clearly state their positions than for everyone to assume they know where a candidate stands.
We the voters have been known to make different assumptions concerning the same actions and issues.
If we’ve learned anything, it’s best to find out where a politician stands “before” they take office. Kennedy’s religion and religious beliefs were only a few of the questions that JFK had to clarify before he truly became electable.
Which is why both Carson and Huckleberry are not qualified for the office.
The POTUS is also referred to as the “leader of the free world”. A post that they were never elected to. Life goes on.
DR. BEN CARSON:
I would not advocate that we put a Muslim in charge of this nation. I absolutely would not agree with that.
Why doesn’t Carson advocate putting a Muslim in charge of this nation?
*DR. BEN CARSON:
Well, I guess it depends on what that faith is. If it’s inconsistent with the values and principles of America, then of course it should matter. But if it fits within the realm of America and consistent with the constitution, no problem.
CHUCK TODD:
So do you believe that Islam is consistent with the constitution?
DR. BEN CARSON:
No, I don’t, I do not.*
Apparently, Carson has no problem supporting a Muslim for POTUS if that Muslim candidate supports, among other items, the Bill Of Rights.
Can a person follow a faith that is inconsistent with the Constitution, AND support the Constitution at the same time?
Did you read what you posted? Carson said Islam is not compatible with the constitution, but you say he would support a Muslim who supports the Bill of Rights.
He would support a Muslim who doesn’t follow Islam?
This does not fit in with adaher’s preconceived notions, so he will not only ignore it, but it will not penetrate his neutronium thick skull plates.
He literally will not be able to see your post. Things that disagree with his warped sense of the world do not actually get into his optic nerves. They are blocked at the source.
His view of Islam is that it requires absolute submissiveness to the dictates of Sharia law (about which I suspect he actually knows nothing), although I doubt his view of Catholicism and canon law is similar.
Can you refrain from saying totally ignorant things? educate YOURSELF.:smack:
Would you advocate for a Muslim candidate who choses radical, fanatical, or violent, Islam over a candidate who believes in the BOR?
[QUOTE=Mike Huckabee]
“I have opponents in this race who do not want to change the Constitution. But I believe it’s a lot easier to change the Constitution than it would be to change the word of the living God. And thats what we need to do is amend the Constitution so it’s in God’s standards rather than trying to change God’s standards so it lines up with some contemporary view of how we treat each other and how we treat the family.”
[/QUOTE]
So, is Huckabee wrong?
Well *of course *most us would, we’re liberals!