US Republican Carson: Muslim shouldn't be elected president

[webfact]

Republican Carson: Muslim shouldn't be elected president
HOPE YEN, Associated Press

WASHINGTON (AP) — Republican presidential candidate Ben Carson says Islam is antithetical to the U.S. Constitution, and he doesn't believe that a Muslim should be elected president.

Carson, a devout Christian, says a president's faith should matter to voters if it runs counter to the values and principles of America.

Responding to a question during an interview broadcast Sunday on NBC's "Meet the Press," Carson described the Islamic faith as inconsistent with the Constitution.

"I would not advocate that we put a Muslim in charge of this nation," Carson said. "I absolutely would not agree with that."

He did not specify in what way Islam ran counter to constitutional principles.

National polls show that Carson, a retired neurosurgeon, is now running second to businessman Donald Trump in the crowded Republican presidential field. He has been gaining support in Iowa, whose caucuses lead off the state-by-state nominating contests, by appealing to socially conservative evangelical voters.

Carson's comments drew strong criticism from the country's largest Muslim civil rights and advocacy organization, the Council on American-Islamic Relations.

"To me this really means he is not qualified to be president of the United States," said the group's spokesman, Ibrahim Hooper. "You cannot hold these kinds of views and at the same time say you will represent all Americans, of all faiths and backgrounds."

Hooper said the Constitution expressly forbids religious tests for those seeking public office and called for the repudiation of "these un-American comments."

In a separate appearance on NBC, one of Carson's rivals for the Republican nomination, Ohio Gov. John Kasich, was asked whether he would have a problem with a Muslim in the White House. "The answer is, at the end of the day, you've got to go through the rigors, and people will look at everything. But, for me, the most important thing about being president is you have leadership skills, you know what you're doing and you can help fix this country and raise this country. Those are the qualifications that matter to me."

Carson's comments came amid lingering fallout over Trump's refusal last week to take issue with a man during a campaign event who wrongly called President Barack Obama a Muslim and said Muslims are "a problem in this country."

Also speaking on NBC on Sunday, Trump said that a Muslim in the White House is "something that could happen ... Some people have said it already happened, frankly."

In multiple interviews Sunday, Trump tried to draw a distinction between all American Muslims and extremist Muslims in the U.S. and elsewhere.

"I have friends that are Muslims, they're great people, amazing people," Trump said on CNN's "State of the Union."

"You have extremist Muslims that are in a class by themselves," Trump added. "It's a problem in this country, it's a problem throughout this world.... You do have a problem with radical Muslims."

Republican candidates have since been split over whether to criticize Trump, who has been a vocal skeptic of Obama's birthplace and faith. Obama is Christian.

In the NBC interview, Carson said he believes that Obama was born in the U.S. and is Christian, saying he has "no reason to doubt" what the president says.

Carson also made a distinction when it came to electing Muslims to Congress, calling it a "different story" from the presidency that "depends on who that Muslim is and what their policies are, just as it depends on what anybody else says."

Congress has two Muslim members, Democratic Reps. Keith Ellison of Minnesota and Andre Carson of Indiana.

"If there's somebody who's of any faith, but they say things, and their life has been consistent with things that will elevate this nation and make it possible for everybody to succeed, and bring peace and harmony, then I'm with them," Carson said.
___

Associated Press writer Kevin Freking contributed to this report.


-- (c) Associated Press 2015-09-21

[notmyself]

He did not specify in what way Islam ran counter to constitutional principles.

Article VI explicitly bans religious tests so he couldn't if he tried.

[Seastallion]

"Carson, a retired neurosurgeon, is now running second to businessman Donald Trump"

Oh Gawd

[steven100]

what's the big deal .. !! you have radical extremist muslims all over the world .... which of course you don't want !!!!!!!!

and you have reasonably decent law abiding muslims ......

[NeverSure]

Islam is a political system which its adherents attempt to bring with them and impose on people. It's that part that Carson was probably referring to and I agree with him.

Anyone who claims an intent to change the whole world to his political system and laws would be a traitor in the US.

[Gulfsailor]

In a truly secular country it shouldn't matter what religion the president has. What Carson is saying is that the US is not truly secular. And I agree. Hence all devout religious people should be barred from holding office. So that's a no no for Carson as well in my opinion.

[Loptr]

The world would be a much safer place if all religions were banned for humanitarian reasons...

[hard124get]

Islam is a political system which its adherents attempt to bring with them and impose on people. It's that part that Carson was probably referring to and I agree with him.

Anyone who claims an intent to change the whole world to his political system and laws would be a traitor in the US.

And a bigot should not be elected president either

[Friendly Stranger]

Geez, all the wacky candidates are high up in the poles. What next?

[lostoday]

"Carson, a retired neurosurgeon, is now running second to businessman Donald Trump"

Oh Gawd

My gosh we may get a President who does not like Muslims. Wow what a shock. Do you think a person of Japanese descent could have got elected in 1945?

Edited September 21, 2015 by lostoday

[Pinot]

I fear the Christian/right wing loonies far more than Muslims. They're dangerous, they're bizarrely fanatical, they have guns, they're everywhere and they want to take over the country.

[whybother]

There is very little chance of a Muslim being elected President, so it's something that doesn't need to be said.

[lifeincnx]

I wish Meet the Press had followed up by asking Carson is he was OK with an atheist being elected President.

[pedro01]

I fear the Christian/right wing loonies far more than Muslims. They're dangerous, they're bizarrely fanatical, they have guns, they're everywhere and they want to take over the country.

.

That's pretty funny.

ISIS are beheading people, raping women and children, destroying historical monuments.

But you fear Christians more?

[lifeincnx]

I fear the Christian/right wing loonies far more than Muslims. They're dangerous, they're bizarrely fanatical, they have guns, they're everywhere and they want to take over the country.

Frankly, I fear both radicalized Muslims as well as far right evangelicals. In the case of the latter, Evangelicals are looking forward to the second coming of Christ and the end of days (has a nice ring, doesn't it?). An an all-out, open season war in the Middle East fits their book of insanity nicely.

[elgenon]

I remember when Kennedy (JFK) ran for president. People (Republicans) were saying a Catholic should not be president. I guess the fear was the pope would rule America.

The Republican party uses scare tactics to win support. So be afraid, be very afraid. As Trump says, Mexicans are theives, rapists. Oh my goodness.

[marios]

Everyone is allowed to proclaim and campaign for his religion. The Muslims do that, the Jewish do that, when it comes to the Christians, however, they must'nt do.Yes, Europe and the US have been traditionally Christian and trying to preserve this is not bigotry. If other faiths are so vocal in defending their identity and rights so the Christians must be able tro do so also. I cannot accept that Christians must be apologetic to be large in number, powerful and successful. Having said that this power must not be used to oppress or subdjugate. US during WWII has shown bravery, generosity and maganimity. US at that time (the greatest moment) was not shy to seek the help of the religion of the Nation without the uneasiness or guilt that would accompany such a display today.

Bottom line: Christians must have an equal right to be vocal in support of their religion like all others. Given the fact now, as it was in the middle ages, religion carries a political agenda. The US, in my opinion is more capable to protect the majority of the Americans if a Christian President is elected.

[Credo]

We can just be glad that he didn't add the word again after saying "A muslim shouldn't be elected President."

[ezzra]

Finally, some one who's not publicly correct and is calling a spade, a spade...

[maidee]

the agenda tells us ... the first black prez, followed by the first woman ever, and then , followed by a mozz

[stevenl]

I fear the Christian/right wing loonies far more than Muslims. They're dangerous, they're bizarrely fanatical, they have guns, they're everywhere and they want to take over the country.

.

That's pretty funny.

ISIS are beheading people, raping women and children, destroying historical monuments.

But you fear Christians more?

Deleted, no point.

Edited September 21, 2015 by stevenl

[Whyamiandwhatamidoinghere]

We fought the hell out of those British to have freedom of religion and expression. So if an Muslim can't be president than neither can a Jew, Buddhist, Hindu, nor a host of other non Christian religions including atheist.

Edited September 21, 2015 by Whyamiandwhatamidoinghere

[Jingthing]

A secular type Muslim that distanced herself 100 percent from Sharia law and was gay married to Japanese American Jewess ... well that would be different. More seriously a Muslim who was associated with sympathy towards Sharia law in any way would not be appropriate for a US president.

Still it's an academic question as it is so unlikely to happen with any kind of Muslim.

Edited September 21, 2015 by Jingthing

[Berkshire]

Finally, some one who's not publicly correct and is calling a spade, a spade...

Not the "non PC" thing again. You only like the comment because you agree, has nothing to do with whether it's PC or not. What if Carson were to say "Republicans need to nominate a black man because white folks can't govern!" Would that be sufficiently non-PC for you?

[piersbeckett]

IMO the freedom to subjugate females, indoctrinate (with menaces) under the guise of education and uphold laws contradicting the laws of the land which have been democratically arrived at are freedoms too far.

A free, humane, civilised and democratic nation in the 21st. century should only afford franchise to adult persons who put human rights before religion including the human right not to be indoctrinated into any religious belief.

Religious freedom must have such caveats in order to prevent the abuse not only of religion which should be freely arrived at and at any time freely rejected without penalty by any individual but also of democracy which otherwise can be manipulated to achieve power and then conveniently abandoned in favour of a system that fails to protect the human rights of its citizens.

Edited September 21, 2015 by piersbeckett

[CaptHaddock]

It's embarassing being an American and having to hear the ignorant opinions of people like Trump and Carson, and indeed most of the TV posters in this thread.

[Jingthing]

We fought the hell out of those British to have freedom of religion and expression. So if an Muslim can't be president than neither can a Jew, Buddhist, Hindu, nor a host of other non Christian religions including atheist.

No president of your list has been elected or even nominated by a major party. Legally you're right of course.

[notmyself]

Everyone is allowed to proclaim and campaign for his religion. The Muslims do that, the Jewish do that, when it comes to the Christians, however, they must'nt do.Yes, Europe and the US have been traditionally Christian and trying to preserve this is not bigotry. If other faiths are so vocal in defending their identity and rights so the Christians must be able tro do so also. I cannot accept that Christians must be apologetic to be large in number, powerful and successful. Having said that this power must not be used to oppress or subdjugate. US during WWII has shown bravery, generosity and maganimity. US at that time (the greatest moment) was not shy to seek the help of the religion of the Nation without the uneasiness or guilt that would accompany such a display today.

Bottom line: Christians must have an equal right to be vocal in support of their religion like all others. Given the fact now, as it was in the middle ages, religion carries a political agenda. The US, in my opinion is more capable to protect the majority of the Americans if a Christian President is elected.

I'm feeling in a helpful mood so will quote rather than just suggesting you read (for the first time?) the OP

Responding to a question during an interview broadcast Sunday on NBC's "Meet the Press," Carson described the Islamic faith as inconsistent with the Constitution.

"I would not advocate that we put a Muslim in charge of this nation," Carson said. "I absolutely would not agree with that."

Having a pop at another faith is not the same as standing up for his own. His own argument can be logically used back at him in that Christianity is inconsistent with a secular constitution.

[micmichd]

"Carson, a retired neurosurgeon, is now running second to businessman Donald Trump"

Oh Gawd

What about a psycho test?

Even retired neurosurgeons can get mentally sick.

[NeverSure]

Where do we get all of the puzzies who can't see the danger of Muslims encroaching into a country? Are we just going to roll over for the atrocities they commit against their women, and their desire to force everyone into their religion or kill them?

Are there no real men left anywhere, any more? Are so many so brainwashed by the apologists? Is no one concerned about the terrorists who are surely slipping into our countries as we speak? Does no one care about sovereign borders and cultures that have been died for by ancestors?

Are we just going to let them walk in and take over? Can no one see what is happening in Europe today?

The hopeless, helpless European citizens are being overwhelmed and no one cares?? Would no one stand up?

Geez...

Edited September 21, 2015 by NeverSure