Ben Carson: Islamophobe of the Day

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:throwing up pictures of muslim female 'royalty' is disgusting and makes my stomach turn. These women parade around like models when their citizenry is literally in the shit.

Rania is an actual queen, so why "royalty"? She IS royalty, no need for quotation marks.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I personally would not want my daughter or any other little girl seeing a First Lady covered head to toe in black cloth with only a small slit for their eyes.
As women in this country, we have come way too far for that. I also do not want my gay friends and family to find themselves again on the outskirts of society after the recent Supreme Court decision. Islam is not compatible with our constitution and our freedoms. I have no interest in shariah law becoming accepted anywhere in this country. I also find it terribly disturbing that liberal society thinks it is OK to discriminate against women and gays as long as you are Muslim. I am not saying all Muslims are bad people, certainly there are many more good Muslims than bad. But the basis of the religion is anti-woman and anti-gay and I am not OK with that. How anyone can deny the obvious is very disturbing.

Islam isn't anti-woman and it does not require women to cover head to toe, or wear all black, or cover their faces. No first ladies in Muslim-majority countries look like that, either.

So women in Muslim countries can throw off their burqa without fear if they choose?

[Anonymous]

Jeff quoted the constitution. Y'all are the ones resorting to emotional outbursts.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I personally would not want my daughter or any other little girl seeing a First Lady covered head to toe in black cloth with only a small slit for their eyes.
As women in this country, we have come way too far for that. I also do not want my gay friends and family to find themselves again on the outskirts of society after the recent Supreme Court decision. Islam is not compatible with our constitution and our freedoms. I have no interest in shariah law becoming accepted anywhere in this country. I also find it terribly disturbing that liberal society thinks it is OK to discriminate against women and gays as long as you are Muslim. I am not saying all Muslims are bad people, certainly there are many more good Muslims than bad. But the basis of the religion is anti-woman and anti-gay and I am not OK with that. How anyone can deny the obvious is very disturbing.

Islam isn't anti-woman and it does not require women to cover head to toe, or wear all black, or cover their faces. No first ladies in Muslim-majority countries look like that, either.

So women in Muslim countries can throw off their burqa without fear if they choose?

Burqa is worn in a minority of Muslim countries and by a minority of Muslim women.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I personally would not want my daughter or any other little girl seeing a First Lady covered head to toe in black cloth with only a small slit for their eyes.
As women in this country, we have come way too far for that. I also do not want my gay friends and family to find themselves again on the outskirts of society after the recent Supreme Court decision. Islam is not compatible with our constitution and our freedoms. I have no interest in shariah law becoming accepted anywhere in this country. I also find it terribly disturbing that liberal society thinks it is OK to discriminate against women and gays as long as you are Muslim. I am not saying all Muslims are bad people, certainly there are many more good Muslims than bad. But the basis of the religion is anti-woman and anti-gay and I am not OK with that. How anyone can deny the obvious is very disturbing.

Islam isn't anti-woman and it does not require women to cover head to toe, or wear all black, or cover their faces. No first ladies in Muslim-majority countries look like that, either.

So women in Muslim countries can throw off their burqa without fear if they choose?

Burqa is worn in a minority of Muslim countries and by a minority of Muslim women.

Are those that wear them allowed to remove them without fear any time they would like?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:You pick the Queen of Jordan and post it over and over again. LOL. She is certainly stunning! Show me where this is the norm in the majority of Muslim countries because it's not. You know it and I know it. I am hardly a pig. I am a woman with a little girl who wants her rights as a woman to expand. I am a woman with many gay friends and family who wants them to be included and feel secure in society. Islam is not compatible with those wishes for the people I love. I am also offended by hard core Christians. People should be free to live the lives they chose. Islam does not believe this and I have a problem with that. That hardly makes me a pig.

The only way to confront prejudice is to flood them with data that busts the stereotypes. So here are three countries:



Istanbul fashion show:



More Turkish women:



Bodrum Nightclub having a Foam party:


Former President of Indonesia (you know, the largest Muslim country in the world??)



Jakarta Fashion Week:


Club Exodus, Jakarta:


Lebanon:

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I personally would not want my daughter or any other little girl seeing a First Lady covered head to toe in black cloth with only a small slit for their eyes.
As women in this country, we have come way too far for that. I also do not want my gay friends and family to find themselves again on the outskirts of society after the recent Supreme Court decision. Islam is not compatible with our constitution and our freedoms. I have no interest in shariah law becoming accepted anywhere in this country. I also find it terribly disturbing that liberal society thinks it is OK to discriminate against women and gays as long as you are Muslim. I am not saying all Muslims are bad people, certainly there are many more good Muslims than bad. But the basis of the religion is anti-woman and anti-gay and I am not OK with that. How anyone can deny the obvious is very disturbing.

Islam isn't anti-woman and it does not require women to cover head to toe, or wear all black, or cover their faces. No first ladies in Muslim-majority countries look like that, either.

So women in Muslim countries can throw off their burqa without fear if they choose?

Burqa is worn in a minority of Muslim countries and by a minority of Muslim women.

Are those that wear them allowed to remove them without fear any time they would like?

We can resume the discussion after you admit making a giant booboo asking for JUST ONE picture of a Muslim first lady uncovered with her legs showing, or implying that all Muslim women dress in black from head to toe with covered faces.

[Anonymous]

Is there a Muslim candidate for a president?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Is there a Muslim candidate for a president?

Jindal and Pataki.

[Anonymous]

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:And Carson is correct in that the Islamic faith is not consistent with the Constitution

How so? There is no "official" Islam. So, how are you able to make such a categorial statement? That is exactly what used to be said about Catholics because a Catholic would be subservient to the Pope. It was wrong about Catholics and is wrong about Muslims.

I agree. I would never vote for a muslim. Especially Sunni. Their values are incompatible with a secular democracy. They are still rooted in beliefs similar to Old Testament. Intolerant.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I personally would not want my daughter or any other little girl seeing a First Lady covered head to toe in black cloth with only a small slit for their eyes.
As women in this country, we have come way too far for that. I also do not want my gay friends and family to find themselves again on the outskirts of society after the recent Supreme Court decision. Islam is not compatible with our constitution and our freedoms. I have no interest in shariah law becoming accepted anywhere in this country. I also find it terribly disturbing that liberal society thinks it is OK to discriminate against women and gays as long as you are Muslim. I am not saying all Muslims are bad people, certainly there are many more good Muslims than bad. But the basis of the religion is anti-woman and anti-gay and I am not OK with that. How anyone can deny the obvious is very disturbing.

Islam isn't anti-woman and it does not require women to cover head to toe, or wear all black, or cover their faces. No first ladies in Muslim-majority countries look like that, either.

So women in Muslim countries can throw off their burqa without fear if they choose?

Burqa is worn in a minority of Muslim countries and by a minority of Muslim women.

Are those that wear them allowed to remove them without fear any time they would like?

We can resume the discussion after you admit making a giant booboo asking for JUST ONE picture of a Muslim first lady uncovered with her legs showing, or implying that all Muslim women dress in black from head to toe with covered faces.

That wasn't me. sorry.

But I will say the photos being posted are of the three most liberal Muslim countries. Turkey, unfortunately is getting more radicalized. Please now find us recent examples in Saudi, Iran, Qatar and other countries that are causing worldwide issues.

[jsteele]

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:
Can you state specifically which polices a Muslim candidate in the US is likely to expose based on her religion that you would oppose? Is it the praying five times a day that you believe would be disqualifying? The chance that the President might go on the Haj? Is it the charity that the President would demonstrate? The fasting? Or, her simple profession of faith? I am having a really difficult time understanding why all Muslims should be unconstitutionally barred from the Presidency.

NP here

I'll give a simple example. Muslims due to religious reasons do not consume pork. If they supported a policy banning or restricting pork products I would be opposed. It really boils down to how willing said person is to imposing their believes onto the general public. Nothing wrong with them practicing their believes as an individual. There is only an issue when/if they impose their religious beliefs onto the general public.

Jews have the same restriction. Do you oppose Jewish presidents? Catholics are not supposed to eat meat on Friday. If you like to eat meat on Friday, do you oppose Catholic presidents?

Again, if an individual candidate espouses positions that you oppose, don't vote for him. What I don't understand is that Ben Carson and many posters here oppose a Muslim candidate regardless of any political positions that candidate had simply due to her religion.

Your not getting it are you. I'm not oppose if they practice those beliefs on a personal level. I oppose them imposing those beliefs upon the general public. So yes, I oppose any individual who puts religion above the common good no matter the Religion.

Are you saying it is OK for a President to put religion above the common good? To impose their beliefs onto the general public? I hope not.

No. Where did you ever get the idea that I support putting religion above the common good? You must be making the assumption that all Muslims would put religion above the common good. I do not think that is true. Why do you seem to think it is true? What I oppose is having one standard for Muslims and one standard for everyone else. If you have one standard, then you and I are on the same page. I don't know why you would think that we have a disagreement.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Is there a Muslim candidate for a president?

Jindal and Pataki.

Jindal was a Hindu, converted to Christianity. Pataki is Roman Catholic.

[jsteele]

Anonymous wrote:
You have a blind spot when it comes to this issue. Let me try one more time to explain it though I will probably not succeed.

My brother-in-law is a Muslim-American. He also has a medical condition which does not allow him to go through the usual scanner at airport security. He asks the TSA to search him instead - in effect, to frisk him. He is asked whether he would like it to be done away from public sight and he declines the offer. So while he is going through the process with the TSA agent he notices other passengers - usually white passengers - gazing his way at the sight of this brown-skinned "foreigner" being closely checked out by the TSA. He often jokes that they are probably wishing and praying that he will not be on his flight.

But ........ and this is the part that you will not understand - your blind spot. He understands why they react that way. As he puts it when 9/11 occurred it was nine Muslim men some who looked like him, who crashed airliners against buildings. So, of course, they view a brown-skinned man being searched by the TSA as a potential suspicious character although the only reason he is undergoing the body search is because he requested it. He does not think those looking towards him with concern are racists or bigots because it is a natural reaction.

Fast forward to the kid with his home made clock. We have all heard of kids who have been suicide bombers outside of the US. There are also news reports that ISIS has infiltrated the US with potential terrorists and it is a major concern of our security services. No kid has been involved in a suicide attack in the US but can one blame a teacher for feeling uncomfortable that a Muslim kid - an innocent kid - comes to the school with a home made clock that she thinks might be a bomb? It does not make her a bigot because she reacted the way she did. I don't think Maher who commented about this kid is a bigot either - he is voicing a legitimate and reasonable point.

Now to your charges of my alleged prejudice: unfortunately, progressives and conservatives use a litmus test of sorts to determine if someone is a "true believer". It is asinine beyond belief. One does not need to subscribe to every item in a progressive or conservative agenda. Life is more complicated and nuanced than some on this forum think.

I don't agree with Carson's contention that it is constitutional to exclude a Muslim assuming he said this. But I can certainly relate to Carson or anyone else saying that he is not comfortable with a Muslim as president given aspects of what some Muslims believe and practice as part of their faith. I don't think Carson is a bigot or prejudiced and given choices I have made in my life, no one who knows me would accuse me of being a bigot or prejudiced.

Everything in life is not as cut and dried as you think - there are nuances and subtleties that have to be taken into consideration.

You have a prejudice. You have very clearly stated that prejudice. You have even provided justifications for your prejudice. As you said, there are things that some Muslims have done that you suspect all Muslims of potentially doing. You have this prejudice despite knowing about the vast and significant differences between Muslims. Some Christians bomb abortion clinics. By your logic, all Christians should be considered potential abortion clinic bombers.

Treating people as individuals rather than representatives of negative stereotypes should not be a "progressive" issue. That should be something for which all people strive as a measure of common decency.

Why is it so difficult for you to simply say "I wouldn't rule out a Muslim President anymore than I would rule out a Christian, Jewish, or Buddhist President. Each should be evaluated according to her individual strengths and weaknesses"? Why is treating people equally seemingly impossible for you?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I personally would not want my daughter or any other little girl seeing a First Lady covered head to toe in black cloth with only a small slit for their eyes.
As women in this country, we have come way too far for that. I also do not want my gay friends and family to find themselves again on the outskirts of society after the recent Supreme Court decision. Islam is not compatible with our constitution and our freedoms. I have no interest in shariah law becoming accepted anywhere in this country. I also find it terribly disturbing that liberal society thinks it is OK to discriminate against women and gays as long as you are Muslim. I am not saying all Muslims are bad people, certainly there are many more good Muslims than bad. But the basis of the religion is anti-woman and anti-gay and I am not OK with that. How anyone can deny the obvious is very disturbing.

Islam isn't anti-woman and it does not require women to cover head to toe, or wear all black, or cover their faces. No first ladies in Muslim-majority countries look like that, either.

So women in Muslim countries can throw off their burqa without fear if they choose?

Mahnaz Afkhami of Iran


Former Turkish Prime Minister Tansu Ciller


Megawati Sukarnoputri former President of Indonesia


Atifete Jahjaga: President of Kosovo


Roza Otunbayeva former President of Kyrgyzsta


Ameenah Fakim: President of Mauritius


Benazir Bhutto former Prime Minister of Pakistan barely wore a scarf and she made it look sexy


Queen Mother Nyirauhi V Kanjogera of Rwanda