Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:All of these politicians are pitching to their constituency right now so all kinds of generic blanket statements are gonna be getting tossed around.

None of them should be excused. You know full well that making the same blanket statements about other groups would be career-ending. Bigoted statements should not be excused simply because they are targeted at the powerless.

Islam is not an identity; it is a belief system, like white supremacists, or communists. In much of the world Islam is anything but powerless, in almost all of those places a whole lot of things incompatible with western values are implemented by force of law.

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:All of these politicians are pitching to their constituency right now so all kinds of generic blanket statements are gonna be getting tossed around.

None of them should be excused. You know full well that making the same blanket statements about other groups would be career-ending. Bigoted statements should not be excused simply because they are targeted at the powerless.

Islam is not an identity; it is a belief system, like white supremacists, or communists. In much of the world Islam is anything but powerless, in almost all of those places a whole lot of things incompatible with western values are implemented by force of law.

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:All of these politicians are pitching to their constituency right now so all kinds of generic blanket statements are gonna be getting tossed around.

None of them should be excused. You know full well that making the same blanket statements about other groups would be career-ending. Bigoted statements should not be excused simply because they are targeted at the powerless.

I am still waiting for an example of rule by a Seventh Day Adventist so that we can determine Ben Carson's own eligibility. Carson questioned the compatibility of Islam with the Constitution while explicitly stating an unconstitutional position. Therefore, I'd say that by his own criteria, Carson in ineligible regardless of his religion.

Elder Ted N.C. Wilson, president of the General Conference of the Seventh-day Adventist Church, spoke at the event and encouraged the leaders to remain motivated by their faith when making decisions.

“You are the Esthers, the Josephs, the Daniels of our world,” Wilson said, according to a news release. “You make a difference in an arena that most of us never touch. And never forget you are there for a purpose; you are where God has placed you. Yes, you serve your country, or a particular legislature. But most importantly, because you are a Seventh-day Adventist, you are working under the very highest authority: Jesus Christ our Savior. You are called to be unusual ambassadors for Christ.”

Anonymous wrote:All of these politicians are pitching to their constituency right now so all kinds of generic blanket statements are gonna be getting tossed around.

Anonymous wrote:Both groups are prone to a certain intolerance when it comes to issues that violate some tenet of their faith.

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:A Muslim candidate for President would be an American, born in America. Therefore, I'm not sure what it matters how Muslim rulers are treating non-Muslims in other countries. But, if treatment of minority religions in other countries is used to determine the eligibility for the office of President in the US, doesn't it pretty much rule out Jewish candidates? Shouldn't Bernie Sanders (who I personally love), be ruled out because Israel has never and probably will never have a Christian or Muslim Prime Minister?

I am still waiting for an example of rule by a Seventh Day Adventist so that we can determine Ben Carson's own eligibility. Carson questioned the compatibility of Islam with the Constitution while explicitly stating an unconstitutional position. Therefore, I'd say that by his own criteria, Carson in ineligible regardless of his religion.

I don't agree with Carson's interpretation of the Constitution and it was you who cited the example of India and other countries when it came to "moderate" nations which have Islamic leaders.

The real question is whether any president can separate his faith from the policies he/she will follow. If he cannot as far as I am concerned it would rule him out. It does not matter if it is a Muslim or a Christian.

Also, FWIW, I have a strong discomfort with Jewish legislators who express the sort of affinity with Israel that causes them to be unable to separate their heritage from whatever is in Israel's interests. For this reason I'd never have voted for someone like Lieberman.

FYI, it wasn't me that mentioned India and other countries.

But, it sounds like what you are saying is that it is not the religion of an individual that it is important to you, but that specific polices of that individual. Given the role of religion in most people's lives, it is almost impossible to expect someone to completely separate his faith from the values he holds and to further separate those values from polices he advocates. But, it is not infrequent for individuals to diverge from specific practices that are common within a faith -- for instance, a Catholic taking a pro-choice position.

I am curious which Muslim beliefs posters in this thread believe should disqualify Muslims from being President? The only examples that have been mentioned -- hanging people from cranes for example -- would never be advocated by a Muslim candidate in the US and, in fact, are not practiced in the vast majority of Muslim countries.

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:A Muslim candidate for President would be an American, born in America. Therefore, I'm not sure what it matters how Muslim rulers are treating non-Muslims in other countries. But, if treatment of minority religions in other countries is used to determine the eligibility for the office of President in the US, doesn't it pretty much rule out Jewish candidates? Shouldn't Bernie Sanders (who I personally love), be ruled out because Israel has never and probably will never have a Christian or Muslim Prime Minister?

I am still waiting for an example of rule by a Seventh Day Adventist so that we can determine Ben Carson's own eligibility. Carson questioned the compatibility of Islam with the Constitution while explicitly stating an unconstitutional position. Therefore, I'd say that by his own criteria, Carson in ineligible regardless of his religion.

I don't agree with Carson's interpretation of the Constitution and it was you who cited the example of India and other countries when it came to "moderate" nations which have Islamic leaders.

The real question is whether any president can separate his faith from the policies he/she will follow. If he cannot as far as I am concerned it would rule him out. It does not matter if it is a Muslim or a Christian.

Also, FWIW, I have a strong discomfort with Jewish legislators who express the sort of affinity with Israel that causes them to be unable to separate their heritage from whatever is in Israel's interests. For this reason I'd never have voted for someone like Lieberman.

jsteele wrote:A Muslim candidate for President would be an American, born in America. Therefore, I'm not sure what it matters how Muslim rulers are treating non-Muslims in other countries. But, if treatment of minority religions in other countries is used to determine the eligibility for the office of President in the US, doesn't it pretty much rule out Jewish candidates? Shouldn't Bernie Sanders (who I personally love), be ruled out because Israel has never and probably will never have a Christian or Muslim Prime Minister?

I am still waiting for an example of rule by a Seventh Day Adventist so that we can determine Ben Carson's own eligibility. Carson questioned the compatibility of Islam with the Constitution while explicitly stating an unconstitutional position. Therefore, I'd say that by his own criteria, Carson in ineligible regardless of his religion.

jsteele wrote:A Muslim candidate for President would be an American, born in America. Therefore, I'm not sure what it matters how Muslim rulers are treating non-Muslims in other countries. But, if treatment of minority religions in other countries is used to determine the eligibility for the office of President in the US, doesn't it pretty much rule out Jewish candidates? Shouldn't Bernie Sanders (who I personally love), be ruled out because Israel has never and probably will never have a Christian or Muslim Prime Minister?

I am still waiting for an example of rule by a Seventh Day Adventist so that we can determine Ben Carson's own eligibility. Carson questioned the compatibility of Islam with the Constitution while explicitly stating an unconstitutional position. Therefore, I'd say that by his own criteria, Carson in ineligible regardless of his religion.