[quote]dave1791 wrote:
Given that the precepts of Islam, as practiced virtually everywhere in the world, is in direct opposition to the US constitution (Sharia law, treating non-Muslims as inferior, death for defaming the profit (NO free speech), etc.), not sure how a Muslim could swear allegiance to the constitution, honestly.[/quote]
Pretty much this.
Plus my little off handed opinion that we should genocide them before they genocide us.[/quote]
So you would applaud “preventative” nuclear war against Muslim majority states? Genocide is an ethically tenable and pragmatic response to religious terrorists who murder far more Muslims than non-believers? You’re truly an imbecile.
[quote]dave1791 wrote:
Given that the precepts of Islam, as practiced virtually everywhere in the world, is in direct opposition to the US constitution (Sharia law, treating non-Muslims as inferior, death for defaming the profit (NO free speech), etc.), not sure how a Muslim could swear allegiance to the constitution, honestly.[/quote]
Pretty much this.
Plus my little off handed opinion that we should genocide them before they genocide us.[/quote]
So you would applaud “preventative” nuclear war against Muslim majority states? Genocide is an ethically tenable and pragmatic response to religious terrorists who murder far more Muslims than non-believers? You’re truly an imbecile. [/quote]
“religious terrorists who murder far more Muslims than non-believers” Do you think this point is reason to change my way of thinking?
[quote]dave1791 wrote:
Given that the precepts of Islam, as practiced virtually everywhere in the world, is in direct opposition to the US constitution (Sharia law, treating non-Muslims as inferior, death for defaming the profit (NO free speech), etc.), not sure how a Muslim could swear allegiance to the constitution, honestly.[/quote]
Pretty much this.
Plus my little off handed opinion that we should genocide them before they genocide us.[/quote]
So you would applaud “preventative” nuclear war against Muslim majority states? Genocide is an ethically tenable and pragmatic response to religious terrorists who murder far more Muslims than non-believers? You’re truly an imbecile. [/quote]
“religious terrorists who murder far more Muslims than non-believers” Do you think this point is reason to change my way of thinking?[/quote]
Your blood thirsty and despicable “prescription” is based upon the false assumption of a monolithic Muslim world. How do you think the world and the American people would react to the mass murder of nearly a quarter of the world’s population? Do you think that response would increase the security of the United State, or lead to its destruction? Your “way of thinking” is even worse than that of ISIL.
Carson addressed this on social media today, his response below. This clarifies he meant a strict practicing Muslim which is a reasonable assumption.
The first issue I want to deal with tonight is the stories today about my comments yesterday when I was asked if I would support a hypothetical Muslim candidate for President. I responded ?I would not advocate for that? and I went on to say that many parts of Sharia Law are not compatible with the Constitution. I was immediately attacked by some of my Republican peers and nearly every Democrat alive. Know this, I meant exactly what I said. I could never support a candidate for President of the United States that was Muslim and had not renounced the central tenant of Islam: Sharia Law.
Those Republicans that take issue with my position are amazing. Under Islamic Law, homosexuals ? men and women alike ? must be killed. Women must be subservient. And people following other religions must be killed.
I know that there are many peaceful Muslims who do not adhere to these beliefs. But until these tenants are fully renounced?I cannot advocate any Muslim candidate for President.
?I also can?t advocate supporting Hillary Clinton either by the way.
There were many questions about this and I wanted everyone to know exactly where I stand.
“Under Islamic Law, homosexuals men and women alike must be killed. Women must be subservient. And people following other religions must be killed”
^^^^^^^^^^ Correct, most people seem to ignore this little tidbit.
Having been embedded with various Muslim units over the past 10 years, I can tell you from PRACTICAL experience, Islam dominates everything in their life, it is the centerpiece of their thinking to the point of absolute stupidity. It comes before country, tribe, family, duty, honor, ect. No, I certainly would not want a President who is a slave to this religion.
[quote]sufiandy wrote:
Carson addressed this on social media today, his response below. This clarifies he meant a strict practicing Muslim which is a reasonable assumption.
The first issue I want to deal with tonight is the stories today about my comments yesterday when I was asked if I would support a hypothetical Muslim candidate for President. I responded ?I would not advocate for that? and I went on to say that many parts of Sharia Law are not compatible with the Constitution. I was immediately attacked by some of my Republican peers and nearly every Democrat alive. Know this, I meant exactly what I said. I could never support a candidate for President of the United States that was Muslim and had not renounced the central tenant of Islam: Sharia Law.
Those Republicans that take issue with my position are amazing. Under Islamic Law, homosexuals ? men and women alike ? must be killed. Women must be subservient. And people following other religions must be killed.
I know that there are many peaceful Muslims who do not adhere to these beliefs. But until these tenants are fully renounced?I cannot advocate any Muslim candidate for President.
?I also can?t advocate supporting Hillary Clinton either by the way.
There were many questions about this and I wanted everyone to know exactly where I stand.[/quote]
What an idiot Carson (or whoever wrote that, but Carson too) is.
A tenant occupies rented property. A tenet is a fundamental principle. The author of that post confused the two twice, so a typo is unlikely. Either way, you’re supposed to rid correspondence of typos and mistakes before applying to a job as a used car salesman; it would be nice if aspiring commanders in chief (and their staffs) would show the same intellectual rigor.
[quote]ZEB wrote:
I laugh when so many people are offended when Obama has been accused of being a Muslim. He will tell you himself that he grew up Muslim and practiced that religion for well over 20 years. He then attended the racist Church of Reverend Wright for about 20 years where many of Wrights sermons were filled with hate speech toward the United States and white people.
I’m not sure what’s worse if he was a Muslim or the fact that he attended a black racist church. Either way we know for sure he is not a lover of Israel. That sort of leads me to believe that if he is not Muslim he sure does have some leanings.
Oh… would I vote for a Muslim? That depends on the Muslim doesn’t it? It’s like asking would I vote for a Christian. [/quote]
Obama did not grow up a muslim and did not practise the religion for 20 years. His father by the time he came to America was an athiest.
[quote]sufiandy wrote:
Carson addressed this on social media today, his response below. This clarifies he meant a strict practicing Muslim which is a reasonable assumption.
The first issue I want to deal with tonight is the stories today about my comments yesterday when I was asked if I would support a hypothetical Muslim candidate for President. I responded ?I would not advocate for that? and I went on to say that many parts of Sharia Law are not compatible with the Constitution. I was immediately attacked by some of my Republican peers and nearly every Democrat alive. Know this, I meant exactly what I said. I could never support a candidate for President of the United States that was Muslim and had not renounced the central tenant of Islam: Sharia Law.
Those Republicans that take issue with my position are amazing. Under Islamic Law, homosexuals ? men and women alike ? must be killed. Women must be subservient. And people following other religions must be killed.
I know that there are many peaceful Muslims who do not adhere to these beliefs. But until these tenants are fully renounced?I cannot advocate any Muslim candidate for President.
?I also can?t advocate supporting Hillary Clinton either by the way.
There were many questions about this and I wanted everyone to know exactly where I stand.[/quote]
What an idiot Carson (or whoever wrote that, but Carson too) is.
A tenant occupies rented property. A tenet is a fundamental principle. The author of that post confused the two twice, so a typo is unlikely. Either way, you’re supposed to rid correspondence of typos and mistakes before applying to a job as a used car salesman; it would be nice if aspiring commanders in chief (and their staffs) would show the same intellectual rigor.[/quote]
Hmmm.
That’s a bit more venom than I’d expect from you for misspelled words, my friend.[/quote]
Ya, I was a bit surprised myself. I don’t understand how you can call a person like Dr. Ben Carson an idiot over a typo.
[quote]sufiandy wrote:
Carson addressed this on social media today, his response below. This clarifies he meant a strict practicing Muslim which is a reasonable assumption.
The first issue I want to deal with tonight is the stories today about my comments yesterday when I was asked if I would support a hypothetical Muslim candidate for President. I responded ?I would not advocate for that? and I went on to say that many parts of Sharia Law are not compatible with the Constitution. I was immediately attacked by some of my Republican peers and nearly every Democrat alive. Know this, I meant exactly what I said. I could never support a candidate for President of the United States that was Muslim and had not renounced the central tenant of Islam: Sharia Law.
Those Republicans that take issue with my position are amazing. Under Islamic Law, homosexuals ? men and women alike ? must be killed. Women must be subservient. And people following other religions must be killed.
I know that there are many peaceful Muslims who do not adhere to these beliefs. But until these tenants are fully renounced?I cannot advocate any Muslim candidate for President.
?I also can?t advocate supporting Hillary Clinton either by the way.
There were many questions about this and I wanted everyone to know exactly where I stand.[/quote]
What an idiot Carson (or whoever wrote that, but Carson too) is.
A tenant occupies rented property. A tenet is a fundamental principle. The author of that post confused the two twice, so a typo is unlikely. Either way, you’re supposed to rid correspondence of typos and mistakes before applying to a job as a used car salesman; it would be nice if aspiring commanders in chief (and their staffs) would show the same intellectual rigor.[/quote]
Hmmm.
That’s a bit more venom than I’d expect from you for misspelled words, my friend.[/quote]
Ya, I was a bit surprised myself. I don’t understand how you can call a person like Dr. Ben Carson an idiot over a typo.[/quote]
Why, he is a bigot. I would be pissed of if a Muslim said we shouldn’t have a Christian in charge of the U.S. The founders of this nation far sightedly and rationally put together the best possible system for society, a secular republic with no official state religion and the separation of church and state.
[quote]sufiandy wrote:
Carson addressed this on social media today, his response below. This clarifies he meant a strict practicing Muslim which is a reasonable assumption.
The first issue I want to deal with tonight is the stories today about my comments yesterday when I was asked if I would support a hypothetical Muslim candidate for President. I responded ?I would not advocate for that? and I went on to say that many parts of Sharia Law are not compatible with the Constitution. I was immediately attacked by some of my Republican peers and nearly every Democrat alive. Know this, I meant exactly what I said. I could never support a candidate for President of the United States that was Muslim and had not renounced the central tenant of Islam: Sharia Law.
Those Republicans that take issue with my position are amazing. Under Islamic Law, homosexuals ? men and women alike ? must be killed. Women must be subservient. And people following other religions must be killed.
I know that there are many peaceful Muslims who do not adhere to these beliefs. But until these tenants are fully renounced?I cannot advocate any Muslim candidate for President.
?I also can?t advocate supporting Hillary Clinton either by the way.
There were many questions about this and I wanted everyone to know exactly where I stand.[/quote]
What an idiot Carson (or whoever wrote that, but Carson too) is.
A tenant occupies rented property. A tenet is a fundamental principle. The author of that post confused the two twice, so a typo is unlikely. Either way, you’re supposed to rid correspondence of typos and mistakes before applying to a job as a used car salesman; it would be nice if aspiring commanders in chief (and their staffs) would show the same intellectual rigor.[/quote]
Hmmm.
That’s a bit more venom than I’d expect from you for misspelled words, my friend.[/quote]
Ya, I was a bit surprised myself. I don’t understand how you can call a person like Dr. Ben Carson an idiot over a typo.[/quote]
Why, he is a bigot. I would be pissed of if a Muslim said we shouldn’t have a Christian in charge of the U.S. The founders of this nation far sightedly and rationally put together the best possible system for society, a secular republic with no official state religion and the separation of church and state.
[/quote]
We are specifically talking about SMH getting upset over the misuse of the word tenant…
As to your point, I don’t believe what Carson said and later clarified makes him a bigot. Sharia can’t coexist with the constitution and he wouldn’t support it. That doesn’t make him a bigot.