so.much.for.sep.of.church.n.state Ben Carson"Muslims unfit to be Prez"

[CoAspen]

So then...where is 'true christianity' being observed??

[JoeMo]

So then...where is 'true christianity' being observed??

In the hearts of individual true believers like you and me (unless you don't agree with me, then it's just in my heart )

[joeb]

The test with religious liberty questions is that it must apply to every religion. Christianity cannot demand special rights over any other religion. SDAs cannot demand special rights over any other denomination. No religion can demand special rights over any other religion. If any religion is excepted, either positively or negatively, it is no longer religious liberty. "With liberty and justice for all". 

Nice twist.  It's deceptive, but a nice try.  Installing sharia law, which a vast majority of muslims thinks needs to be done in this country, including cair, is not consistent with the constitution.  It is in direct violation of the constitution and that is what Carson was addressing.  Sharia law would not allow for freedom of religion, women to drive, hold down jobs, etc... and allow things like "honor killings" in which fathers and brothers allowed to freely kill the women in their family.  And you're criticising Carson for standing up against such tyrranny.....  Shows where your heart is.

[Bravus]

Instituting Sharia would be demanding special rights over other religions, which is what I very clearly and specifically said should not and must not happen.

I'm afraid the twist is in your thinking, if you think I'm advocating the exact opposite of what I'm advocating.

[bonnie]

Instituting Sharia would be demanding special rights over other religions, which is what I very clearly and specifically said should not and must not happen.

I'm afraid the twist is in your thinking, if you think I'm advocating the exact opposite of what I'm advocating.

Muslims March Through the Streets of Denmark Demanding a Caliphate 

22Sep, 2015by Cassy Fiano

 

How would you react if you saw thousands of Muslims marching down your street, waving ISIS flags and screaming for a caliphate? That’s exactly what happened in Denmark, and the question is, what are the Danes going to do about it?

 

 

 

 

In September 2014 the Danish Muslim Party claimed that Denmark would be the first Muslim Country in Europe. In their press release the Muslim party website claimed their party would be the largest in Denmark.

… A video posted this weekend shows Muslims with police escort marching in Denmark screaming and demanding a caliphate.

It is not clear when this rally took place but the Muslim protesters are carrying an Hizb-ut-Tahir banner and Islamic flags.

Hundreds, if not thousands, of protesters took part in the march.

Will the people of Denmark stand up against this obvious invasion, or will they let themselves be led like lambs to the slaughter? Only time will tell, but the answer seems obvious — if Muslims were given a police escort that allowed them to wave ISIS flags and demand a caliphate, then it’s not looking good.

[CoAspen]

Joe, say it ain't so!! Many claim to be true believers/christians, like the both of us, but my question is more about the implied assumption of what true believers/christians may or may not be involved in.

[GayatfootofCross]

Ben Carson: Republican Presidential Candidate Clarifies Remarks Made About Muslims

Carson said Tuesday that his comments on Sunday were taken out of context. Carson appeared on NBC's "Meet the Press" and said that a Muslim should not be "in charge of this nation."

 

 

 

Dr. Ben Carson

US presidential candidate

 

· 23 hrs ·

I wanted to get back to answering questions tonight sent in by you guys. Remember, you can send in your questions via email by sending it to AskBen@BenCarson.com.

Before I get started, I wanted to thank the hundreds of thousands of you that sent birthday greetings. I was touched and deeply appreciative.

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.

The second question comes tonight from John. John asks “what other talents does Candy have besides violin?”

She is extremely talented. She also plays piano and flute. In fact, she recently recorded a CD that we plan to give to our donors as a thank you gift. Candy also graduated from Yale and earned an MBA from Johns Hopkins. She just finished her new book that comes out in January. Candy is one of those people who can do just about anything.

The last question tonight is from Brenda. Brenda asks if my family tree has been researched.

Actually, I was quite blessed that a Yale classmate of mine, Henry Louis Gates, researched my ancestors on the PBS show "African American Lives" in 2006. My ancestors were slaves brought to the United States from a region along the border of Kenya and Tanzania. They were brought to Georgia. After emancipation, the family, which had been divided by their owners, was reunited. I am very thankful for all of the research that was done by Professor Gates. I assume you can probably find the show on YouTube.

Thank you for reading this tonight. Most of all, thank you for standing with me in this fight to save our great country.

Goodnight,
Ben

[CoAspen]

As I was surmising.....not the whole story was reported. Good to see that he very clearly explained what he was talking about.

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.

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.

 

[Bravus]

I'm pretty sure that sharia is *not* the central tenet of Islam. 

[8thdaypriest]

I'm pretty sure that sharia is *not* the central tenet of Islam. 

The Koran IS - and Sharia is taught in the Koran. 

Only someone truly ignorant of Sharia, would VOTE for a Muslim.  Ignorance abounds - so who knows, what the future may hold.  We may - one day - have a politically correct majority in this country, (who are also ignorant of just what Sharia calls for) that a devout Muslim COULD be elected as president. 

[Bravus]

Labeled by whom?

It's confirmation bias all the way down for some... read some serious academic unbiased history on the Crusades.

[JoeMo]

Joe, say it ain't so!! Many claim to be true believers/christians, like the both of us, but my question is more about the implied assumption of what true believers/christians may or may not be involved in.

OK CoAspen; I'll say it - IT AIN'T SO!  But you know I was just kidding you.

What should true believers/Christians be involved in?  That's difficult for you and I to discern; and my best answer is in whatever God calls them to be involved in.  I can think of lots of things that *I* don't think we should be involved in; but I know of Christians who "invade" Wiccan and New Age conventions, voodoo ceremonies, mosque services, etc.  Just because I wouldn't do that doesn't mean that other believers shouldn't be shining their light in dark places.  Light wins over darkness every time.

[rudywoofs (Pam)]

OK CoAspen; I'll say it - IT AIN'T SO!  But you know I was just kidding you.

What should true believers/Christians be involved in?  That's difficult for you and I to discern; and my best answer is in whatever God calls them to be involved in.  I can think of lots of things that *I* don't think we should be involved in; but I know of Christians who "invade" Wiccan and New Age conventions, voodoo ceremonies, mosque services, etc.  Just because I wouldn't do that doesn't mean that other believers shouldn't be shining their light in dark places.  Light wins over darkness every time.

but there are *good* ways to shine light, and there are *bad* ways to shine light.  It's the *intensity and direction* that makes a difference...  :)

[lazarus]

Only someone truly ignorant of Sharia, would VOTE for a Muslim.  Ignorance abounds -

Hasn't the whole notion of shariah in America gotten a bit out of control? No, it hasn't -- it's gotten hugely, obscenely, ignorantly out of control. How many of those anti-Islam protesters holding "NO SHARIA LAW" signs (as if anyone were advocating shariah law in the U.S.) actually know what the word means? I'd say, oh, none. Roughly.

Shariah (also spelled shari'ah or sharia or shari'a) is the Arabic word for "the road to the watering place." In a religious context, it means "the righteous path." Loosely, it can mean simply, "Islam."

There are six principles of shariah. They are derived from the Qur'an, which Muslims believe is the word of God. All Islamic religious rules must be in line with these six principles of shariah.

Aha! The six principles must be about killing infidels, veiling women, stoning people for adultery, honor killings and female genital cutting, right? Nope.

Here they are, the six principles of shariah:

1. The right to the protection of life.
2. The right to the protection of family.
3. The right to the protection of education.
4. The right to the protection of religion.
5. The right to the protection of property (access to resources).
6. The right to the protection of human dignity.

 

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/sumbul-alikaramali/whos-afraid-of-shariah_b_701331.html

[Geoarrge]

 

Hasn't the whole notion of shariah in America gotten a bit out of control? No, it hasn't -- it's gotten hugely, obscenely, ignorantly out of control. How many of those anti-Islam protesters holding "NO SHARIA LAW" signs (as if anyone were advocating shariah law in the U.S.) actually know what the word means? I'd say, oh, none. Roughly.

Try again. https://archive.org/details/RelianceOfTheTraveller-TheClassicManualOfIslamicSacredLawumdat  Most of the interesting stuff starts at page 578.

[lazarus]

Try again.

It seems that you did not read the article.

[Geoarrge]

I read it, I just fail to see why it should hold much credibility.   I prefer to examine actual Islamic texts and sermons, and the statistics showing how many people follow that line of instruction, over PR pieces intended to promote a positive view of Islam in the general media. 

 

[JoeMo]

Here they are, the six principles of shariah:

1. The right to the protection of life.
2. The right to the protection of family.
3. The right to the protection of education.
4. The right to the protection of religion.
5. The right to the protection of property (access to resources).
6. The right to the protection of human dignity.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/sumbul-alikaramali/whos-afraid-of-shariah_b_701331.html

ISIS, Al-Qaida, Taliban, the, Iran, Saudi Arabia, and several other Islamic countries and organizations don't seem to be aware of these principles unless it is to protect their own lives, family, education, religion, property and dignity.  As far as Christianity, Judaism, or even some other branches of Islam are concerned, their attitude is "to hell with them".

Name one Islamic country that protects the rights of non-Muslims like it says in these 6 principles, rather than just barely tolerate their existence.

[Bravus]

Indonesia, Malaysia, to name just two.

[pierrepaul]

I know that there are many peaceful Muslims who do not adhere to these beliefs. But until these tenants (sic) are fully renounced…I cannot advocate any Muslim candidate for President.

 

It's time for Dr Carson to fire his text writer. A "tenant" is one who rents or leases an immovable property from another (in the English common law a "tenant" can also be a landowner, since in theory, ultimate title rests with the Queen). A "tenet" is a statement of principle or belief.

[pierrepaul]

And people say they like Carson because he's a Strict Constitutionalist. Guess he missed this bit of Article VI:

The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the Members of the several State Legislatures, and all executive and judicial Officers, both of the United States and of the several States, shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation, to support this Constitution; but no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States.
 

No, he didn't miss Article VI. All that this portion of Article VI means is that someone who otherwise qualifies for an office will not be disqualified by a religious test. The only qualifications for President are (a) natural born citizen; (b) 35 years of age; (c) resident in the US for 14 years; (d) chosen by a majority of the electoral college.

Article VI does NOT prevent any person from considering a candidates religion when deciding whom to support for any elected office including that of the presidency.

[joeb]

No, he didn't miss Article VI. All that this portion of Article VI means is that someone who otherwise qualifies for an office will not be disqualified by a religious test. The only qualifications for President are (a) natural born citizen; (b) 35 years of age; (c) resident in the US for 14 years; (d) chosen by a majority of the electoral college.

Article VI does NOT prevent any person from considering a candidates religion when deciding whom to support for any elected office including that of the presidency.

And, the President must swear to support and defend the Consititution.  If he does not do that he cannot be president.  So, someone whose belief system runs counter to the principles of the Constitituion would have to reject the religious principles he believes in to honestly take that oath.  The second problem that comes up is that any believer in Islam is allowed to decieve any and all infidels(the entire world outside of Islam) to spread the power and influence of Islam.  That means they could lie through their teeth to support the Consititution and be following the tenets of their religion to the letter. Since this is the case, what Muslim can be trusted to support and defend the Consititution?     

[joeb]

Indonesia, Malaysia, to name just two.

Huh?  Christians are routinely persecuted in Malasia.

http://www.crossmap.com/news/a-christian-in-malay-gives-us-a-window-into-the-hidden-persecution-of-malay-christians-to-be-malay-is-to-be-muslim-10458

The same goes for Indonesia. 

http://www.persecution.org/2015/09/01/ri-failing-to-protect-religious-freedom/

Indonesia has a Consititution that is supposed to protect religious freedom, but the government does not, as a routine practice disourage persecution of non-Muslims.

[joeb]

Labeled by whom?

It's confirmation bias all the way down for some... read some serious academic unbiased history on the Crusades.

 

 

LOL.  My thinking is twisted because you're claiming Ben Carson is in violation of the Consitution for saying he would never vote for a Muslim because of the fact that the majority of Muslims want to have instituted here in the US?  Seems to me the person with the twisted thinking is you.  Ben Carson is supporting the Constitution when he says he will never vote for someone from a religion that works to enforce its beliefs, by any and all means they think necessary, on the rest of the world.  He is, in fact, upholding the Consitution when he says that for the president of the US must take an oath to support and defend the Constitution.  He is acting presidential.  He is speaking out for the protection of our way of government and way of life.  He is speaking out in support of liberty.

 

I don't know how I ended up quoting this post.  I read your reply to me about my thinking being twisted and clicked on the quote button on that post, and somehow the software ended up quoting a different post of yours.  Sorry bout that.

Edited September 25, 2015 by joeb

[LifeHiscost]

 

{quote]Ben Carson is supporting the Constitution when he says he will never vote for someone from a religion that works to enforce its beliefs, by any and all means they think necessary, on the rest of the world.  He is, in fact, upholding the Consitution when he says that for the president of the US must take an oath to support and defend the Constitution.  He is acting presidential.  He is speaking out for the protection of our way of government and way of life.  He is speaking out in support of liberty.

 

Not to mention his honesty is not predicated on what is politically correct.

 

God is Love!  Jesus saves!