Would YOU support a Presidential candidate who held that Sharia Law superseded the U.S.Constitution?

[Moonglow]

Carson does not support Sharia law

No American candidate does, or ever would! If they did, they would be a candidate for about 5 minutes. Carson's answer is a bullshit deflection from the question he was asked:

Could you ever see yourself supporting a Muslim for President.

He wasn't asked about Sharia.

The President swears to uphold the Constitution...PERIOD

Yes which makes it frustratingly annoying to watch you defend him as he breaks that oath daily and then procedure to act like no one else ever would.

What did he do yesterday?

 

[Syriusly]

No laws for or against the free-expression of religion.

....no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States. - U.S. Constitution, Article 6, Paragraph 3

If it says it's not required that's the same as saying it can be allowed.

You come up with some of the weirdest distortions of the Constitution I've ever seen. And on a board full of desperate liberals, that's saying something.

If you support the left, that's rich.

But I understand the English language.

Your posts fail to establish that you do.

 

[Arizona Willie]

14 out of 17 of the Republican candidates supported Davis in her claim that her personal religious beliefs trump the Constitution.

They support Christaria Law ( Christian Sharia ).

Huckabee is probably the worst of the bunch.

Anytime the Constitution or Supreme Court interferes with the right wing / religious wing nuts implementing their ideology, they claim their ideology trumps the Constitution / Supreme Court.
========

Would YOU support a Presidential candidate who held that Sharia Law superseded the U.S. Constitution?


The media is crowing in triumph after managing to catch Dr. Ben Carson in a "Gotcha" question.

They asked first if he would support a candidate whose views went against the Constitution. He gave the obvious answer: Of course not. (Never mind that this would cut out nearly every Democrat in elected office today.)

They then asked if he considered Muslim beliefs to be contrary to the Constitution. He correctly answered "Yes".

Then they asked if he would support a Muslim candidate for President. Rather than hedge, he flatly answered that he would not.

The media then jumped as far as they could, and are screaming that Dr. Carson would require a religious test for elected office, something forbidden by the Constitution.

When it's clear that Carson simply meant what he said: The he would not support anyone whose opinions and beliefs were contrary to the Constitution... whether those beliefs came from what he read in the newspaper this morning, or from his religion, or from what he was taught in public school, or from listening to Hillary. Doesn't matter WHY the guy held opinions that opposed the Constitution. If they did, then Dr. Carson would not support him, nor should he.

But the leftists are screaming with delight that they can twist what he said into something he obviously did NOT mean, and pretend he meant it. That's their bread and butter, no matter how false on disingenuous. And the leftists aren't about to give it up. In part because it's all they have.

So, let's ask generally:

Would YOU support a Presidential candidate who held that Sharia Law superseded the U.S. Constitution?

 

[Arizona Willie]

And Christaria Law is perhaps even worse. Same kind of crap with a different imaginary Being but disguising itself as " Fundamentalist Christianity " and pretending to be innocuous.

========

Sharia is not only a law but a religion AND culture. They do NOT come apart.

Sharia is a DISEASE...an infection that enters the host and begins to rot and drive insane the being it enters. Signs of this disease are intolerance, oppression, hostility, suicidal thoughts, rage, and the desire to kill others who do not believe the way you do. This insanity has been known to drive fathers to kill their own daughters for holding hands with a boy at the movies or for being a victim of rape at the hands of another.

 

[Synthaholic]

The media is crowing in triumph after managing to catch Dr. Ben Carson in a "Gotcha" question.

Yeah, you spewed this bullshit in the OP. There are no gotcha questions, moron.

Isn't little sinner comical when he squeezes his eyes shut, claps his hands over his ears, and runs around calling people names and saying loudly, "LA LA LA LA LA no it isn't no it isn't no it isn't LA LA LA LA LA...."?

He's so cute.

Then tell us what the gotcha question was.

You can't.

 

[imawhosure]

Heeee, heeee! Lefties want this thread to go away. Why? Because if they answer no, then they can't attack Carson. If they answer yes, then they are anti woman, and pro-terrorist. I find it funny that they have boxed themselves into a box on this one, lol.

And so, by extrapolating the fact that lefties have attacked Carson for none support of a Muslim, Sharia candidate, we must assume that ALL LEFTIES WOULD support a Sharia candidate for President of the United States. We must begin to circulate this around, post haste; and also with it, what Sharia would do to women-)

Don't forget...

If the Libs support Sharia, they support killing Gays!!!

Can you name one liberal leader who supports Sharia? I'll wait.

Sure, all of these people right here!

CAIR was founded in June 1994 by three former officers of the Islamic Association of Palestine (IAP)—Omar Ahmad (IAP President; became CAIR President), Nihad Awad (IAP PR Director; became CAIR Secretary & Treasurer), and Rafeeq Jaber (IAP Chicago Chapter President; became CAIR Vice President).

 

[g5000]

57% percent of Republicans would supersede the Constitution!!!

78% of Carson supporters would supersede the Constitution.

94% of Huckabee supporters would supersede the Constitution!!!

94 PERCENT!!!

http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/pdf/2015/PPP_Release_National_22415.pdf[

 

[Syriusly]

This all always reminds me of the bigoted anti-catholic campaigns against Catholic's being president.

That integration would be tested during the presidential contest of 1960. Catholics delighted by the possibility of having one of their own in the White House soon learned that other Americans were horrified by the prospect. Many feared that a member of an international, hierarchical church could not fulfill his presidential duty to preserve, protect and defend the Constitution. They worried that Kennedy's Catholic faith would lead him to flout the Constitution's First Amendment guarantee of religious freedom and prohibition against the establishment of a state church.

During the campaign, the anti-Catholicism that had lay dormant for decades re-emerged with a vengeance. Secularists warned of "fundamental" value differences between Catholics and other Americans, and suggested that the election of a Catholic President would open the door to theocracy. As Mark Massa noted in his book, Catholics and American Culture (Crossroad, 1999), Protestant fundamentalists harbored similar fears and launched a direct mail campaign to send more than 300 different anti-Catholic tracts to some 20 million homes before the election. Kennedy's candidacy was denounced by the nine-million-member Southern Baptist Convention and a host of other Protestant churches and associations. Clergy affiliated with the National Association of Evangelicals and other Protestant groups launched a nationwide campaign of anti-Kennedy sermons to coincide with "Reformation Sunday" on October 30, 1960. Protestants opposing Kennedy were urged to wear buttons throughout the campaign season that said, "Stand Up and Be Counted" over the numbers "1517" — a reminder to follow in the footsteps of Martin Luther, who launched the Protestant Reformation that year by nailing his 95 theses to the door of the Wittenberg Castle Church.

How many times have we heard from Christian candidates that they believe 'God's Law' supercedes any of Man's laws? And what is the Constitution but the ultimate law of the United States

Like Mike Huckabee

In an interview with Iowa-based conservative talk show host Steve Deace on Monday, former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee repeated his recommendation that governors simply ignore the Supreme Court’s decision to let stand lower court rulings legalizing marriage equality in several new states, adding that state governments should have also ignored Roe v. Wade and the Supreme Court rulings banning school-sponsored prayer.

When Deace pressed him on the “maelstrom” that would be set off if state governments simply ignored court rulings on marriage, Huckabee responded that it was in fact the courts that have set off a “constitutional crisis” by ruling in favor of marriage equality…

In cases such as Roe and rulings in favor of marriage equality and church-state separation, Huckabee said, elected officials should have said, “Well, the courts have spoken and it’s an important voice, but it’s not the voice of God and the Supreme Court isn’t God” and simply ignored the courts’ rulings

 

[g5000]

This all always reminds me of the bigoted anti-catholic campaigns against Catholic's being president.

A-yup.

 

[Syriusly]

This all always reminds me of the bigoted anti-catholic campaigns against Catholic's being president.

A-yup.

Same argument- different non-protestant faith being attacked.

 

[BULLDOG]

Heeee, heeee! Lefties want this thread to go away. Why? Because if they answer no, then they can't attack Carson. If they answer yes, then they are anti woman, and pro-terrorist. I find it funny that they have boxed themselves into a box on this one, lol.

And so, by extrapolating the fact that lefties have attacked Carson for none support of a Muslim, Sharia candidate, we must assume that ALL LEFTIES WOULD support a Sharia candidate for President of the United States. We must begin to circulate this around, post haste; and also with it, what Sharia would do to women-)

Don't forget...

If the Libs support Sharia, they support killing Gays!!!

Can you name one liberal leader who supports Sharia? I'll wait.

Sure, all of these people right here!

CAIR was founded in June 1994 by three former officers of the Islamic Association of Palestine (IAP)—Omar Ahmad (IAP President; became CAIR President), Nihad Awad (IAP PR Director; became CAIR Secretary & Treasurer), and Rafeeq Jaber (IAP Chicago Chapter President; became CAIR Vice President).

So you think CAIR is a leader for liberals in America? What kind of crap is hannity telling you?

 

[ShaklesOfBigGov]

Would YOU support a Presidential candidate who held that Sharia Law superseded the U.S. Constitution?


The media is crowing in triumph after managing to catch Dr. Ben Carson in a "Gotcha" question.

They asked first if he would support a candidate whose views went against the Constitution. He gave the obvious answer: Of course not. (Never mind that this would cut out nearly every Democrat in elected office today.)

They then asked if he considered Muslim beliefs to be contrary to the Constitution. He correctly answered "Yes".

Then they asked if he would support a Muslim candidate for President. Rather than hedge, he flatly answered that he would not.

The media then jumped as far as they could, and are screaming that Dr. Carson would require a religious test for elected office, something forbidden by the Constitution.

When it's clear that Carson simply meant what he said: The he would not support anyone whose opinions and beliefs were contrary to the Constitution... whether those beliefs came from what he read in the newspaper this morning, or from his religion, or from what he was taught in public school, or from listening to Hillary. Doesn't matter WHY the guy held opinions that opposed the Constitution. If they did, then Dr. Carson would not support him, nor should he.

But the leftists are screaming with delight that they can twist what he said into something he obviously did NOT mean, and pretend he meant it. That's their bread and butter, no matter how false on disingenuous. And the leftists aren't about to give it up. In part because it's all they have.

So, let's ask generally:

Would YOU support a Presidential candidate who held that Sharia Law superseded the U.S. Constitution?

Why did he support Kim Davis then?

I don't understand why some liberals insist in fighting so hard to make an excuse for, and defend Shiria law for this country? Our nation already HAS a system of government in place, we have our own laws, it stems from our Constitution which is the foundation to which this country was built on. We should never allow immigrants from a different culture to try and change THIS country to accommodate them. If you want to be considered an American citizen you must be respectful of our nation's government. You are a foreigner who chose to live here, if you don't like the way our Constitution works and the rights it instills - LEAVE. I believe Teddy Roosevelt understood this and said it best.

"In the first place, we should insist that if the immigrant who comes here in good faith becomes an American and assimilates himself to us, he shall be treated on an exact equality with everyone else, for it is an outrage to discriminate against any such man because of creed or birthplace or origin. But this is predicated upon the person's becoming in every facet an American, and nothing but an American... there can be no divided allegiance here. Any man who says he is an American, but is something else also, isn't an American at all. We have room but for one flag... the Anerican flag ... We have room for but one language here, and that is the English language ... and we have room for but one sole loyalty and that is the loyalty to the Anerican people."
Theodore Roosevelt 1907

 

[ShaklesOfBigGov]

Of course not.

Yes, this is a non-issue being blown out of proportion by leftists and the media.

"The Media" didn't blow anything out of proportion, Carson made a statement about a religious litmus test.

His handlers saw how badly that played in the media and now are qualifying and walking back what he said.

And still? He's been pretty clumsy about it. He's wholly not qualified to be President. That said? I hope he becomes the Republican candidate.

Hillary has done some back peddling and explaining over those emails. We have one media trying to show republicans are demonstrating religious discrimination, while the other is focusing on a democrat of being incompetent with respect to handling national security matters. Out of the two, which is more of a risk and concern for this nation, that comes with the position and responsibility of being Commander-in-Chief? Seems to me the left is reaching to protect their preferred candidate Hillary by throwing ANY dirt they can on the republican candidates, in hopes to make something strick that exonerates Mrs. Clinton from any lack of trust she has created with voters.

 

[Sallow]

Of course not.

Yes, this is a non-issue being blown out of proportion by leftists and the media.

"The Media" didn't blow anything out of proportion, Carson made a statement about a religious litmus test.

His handlers saw how badly that played in the media and now are qualifying and walking back what he said.

And still? He's been pretty clumsy about it. He's wholly not qualified to be President. That said? I hope he becomes the Republican candidate.

Hillary has done some back peddling and explaining over those emails. We have one media trying to show republicans are demonstrating religious discrimination, while the other is focusing on a democrat of being incompetent with respect to handling national security matters. Out of the two, which is more of a risk and concern for this nation, that comes with the position and responsibility of being Commander-in-Chief? Seems to me the left is reaching to protect their preferred candidate Hillary by throwing ANY dirt they can on the republican candidates, in hopes to make something strick that exonerates Mrs. Clinton from any lack of trust she has created with voters.

She, like Bill Clinton, has handled the manufactured scandal pretty badly. She should have took a page from the Bush/Cheney book when they had the exact same issue with over several million emails. They were like "fuck you". Next.

Good stuff.


FLASHBACK: When Millions Of Lost Bush White House Emails (From Private Accounts) Triggered A Media Shrug

Colin Powell relied on personal emails while secretary of state

 

[Avatar4321]

Of course not.

Yes, this is a non-issue being blown out of proportion by leftists and the media.

"The Media" didn't blow anything out of proportion, Carson made a statement about a religious litmus test.

His handlers saw how badly that played in the media and now are qualifying and walking back what he said.

And still? He's been pretty clumsy about it. He's wholly not qualified to be President. That said? I hope he becomes the Republican candidate.

Hillary has done some back peddling and explaining over those emails. We have one media trying to show republicans are demonstrating religious discrimination, while the other is focusing on a democrat of being incompetent with respect to handling national security matters. Out of the two, which is more of a risk and concern for this nation, that comes with the position and responsibility of being Commander-in-Chief? Seems to me the left is reaching to protect their preferred candidate Hillary by throwing ANY dirt they can on the republican candidates, in hopes to make something strick that exonerates Mrs. Clinton from any lack of trust she has created with voters.

She, like Bill Clinton, has handled the manufactured scandal pretty badly. She should have took a page from the Bush/Cheney book when they had the exact same issue with over several million emails. They were like "fuck you". Next.

Good stuff.


FLASHBACK: When Millions Of Lost Bush White House Emails (From Private Accounts) Triggered A Media Shrug

Colin Powell relied on personal emails while secretary of state

See, that's the problem with this nation. You want to keep excusing people for corruption just because of the party they belong to. Bill and Hillary Clinton are criminals. What does that say about you when you think they are good representatives for you?

 

[Sallow]

Of course not.

Yes, this is a non-issue being blown out of proportion by leftists and the media.

"The Media" didn't blow anything out of proportion, Carson made a statement about a religious litmus test.

His handlers saw how badly that played in the media and now are qualifying and walking back what he said.

And still? He's been pretty clumsy about it. He's wholly not qualified to be President. That said? I hope he becomes the Republican candidate.

Hillary has done some back peddling and explaining over those emails. We have one media trying to show republicans are demonstrating religious discrimination, while the other is focusing on a democrat of being incompetent with respect to handling national security matters. Out of the two, which is more of a risk and concern for this nation, that comes with the position and responsibility of being Commander-in-Chief? Seems to me the left is reaching to protect their preferred candidate Hillary by throwing ANY dirt they can on the republican candidates, in hopes to make something strick that exonerates Mrs. Clinton from any lack of trust she has created with voters.

She, like Bill Clinton, has handled the manufactured scandal pretty badly. She should have took a page from the Bush/Cheney book when they had the exact same issue with over several million emails. They were like "fuck you". Next.

Good stuff.


FLASHBACK: When Millions Of Lost Bush White House Emails (From Private Accounts) Triggered A Media Shrug

Colin Powell relied on personal emails while secretary of state

See, that's the problem with this nation. You want to keep excusing people for corruption just because of the party they belong to. Bill and Hillary Clinton are criminals. What does that say about you when you think they are good representatives for you?

Well no, they are not criminals.

They are hated by rabid racist nationalists in this nation that want to see a Christian theocracy.

 

[M14 Shooter]

This all always reminds me of the bigoted anti-catholic campaigns against Catholic's being president.

So...
Would you or would not not support a Presidential candidate who refuses to set aside Sharia law and accept the constitution as supreme?

 

[Pogo]

This all always reminds me of the bigoted anti-catholic campaigns against Catholic's being president.

Yup, exactly. Same thing. I'm old enough to remember that "issue" in 1960. My first exposure to political bullshit-mongering. My parents tried to explain the rationale but it still didn't make any sense. And here 55 years later --- it still doesn't.

 

[Syriusly]

Would YOU support a Presidential candidate who held that Sharia Law superseded the U.S. Constitution?


The media is crowing in triumph after managing to catch Dr. Ben Carson in a "Gotcha" question.

They asked first if he would support a candidate whose views went against the Constitution. He gave the obvious answer: Of course not. (Never mind that this would cut out nearly every Democrat in elected office today.)

They then asked if he considered Muslim beliefs to be contrary to the Constitution. He correctly answered "Yes".

Then they asked if he would support a Muslim candidate for President. Rather than hedge, he flatly answered that he would not.

The media then jumped as far as they could, and are screaming that Dr. Carson would require a religious test for elected office, something forbidden by the Constitution.

When it's clear that Carson simply meant what he said: The he would not support anyone whose opinions and beliefs were contrary to the Constitution... whether those beliefs came from what he read in the newspaper this morning, or from his religion, or from what he was taught in public school, or from listening to Hillary. Doesn't matter WHY the guy held opinions that opposed the Constitution. If they did, then Dr. Carson would not support him, nor should he.

But the leftists are screaming with delight that they can twist what he said into something he obviously did NOT mean, and pretend he meant it. That's their bread and butter, no matter how false on disingenuous. And the leftists aren't about to give it up. In part because it's all they have.

So, let's ask generally:

Would YOU support a Presidential candidate who held that Sharia Law superseded the U.S. Constitution?

Why did he support Kim Davis then?

I don't understand why some liberals insist in fighting so hard to make an excuse for, and defend Shiria law for this country?

Why do some Conservatives keep claiming any liberals are fighting for Sharia law?

I don't support Sharia law- and there is no chance in hell of Sharia law being mandated in the United States.

The whacky right wing hysteria about Sharia in the United States is nothing but right wing hysteria- the same kind of hysteria that was used to attack Catholicism in the United States in my life time.

 

[Syriusly]

Of course not.

Yes, this is a non-issue being blown out of proportion by leftists and the media.

"The Media" didn't blow anything out of proportion, Carson made a statement about a religious litmus test.

His handlers saw how badly that played in the media and now are qualifying and walking back what he said.

And still? He's been pretty clumsy about it. He's wholly not qualified to be President. That said? I hope he becomes the Republican candidate.

Hillary has done some back peddling and explaining over those emails. We have one media trying to show republicans are demonstrating religious discrimination, while the other is focusing on a democrat of being incompetent with respect to handling national security matters. Out of the two, which is more of a risk and concern for this nation, that comes with the position and responsibility of being Commander-in-Chief? Seems to me the left is reaching to protect their preferred candidate Hillary by throwing ANY dirt they can on the republican candidates, in hopes to make something strick that exonerates Mrs. Clinton from any lack of trust she has created with voters.

She, like Bill Clinton, has handled the manufactured scandal pretty badly. She should have took a page from the Bush/Cheney book when they had the exact same issue with over several million emails. They were like "fuck you". Next.

Good stuff.


FLASHBACK: When Millions Of Lost Bush White House Emails (From Private Accounts) Triggered A Media Shrug

Colin Powell relied on personal emails while secretary of state

See, that's the problem with this nation. You want to keep excusing people for corruption just because of the party they belong to. Bill and Hillary Clinton are criminals. What does that say about you when you think they are good representatives for you?

Remind us again when Bill and Hilary were convicted of crimes- and which crimes that they were convicted of?