Question, Can a Muslim run for office in the USA?  Well, I know a Muslim can but in your opinion should they be allowed to?  I was reading my favorite blog, Free Republic, and they were commenting on the fact that a Muslim is running for congress in Minesota.  Some of the free Republican thinkers have this to say:

"Perhaps he will offer free Burkas for who ever promises to vote for him. And how will he answer the question about whether or not Sharia ought to be the supreme law of the land?"

"Having any Muslim in Congress is a threat to national security."

"However, I don't want any Muslim running for Congress"

"It is important to damage Ellison as badly as possible in this campaign. Beat him like a drum. His future campaigns will be much easier, simply because he'll be an incumbent. We don't him to become a viable possibility for higher office. We can't have a future senator and a future VP candidate. A VP can become a president. "

Now personally I don't like this candidates background, however, can a Muslim run for office?

"We cannot allow a mine shaft gap"

Yes, any American should have the right to run for any office providing they meet the qualifications.

Would I vote for a Muslim running for Congress in my district?  It depends entirely on the Muslim candidate but the truth is the Muslim candidate would have to prove to me that he/she was not one who believed in the primacy of Islam over the state.  This is tricky.  When JFK ran as the first Catholic presidential candidate, some fretted that he would feel a greater allegiance to the Vatican or the Pope than the USA.  Same kind of comments are made about Jews having a greater allegiance to Israel than the US but at least in the case of both the Vatican and Israel, they are generally friendly allies with the USA.

A Muslim candidate that would receive my vote would have to go a distance to prove they were not victims of Israeli Persection Syndrome as well.   

I can think of several Muslims and ex-Muslims (though Muslims claim there's no such thing) who would stand a chance for me but I would judge them with great scrutiny.  Truth is it would be a greater scrutiny than many others.

Reading Free Republic as your bellweather for what Republicans think could be misleading, Danwhy, but I wouldn't know for sure.  The only time I ever hear about what is written on their website is from leftist websites quoting them. 

Are any of my Republican colleagues here regular readers of the Free Republic website?

Susan 

     
“Half a truth is often a great lie.”

Ben Franklin

Well I'm not American, and hence not Republican, but I align myself more with their policies than I would the Democrats.

My first thought was that pollies in the US have to swear allegiance to God don't they?  Not Allah...not Mohammed...but God.  That could pose some difficulties.  But then there must be many Godless members of the Democrat party already (given their pro-abortion stance), and they have to swear allegiance also.  So perhaps that's not such an issue...

Theoretically I can't think of any reason why he shouldn't be able to campaign.  Mind you, I don't see any reason why Americans would vote him in either...unless they're one of the politically-correct extremists that are infesting the dark corners of our western nations.

It's a small step forward for muslims, who are usually quite open about their intent for the whole world to be Islamic.  I guess this is the more peaceful part of their invasion.

I know nothing about it, except from D. Free republic that is.

 I saw a poll a couple months ago about Muslims in Europe and the Islam over Country issue. As I recall something like 60 % said Islam over, so that leaves a bunch who would put country first.

Some nice intelligent comments, thanks.

I feel the same way about a Muslim candidate as I do about a Christian candidate.  First and foremost a candidate must serve their constituancy so what I need to know about any candidate is will they put what the people want ahead of their own personal believes.

And not to go off topic but I am a Christian and I also believe that abortion should be available in certain cases, I don't think that makes me Godless (as I was directly accused of being above).

I am also wary of Christian politicians (or maybe I should say I put them under extra scrutiny) as their job if elected is to serve the state and this may conflict with their Christian beliefs.  For instance, with my beliefs I could never order military action, hence, I will never run for office as gov't's do need to order military actions sometimes.  I won't call a Christian who believes in military action "Godless" though, they just have a different relationship with God than I do.

"We cannot allow a mine shaft gap"

Frankly, I find the question, Danwhy, condescending and downright ignorant (or arrogant) towards all the comments many of us have made through the years, and the effort we have all made in seperating your moderate Muslim with an Islmaic-facsist. We've all worked hard in seperating the two groups in an effort to not brandish all Muslims the same way (something many of you - general you - either don't see, or don't do yourselves - general you - when talking about Christians).

I'm almost insulted you would ask such a question. No, I AM insulted you asked this question. It negates and ignores the majority of what we've said and begs the question as to whether the Republicans here are racists toward Muslims. And no, I'm not reading between the lines or emotional. The question just stinks....frankly, you should know what the GOP-ers on this board would say and if you didn't, you aren't reading our posts from the past few years very well.

Of course a Muslim can run for office. Just like a Christian. Just like an atheist. Just like anyone else who falls under the Constituional requirements. Just like a Communist. Just like a Capitalist or a Socialist.  And they have all right to do it. And the responses in the Free Rebpulic are frankly ignorant and stupid. Gag.

Jordan .

Well the question certainly wasn't meant in the way you received it Jordan.  Other than that I am at a loss as to what to say to your response.

"We cannot allow a mine shaft gap"

I knew that would be your response, D. that's why I wrote the following reply earlier this morning:

See, Danwhy, I thought you'd respond that way, which is why the majority of this post was written before you even posted.

Did it even occur to you when you were posting to not lump the GOP into the subject? Be honest. What if there 5 registered Democrats on this board - would you have called them out? See, I don't think so, I think you would've thought, "Oh, Democrats, they would never think like that." And if that's what you would've thought, it only supports my original response.

What you did is basically indirectly accuse the GOP here on this board as being Muslimphobic (my new word). You prefaced with "I read all this at the Free Republic" and then basically said, "And I want to know if you guys are also Muslim-phobic also?" without actually saying it.

It's ridiculous!

this would be like me running over to Democratic Underground, picking up some quotes and then coming here and asking, "A Question for Bush Critics..."

Let me prove it to you:

This week, DU had a thread about Christians. Many comments were made which I will copy and paste portions below. What you did is this:

---

SUBJECT: A Question for All Non-Evangelicals...(pretty much everyone but me)

POST:

Can a Evangelical run for office in the USA? Well, I know a Evangelical can, but in your opinion, should they be allowed to. I was reading my favorite forum, Democratic Underground, and they were commenting on Evangelicals in the world of politics. Some of the DU thinkers have this to say:

"I don't WANT to reach out to right wing Evangelicals, screw em'.....I am talking about the right wing evangelicals who actually think the creator of all things chose the stupidest man on earth to be our president....You can't make a right wing evangelical into a Democrat if they are not willing to already. They see us as enemies, and I return the favor."

"Agree. They are what we are not. This is the political issue of our times."

"No, no. I want to connect with them. With a fist to the face."

"Totally agree! They are regressive, power hungry, dangerous and needing to be put in their places. If they are allowed to have their way we'll be having "Salem Witch Trials" all over America."

"They're f*cking crazy. You can't talk sense to them. It's a waste of time."

"Call them what they are. Religious fanatics. Extremists. Cult members. They are no different than Muslim extremists, Jewish extremists, or any other extremist or fanatical religious cult."

"Lets reach out to meet intolerant bigots halfway!"

"Oh, I do!! I want to reach out and knock them right on their asses."

"we need to ensure that mentally ill people get the help they need and are made no longer a threat to the well being of themselves, of others and of their country"

"I've always felt they needed deprogramming. They need help to get out of their self-made hell."

So, do you think non-Evangelical Christians should be allowed to run for office.

----

This entire example begs a variety of questions. First, it begs the question of "Evangelical-phobia" among non-Evangelicals. With the quotes added, it infers that it's possible some non-Evangeliclas on this board might even believe the comments made above.

I am 100% positive that if I or any other "GOP-er" were to post something like this, hell fire and brimstone would've been rained down on that individual for implying such horrible things.

Basically, D, why did you call out Republicans on this board and ask such a question? Did you really expect any of us to agree with the guys at Free Republic? If not, then what was the point? And if you thought any of us would actually agree with Free Republic, then I don't know what to think....

EDIT - and if you still aren't sure how to respnod then just answer me this - why did you ask the question in the first place  and call out us Republicans?  

Jordan .

I didn't expect anyone to answer in support of banning Muslims from being able to run, but I did expect an interesting take on the matter (which I got).  I didn't expect anyone to be offended either, anytime you want to call out for an answer for someone who started life as a card carrying New Democrat, switched mid life to going between Liberal and Conservatives and who now votes based more on fiscal responsibilty/social liberal thinking (which can go to any of many parties up here) please feel free to do so.  I haven't asked a Democratic question lately as I haven't had one.

I think skins may be getting a little thin around here and I will be the first to put my hand up in the air and say my skin is likely thinner than it should be at the moment due to some of the comments posted here lately.

One of the points I have been trying to make is that the blogs, left and right, are full of idiots.  I myself have felt personally attacked based on generalisations made from political blogs, I probably shouldn't though, this is just the internet.

I think maybe a bigger issue here is the problem that seems to be coming to Canada and I believe is in the US, the parties are just getting more and more entrenched in theor corners and trying to find a middle ground or play the role of moderator just doesn't seem to work anymore.  What's the solution to getting people togther again, or at least acknowledging common ground?  Why have beliefs seemed to split into chasms?  It will be interesting to see what the hostory books say about this period of time.

In the meantime I'm not sure what the answer is to this political board.  Maybe I am too thin skinned at the moment to see it, maybe I am not alone though?

"We cannot allow a mine shaft gap"

"I didn't expect anyone to answer in support of banning Muslims from being able to run, but I did expect an interesting take on the matter (which I got).  "

I don't have a problem with you asking hte question. My issue with your post is that you called out Republicans for some reason. You specifically said "Hey Republicans, do you think Muslims should or shouldn't be allowed to run for office? Here's what your fellow GOP-ers are saying" without actually saying it.  So in other words, if you had said, "I was reading a blog and there were some posts on there about Muslims not being allowed to run for Congress, and I wanted to get your take on it" that would not even have sounded insulting or pointed any fingers at any one group. But instead you actually call out Republicans.

"I haven't asked a Democratic question lately as I haven't had one." 

This was NOT a question for Republicans or Democrats. This could've been posed to anyone. In another thread we got a discussion going on about the Netherlands and having Sharia law that goes hand in hand with this to a certain extent. So when I read it this morning, half asleep, not awake enough to read between the lines, I saw a post which when summarized could be potentially insulting and was pointing at the GOP.

For the record I have plenty of skin left. I'm far from thin-skinned. And I don't know if I was insulted or just taken back by your question and you calling Republicans out like that. But the way you phrased the post and the subject just left me with a bad taste in my mouth. I still don't even see why you asked the question. I've gotten to know most of you by now and I can guess how many of you will respond to posts as I write them. I wrote my post to you this morning, I went to work, and then wrote up my reply to your reply feeling I knew how you would answer, D. In fact, at supper, I told Kelly how I felt you would respond and what my response was to you. I'm assuming most of you know how I and others are going to respond, so as a result, I see this question pointed at GOP-ers and it just floors me. My first thought was, "Dan - do you really think any of us REpublicans are going to agree with those stupid comments? Then why even ask the question?"

"the parties are just getting more and more entrenched in theor corners and trying to find a middle ground or play the role of moderator just doesn't seem to work anymore."

I recently read something from a political advisor to Karl Rove from one of the eletions that said that fewer and fewer people are in the middle ground anymore. There are fewer independents than there were just 20 years ago, and those Indpedents today will pretty much vote a straight party ticket. This supports what I've been saying for years. Indepedents are usually just people who are unwilling to commit. Not all, but many. My mother in law is like that - she'll swear up and down she's an Indepdent but she'll vote down Republican Party line. So yes, there is less and less middle ground, and that's partly because many of the issues we have today do not have a middle ground. The issue may be complex, but the answer to the issue is often YES or NO and rarely MAYBE.

I'm always open to me reading something wrong, D. And if I completely took your post wrong, my apologies, but I am stil astounded that you specifically asked for us Republicans to respond to your question -- I just don't understand why REpublicans had the finger pointed at them. And the only thing I can take away from it is that you were either a) expecting the same answers as you read in Free Republic, or b) you expected us to say of course they can run (which we did), but why finger the Republicans?

I guess if I can summarize myself - that's the question - why point this post at Republicans?

Jordan .

"Democrats" would answer Yes with near unanimity. I'd bet a hundred dollars on it, and I imagine most people who follow American politics would too.

There will be a statistically significant number of Americans who would answer No. Probably, hopefully, a small number, but some. Of those associated with either major party, I'd wager another hundred that they'd nearly all be Republican.

I wouldn't take such a view to be representative of Republican ideology in general, but that doesn't mean the view isn't there. To me this is not a structurally different issue from anti-Semitism on the left; it's there if you want to go looking under rocks.

For politeness, yes, it could have been phrased as open to all instead of targeted at Republicans. I'll try to have the grace not to rehash this idea after every generalization about liberals and Democrats I encounter in life.

- - - - -

PS - I'm glad to see you state that Little Green Footballs has a high moron population amongst those who post there, and the subsequent implication that the site is a poor model for discourse. Quid pro quo , Dr Lecter.

Well I quite openly dislike Islam.  I welcome religious freedom in my country, and count members of many faiths amongst my friends.  Where I draw the line is at any movement which either:

1. Promotes intolerance, hate and violence against non-members.

2. Promotes allegiance to their laws to the detriment of the laws of the land.

As I see it, the majority of muslims fall into the 2nd category, and while not all muslims practice #1, it is a core belief of the religion.

Islam as I have read the hadiths and koran openly promotes violence against non-muslims.  It's not murky, unclear or ambiguous about it - but very clear.  In case anyone missed the point, Mohammed, his life and teachings serve to drive the point home.  He went on a murderous rampage, and (surprise, surprise) when people dared to speak against him, he reacted with violence, and often murder.  So it's little wonder to me that when anyone (Popes, politicians, filmmakers etc) dare to speak negatively about Islam, the response of many muslims is violence and murder.

While I embrace multiculturalism and religious freedom, I draw the line at hate groups - and I put Islam into that category.  The closest analogy is the Nazi movement.  They believe they are supreme, and they promote hate, intolerance and violence against non-members.  I wouldn't welcome nazis into this country, nor allow them to promote their brand of hate if they live here already.

It's a cliche, but while most muslims are not terrorists, most terrorists ARE muslim.  And these people FOLLOW their holy book in conducting such actions.  It's the moderate/non-practicing muslims who pose less harm to our societies.

Also, this is not an issue of race - I abhore racism.  People are born into a race - it's not their choosing.  People aren't born Nazi or Muslim - it's a group with shared beliefs that one must choose to join.  So let's put the Racist stamp back in the pocket right away...that's a weak substitute for actual debate...

 Simply because I was just reading from a purported Republican website, it's honestly as simple as that.  What I expected here (and received) was a level of discourse that would be much more thoughtful than that found over there.  If I was just reading a purported Democratic website and there was something that caught my eye I likely would have posted my question in the same way to Democrats, I simply didn't see it as anything but a question.  Believe it or not though, I don't really read any Democratic websites with any regularity (I know, you'll tell me CNN is, lol).

I thought my history of posting here over the last 2 or 3 years would demonstarte that I try to see both sides even when I don't agree and that I also try to look for good where I can.

It seems we are almost all coming to agreement though that quoting from most political blogs left and right doesn't seem to be indicative of the majority of thinkers we encounter here, if not all (in terms of the blog responses from the masses).

Time for coffee now!

"We cannot allow a mine shaft gap"

"Simply because I was just reading from a purported Republican website, it's honestly as simple as that."

Fine....the fact that you were expecting the type of responses you got still makes me wonder why you asked hte question. If you knew the response, then why ask the question. I know above you said you were hoping to find something interesting. But frankly, and no offense to anyone above, nothing above is interesting IMHO. It's the same kind of stuff that has been stated for years and that I would expect Ray and Susan (Cybaca - leaving you out because you aren't Republican - no offense) to say. I'm not "offended" any longer, but I still can't wrap my head around the need for the question.  I'll let it go though, Dan.

Now the issue of blog responses and forums like DU is a whole other issue. Let's not forget that at least when it comes to DU, many of these same people who make extreme statements are also the ones protesting up and down city streets against Bush, the war, capitalism, etc. They are the ones helping to run ANSWER and other left-wing non-profits. And up to just a few weeks ago, LR was basically saying that govt should consider these people's beliefs simply because they protest. Yes, there's extremism on both sides, but let's not fool ourselves into thinking they (both sides) are not potentially dangerous to democracy because of their beliefs. Kos was instrumental in getting Lamont to win in the Democratic Primary, and he has plenty of "extreme" followers. There's always going to be a minority of extremes, the problem is that many of the extremists get so loud that they sound like the majority. Which is what is happening to the Democratic Party as these far left-wing groups (with memberships like DU and Kos) start trying to get their votes, it makes the Democratic Party move to the left, just like the GOP has moved toward Christians in the 80s and 90s. But because many of the left extremists (and even right) believe in values that are not American or Constitutional then there is always a little room to be concerned esp when many of them believe in appeasement and that the true threat to the US is George Bush and Republicans.

Then throw in the fact that people use the type of rhetoric they use in both left and right political sites and that only makes the chasm between the two bigger and bigger because the rhetoric is so inflammatory. This is what Susan has been warning about for as long as I've known her. The level of rhetoric is dangerous to debate. It started in the 90s and has only grown worse now that we've moved into one of the biggest controversies in recent US history. But then I think back to the 1800s in the US and remember the type of rhetoric that was coming out of politicians and the public then and realize that we aren't really all that different today.....

Jordan .

I think you all need a group hug.

GROUP HUG!!!!

Kelly

How Do You Live Your Dash?

Check out the Kids' blogs:
The CaleBlog and the Zoe Blog

~ Amanda

"Just fear me, love me, do as I say and I will be your slave..."

I think we need a new emoticon for that, Amanda!  This is too .  I'll bet CCC could find the perfect visual!

Susan 

     
“Half a truth is often a great lie.”

Ben Franklin

 Nice.

~ Amanda

"Just fear me, love me, do as I say and I will be your slave..."

Jordan .

     
“Half a truth is often a great lie.”

Ben Franklin

That will look beautiful at 25x25 pixels.

Yeah, that's hot.

(And thanks to Kelly and Amanda for encouraging us to pull our heads out of our asses.)