by James Mixon 30 Replies latest social current
No Jews
No Caholics except for John F Kennedy and there was a big stink about that and his taking directions from the Vactican
Did people want a Mormon president...evidently no
http://www.jfklibrary.org/JFK/JFK-in-History/JFK-and-Religion.aspx
No restrictions in the Constitution as to religion, not even being required to believe in a god....it let's the voting public decide.
Simon , Christians for the most part believe in the second coming of christ SDA believe the second coming is somewhere between the Anglicans and the JWs in the soon coming of our lord in terms of the imminence. All christians look forward to the second coming. The SDAs recently released a film about the second coming set in about 1920 and saying if the church had been faithful jesus would have already come. I don't know where Ben Carsons stands on that. Too bad for anyone born after 1920 non of us would be here. nuts
I think a moderate Muslim would be OK but should I say Liberal Muslim. Moderate Muslims are fanatics in my estimation.
Plenty of Americans- many of whom are anything but ignorant of the scriptures
of their traditions-are liberal Christians or liberal Jews, so it's not hard to find
defense of the liberal versions of those faiths. But the idea that there is no authentic
liberal Islam is fairly widespread in this country.
As a result, while almost everyone acknowledge that some Christians or Jews take their
religiosity to crazy extremes, craziness and extremism are often attributed to islam itself.
Liberal reform of Islam is something Americans simultaneously wish for and claim is
impossible, because lets face it the heart of Islam is necessarily violent and intolerant.
spectrummagazine.org/artical/2015/05/12/adventists-deeply-divided-over-ben-carsons-candidacy
That link gets you to the site but there is a discussion with SDA and what they think about Ben Carsons and his candidacy . Go to news and then to page 8 the article is on that page
The Constitution doesn't care what religion a President is, it only cares that the Country is not under the control of any religion (or Church). The founders were ensuring that the US wouldn't be similar to Europe (at the time) where the Church controlled the State(s) and it's rulers, persecuted people, etc.
It had a lot to do with England it's kings getting and the then corrupt Popes & their constant meddling for their own greedy purposes. Also the Papacy could be bought in those days and Popes could give New World áreas as possessions to various princes and kings.
Once self determinant, the colonists ensured that no monarchy or Church could overrule or overtly influence elected leaders.
What we're really talking about is whether we want any form of extremist religious nut job in such a powerful position
James Mixon:
Plenty of Americans- many of whom are anything but ignorant of the scriptures of their traditions-are liberal Christians or liberal Jews, so it's not hard to find defense of the liberal versions of those faiths.
Both sides are willfully ignorant of their scriptures. Liberals for obvious reasons and conservatives when it comes to their own scriptures' relative benevolence to the poor.
But the idea that there is no authentic liberal Islam is fairly widespread in this country.
The idea yes, but the reality is that every organization or group with a few thousand or more members along with multiple generations from it's founding automatically fall into liberal, moderate and conservative camps. This is most probably due to psychological reasons.
"Islam will dominate the world", that's what I'm afraid of.
They can't.
Would a Muslim country tolerate a Christian or Atheist or homosexual president? Probably not. No, a Muslim should not be president of the USA. Not until they stop stoning women, marrying young girls, allow people to have the freedoms that we take for granted in muslim countries.
