Predictable, Ben Carson is getting pounded (even at NRO) for an answer he gave to Meet the Press. Here's the whole exchange:
CHUCK TODD:
Let me wrap this up by finally dealing with what's been going on, Donald Trump, and a deal with a questioner that claimed that the president was Muslim. Let me ask you the question this way: Should a President's faith matter? Should your faith matter to voters?
DR. BEN CARSON:
Well, I guess it depends on what that faith is. If it's inconsistent with the values and principles of America, then of course it should matter. But if it fits within the realm of America and consistent with the constitution, no problem.
CHUCK TODD:
So do you believe that Islam is consistent with the constitution?
DR. BEN CARSON:
No, I don't, I do not.
CHUCK TODD:
So you--
DR. BEN CARSON:
I would not advocate that we put a Muslim in charge of this nation. I absolutely would not agree with that.
CHUCK TODD:
And would you ever consider voting for a Muslim for Congress?
DR. BEN CARSON:
Congress is a different story, but it depends on who that Muslim is and what their policies are, just as it depends on what anybody else says, you know. And, you know, if there's somebody who's of any faith, but they say things, and their life has been consistent with things that will elevate this nation and make it possible for everybody to succeed, and bring peace and harmony, then I'm with them.
i) He was speaking off-the-cuff. And he's not an expert on Islam.
That said, his answer was perfectly reasonable. He gave a nicely qualified answer.
As a matter of fact, Islamic theology/ideology is antithetical the US Constitution. Islam demands a coercive state religion. Religious dissent is either intolerable or punished by fines. Non-Muslims don't have the same civil/legal rights as Muslims.
A nominal, secularized Muslim might reject all that, but then, he isn't really a functional Muslim.
ii) I'd add, going beyond what Carson said, that Islam is the religion of our mortal enemy. And that's not an incidental relationship. Islam is what is motivating our mortal enemy. That's what fuels jihad.
To have a pious Muslim president would be making our enemy the commander-in-chief. It would give him access to all our classified intelligence and classified military technology. In effect, it would be putting a foreign spy in charge of the CIA, Pentagon, &c. It's like asking if, during the Cold War, a Leninist should be the US president. That would instantly subjugate us to the enemy.
If there isn't a divine source and preservative Holy Spirit behind the religion, as there is with Christianity, then I'm not sure questions about who is truly a Muslim are all that meaningful. There are problems with how to characterize the No True Scotsman fallacy so that people citing it aren't themselves committing a fallacy, especially when you're dealing with an authentic faith that God really stands behind and preserves, but that's not so with Islam, which really does consist of several variants that are pretty different from each other. I don't think we're in any position to dictate to another religion what counts as a legitimate use of the name they assign themselves as members of it.
ReplyDeleteNow it might be that he means it the way you mean it, and I think that's less irresponsible than if he really meant he couldn't support a moderate Muslim who agreed with him over someone like Hillary Clinton. But I think it's still irresponsible even if that's what he meant. Even if you would insist that it's misusing language to describe liberal or moderate Muslims as Muslims, the fact of the matter is that many Americans will assume he's including them even if he didn't intend to. It's a stupid comment, if that's what he meant by it, because nearly everyone I know would not take it the way you're presenting it.
Ben is right. Anyone who understands orthodox, historic Islam knows that it is incompatible with western notions of tolerance and freedom. "Moderate" Muslims must live according to an incompatible, inconsistent worldview. They are a novel, modern brand of Muslim who borrow their ideas of tolerance from the West. And even that assumes that they are sincere in their tolerant disposition.
ReplyDelete