A few days ago, Dr. Carson stirred up a hornet’s nest by indicating a Muslim U.S. President is probably not the best idea for getting America back on track. Such a statement is an anathema to liberals who would love to see a Muslim President. As a matter of fact, for a liberal, the only thing better than Socialist-Sanders or Clean-My-Hard-Drive-Clinton would be a transgender Muslim candidate. Remember, liberals love anything that goes against traditional values. The greater the rejection of the tradition, the more appealing it will be to the liberal political palate. Horror of horrors that Dr. Carson would offend the Muslim community. Of course, you can throw Christians in jail for standing on their convictions, but you sure as heck better not tick off Muslims—that would be insensitive.
Nonetheless, after the attacks kicked in, Dr. Carson decided to nuance his statement with the caveat that a Muslim that was willing to publicly denounce Sharia law would be suitable for the White House. The response of the pacified was immediate. “Oh, that’s better,” as Republican heads started bobbing in agreement. “Yeah… that’s right… the Constitution should be first.” Dr. Carson went on to state that a Christian who desires a theocracy would not be suitable for the White House. Oh boy… now you’re talking to liberals! You can hear them now; “Those Christians and their theocratic nonsense shouldn’t even be able to stand at the White House fence.” Really? So we’re going to group Christians who put Christ first with Muslims who embrace Sharia law? Here’s the problem with this conversation—it reflects the blatant ignorance that prevails in America today. People who think Christianity and Islam are the same bag of tricks simply because they are monotheistic systems don’t understand Islam or Christianity. Let me explain.
First, you don’t need to ask a Christian to deny any of the fundamental teachings of Christianity in order to support the U.S. Constitution. As a matter of fact, the notion of Christian benevolence, that is, making room for “the other,” is essential to our understanding of individual rights. Mikey Weinstein and his minions will argue that I’m making this up and imposing my faith on the secular intents of the Founding Fathers. Whatever! To prove my point, Christians comprised the vast majority of people involved in the development and ratification of the Constitution. “What the hell are you talking about?” asks the nearest secularist liberal. Yep… that’s right. Jump p and down and cry, but the truth remains—Christians were the major influence on the Constitution. That’s why it’s not in disagreement with any major tenet of the Christian faith.
Second, our nation functioned for nearly two centuries with a strong sense of commitment to the general religious sentiments of the people. We did this without ever establishing a theocracy. As a matter of fact, Christianity and a “theocratic” government are incompatible precisely because the Bible teaches us that it’s impossible to force someone into a relationship with God through the person of Jesus Christ. Thus, the very essence of Christianity is lost when conversions are coerced. This is not the case with Islam. To the contrary, Islam is not only compatible with the notion of forced conversion—it actually promotes the notion. When you take the teachings of Christianity to the extreme, you become a pacifist. However, when you take the teachings of Islam to the extreme, you become a terrorist. Exhibit A… the modern Middle East.
Third, the U.S. has lost its Christian identity precisely because Christians are always giving in to and making room for “the other.” The influence of Islam is growing tremendously because Muslims do not compromise. We are in a prolonged war with Islamic terrorism, and we are debating the efficacy of having a Muslim President. This conversation is proof of their influence, and it’s the height of our stupidity. When you say this and draw the ire of every liberal within earshot, be prepared to respond with this, “Mr./Mrs. Liberal… do you really want a Muslim in the White House? Even if you find a Muslim presidential candidate that would denounce Sharia law, should we expect the rest of your agenda to be embraced by a Muslim? Let’s see… how many same-sex Muslim weddings took place this year? How many Muslim women are rallying in support of Planned Parenthood? How many Muslims are against drilling for oil? How many Muslims encourage their kids to decide what gender they want to be today? No… Mr./Mrs. Liberal… make no mistake about it… you really don’t want a Muslim in the White House nor do you want a Christian in the White House. Rather, you want a person just like you in the White House, that is, a person who feigns commitment to God, but is really committed to a godless agenda.” Interestingly, that’s exactly what liberals have in the White House today, but that’s a topic for another blog. Until then, stand your ground Dr. Carson!