What is wrong with having a Muslim as president?

This thread is not about the US election per se, but an intriguing question that has arisen from some of the attacks and misconceptions heaped upon Senator Obama. Despite irrefutable evidence otherwise, the charge that he is a muslim appears to have stuck in some circles, and evidently has power to dent, if not derail, his campaign.

But as General Powell so eloquently asked: Why shouldn't it be possible for a muslim American to run for president?

This opinion piece from the Irish Times provokes some questions, the answers to which I would interested in reading.

Maybe different groups just take turns at being the victim. Jewish people had a stint, black people are hopefully coming out of theirs, and it looks like the group of the moment are the Muslims. All it took was one or two unhinged groups and a couple of acts of terrorism. Now, one can almost publicly say things like "they don't like us", "they have a violent culture", or "they think we are all infidels and want to take over the West".

What about other groups? If the idea of a Latino or a Muslim in the White House is beyond belief, what does that say of American society? Either the White House is strictly reserved for those who profess to be orthodox Christians (that excludes Mormons like Mitt Romney) and the whole notion of plurality is a lie, or something has gone wrong.

Quote:

---

But as General Powell so eloquently asked: Why shouldn't it be possible for a muslim American to run for president?

---

As long as enough of their policy views line up with mine, I don't care what religion or race they are. I think Powell was a little hypocritical in his criticism along those lines. For every time a McCain supporter suggested Obama was a muslim, Obama supporters have just as vehemently tried to shout it down, as though being muslim would be some fatal character flaw. He's not a muslim, he's a christian- but so what if he was? Using his middle name has also become a smear, or even a racist attack- why?

I guess, to answer the question, I personally, don't care what a candidate's specific religion is. But, judged by the reactions on both sides to muslim insinuations on both sides, society as a whole apparently isn't ready for it. :shrug:

I don’t think a true Muslim could be the president of a nation of people that are not Muslims. The religion doesn’t seem to work well with the any kind of multiculturalism.

[Stupid irony/McCainiac's men are dumb as hell]Because Muslims incite to global terrorrism![/stupid irony]

A Muslim president? We cannot have a president that takes orders from Mecca!

Or where ever they take their orders from...

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

~D

Because people tend to vote for what they know and understand. Islam is still largely and enigma in our society, and the antics put up by various crazies in the middle east do not exactly help its image. A muslim presidential candidate will have serious trouble connecting with the bulk of the voters, and while he might do well in the oval office, there's practically no chance for a muslim to get there.

In all fairness - the accusations are not simply that he is a Muslim, but that he has been lying about his faith in order to subvert criticism of his Muslim faith. That would be a major concern if the rumors were true.

Other than that, any faith that is outside of the US mainstream brings deeply held beliefs that might be hard for large swathes of society to accept. The more exotic, the more different ideals, the more people will question them.

Look at what they did to Romney over his faith.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TuffStuffMcGruff

Look at what they did to Romney over his faith.

---

Yes. Tom Cruise too, should never bother running for president.

i would say nothing's wrong. I dont think a person's religious beliefs have any bearing on his ability to lead a government..... also i dont think anyone whose defiining chrateristic is his religious belief might not make it as far as becoming a president...:shrug:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Xiahou

I think Powell was a little hypocritical in his criticism along those lines. For every time a McCain supporter suggested Obama was a muslim, Obama supporters have just as vehemently tried to shout it down, as though being muslim would be some fatal character flaw.

---

Angry redneck: I'm not voting for Barack HUSSEIN Obama because he's a muslim!
Obama supporter: Actually, he isn't: *proof*

or

Angry redneck: I'm not voting for Barack HUSSEIN Obama because he's a muslim!
Obama supporter: What's wrong with being muslim?

:laugh4:

One word, takiyya.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Xiahou

For every time a McCain supporter suggested Obama was a muslim, Obama supporters have just as vehemently tried to shout it down, as though being muslim would be some fatal character flaw.

---

I personally do NOT shout it down when I hear it passed around. I have always responded to the rumor with "And what if he was?"

I think it's a little bit of spin to say Dems are just as endorsing of the idea that "it's bad to be Muslim." I am sure you can find Dems who'd never vote for one (just as you'd find Dems who'd never vote for a black man.) But I think the outrage has a little more to do with the fact that, I dunno, it's a complete lie being made up to hurt our party by playing on ignorance. I think you'd see the same reaction from Dems if they heard from Republicans all the time that Obama had seven toes.

It would not make any difference whatsoever to me. I am not Christian and I have never even had the option of voting for a major party candidate who was not Christian, or at least did not heavily profess to be one. As long as their religious views (be they Sikh or Christian or Muslim or Buddhist) does not underline and inform their policy views on everything and God doesn't tell them which wars to start, my vote is within their potential reach.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Koga No Goshi

I personally do NOT shout it down when I hear it passed around. I have always responded to the rumor with "And what if he was?"...

---

Realistically, it would likely be the kiss of death for his presidential bid.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rvg

Realistically, it would likely be the kiss of death for his presidential bid.

---

Of course it would. No one denied most Americans are stupid and hypocritically prejudiced, even within the confines of the "freedoms" they profess to stand for.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Koga No Goshi

Of course it would. No one denied most Americans are stupid and hypocritically prejudiced, even within the confines of the "freedoms" they profess to stand for.

---

Well, I will certainly deny that. People have a very natural tendency to gravitate towards their own kind. There's nothing wrong with that. Thus, Waspy McWaspers will always stand a better chance of getting elected than anyone else, while a muslim's chances will be slim provided that his opponent is not a complete idiot. People out of two similar choices people will always vote for a safer one. That's quite the opposite of being stupid.

Stupid is as stupid does.

Nothing is wrong with it. Just people in Missouri seem to have a problem with it.

Preventing a muslim from becomming a president would be betraying our system. But I don't want a muslim president for the same reason I don't want a nazi president, it's a sick religion that has brought nothing other then misery and death at worst and backwardness at best. Most muslims are good people but that's a despite not a because, islam is simply evil if you let it be.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fragony

Preventing a muslim from becomming a president would be betraying our system. But I don't want a muslim president for the same reason I don't want a nazi president, it's a sick religion that has brought nothing other then misery and death at worst and backwardness at best. Most muslims are good people but that's a despite not a because, islam is simply evil if you let it be.

---

Islam is no more evil than anything else. Powerful people have perverted it to make the poor and destitute do there bidding but it is no more evil than anything else. Not to mention people forget the whole concept of blowback. You screw around in someones backyard for 100 years they MAY resent you for it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Strike For The South

Islam is no more evil than anything else. Powerful people have perverted it to make the poor and destitute do there bidding but it is no more evil than anything else. Not to mention people forget the whole concept of blowback. You screw around in someones backyard for 100 years they MAY resent you for it.

---

Nonsense, islam is imperialistic in nature, there will be expected a lot from an islamic president when dealing with the muslim world. He will be much more vulnerable for moral blackmail, and so will the governments of muslim countries when a muslim president is sitting in the US. Think of the international arena and count the ways of why it is a very very bad idea.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fragony

Nonsense, islam is imperialistic in nature, there will be expected a lot from an islamic president when dealing with the muslim world. He will be much more vulnerable for moral blackmail, and so will the governments of muslim countries when a muslim president is sitting in the US. Think of the international arena and count the ways of why it is a very very bad idea.

---

Christianity can't have exactly the same case made against it? I have some ancestors who would like a word with you. And no, they're not from the Middle East.

The U.S. calls itself a "Christian country", Christianity was the overtly given justification for the complete conquest of at least two continents of the planet, and the eradication of much of the existing populations. So coming from a western culture, European post-Christian society, I'd be careful about throwing accusations of religiously-based imperialism around at other people.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fragony

Nonsense, islam is imperialistic in nature, there will be expected a lot from an islamic president when dealing with the muslim world. He will be much more vulnerable for moral blackmail, and so will the governments of muslim countries when a muslim president is sitting in the US. Think of the international arena and count the ways of why it is a very very bad idea.

---

Im not voting for a man who puts his religion above the people he serves. So that will not be an issue. There are plenty of muslims who Im sure will be able to see through any type of buddy buddy pandering the arab world will give to them. You saying that is like saying JFK was taking orders from Rome. It doesnt hold water.

I think the Mitt Romney parallel is the more telling. His religion clearly cost him something.

Are we saying that this alleged propensity to only elect leaders directly in step with the majority religion is to be accepted? Would an orthodox Jew be unelectable, for example? It's pretty clear that an atheist would have a torrid time, but what about a Buddhist?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fragony

Nonsense, islam is imperialistic in nature, there will be expected a lot from an islamic president when dealing with the muslim world. He will be much more vulnerable for moral blackmail, and so will the governments of muslim countries when a muslim president is sitting in the US. Think of the international arena and count the ways of why it is a very very bad idea.

---

I understand where you're coming from, and I think that islam is not a threat for as long as it does not become a dominant (or significant) force in the society. Aside from that happening, I would hesitate to brand a muslim candidate as a threat simply because of his religion. After all, that's what they said about JFK. Oh no! He will tapdance to the Vatican's fiddle! Run for your lives! Didn't happen.

I'm sure there are muslims that can be shamed by some whacko cleric into doing just about anything, just as there are muslims that can't be manipulated in this way. I'd hate to think that *all* of them will start bleating in acceptance to any fatwah that comes out of the Arabian peninsula. Heck, a few weeks ago some moron there issued a fatwah declaring mice to be enemies of islam. That included both the household mice and cartoon mice (like Mickey Mouse). Came back from the Disney World a couple of weeks ago. Saw muslims there. They did not try to kill Mickey Mouse.

Why would it be wrong for Islam to become the dominant culture of somewhere?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Banquo's Ghost

I think the Mitt Romney parallel is the more telling. His religion clearly cost him something.

Are we saying that this alleged propensity to only elect leaders directly in step with the majority religion is to be accepted? Would an orthodox Jew be unelectable, for example? It's pretty clear that an atheist would have a torrid time, but what about a Buddhist?

---

There is no way to stop it, as long as people are stupid and there are so many Americans who think you can't possibly have either American or moral values without being Christian (L O f-L) and will vote accordingly, there is nothing we can do about it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rvg

I understand where you're coming from, and I think that islam is not a threat for as long as it does not become a dominant (or significant) force in the society. Aside from that happening, I would hesitate to brand a muslim candidate as a threat simply because of his religion. After all, that's what they said about JFK. Oh no! He will tapdance to the Vatican's fiddle! Run for your lives! Didn't happen.

I'm sure there are muslims that can be shamed by some whacko cleric into doing just about anything, just as there are muslims that can't be manipulated in this way. I'd hate to think that *all* of them will start bleating in acceptance to any fatwah that comes out of the Arabian peninsula. Heck, a few weeks ago some moron there issued a fatwah declaring mice to be enemies of islam. That included both the household mice and cartoon mice (like Mickey Mouse). Came back from the Disney World a couple of weeks ago. Saw muslims there. They did not try to kill Mickey Mouse.

---

hehe in the backroom-video thread I posted a video of the good man explaining it, absolutily [insert hyperbole] hilarious, a must see.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Strike For The South

Why would it be wrong for Islam to become the dominant culture of somewhere?

---

I just look at muslim countries and cannot help but notice that most of them are having serious trouble maintaining religious freedom. Turks have managed to do it, Lebanon seems okay, but that's about it. Countries with distinct muslim majorities do not make life easy for non-muslims.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rvg

I just look at muslim countries and cannot help but notice that most of them are having serious trouble maintaining religious freedom. Turks have managed to do it, Lebanon seems okay, but that's about it. Countries with distinct muslim majorities do not make life easy for non-muslims.

---

Aren't we in this thread discussing how people in a Christian dominated country can't get into office unless they're Christian?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Koga No Goshi

Aren't we in this thread discussing how people in a Christian dominated country can't get into office unless they're Christian?

---

They can. At least in theory. In most muslim countries the opposite is impossible even in theory, and that's just the tip of the iceberg.