• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Would you support a Muslim for President?

Would you vote for a Muslim candidate for president?

  • Yes, I would still vote for the candidate.

    Votes: 30 44.8%

  • No, I would not vote for the candidate.

    Votes: 19 28.4%

  • Depends (on how less-qualified the other candidates are)

    Votes: 18 26.9%
  • Total voters
    67
  • Poll closed .
Bodhisattva said:
I wouldn't right now because I think that it would embolden the extremists into more terror...
Click to expand...


I have to agree with this, you have a point there.
 
Bodhisattva said:
I wouldn't right now because I think that it would embolden the extremists into more terror...
Click to expand...

I think theres just as much as a chance that it emboldens the non-extremists to stand up against the extremists. :)
 
So long as it was not seen as a radical sect, no it would not impact my vote. However, I disbelieve that a Presidential candidate would announce on the eve of the election he is going through a religious change. Such matters are dealt with months prior to the election so as to allow for the campaign to create a plan as to the necessary responses (same goes with many religions, and yes, especially Islam), or the President, once secured in his post (perhaps even after the inauguration) would make the announcement.

You don't want to give any opportunity for the change to impact the very immediate political outcome of securing political office the next day. On election day, you want constancy and the status-quo if you are in a close or comfortable position. Don't sacrifice sure ground for that.
 
Last edited:
The idea of a presidential candidate (or any politician) to make that kind of announcement right before an important election is a bit far-fetched. He or she would really have to be kind of dumb to do something like that at that particular time.
 
Objective-J said:
I think theres just as much as a chance that it emboldens the non-extremists to stand up against the extremists. :)
Click to expand...

I would live to think so... but I doubt that would happen. There is already so much out there to embolden the non-extremists. First, there are untold millions upon millions MORE of the non-extremists, yet they do little to nothing. Second, untold tens of thousands of innocent Muslims have been killed by the extremists and yet they do nlittle to nothing to stop them.

In the long run I don't see anybody with any extremist back ground even being nominated EVER and I don't see anybody announcing that they were Muslim running for President either.
 
Bodhisattva said:
I would live to think so... but I doubt that would happen. There is already so much out there to embolden the non-extremists. First, there are untold millions upon millions MORE of the non-extremists, yet they do little to nothing. Second, untold tens of thousands of innocent Muslims have been killed by the extremists and yet they do nlittle to nothing to stop them.

In the long run I don't see anybody with any extremist back ground even being nominated EVER and I don't see anybody announcing that they were Muslim running for President either.
Click to expand...

well of course not if they were a extremist ;)
 
Hatuey said:
Apparently a lot of people on the right would considering how much they keep bringing up Obama being a secret Muslim. These are the same people who then turn around and go "Well, but I wouldn't care if he was!" - Why the **** bring it up then? Same people who'll scream that Romney belonging to a creepy ass cult in Utah is not relevant.
Click to expand...

Islam is the only religion with a theology demanding violence against unbelievers.
 
Anrch-Cptlst said:
It doesn't matter what there religion is. Religion is suppose to be between man and his god. Has no place when it comes to matters of running a country. I vote for a candidate because he stands where I stand on the issues, not because of his religion. Also I am and athiest.
Click to expand...

Also, you have an inadequate understanding of Islam, IMHO.

Only until the POLITICAL component is removed from Islam will we be safe. We are dealing with a deadly viper. Moderation in dealing with Islam without first defanging it is only delaying the inevitable.

Especially as it seems fashionable to hold ill informed opinions about Islam and how best to deal with it, people don't understand what a real moderate philosophy about Islam should be.
 
Last edited:
Cephus said:
I would vote based on the qualifications of the candidate. Their religion has no bearing whatsoever on their ability to do the job.
Click to expand...

Are you kidding?

We need to ban political Islam so poitions like yours won't bite US in the arse.
 
marsden said:
Are you kidding?

We need to ban political Islam so poitions like yours won't bite US in the arse.
Click to expand...

Speaking of historical documents you haven't bothered to read:

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof..."
 
marsden said:
That's not from the Bible is it?
Click to expand...

Pretty sure.

Supposed to be a mistranslation.

Poisoner/assassin is the correct word.

Christians killed their competition for a while back in the day.
 
Viktyr Gehrig said:
Speaking of historical documents you haven't bothered to read:

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof..."
Click to expand...

If there were legislation proposing an Amendment to outlaw the political component of Islam, effectively eliminating the threat from Islam, would you support it?
 
What if...? said:
Pretty sure.

Supposed to be a mistranslation.

Poisoner/assassin is the correct word.

Christians killed their competition for a while back in the day.
Click to expand...

Well, where Christianity has evolved and has more or less kept up with the times, Islam still preaches conquest and killing disbelievers. And around 10 - 20% of the world's Muslims still find that message relevant.

Final word on the Christianity vs Islam subject is that Jesus' final word to His followers is to love one another.

You know what Muhammad's marching orders to His followers are.
 
marsden said:
Well, where Christianity has evolved and has more or less kept up with the times, Islam still preaches conquest and killing disbelievers. And around 10 - 20% of the world's Muslims still find that message relevant.

Final word on the Christianity vs Islam subject is that Jesus' final word to His followers is to love one another.

You know what Muhammad's marching orders to His followers are.
Click to expand...

From a ertain perspective it could be said Islam is going through a "phase".

Similar to the ones the Jews and Christians went through at about the same "age".
 
marsden said:
If there were legislation proposing an Amendment to outlaw the political component of Islam, effectively eliminating the threat from Islam, would you support it?
Click to expand...

Absolutely ****ing not, because that sets the precedent that such amendments are politically acceptable-- and then, as another unpopular religious minority, it's only a matter of time until they come after me. I would consider the passage of such a proposal by the Congress to be a betrayal of the principles this country was founded upon and a declaration of war against myself and the American people.

You're more of a threat to me than the average Muslim.
 
marsden said:
Are you kidding?

We need to ban political Islam so poitions like yours won't bite US in the arse.
Click to expand...

Cool, can we ban Christianity too? Hell, let's wipe out all religion while we're at it, the planet will be a much better place to be. But back in the real world, as much as I might wish religion would just go away, it's going to take a while, so let's pretend to be realistic for a while, shall we?
 
Viktyr Gehrig said:
Absolutely ****ing not, because that sets the precedent that such amendments are politically acceptable-- and then, as another unpopular religious minority, it's only a matter of time until they come after me. I would consider the passage of such a proposal by the Congress to be a betrayal of the principles this country was founded upon and a declaration of war against myself and the American people.

You're more of a threat to me than the average Muslim.
Click to expand...

We aren't talking about me or the average Muslim. Don't act like you don't recognize the threat. Why did Egypt outlaw the Muslim Brotherhood for so many years? Why is the Turkish government secular?


Islam is a form of government and has laws which are antithetical to democracy.


The ONLY reason Islam has bloody borders and a terrible reputation is because of the POLITICAL aspects of it.

And, because everyone here fails to see Islam for what it is, a system of government wrapped by a religious cloak, they are making thisvcountry vulnerable to inroads by stealth jihadists.
 
Cephus said:
Cool, can we ban Christianity too? Hell, let's wipe out all religion while we're at it, the planet will be a much better place to be. But back in the real world, as much as I might wish religion would just go away, it's going to take a while, so let's pretend to be realistic for a while, shall we?
Click to expand...

Let's defang Islam. Leave the religious part alone but ban the dangerous, aggressive, rival to democracy.

Islam is the only religion with a theology demanding violence against unbelievers.
 
marsden said:
Islam is the only religion with a theology demanding violence against unbelievers.
Click to expand...

You've already been called on this and proven incorrect. Every religion based on Judaism has a theological justification-- and history-- of violence against infidels.
 
Viktyr Gehrig said:
You've already been called on this and proven incorrect. Every religion based on Judaism has a theological justification-- and history-- of violence against infidels.
Click to expand...

I have not been proven incorrect.

No one wants to prevent anyone from worshipping their deity. But when the Church members actively - and we're not talking about thousands of years ago - suborn killing, intimidation and terrorism in the name of their that deity, NO OTHER RELIGION can match that kind of worship.

Why? Because it is not the religious part that causes these abominable actions, it is the political part.

Name ANY other RELIGION that commands it's followers to slay disbelievers and make their "religion" dominant over all others on earth.

That isn't a religion. It's a warring force with a system of government that is hostileto all other systems of government.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom