Comments on: Must we Tip-Toe around the Important Things?

By: Nathan Brindle

Nathan Brindle — Fri, 07 Mar 2008 14:16:36 +0000

FWIW, just to expand on my previous comment, I don’t give a particular damn what your religion is, but with whom you associate is definitely of interest. There’s this little thing called “the appearance of impropriety”. Perhaps you should google it.

By: Nathan Brindle

Nathan Brindle — Fri, 07 Mar 2008 14:13:38 +0000

It’s the ties to CAIR and the Nation of Islam (yes, I know he is not a member, but recall that he didn’t object to Louis Farrakhan speaking at his grandmother’s funeral) that are of interest, and I don’t see where Andre has addressed those ties to my satisfaction.

Maybe Bill could clue us in on that.

By: Bil Browning

Bil Browning — Fri, 07 Mar 2008 14:06:25 +0000

>>Yet beyond perhaps a mention or two of this “out of Iraq” stance on the part of Mr. Carson, the mainstream media has failed to carefully touch on a very important underlying issue: Mr. Carson’s Islamic faith.

Oh, Brian. Why do I even bother to read your posts? Did you miss the big article in the Star that was about Carson’s Muslim faith? You mention Gary’s constant barrage of “If you vote for Carson the terrorists win!” and radio shows. So that gives us the blogs, the newspaper of record and radio. The only thing left is TV news - but they covered it the day the Star article came out.

So which “mainstream media” is missing? The one that says “He’ll blow up the Capital?” Look for that one at WingNutDaily…

*geez*

Investigate a little before you spout off, please.

By: Chris Douglas

Chris Douglas — Fri, 07 Mar 2008 11:38:02 +0000

Joel, what is motivating the policy doesn’t much matter to me, especially if it requires delving into their religious beliefs.

A policy can and should stand or fall on its own merits. If a candidate’s religious views parallel the merits of good policy, I have no objection but don’t really need to know it. If the candidate’s religious views conflict with good policy, I also don’t need to know what his or her religious views are. What I want to know is what is the policy being pursued and what are its merits exclusive of religious considerations.

It’s like asking why a gunman killed 30 people in a high school. If his policy is to kill 30 people in a high school, I don’t care why. Or a asking why a student volunteers to serve 30 home-bound elderly. If his or her policy is to serve 30 home-bound elderly, I don’t care why.

Religion CAN serve as an explanation of why a policy is being pursued clearly in conflict with a policy that would do better on it own merits. But a religious explanation, even if helpful to our own understanding of the candidate, is not necessary.

End-times ideology is an explanation for why some Fundamentalist Baptists support a policy on Israel that is often contrary to the long term interests of peace of both Israel and of the U.S. I wouldn’t oppose a Fundamentalist Baptist who supported a more effective policy in the Mideast.

To quote Milton, the author of Paradise lost:

“Both commonwealth and religion will at length, if ever, flourish in Christendom, when either they who govern discern between civil and religious, or they only who so discern shall be admitted to govern.”

By: Josh Gillespie

Josh Gillespie — Fri, 07 Mar 2008 03:27:21 +0000

Though I don’t believe that Carson’s religious faith should be an issue (unlike some bloggers not affiliated with this site), I do think that the fundamentalist Baptist perspective of Israel has been an extreme detriment to our national security policy. But that’s b/c Presbyterians (specifically Reformed Presbyterians like myself) have a different view of the “end times” than Fundamentalist Baptists do.

Doesn’t mean I’d vote against a Fundy Baptist b/c of that.

By: Joel Harris

Joel Harris — Fri, 07 Mar 2008 03:10:51 +0000

What if he was a fundamentalist Baptist who thinks that Israel is the key to the return of Christ?

By: Chris Douglas

Chris Douglas — Fri, 07 Mar 2008 02:37:26 +0000

Brian, I think a discussion of Carson’s faith is completely irrelevant.

Why should we pull out of Iraq and when? That’s relevant. What are your views on government services, fiscal policy, social security, and welfare? That’s relevant. Which of your religion’s various tenets you agree or disagree with? Irrelevant.

Accepting support from an organization with terrorist ties? If true, that’s relevant, and requires no discussion of what the candidate’s religious views are.

Brian, were you to run for office, I wouldn’t ask or care about which of Christianity’s many often conflicting beliefs, some of them held by as extremist or crackpot crazies as any Muslim belief, you choose to embrace. All I care about is what policies you are going to pursue in office. And to ask that question does not necessitate asking a single question about your religious views.