This is the one that clinched it for me...One does not have to read into the Federalist papers too far or any of the writings of the Founders to know that they would reject a member of Izlam from becoming the President of the United States...
So, then, Cruz is committed not to a theocratic state, but to Judeo-Christian values that benefit all of America, and affirms the right of Jews, Christians, and Muslims to act consistently with their beliefs.
Oh really Ted??? The President could remove the American Flag from the White House along with all bibles and set up a mosque in the West Wing???
No thanks Ted...It may be legal Constitutionally but I'll never vote for someone who panders for the terrorist muzlim vote...
In my view if Ted was a real Christian he would recognize that the so-called muzlim religion is the enemy of God and has no place in our government...
This shows your ignorance of both the Christian values and the Founders' intents.
(1) You cannot force Christ on anyone -- He will not have it, despite the force with which the statist church has put behind their efforts; and
(2) Realizing this our Founders also knew that they could not force their sense of liberty on anyone who would accept it only by choosing their representatives to deflect heathen influences.
As a brilliant and thoroughly competent constitutional lawyer, Cruz has won his arguments on the same basis as our Founders.
You need to study this out for yourself. The experience gained by Cal Thomas and Ed Dobson from their debacle with Falwell's Moral Majority is recorded in their paperback "Blinded By Might" shows that your approach does not work, and is foolish. It's still available, and cheaply.
“No thanks Ted...It may be legal Constitutionally but I’ll never vote for someone who panders for the terrorist muzlim vote...”
Just for the record, electing a Muslim as President of the United States would be unconstitutional due to Islam being a form of government in addition to being a form of religion that is formally dedicated to the destruction of the “Republican Form of Government” mandated by the Constitution; see:
Bernard Lewis summarizes:
The penalty for apostasy in Islamic law is death. Islam is conceived as a polity, not just as a religious community. It follows therefore that apostasy is treason. It is a withdrawal, a denial of allegiance as well as of religious belief and loyalty. Any sustained and principled opposition to the existing regime or order almost inevitably involves such a withdrawal.
Lewis, Bernard (1998-01-21). “Islamic Revolution”. The New York Review of Books. In:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticism_of_Islam#Human_rights_conventions
See also:
Article. II. Section. 1. . . . Before he enter on the Execution of his Office, he shall take the following Oath or Affirmation:—”I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my Ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.”
Article. IV. Section. 4.
The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government, and shall protect each of them against Invasion; and on Application of the Legislature, or of the Executive (when the Legislature cannot be convened), against domestic Violence.
xactly iscool.
imho, this is a primary example of the differences in mindset between supporters of cruz and trump.
despite their encroachments (and some unfortunate entrenchments), socialism, communism, islamism - dominionism, are wholly incompatible with our nation’s experiment with liberty.
while we are an overwhelming judeo/christian people, we were first and foremost to be an enlightened citizen populace whom embraced our spirituality or faith (catholic, protestant, or otherwise) at the personal and local level.
if ‘we the people’ lose/have lost grip with the core responsibility of enlightenment, then that needs to be addressed primarily at the personal and local level; from the bottom up.
any top down theocratic and/or economic desires/mechanisms are to the left of that core ideal, and as is the case with such leftist collectivist dogma, further subjugation as opposed to citizenship and are thus incompatible with our founders’ constitutional diktat for individual liberty.
trump will be focused on the executive position as he’s been raised to be; a chief officer of our business affairs, the presidents rightful role.(that being (1) ensuring justice, personal freedom, and a free society where individuals are protected from domestic lawbreakers and criminals, and; (2) protecting the people of the united states from foreign aggressors.)
cruz will be focused on the executive position as he’s been raised to be; a dominionist.