The Culture Warriors Zero In On Ben Carson

So, Ben Carson is in the dock because he said he would not advocate for, or support, a Muslim for president because of his concerns that Islam, of which Sharia is an indispensable part, is not compatible with the United States Constitution. First, it is nearly impossible without ignorance or ill will to misunderstand Dr. Carson’s clear and carefully chosen words. He did not say a Muslim could not be president, but only that he personally would not advocate for or support such a candidate due to issues of incompatibility. However, for those since who have relied upon the purposeful misstatement or reinvention of his words, we should be asking why they lie, and what they seek to achieve if they get away with it.

Many Americans are no longer religious, but cannot deny that our nation and our culture are direct products of Judeo-Christian history, experience, and law. The Ten Commandments are the bedrock of our legal system. There is the firmness of the Old Testament, with the temperance and forgiveness of the New Testament. Most of our ancestors were raised with the Bible. For the most part, those who emigrated to the United States through most of the 20th Century also came predominantly from Christian countries, bringing their faith with them. In America, one can accept religion or reject it, but Judeo-Christian history is woven into our culture. 

Unlike Muslim countries, there is no requirement here that all belong to a monolithic religion under penalty of law. But Islam imposes that rule. It is part of the culture that goes with strict Islam and Sharia. Indeed, the American tradition of separation of church and state is utterly unknown in Islam. The state and the church are effectively one and the same, because Sharia is the legal and social code of Islam. If you are a devout Muslim, you must adhere to Sharia. The state exists to enforce the religion and the code, and does so ruthlessly and cruelly. Just ask women in Islamic countries, where they are still mutilated or stoned as property. Or gays, who are thrown from the highest buildings. Or people of other faiths who are murdered for their refusal to convert. Many of these crimes are not merely ISIS behaving barbarically, but are the current legal penalties handed down by the clerics and holy men who govern as officials.

So, if you are a typical liberal who is enraged at what Dr. Carson said about incompatibility, ask yourself this: Does any of this sound compatible with the Constitution of the United States so far? If you answered in the affirmative, you’re either devoid of knowledge of the Constitution, or lying. Let us assume that you are neither stupid nor dishonest, but instead sincere and curious. Have you considered what this country might look like under Sharia law? Perhaps even more importantly, have you asked yourself why some people in this country would implicitly urge Islam as an acceptable code for the United States, replacing the Constitution? That risk goes hand in hand with a successful Muslim presidential candidate. The Constitution won’t change, but will simply cease to exist. We’ve already seen what can be done to us by “executive order”.

Is it realistic to expect that someone raised within and faithful to a monolithic belief system, in which the government is its god’s enforcer, will foreswear that code and instead swear allegiance to a system built on entirely antithetical beliefs, principals and goals? The answer to the question becomes even more problematic when one with knowledge of Islam and Sharia admits that the believer is obligated to spread Islam and Sharia into all lands as commanded by his god, especially the lands of the infidels, and is encouraged to lie about his intentions to surreptitiously achieve that goal. Thus, how will we know when a devout Muslim running for president is abiding by his religion’s mandates and lying about his intentions, and how much are liberals willing to risk to find out? Good luck finding one who will even permit that question.

Because of the nature of Islam, more than religion is at stake. Just as our culture is a product of Judeo-Christian history, Islam brings with it an entirely different culture and history, and one that is antithetical to ours. Islam is a complete system of religion, law, and culture. There is no opt-out, no flexibility, and no freedom. There are no individual rights, and no protections from the theocracy if you stray. There is no Islam alongside Christianity, alongside Judaism. We don’t even share Islam’s version of God, whose commands still bring death upon non-believers to this day. There is only Islam. Join or die. Find that in the Constitution or within our culture.

Consider our foolishness from a different angle. What chance would a Catholic have of being elected president of Egypt, or of ruling Saudi Arabia? None, of course. It isn’t that they hate Catholics, though some might. It’s that they would never be so reckless as to chance that a complete outsider, with no shared code or culture, would protect them and their unique identity. They are not so intellectually deformed by political correctness that they’d willingly risk religious and cultural suicide. They are who their history and culture made them, and they choose to remain so.

Perhaps in this regard, we differ the most from countries that value and protect their own culture. Our makeup these days includes a significant percentage of liberal social engineers who appear to hate other Americans, especially those who value and wish to preserve our unique culture, built upon individual rights and freedoms. They point to our rejection of other cultures, religions and laws being forced upon us as evidence of our insularity and alleged xenophobia, trying to shame us into accepting the chaos and inevitable social conflict that would overwhelm the Great American Experiment once and for all. Having failed to persuade us to surrender, they are now trying to drown us in other peoples and cultures, imported to make the outcome a certainty. If we challenge this, as did Dr. Carson, we are branded as narrow-minded bigots who must be shamed before the idiots welcoming their own disappearance in the waters of multiculturalism.   

It is becoming clearer that the populace of the United States is being fundamentally transformed on an ongoing basis through the importation of other cultures, which are both enabled and encouraged as coequal to, or more worthy than, our own. It’s enough now that the migrant comes from an entirely inconsistent or conflicting culture, and demands that we honor and embrace what he left behind. If we do not agree to embrace his culture, we must be punished. 

There is a model for this, and it’s one that the left no doubt finds ironic and justified. Just as white settlers came to this continent with their cultures and overwhelmed the native culture, so now is the left importing people of other countries, with their incompatible cultures, to smother the vestiges of the America they loathe. That the imported cultures are incompatible and will eventually compete for scarce funds and power, even to the point of violence, merely accelerates the outcome. They will be dependent and vote, and soon will make traditional Americans irrelevant. America is being “Indianed”, and the left can’t get it done quickly enough. Their abuse of Dr. Carson was merely a means to that end.

So, Ben Carson is in the dock because he said he would not advocate for, or support, a Muslim for president because of his concerns that Islam, of which Sharia is an indispensable part, is not compatible with the United States Constitution. First, it is nearly impossible without ignorance or ill will to misunderstand Dr. Carson’s clear and carefully chosen words. He did not say a Muslim could not be president, but only that he personally would not advocate for or support such a candidate due to issues of incompatibility. However, for those since who have relied upon the purposeful misstatement or reinvention of his words, we should be asking why they lie, and what they seek to achieve if they get away with it.

Many Americans are no longer religious, but cannot deny that our nation and our culture are direct products of Judeo-Christian history, experience, and law. The Ten Commandments are the bedrock of our legal system. There is the firmness of the Old Testament, with the temperance and forgiveness of the New Testament. Most of our ancestors were raised with the Bible. For the most part, those who emigrated to the United States through most of the 20th Century also came predominantly from Christian countries, bringing their faith with them. In America, one can accept religion or reject it, but Judeo-Christian history is woven into our culture. 

Unlike Muslim countries, there is no requirement here that all belong to a monolithic religion under penalty of law. But Islam imposes that rule. It is part of the culture that goes with strict Islam and Sharia. Indeed, the American tradition of separation of church and state is utterly unknown in Islam. The state and the church are effectively one and the same, because Sharia is the legal and social code of Islam. If you are a devout Muslim, you must adhere to Sharia. The state exists to enforce the religion and the code, and does so ruthlessly and cruelly. Just ask women in Islamic countries, where they are still mutilated or stoned as property. Or gays, who are thrown from the highest buildings. Or people of other faiths who are murdered for their refusal to convert. Many of these crimes are not merely ISIS behaving barbarically, but are the current legal penalties handed down by the clerics and holy men who govern as officials.

So, if you are a typical liberal who is enraged at what Dr. Carson said about incompatibility, ask yourself this: Does any of this sound compatible with the Constitution of the United States so far? If you answered in the affirmative, you’re either devoid of knowledge of the Constitution, or lying. Let us assume that you are neither stupid nor dishonest, but instead sincere and curious. Have you considered what this country might look like under Sharia law? Perhaps even more importantly, have you asked yourself why some people in this country would implicitly urge Islam as an acceptable code for the United States, replacing the Constitution? That risk goes hand in hand with a successful Muslim presidential candidate. The Constitution won’t change, but will simply cease to exist. We’ve already seen what can be done to us by “executive order”.

Is it realistic to expect that someone raised within and faithful to a monolithic belief system, in which the government is its god’s enforcer, will foreswear that code and instead swear allegiance to a system built on entirely antithetical beliefs, principals and goals? The answer to the question becomes even more problematic when one with knowledge of Islam and Sharia admits that the believer is obligated to spread Islam and Sharia into all lands as commanded by his god, especially the lands of the infidels, and is encouraged to lie about his intentions to surreptitiously achieve that goal. Thus, how will we know when a devout Muslim running for president is abiding by his religion’s mandates and lying about his intentions, and how much are liberals willing to risk to find out? Good luck finding one who will even permit that question.

Because of the nature of Islam, more than religion is at stake. Just as our culture is a product of Judeo-Christian history, Islam brings with it an entirely different culture and history, and one that is antithetical to ours. Islam is a complete system of religion, law, and culture. There is no opt-out, no flexibility, and no freedom. There are no individual rights, and no protections from the theocracy if you stray. There is no Islam alongside Christianity, alongside Judaism. We don’t even share Islam’s version of God, whose commands still bring death upon non-believers to this day. There is only Islam. Join or die. Find that in the Constitution or within our culture.

Consider our foolishness from a different angle. What chance would a Catholic have of being elected president of Egypt, or of ruling Saudi Arabia? None, of course. It isn’t that they hate Catholics, though some might. It’s that they would never be so reckless as to chance that a complete outsider, with no shared code or culture, would protect them and their unique identity. They are not so intellectually deformed by political correctness that they’d willingly risk religious and cultural suicide. They are who their history and culture made them, and they choose to remain so.

Perhaps in this regard, we differ the most from countries that value and protect their own culture. Our makeup these days includes a significant percentage of liberal social engineers who appear to hate other Americans, especially those who value and wish to preserve our unique culture, built upon individual rights and freedoms. They point to our rejection of other cultures, religions and laws being forced upon us as evidence of our insularity and alleged xenophobia, trying to shame us into accepting the chaos and inevitable social conflict that would overwhelm the Great American Experiment once and for all. Having failed to persuade us to surrender, they are now trying to drown us in other peoples and cultures, imported to make the outcome a certainty. If we challenge this, as did Dr. Carson, we are branded as narrow-minded bigots who must be shamed before the idiots welcoming their own disappearance in the waters of multiculturalism.   

It is becoming clearer that the populace of the United States is being fundamentally transformed on an ongoing basis through the importation of other cultures, which are both enabled and encouraged as coequal to, or more worthy than, our own. It’s enough now that the migrant comes from an entirely inconsistent or conflicting culture, and demands that we honor and embrace what he left behind. If we do not agree to embrace his culture, we must be punished. 

There is a model for this, and it’s one that the left no doubt finds ironic and justified. Just as white settlers came to this continent with their cultures and overwhelmed the native culture, so now is the left importing people of other countries, with their incompatible cultures, to smother the vestiges of the America they loathe. That the imported cultures are incompatible and will eventually compete for scarce funds and power, even to the point of violence, merely accelerates the outcome. They will be dependent and vote, and soon will make traditional Americans irrelevant. America is being “Indianed”, and the left can’t get it done quickly enough. Their abuse of Dr. Carson was merely a means to that end.