During a September 20 appearance on NBC’s Meet The Press, Republican presidential candidate Ben Carson voiced his opposition to a Muslim holding the office of the President of the United States.
On September 21 Rush Limbaugh addressed the media’s backlash against Carson by asking how people fail to note that sharia law and U.S. constitutional law are mutually exclusive?
If you look into Sharia law, you will not find any consistency with the US Constitution. Sharia law is the law which is used to behead women in Islamic countries who have been raped. Sharia law is the reason women in Islamic countries can’t drive. Sharia law is so inconsistent with the US Constitution Ben Carson could not be more right. And the question he was asked was in that context. “Well, do you believe that Islam is consistent with the Constitution?” Well, Sharia law isn’t.
Breitbart News previously reported that Founding Father Sam Adams argued against extending religious toleration to theocratic religions in 1772. Hanover College published Adams’ “The Rights of the Colonists” in which Adams wrote:
In regard to religion, mutual toleration in the different professions thereof is what all good and candid minds in all ages have ever practised, and, both by precept and example, inculcated on mankind. And it is now generally agreed among Christians that this spirit of toleration, in the fullest extent consistent with the being of civil society, is the chief characteristical mark of the Church. Insomuch that Mr. Locke has asserted and proved, beyond the possibility of contradiction on any solid ground, that such toleration ought to be extended to all whose doctrines are not subversive of society. The only sects which he thinks ought to be, and which by all wise laws are excluded from such toleration, are those who teach doctrines subversive of the civil government under which they live.
Adams was suggesting that toleration for religions should be based on whether a given religion is or isn’t subversive to the principles undergirding order in American society. He intimated testing religions based on whether the “doctrines”–or teachings–of a given religion are “subversive of society” and contended that religions “are excluded from… toleration” when they “teach doctrines subversive of the civil government.”
Limbaugh contends that the incongruity between sharia law and constitutional law are obvious to the honest examiner and that the media’s “outrage” over Carson’s statement is “manufactured.” He said the criticism of Carson is “made up just like the Trump furor was.” Moreover, he says “the furor is not [even] about this specifically, but it’s about giving the media another chance, or better stated, the media taking another opportunity to point out in their minds that Republicans are bigots.”
Follow AWR Hawkins on Twitter: @AWRHawkins. Reach him directly at firstname.lastname@example.org.