I'm a solid negative on this one, just as I was on the Bible version of this question.
2007-10-09 04:01:01 · 14 answers · asked by Spartacus 3 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
If a candidate is asked this question, they had better be able to give a decent answer or they will be seen as dodging the question bringing their own beliefs into question!
The Koran is based on the old testament & in fact does even have some parts in it that the Christian religion decided were not revelant. Remember, the Muslims were Christian before they decided to follow Muhammad. Muhammad was born some 600 years after Jesus; so Christianity was well founded before he started his religion. I would say that the person answering this question knew what he/she was saying to be somewhat true. It is parts of the new testament that is not accepted by Muslims. I am a Christian & believe in Jesus Christ, so don't mistake what I have written as an acceptance of the Islamic faith, it isn't.
2007-10-09 04:23:15 · answer #1 · answered by geegee 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Until the "Religion of Peace" actually demonstrates that philosophy, there is no way anyone should ever consider a believer in Islam as president of this country.
As for the Koran, it preaches intolerance which is a stark contrast to what this country was founded upon and therefore, no one who follows the Koran should be allowed to be president.
OK, I have read some of these answers and I am not surprised this country is in the shape it is in today. This country was founded on Judeo-Christian values. Fine enough. But anyone who believes that a person can separate their religious beliefs from the job they do is plain out stupid. Your faith helps make you the person you are. It is part of your humanity. For you athiests, get a clue. You claim that this world was made from logical scientificly proove incidents, or whatever you believe in. Just remember this, something was put there before anything you can imagine started. Who put it there?
As I said before, your faith is part of your humanity. Remove your faith and you remove your humanity. That is why liberals are the way they are today, lacking humanity.
2007-10-09 04:15:17 · answer #2 · answered by Michael H 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I'm really not sure. I would be more apprehensive about electing a Muslim only because there are not that many first generation Muslim's in America. Further down the road I'd probably be more open minded towards it. But right now, I would have a hard time believing that a first generation Muslim would not have a larger portion of patriotism towards their parents homeland than to America.
2007-10-09 04:06:19 · answer #3 · answered by Lisa M 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋
The Koran is somewhat historically correct but probably not scientifically correct. One's religious beliefs do not play a major role in my decision making when deciding on a candidate to vote for. They are running for a secular office not for POPE. If I believe the person can do the secular job I will vote for them.
Suppose you have two candidates, one is a Muslim but also is uniquely qualified in every other way. Super candidate who agrees with you on every issue, the other is a Christian who disagrees with you on every issue and has a mediocre or poor track record. You are telling us that you would vote for poor/mediocre just because the other one is a Muslim? I'll bet you would whine and moan about how bad your candidate did his job whouldn't you?
2007-10-09 04:08:29 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 2⤋
NO!
Doesn't matter what the religion is, to vote for a candidate based solely on his religious faith would bring us down the road to Theocracy.
History is littered with the wreckage of regimes that have chosen such a path.
2007-10-09 04:07:44 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
Well, there's two things to look at with this. If the candidate was willing and able to govern by the law, and keep his or her religious beliefs separate, I'd consider them. But then I'd have to take into consideration the lack of logic, common sense and intelligence such beliefs indicate about a person, and then not vote for them.
2007-10-09 04:04:24 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 2⤋
No! Who is to say what book is more accurate than another. One may be more accurate than another, but I have yet to see solid proof, not opinion. No candidate should say that.
2007-10-09 04:04:34 · answer #7 · answered by Mobus 2 · 1⤊ 1⤋
I'm not that familiar with the Koran so, this is not an item I would use to judge any political candidate.
2007-10-09 04:04:45 · answer #8 · answered by labken1817 6 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Not if they gave any indication to that opinion on the record where I would know about it before I voted.
2007-10-09 04:09:52 · answer #9 · answered by Chef 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Yes I would have reservations on any president believing a book of religion to be scientifically accurate.
2007-10-09 04:03:58 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 2⤋