For all those who said no, I have one question:
Why not?
For all those who said no, I have one question:
Why not?
Islam is incompatible with our ideas of democracy, Islam codifies gender inequality and discrimination against non-Muslims. If elected it would his (under Islam Bukhari (88:219) - "Never will succeed such a nation as makes a woman their ruler." so it wouldn't be a woman) duty to force Islam onto the country, with all the laws that go with it. So as a cleric Sufi Muhammad, recently put it, "True Islam permits neither elections, nor democracy."
This is an interesting answer. But I wonder if you would also still consider voting for a follower of Christianity or Judaism considering not only are both of those religions closely related to Islam, but they also codify slavery and stoning in the Old Testament (among other outdated and unpleasant things).
Given that most, by most I mean over 80+%, of Christians and Jews, don't follow the Bible or the Torah and just pick and choose what parts they do follow, it's not that big of a problem. But if the candidate was standing up saying how they would return the US to the bible, etc I would NOT vote for them.
Would you therefore be willing to vote for a Muslim who didn't follow the ideology you have highlighted in your original reply? I imagine there are plenty of Muslims who do not follow those teachings, but would you still refuse to vote for them based solely on their religion?
Is a person a Christian if they don't follow the bible or Jewish if they don't follow the Torah? I say no, so if a Muslim isn't following the Quran, then are they truly Muslim? Like I've said in this thread, if a Christian were to stand up and say I'm a Christian and we need to return to the bible, I wouldn't vote for them. Odds are if they aren't following the Quran they won't say they are Muslim. So basically no problem. But the question is "Would you consider voting for a Muslim to be the president of your country?" Which to me means the person is following their religion and is claiming to be Muslim.
Well in your previous response you did characterise Christians and Jews who did not follow their respective religious texts as still being Christians or Jews. But then I suppose we have to make the distinction between textual or modernised interpretations of each text, which I would say would allow someone to remain part of their religion but not as strong an adherent as many more traditional members. What I know of the Muslims I know is that they often take a less textual approach and still call themselves Muslim when asked what their religion is. Would you say that people like that would still not be getting vote?
At best they would have to explain the quran at every press conference, remember we're talking presidential election not local and all the pundits would be taking shots. He's a muslim and this is what the quran says. What I was trying to point out, badly perhaps, is that just because a person calls themselves a Christian or a Jew, if they don't follow their religion are they really a Christian or a Jew? Like I've stated several times If a Christian or a Jew for that matter would to say we need to follow this book and all the law contained within, I wouldn't vote for them either.
All reasonably fair, but my point is would you still be unwilling to vote for a Muslim candidate for President even if they had been shown to neither believe nor follow the extracts of Islamic text that you oppose? If you were willing then surely your opposition would be along ideological grounds, rather than religious.
Let's assume that said candidate came out and said "I'm a non-practicing Muslim." said candidate didn't attend pray, mosque, etc. In which case I would say they weren't a Muslim and then I would look at their ideologies and see if there were a good fit. I think I made it plan, that the question is implying the person is a practicing Muslim who believes in the quran.
I would agree someone who claims to be a Muslim but does not visit the mosque for prayers is not entirely so, however let us assume they do attend the mosque for prayers but hold more progressive views on social matters such as those that you drew attention to earlier. Would you still refuse to vote for them?
A progressive Muslim is one who is firmly grounded in the Quran. Progressive Islam is not about reforming or altering the Quran itself, but rather reforming the interpretations of it. Now there are many parts of the Quran very clear and wouldn't be open to interpretation, many of therm are social matters. So a progressive muslim might say it's OK to drawing Muhammad, after all there is nothing in the quran about drawing Muhammad, and modest dress is open to interpretation. But, there is no equality between genders, there is no equality between people of other faiths in the quran. Such view are, I my opinion, incomparable with a republic or a democracy, therefore I wouldn't vote for them.
Whether I like it or not, I live in a Catholic country, Christianity is a part of its history and tradition.