Carson's Comments About a Muslim President Weren't Islamophobic

Carson has said he would require any Muslim candidate for the presidency to address the question of sharia and explicitly renounce any belief in it. After such repudiation Carson would be quite willing to support a Muslim candidate. I suspect that most Americans, once made aware of the foregoing facts, would feel that way, including many Muslims.
This post was published on the now-closed HuffPost Contributor platform. Contributors control their own work and posted freely to our site. If you need to flag this entry as abusive, send us an email.

Over two weeks have passed since Ben Carson, Republican presidential candidate, made an inept comment about his unwillingness to consider a Muslim for the U.S. presidency. He has been widely condemned for bigotry, especially by New York Times op-ed columnist Charles Blow, a fellow African-American.

Now that the brouhaha has settled somewhat, let's take another look at what Carson intended. It might be that his views, now clarified, are shared by most Americans. Let me say at the outset that I am a Democrat. This is not about politics.

In my view Carson is no Islamophobe. Rather, as he eventually made clear, he is concerned about the requirements of sharia law, which butts heads with the U.S. Constitution. Sharia is the Islamic legal system based on the Quran and the Hadiths (Sayings of Muhammad); it covers such topics as rules for sexual intercourse, divorce, inheritance, hygiene, proper diet, how to pray, fasting, etiquette--the list goes on and on. And it prescribes punishment for violations of the code.

In 2013 the PEW Research Center, the country's most prestigious polling organization on matters of religion, conducted an exhaustive poll of Muslim beliefs in 23 countries where Islam is a pervasive force. As we proceed through the following list, we might find that Carson's remarks suggest a wise caution rather than bigotry.

First, according to the poll, "In 17 of the 23 countries where the question was asked, at least half of Muslims say sharia is the revealed word of God." Only six said it was "developed by men, based on the word of God." Moreover, a clear majority said there was a "single interpretation" of sharia law as opposed to "multiple interpretations."

More troublesome for Carson, and for many of the rest of us, is the question of how sharia should be applied. In South and Southeast Asia, the Middle East and North Africa, and in most of Sub-Saharan Africa, Muslims overwhelmingly supported sharia as the "law of the land." The figures ranged as high as 99 percent in Afghanistan, 84 percent in Pakistan, 82 percent in Bangladesh, 91 percent in Iraq, and 89 percent in the "Palestinian territories." Indonesia, Islam's most populous state, came in at 72 percent.

The poll sought to determine if Muslims thought sharia should be applied to non-Muslims (often meaning Christians) living in their country. It found that "in the Middle East and North Africa . . . at least four-in-ten Muslims in all countries except Iraq (38 percent) and Morocco (29 percent)" thought it should. "Egyptian Muslims (74 percent) were the most likely to say it should apply to Muslims and non-Muslims alike, while 58 percent in Jordan held this view."

How sharia would play out in actual cases was next addressed. According to the poll, "among those in favor of making sharia the law of the land, the survey finds broad support for allowing religious judges to adjudicate domestic disputes. Lower but substantial proportions of Muslims support severe punishments such as cutting off the hands of thieves." As for adultery, "In Pakistan (89 percent) and Afghanistan (85 percent), more than eight-in-ten Muslims who want Islamic law as their country's official law say adulterers should be stoned, while nearly as many say the same in the Palestinian territories (84 percent) and Egypt (81 percent)."

Of course, not all who are born Muslim will choose to remain so. What fate might await those "apostates" who lose their faith in Islam? "Taking the life of those who abandon Islam is most widely supported in Egypt (86 percent) and Jordan (82 percent). Roughly two-thirds who want sharia to be the law of the land also back this penalty in the Palestinian territories (66 percent). In the other countries surveyed in the Middle East-North Africa region, fewer than half take this view."

Given all the above, it does not strike me as ridiculous or outrageous that Carson, or any other American, should demur at the thought of a Muslim president. Clearly sharia law is inconsistent with our laws calling for the separation of church and state, and some of the attitudes of a majority of Muslims surveyed in their countries of origin will strike most of us--let's be frank--as frightening.

Carson has said he would require any Muslim candidate for the presidency to address the question of sharia and explicitly renounce any belief in it. After such repudiation Carson would be quite willing to support a Muslim candidate. I suspect that most Americans, once made aware of the foregoing facts, would feel that way, including many Muslims.

If a Muslim actually were elected to the U.S. presidency, he (or she) would have to live faithfully by the law of our land, not the Quran. If that were to happen, the entire Islamic world, in their 23 countries, couldn't help but see that it was possible to separate church and state, yet live a devout life pleasing to Allah, both at the same time. Such a president would show the Muslim, free from the influence of mullahs and madrasas, how to govern. I can imagine nothing more beneficial for our world. May it come to pass sooner rather than later.

Popular in the Community

Close

What's Hot