Because presidential politics are as much about in-group signaling as actual policy, Ben Carson is locked in a media-generated controversy about whether or not he’d be down with having a Muslim president. Carson was asked about this deeply-important question on Meet the Press. He said no. And when confronted with the error of his ways by the bien pensant media, he qualified his no only slightly, saying that the nonexistent Muslim presidential candidate would have to reject the tenets of sharia.
Naturally, liberals in the media were not amused.
I’m never quite sure why it is that people on the left are scared to death of orthodox Christians, but think that orthodox Muslims are the bee’s knees. I suppose the answer is “multiculturalism.” Or just outright bigotry.
Because exactly how well would a traditional, orthodox Muslim in the White House match up with progressive politics? And I don’t mean some guy from the Taliban, but rather, say, your average, man-on-the-street from Saudi Arabia. Or Iran. Or Yemen. Would a Muslim who’s committed to sharia be good on gay rights? How about abortion? How about the war on women?
Here, for instance, is just a random vignette from Saudi Arabia this week, where a 21-year-old activist is scheduled to be beheaded—and then crucified—for “anti-God” activities. This isn’t extra-legal terrorism we’re talking about. This isn’t “all Muslims are terrorist monsters.” It’s simply window into what life can look like under a reasonably strict Muslim regime.
Of course people on the American left want nothing to do with conservative Islam as a political force in this country. It’s the sort of thing they can pretend to admire from the safety of Williamsburg only because they know the chances of having a “real” Muslim president are next to zero.
