"I would not advocate that we put a Muslim in charge of this nation," Republican presidential hopeful Dr. Ben Carson said after Meet the Press moderator Chuck Todd asked if a candidate's faith should matter to voters.

"If [that faith] is inconsistent with the values and principles of America then of course it should matter," Carson responded. "But if it fits within the realm of America and consistent with the Constitution, then no problem," he added, undoubtedly referring to his own faith, Christianity.

Todd then asked, "Is Islam consistent with the Constitution?" Carson responded, "No," followed by his regrettable No-Muslims-for-President comment. I say regrettable because it caused Carson a lot of guff from which he tried to backpedal.

But you know what? I wouldn't vote for a Muslim, either. Because he's absolutely right. Islam is not consistent with the Constitution; certainly not in the way that Christianity is. Just look at the Ten Commandments, every one of which bolsters the rights afforded in the U.S. Constitution.

Article VIII, Paragraph III states: "The Congress shall make no law establishing other Gods before God."

There's the "No Coveting Clause" in Article VIIII, Paragraph II, which establishes the right of U.S. citizens not to have their wives or oxen "coveted" by neighbors.

Article XI guarantees that "Sunday be kept holy for all U.S. citizens," and Article XVIII prohibits your neighbor from graving out any unapproved images.

And if you still have any doubt about the Ten Commandments being consistent with the Constitution, consider the little-known Article XII provision that forbids taking the Lord's name in vain known as The Cheese and Rice Clause.

Conversely, Islam is waaay out of whack with our Constitution. For example Sharia Law requires an adulterer to be whipped in public, which is so horribly inappropriate to the crime, unlike the biblical penalty, which is that adulterers be stoned to death.

There is also the insanity factor of the Quran which further shows that anyone batcrap crazy enough to believe it is unfit for public office. For instance, Muslims believe there is only one true God, which, well, c'mon. You have to be praying with your ass toward Mecca not to know that God is three people. He is, of course, himself, The Father—The Godhead—whose job it is to throw hurricanes at places that are nice to queers. He is also his son, Jesus, whom he magically begot by asexually deflowering a married perma-virgin without her knowledge or consent (aka "statutory miracle rape"). And he is also the Holy Spirit who, in addition to flitting around the globe as a dove, also oversees Jesus' marketing and promotions.

Want more proof that Muslims, unlike Christians, are unfit for governing? How about the fact that Muslims do not believe that man was created in God's image? To which I say, "Cheese and Rice!" I mean, have Muslims even looked at us? We're like, awesome! Especially white men of European descent, which is clearly what God sees in the mirror. This we know from Genesis: "Lo, and I shall make man in my image—all WASPY and pale, without any scary, dark Araboid features whatsoever."

Or how about that Muslims commune with God by bowing on a mat and chanting "Allahu Akbar, Bismillah-oh! Scaramouche, Scaramouche," even though everybody knows that in order to have real communion with God you must eat his flesh and drink his blood, which is really his son's flesh and blood, and also that Ghost Guy's too—who has no flesh or blood—but it's not really flesh and blood you're consuming anyway, though it actually is. Or it isn't.

OK, so kidding aside, Carson is a hypocritical twit. No, I would not advocate a Muslim as President either, but I would also not vote for a Christian, or a Jew, or Mormon or whatever other fairy tale the candidate still believes in. And yes, I know, tomorrow there will be an inbox full of emails accusing me of bigotry. But I am no bigot. When a person is a member of a specific religion, he or she takes an oath to that religion. He or she makes certain, unwavering vows to his maker which often contradict the rule of law. We recently saw an example of this with that Kentucky County Clerk hag, Kim Davis, who defied the Supreme Court by refusing to issue gay marriage licenses saying that her religion supersedes man's law—a sentiment echoed by many religious righties.

But more to the point, it is not bigotry on my part because—and this, my friends, is the irrefutable truth—being of a certain faith is not an inherent, immutable human quality like gender, age, race, disability or sexual preference. Religion is a concept, a belief—an idea. And the fact that I find most religious ideas to be incompatible with public office is no more bigoted than if I refuse to vote for someone whose "idea" to deal with immigration is an electrified fence.

Ideas, people. That's what I won't be voting for. Ideas. If the candidate believes we need to keep suppressing the LGBT community so that God might stop throwing hurricanes at us, or that creationism should be taught in schools ensuring that our young remain stupid and brainwashed, or that God created Miley Cyrus to punish her father for "Achy Breaky Heart," well I'm sorry, but these are all completely legitimate, non-prejudiced, un-bigoted reason for me to not want that candidate anywhere near a public office, least of all, the oval one.


See all events on Friday, Dec 2