DR. CARSON – AT 9:06 A.M. ET:  Oh the fire, oh the brimstone!  I see the lightning flashes outside my window.  Dr. Ben Carson has stumbled in a manner that outrages the select order of mainstream journalists, and the tumult is great indeed.

Appearing on "Meet the Press," and goaded by moderator Chuck Todd, the politically inexperienced world-class physician committed what, in baseball, is known as an unforced error.  He said something he shouldn't have said, and didn't have to say. "I would not advocate that we put a Muslim in charge of this nation. I absolutely would not agree with that," Carson said.  He elaborated on the show, and later in the day, by expressing the belief that Sharia law (Muslim law) is inconsistent with the Constitution.

First, he shouldn't have gone there.  Second, he should have phrased his answer far differently by saying that he agrees with the Constitution that there should be no religious test for the presidency, but that, of course, citizens may evaluate a candidate's religious commitments to determine whether they violate Constitutional principles. 

The left has now gone bonkers.  The bonkerism is led by CNN, which considers it a religious commandment to prove that all Republicans are racists.  

The hypocrisy flows.  The very people who are in deep anguish over Carson's "bigoted" remarks are the very same souls who regularly mock Christians and Jews who've asked for religious exemptions from certain requirements of, say, Obamacare, because they violate religious principles.  CNN, and others, both find religion and mock religion, depending on the political circumstances.

If a Catholic organization asks for an exemption for a requirement that it cover abortions in its health plan, that organization is called "anti-woman" or charged with "trying to inject religion into government."  I well recall how Senator, and presidential candidate, John F. Kennedy had to appear before a group of Houston ministers in 1960 to assure them that, in public office, he would never let his personal religious beliefs interfere with his public duties.  His 14-year record in Congress proved his claim.  Political figures regularly have differentiated between private belief and public responsibility.  

Religious authorities often clash with government, and government must, on occasion, overrule religious authorities.   I remember, as a journalist, interviewing Dr. Milton Halperin, the legendary medical examiner of New York City, in his office, when he received a call from an orthodox rabbi.  The rabbi asked that a deceased parishioner not be subjected to autopsy because autopsy is barred by Jewish law.  Dr. Halperin, himself Jewish, explained to the rabbi that the civil law must prevail, and that the autopsy had to go forward because the parishioner had died at home, not in the presence of medical personnel.  Therefore, the death had to be investigated.  The rabbi understood and withdrew his request.

It is a complicated subject.  Dr. Carson should have avoided it or made clear his specific concern.  But we cannot grant to Islam a pass that we would not give to any other religion.  Voters have a right to know whether a Muslim candidate would try to impose Sharia law, especially if that candidate had a history that suggested that he would.  When raised tastefully, with evidence and respect, questions about the intersection of religion and public policy are appropriate.  Dr. Carson failed, and it is hurting him, but he is no bigot.

September 21, 2015