Religious Tests

By Douglas V. Gibbs
Author, Speaker, Instructor, Radio Host

At the 2016 Democrat Party National Convention, the same convention during which the Democrats booed the placement of God and Israel back on their platform, a gentleman named Khizr Khan waved a Democrat Party Blue pocket constitution at the crowd and accused candidate Donald Trump of not knowing what was in the document.

He was bothered by Trump's stance on immigration, especially when it came to Muslims.

"Donald Trump, you are asking Americans to trust you with our future. Let me ask you: Have you even read the US Constitution?" said Khan.

"I will gladly lend you my copy. In this document, look for the words liberty and equal protection of law."

It's the only time I've ever heard Democrats cheer the Constitution.

To be honest, I am generally uneasy when anyone in the political arena, regardless of political party, begins acting like they know what the Constitution says, or means.  They usually speak in general enough terms that you can't necessarily nail them down on something.  In the case of Khan, his ignorance about the Constitution quickly became loud and clear.

In his speech Khan stated that immigration shall have no religious tests ... a gross error, at best.

References to religious tests are only pointed towards those holding office, not immigration.  In Article VI. of the Constitution it explains that "no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States."

This means that religion, or one's religious belief, cannot be a factor in whether or not a person may hold a particular office, be it political, judicial, or any other office considered to be under the public trust.

The Democrats are so worried about religious tests when it comes to Muslims, but the problem is, they are not so worried about it when it comes to Christians.  In fact, Democrats are making it a habit to use religious tests quite a bit when it comes to Christians holding office, as if being a Christian is a hindrance to the job the person is about to undertake.

The attacks against the religious beliefs of political figures have been really bad when it comes to President Trump's judicial nominations.

Most recently, last month, Brian C. Buescher, Trump's nominee for the U.S. District Court for the District of Nebraska, was questioned by Senators Mazie Hirono (D-HI) and Kamala Harris (D-CA) when he stood before a judicial committee before his final senatorial nomination confirmation vote.  The Senators were concerned about Buescher's membership in the Knights of Columbus because membership in such a religious (Catholic) organization "might impede" his ability to judge federal cases “fairly and impartially.”

This is nothing new.

In 2017 former Congressman Dennis Kucinich repeated Khan's faulty interpretation of the Constitution, claiming that the Constitution says there can be no religious tests when it comes to immigration during an interview with Bill O'Reilly.

Last April Senator Cory Booker (D-NJ), during the confirmation hearing of Pompeo in the U.S. Senate to become the next Secretary of State, established himself as a vote against CIA Director Mike Pompeo’s nomination because of Pompeo’s beliefs on marriage and sexuality — beliefs consistent with Pompeo’s Christian faith.

In September of 2017, Amy Barrett, Trump's nomination for the 7th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals was questioned by Dianne Feinstein, a Democrat Party Senator from California.  In the questioning, Feinstein targeted Barrett's faith as being unacceptable.

Senator Al Franken, a Democrat from Minnesota, did the same.

In the case of Feinstein, when referring to Barrett's faith, she said, “The dogma lives loudly within you, and that’s a concern.”

The Minnesota Democrat's no-vote was for similar reasons.  "Franken is trying to block the Judiciary Committee from even reviewing Justice Stras’ sterling record, and his refusal to return the blue slip for Justice Stras is unacceptable,” said Carrie Severino, chief counsel and policy director of the Judicial Crisis Network.

All because of her religious views.

But, I thought the Democrats, thanks to Kucinich and Kahn, believe there shall be no religious tests?

The Democrat Party's religious test double-standard and hypocrisy goes even deeper than that.

Social issues are not only State issues, and the federal government has no business being involved, but they are also largely religious issues.  One's stance on abortion, marriage, and gender, for example, are heavily influenced by one's religious beliefs.  Aren't the Democrats when attacking politicians for their stances on those issues, also issuing religious tests in those cases, as well?

-- Political Pistachio Conservative News and Commentary