There is no reason why he should avoid such questions. If he wants to draw parallels between himself and John Kennedy, he should also note that Kennedy addressed such questions fully and honestly. He never charged that those who were asking them were racists or bigots, even though in Kennedy’s case that was much more likely to be true than it is in Ellison’s.
From WorldNetDaily.com, :
…What he hasn’t done is respond to requests from WND to confirm that he will, in fact, base his decisions on the laws of the United States on the U.S. Constitution, not the Quran.
It was during his campaign that he raised the issue of his Islamic beliefs himself, and confirmed then that they would play a large role in his decision-making process:
“I am inspired by the Quran’s message of encompassing divine love, and a deep faith guides my life every day,” he wrote in his promotional materials.
He later told a group meeting in Detroit that, “I’m not here to be a preacher, but in terms of political agenda items, my faith informs these things.”…
Rick Jauert, a spokesman for the congressman, was reached at his campaign headquarters in Minnesota two weeks ago, and confirmed that the congressman does not believe there will be a conflict between his religious beliefs and his duty under the U.S. Constitution.
But when asked which would take priority if there is a conflict, or to describe how the congressman will resolve the differing philosophies provided by the U.S. Constitution and the Quran, which calls for beheading “infidels,” he said he could not answer immediately.
Since then, WND has been unable to obtain answers from the congressman or his staff….
Ellison said he decided to seek congressional office because, “I am for peace now, for universal health care, and for a sustainable future.”
“I will fight for the immediate withdrawal of U.S. troops from Iraq and for an international reconstruction effort; for universal single payer healthcare so that Americans can get the medical care that they need whether they have a job that offers insurance or not; for green energy, conservation, environmental justice, and a sustainable future for our country and the world,” he wrote.
He recognizes Israel, and said “a lasting peace in the Middle East should be one of the United States’ most focused goals.”
“Right now Hamas represents the greatest obstacle to this path, and until Hamas denounces terrorism, recognizes the absolute right of Israel to exist peacefully and honors past agreements, it cannot be considered legitimate partners in this process,” he wrote.
Jauert explained that Ellison’s conflicts between his faith and the law would be no more than those Catholics who support abortion, and then face objections from church leaders who believe they should not be allowed to take part in church rites.
“Not every follower of Islam supports Sharia law,” Jauert told WND.
Fine. But does Ellison? Can we please get a clear statement on that? After all, Ellison has associated himself with CAIR, the Muslim American Society, and the Islamic Circle of North America. CAIR’s Omar Ahmed and Ibrahim Hooper have made statements in favor of Sharia in the U.S., and MAS and ICNA are likewise linked to Sharia supremacism.
If there were any fearless or responsible reporters in America, they would be asking Ellison about this, instead of cowering at charges of bigotry — which, of course, are a very effective way to intimidate critics into silence.