Which religions are "inconsistent with the values and principles of America"?

Much of the morality of the Old Testament is outdated:

1. It supports slavery
2. Being stoned to death is a common punishment for homosexuality, adultery and working on the Sabbath
3. Women are legally the property of their husbands
4. The policy toward child raising is “spare the rod and spoil the child”

Oddly, Carson and other fundamentalists regularly ignore these words from Jesus

All of them.

No one is fit to judge, so either all or none of them.

He was clearly implying that Islam was. I would argue that most interpretations of Sharia are inconsistent with the Constitution, but I don’t think any one religion as a whole is inconsistent with it.

Sharia relies almost totally on “God’s word” in the old testament to run their nations. So, is the Constitution inconsistent with God’s word?

In most Muslim nations, there is no concept of separation of church and state. Islam is not just a religion, it’s a way of life, it’s a political system and the government is inherently tied to it. That kind of interpretation clashes with the U.S. Constitution. It does not mean however, that a Muslim couldn’t be President.

LOLI beat me too it but it’s obvious anyway

It’s a trick question. Or rather the question is a good one because it spotlights the trick. “If it is inconsistent with THE values and principles of America” sounds good to all who hear it , simply because what everyone hears is “MY values”. And to illustrate the point, just try to find an American citizen who does not believe his or her beliefs consistent with the values and principles of America.

The Constitution makes a point of saying all religions are consistent with the values of the United States. It’s almost as if the authors anticipated that one day Ben Carson would appear.

^^^ As long as certain fringe sects aren’t so crazy and violent that they consistently violate the constitution. And the laws.

^^^Not only fringe sects but politicians such as Ben Carson must abide by the constitution and I agree, no one is above the law.

This is just a politician’s answer to a political question. Surmising anything beneficial from it is impossible.

First the US would have to have some valid values and principals, wherever it had, it has but a shadow of it if any at all.

Yep. All of them.

All of them.

The law of Freedom of Religion was adopted on CHRISTIAN principles as the Biblical approach to belief…so any argument that takes FofR as anti-christian is just uninformed.

As for the moral principles themselves…Justice Joseh Story would be the expert:

I verily believe Christianity necessary to the support of civil society. One of the beautiful boasts of our municipal jurisprudence is that Christianity is a part of the Common Law… There never has been a period in which the Common Law did not recognize Christianity as lying its foundations.

Everythng you say is wrong.

It does not support slavery. For example,
If someone is caught kidnapping a fellow Israelite and treating or selling them as a slave, the kidnapper must die. You must purge the evil from among you Deuteronomy 24:7

It could not deal with those outside the legal reach of its laws. Slavery was everywhere in the ancient world

Yes, stoning was the punishment for perversion. But if you didn’t want to be under Jewish law you could go elsewhere. To be a Jew was to accept those punishments.

Women were the property because of the fall from the monogamy and equality in Genesis

In the image of God he created them; male and female he created them.
If anything the earlest society was matriarchal, it is the man who leaves his father and mother NOT THE WOMAN

The last statement calls into question your honesty:
The phrase, “spare the rod and spoil the child” is not a Christian phrase and is not in the Bible. That phrase actually comes from a narrative poem written in the 1600s titled “Hudibras” by Samuel Butler.