By the way, am I allowed to write more than once
on the same question? I have been doing it; I hope
it's not against the rules.

I don't believe Ethan Allen was a Christian. He fought in the Revolution. He also wrote
Reason the Only Oracle of Man. It is a good
book, but it doesn't have chapter headings. As I
recall, the copy I read didn't have an index,
either.

Well, I tried to read the article "Ben Carson is for a
religious theocracy"; several times I tried, and the
machine wouldn't show it to me. I saw "Bad Re-
quest" in the upper left-hand corner. I get pretty
sick of this Internet.

Only a king or queen could force their subjects to abide by a given religious order. Our next President will be a citizen who has lived under "Freedom of Religion" all of their life and couldn't possibly believe that they could change that.
The ones who are truly considering enslaving us would be the ones who wish to totally disarm us (like in Great Britain and Australia) and it seems that at least one Democratic candidate has already suggested that possibility.
I'm an Agnostic, yet I still can't seem to see why so many people are afraid of leaders who wish to openly follow their religious beliefs.

He has serious mental issues as well as being a collectivist and a wannabe theocratic dictator. He's an idiot savant who has the skills of a neurosurgeon and the mind of mystic.

Carson is a deeply religious man and he is also an accomplished physician which means he is trained in scientific disciplines. Like Lewis Carrol's Red Queen he appears to be able to hold two seemingly incompatible thoughts in his mind at the same time. When you consider the number of very capable medical institutions that are sponsored by religious organizations this is not uncommon. It may be difficult for an objectivist to comprehend how logical objective reasoning can coexist with religious faith but it happens all the time. Somehow belief and understanding can be combined and form an emulsion not unlike the mixture of oil and water.
"Believe" is a word I use rarely and with great care but it appears that men like Carson can handle the dichotomy quite well. This opens the question, "Is Objectivism a secular religion?" How much of Objectivism is based on faith and how much on understanding? A is A ... But why?

From Ben's website: Two of his major issues are abortion and "keeping the faith." https://www.bencarson.com/issues

Not only is he trying to create a religious theocracy, he is an intellectual light weight in the issue related to being president. If elected he will be a disaster probably worse than the Bush's.

Carson is right about a lot of things and wrong about a lot of things. My neuroscience PhD son has pointed out many of the statements about the brain and drugs that Carson has made that were incorrect (surgery and research being two very different practices). Carson is human, flawed, and seeks guidance from a higher power.
So what?

I don't see how you come to your conclusion that Carson wants America to scrap the Constitution (which he would have to do) to establish a slavish theocracy.
However differently they characterized it, most founders did believe in a higher power.
The essence of what I've heard Carson say and write is that people should have the choice to believe and say what they want without the yoke of political correctness around their necks.

I sincerely doubt Carson wants to oppress nonbelievers with a theocracy.
I never met a Christian who wants to shred the Constitution.
Though Carson is highly intelligent, his recent statement about Biblical Joseph building the pyramids to store grain is mentally way out there lost in wacko land.
A couple of weeks previously, I received donation snail mail with a dollar in it and Carson stating that his campaigning team "think I am crazy for" sending the dollar to stress a need for contributions or whatever the heck he wrote exactly.
I sent only the dollar back with a note that I resent being guilt manipulated even by charitable organizations and almost always keep the money.
I added that I was going to vote for Carson but now that one dollar guilt trip ploy had me swinging back to Trump.
That wacko statement about Joseph seals the deal.
And I do still like a couple of other candidates who fail to climb up in the polls.
That sure does not include weird-eyes Sir Jeb.of the Royal House of Bush.

Most of our founding fathers were Christian. That they founded the nation on realism and reason does not negate this.

What's sad is how people who, for personal reasons, are not Christians, but then skew facts to make a supposition such as "Masons are not Christians" (Most masons I know personally would debate that with you hotly, as one does not preclude the other). That you may choose to be Athiest - or Theist - is your decision... but in declaring those you admire to be exactly as you believe is no different than the "born again" crowd espousing "Believe exactly as I do or you shall burn in hell"...

I call this group the "born again atheists" because their message - demeaning and degrading what is on someone else's heart - is damned near parroting the arguments and technique borne by the rabid theists.

When someone comes up off the cuff with "(directed) You cannot be an Objectivist because you are a theist of some sort or the other", you may as well say the opposite is true as well - because you are, indeed, saying that A does not equal A. Be it through pride, or self-righteousness, or even the belief that only your beliefs and thoughts are valid... you are making a supposition that, drawn out to all humanity, does not, no, cannot hold water.

Sorry. If you're an Atheist, that's fine. If someone else is not, fine. Has no bearing on their perception of the truth or their belief in Objectivity - because to a Theist, Objectivity fits in just as well as it does to an Atheist.

I know this will prove wildly unpopular to some here - some will likely even attack me for such a radical view. But it is truth. Just like A+A. Objectivity is not some private club - it's just... there. Like the 3rd law of thermodynamics. --shrug--