I recognized Dr. Carsons Rabid dog analogy as being similar to one of mine from years ago called "the Dog Catcher" yet in no way am I calling my own lansmen dogs by using the familiar rational thinking in how we distinguish rabid dogs from a typical docile house dog. That's what analogies do, they find the tangible familiar to make a point. Only createns would try to spin it and change the intent and lesson knowing full well that wasn't what Dr. Ben Carson was saying. My analogy was regarding proselytizing so rabid dogs can be any angry bitter destructive entity. The Dog catcher Scenerio: You have just hired a bunch of dog catchers in a developing city. You have a bunch of wild rabid dogs running around loose in the neighborhoods of this city, no owner, non domesticated, very dangerous. Then you have a bunch of “quiet dog” with dog tags, well behaved “trained” “family” pet “who belong to someone”, and is the “owners best friend”. Which do you send the dog catchers after? The rabid dogs of course. Then why do people evangelize to Jews who are “nonviolent”, “in the Law”, “chosen by G-d”, already worshiping the G-d of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, while ignoring those who are enraged, live outside the law and will of G-d, and don’t have any structure or morality and worship other gods or idols??