[Choux]

Huckabee (R Presidential Candidate) said today that the Constitution should be changed to reflect God's Word as reflected in the Christian Bible. I don't know what specifically he has in mind, but isn't he advocating the overthrow of our government?

[BABRAM]

The part about the Constitution may be reviewed, discussed, dissected or reformed, but his notion of "God's Word" could only apply to the New Testament portion of his Christian Bible. I have no idea what he really means by such statement. If it as you imply, in this post, I'd really like to know what exactly Huckabee thinks is so vastly superior about a Christian Constitution. In Judaism, the Tanakh, or more specifically the Torah permitted (commanded) setting up guidelines for governing, otherwise known as the Noachide laws that predated Christianity by thousands of years. Certainly in Israel and within Jewish communities worldwide we are permitted change, and if necessary because as Jews, we are a people, nation, ethnicity, and faith. But I can't imagine in the US that Huckabee could advocate a Christian coup of sorts or high-jack the government based solely on his view of the Christian Bible. If so, which is questionable until we get solid facts, this would be teetering on the level of Pat Robertson weird. I'll reserve making any more comments until I read about some details. Good question though.





Bobby

[Fr_Chuck]

First I don't know he said it, I have not heard it officially and in political times there are more liies about canidates than truth.

But no, the if there is votes and if the Constitution is changed, there is no over throw, women could not vote at one point, that was changed,
So if this was to be the case, there would just need to be chnages made to the Constitiion and property voted on.

[Fr_Chuck]

Huckabee (R Presidential Candidate) said today that the Constitution should be changed to reflect God's Word as reflected in the Christian Bible. I don't know what specifically he has in mind, but isn't he advocating the overthrow of our government?

From Yahoo news it does not appear he said that the constitution should reflex the word of God but he wanted to merely change it to ban gay marriage and abortion.

Here is a section from Yahoo news

In South Carolina, as he did in Michigan, Huckabee was expected to rally pastors to help turn out their flocks. He has called for constitutional amendments to ban abortion and gay marriage, noting that some of his rivals don't want to change the Constitution.

"But I believe it's a lot easier to change the Constitution than it would be to change the word of the living God," he said Monday night in Warren, Mich. "And that's what we need to do, is to amend the Constitution so it's in God's standards, rather than try to change God's standards."

[BABRAM]

Fr_Chuck,


Here's a link:

Huck, the Constitution and 'God's standards' - First Read - msnbc.com


After reading the news commentary piece I didn't find anything that outlandish that Huckabee has mentioned that other Evangelical candidates haven't already said, implied, or suggested before. Although I disagree with parts of Christian theology in general, I have no problem with his desired expression to change the Constitution based on his views, or anyone else, including if the candidate was a lifelong Atheist for that matter. That's politics in an election year and we simply agree with candidate or not. As you mentioned earlier, at one time women could not vote. Personally to me the Constitution is an imperfect body of work.



Bobby

[tomder55]

An amendment on banning abortion has been tried before. It went nowhere and would not succeed again . The founders made it specifically difficult to change the Constitution ,and really there is no need to. Roe v Wade was an unconstitutional decision and what really needs to be done is to appoint judges who understand that.

The Huckster is pandering to the evangelical base . He knows that there will be no constitutional amendments on either issue. Huckleberry is no different than any politician who uses who or what they can to gain something for themselves.

I'm not interested in electing Nehemiah Scudder. All he needs is Bill Clintoon's sex drive and he could be Elmer Gantry .

[EuRa]

I like how in the USA, where you are supposedly free to believe any religion you want, that Huckabee wants to change the Constitution to reflect the beliefs of his God.

News Flash Huck: Your God isn't the only God that's loved and warshipped in the USA. This country was founded on separation of church and state. What gives you the right to put your beliefs ahead of everyone else's?

His damn religious views are going to blind this country.

[EuRa]

I have no problem with his desired expression to change the Constitution based on his views, or anyone else, including if the candidate was a lifelong Atheist for that matter.

I'd like to know why.

I have a problem with it because it's not his constitution to change, and because this country is supposed to be separate from the church. That's how America was founded, remember? People left England because the Church of England was too closely tied to the government. It was so bad, that everyone was willing to risk death and uncertainty to cross the ocean to get to America, rather than spend another day living under England's rule.

Why some of you people see nothing wrong with this, I'll never know.

[speechlesstx]

Huckabee (R Presidential Candidate) said today that the Constitution should be changed to reflect God's Word as reflected in the Christian Bible.[/QUOTE]

As others have noted he was referring specifically to abortion and same sex marriage. Ain't going to happen, but he sure spoke sweet music to the ears of many conservative evangelicals.

I don't know what specifically he has in mind, but isn't he advocating the overthrow of our government?

No, lol. Huckabee may very well have self-destructed with that remark.

[tomder55]

EuRa . To a point I agree with you . If a Muslim candidate were saying such things then most of us would be rightly alarmed. The founders were predominantly Christian and openly sought God's guidance in writing it. There should be nothing the Huckster should desire to change.

He was talking amending it for 2 specific contentious issues that needs to be addressed .His statement is taken out of content by the poster of the discussion although I agree with the sentiment . An amendment to ban gay marriage or abortion is not going to happen But it makes his supported feel good to hear it.

Remember when everyone was afraid that Romney would be influenced by his religion? Well;the Huckster has turned into that candidate ;preaching from the pulpit during the campaign .

[tomder55]

Quote:
I don't know what specifically he has in mind, but isn't he advocating the overthrow of our government?


No, lol. Huckabee may very well have self-destructed with that remark

Here's hoping. He is becoming the Ayatollah Hucktada al Sada

[speechlesstx]

Here's hoping. He is becoming the Ayatollah Hucktada al Sada

LOL, Hucktada al Sada... :D

It should comfort some (you know who you are) to know I haven't thrown my support behind Hucktada. Yeah, I want my president to have faith in God but I'm not voting for a new pastor.

[BABRAM]

I'd like to know why.

I have a problem with it because it's not his constitution to change, and because this country is supposed to be seperate from the church. That's how America was founded, remember? People left England because the Church of England was too closely tied to the government. It was so bad, that everyone was willing to risk death and uncertainty to cross the ocean to get to America, rather than spend another day living under England's rule.

Why some of you people see nothing wrong with this, I'll never know.

"You people?" Did you mean US citizens? I don't know where your people are from, but for all my country's imperfections I'm still content living in the US.

You need to highlight the correct portion of the subject quoted; I'll do that now. I have no problem with his desired expression. In other words, freedom of expression! That's what I love about living in the United States. BTW historically speaking by far the majority of people that live in the States are immigrants or had family that migrated from other countries, not just England. We vote in politicians whom we like, or not. Besides most of them never get the chance to do what they promise during elections. Those that get the opportunity by being elected, by we the people, still have to deal with a checks and balance system. If in the US we started shutting people out from being able to express themselves, or reform that which may need amending, we would be back under the era of suppression of the Church of England. And I for one certainly don't want that!




Bobby

[ETWolverine]

EuRa,

If all Americans are free to give their opinions, isn't Huckabee free to do the same? Even if you disagree with it? I'm not sure what Huckabee said or meant, but it seems to me that he has the same rights as anyone else. And that includes the right to advocate for a Constitutional Amendment on an issue that you disagree with. Don't like his opinion? Don't vote for him. But he gets his right to preach in favor of his version of G-d from the same place that you get your right to disagree with it... from the Constitution.

Chou,

No, I do not believe that Huckabee is advocating the overthrow of the government. What he is advocating is his trying to make his personal religious opinion into law via the estalished legal process of Constitutional Amendment. That is very different from advocating the overthrow of the government. And again, if you don't like his position, don't vote for him.

Personally, this is one area where you and I agree... Huckabee will not be getting my vote. But it's not because he is trying to overthrow anything. I just don't like his positions on the issues... including his Evangelistic positions calling for Constitutional Amendments. Keeping in mind that he has the right to advocate those positions however he wishes (wthin the bounds of the law), I don't agree with those positions, and I intend to vote against him and advocate against him.

It's called freedom of speech, people, and everyone has it... even those you disagree with.

Elliot

[EuRa]

"You people?" Did you mean US citizens?! I don't know where your people are from, but for all my country's imperfections I'm still content living in the US.

I stated "this country" when I referred to the United States in 2 of my replies, but somehow you still managed to assume I wasn't American. Selective reading?

You need to highlight the correct portion of the subject quoted; I'll do that now. I have no problem with his desired expression. In other words, freedom of expression! That's what I love about living in the United States. BTW historically speaking by far the majority of people that live in the States are immigrants or had family that migrated from other countries, not just England. We vote in politicians whom we like, or not. Besides most of them never get the chance to do what they promise during elections. Those that get the opportunity by being elected, by we the people, still have to deal with a checks and balance system. If in the US we started shutting people out from being able to express themselves, or reform that which may need amending, we would be back under the era of suppression of the Church of England. And I for one certainly don't want that!

So your main point is that you have no problem with the fact that he has freedom of speech, and is excercising his rights? There's a difference between a general "desired expression" and a specific "desired expression that has direction". Besides, an expression is more of a feeling or thought. Huckabee wants to change the constitution to reflect his religious beliefs, which is more of a suggestion. I have every right to disagree. It appeared you agreed with his suggesion. Was I wrong?

You said:

I have no problem with his desired expression to change the Constitution based on his views

You might have been talking about Huckabee's freedom of speech, but the above indicates you wouldn't mind if the constitution were changed based on religious beliefs. The following further supports your statement:

Personally to me the Constitution is an imperfect body of work.

This would suggest that you support his idea to change the constitution based on his religious beliefs. Was I wrong? Do you agree or disagree? If you disagree, make it clear, because so far you have been vague.

[Choux]

I just heard a sound bite, and I was alarmed by the language and message. Thanks for finding the actual quote on Yahoo. Greatly appreciated.

[EuRa]

EuRa,

If all Americans are free to give their opinions, isn't Huckabee free to do the same? Even if you disagree with it? I'm not sure what Huckabee said or meant, but it seems to me that he has the same rights as anyone else. And that includes the right to advocate for a Constitutional Amendment on an issue that you disagree with. Don't like his opinion? Don't vote for him. But he gets his right to preach in favor of his version of G-d from the same place that you get your right to disagree with it... from the Constitution.

Look what you did Bam. You've altered my response so much that other people don't understand what I'm saying.

I don't care if Huckabee said he wants it changed or not. I don't care if he said he wanted to change the constitution to include legalizing murder. Whatever he says is his choice. All I did was disagree with him. That's all I did. I disagree. He can say whatever he wants, but on the issue of changing the constitution to reflect his own personal beliefs, I disagree.

[BABRAM]

I stated "this country" when I refered to the United States in 2 of my replies, but somehow you still managed to assume I wasn't American. Selective reading?.

How ironic that you have selective typing skills. You must of meant, "our people." Although you typed, "you people."

So your main point is that you have no problem with the fact that he has freedom of speech, and is excercising his rights? There's a difference between a general "desired expression" and a specific "desired expression that has direction". Besides, an expression is more of a feeling or thought. Huckabee wants to change the constitution to reflect his religious beliefs, which is more of a suggestion. I have every right to disagree. It appeared you agreed with his suggesion. Was I wrong??.

In a word "YES." You're wrong. Actually I don't agree with the candidate on some issues, but we are not living in Nazi Germany, or under the suppression of the old Church of England, or rule of the Mafioso to permanently shut mouths here in the US. Trying to amend the Constitution is not so easily done, but the notion itself is not illegal.;)

Amending the Constitution

You might have been talking about Huckabee's freedom of speech, but the above indicates you wouldn't mind if the constitution were changed based on religious beliefs. This would suggest that you support his idea to change the constitution based on his religious beliefs. Was I wrong? Do you agree or disagree? If you disagree, make it clear, because so far you have been vague.

Wrong again. It can be proposed for change under any ideology, not just a religious view. In fact I even mentioned not caring if the person was a lifelong Atheist; it's not relative. Vague? I've taken your Church of England idea and put it into context. Huckabee has done nothing illegal here; transparently clear.



Bobby

[ETWolverine]

EuRa,

You said in one of your pior posts:

What gives you the right to put your beliefs ahead of everyone else's?

My response was a direct answer to that question. Huckabee has that right because the CONSTITUTION gives him that right. I happen to disagree with his stance as well. But that doesn't mean that he doesn't have the right to "put his God before everyone else's opinion" in his statements and to advocate for that position.

Unless I completely misunderstood your question (which seems pretty cut-and-dried to me) I think my response directly answers that question.

Elliot

[EuRa]

EuRa,

You said in one of your pior posts:

What gives you the right to put your beliefs ahead of everyone elses?

My response was a direct answer to that question. Huckabee has that right because the CONSTITUTION gives him that right. I happen to disagree with his stance as well. But that doesn't mean that he doesn't have the right to "put his God before everyone else's opinion" in his statements and to advocate for that position.

Unless I completely misunderstood your question (which seems pretty cut-and-dried to me) I think my response directly answers that question.

Elliot

Nah you took it out of context.

Once again, I know that Huckabee has every right to voice his opinion. I know that. I agree with that.

But I don't like how he's coming off. If I were running for president, I wouldn't be up there touting my religious beliefs, and trying to tell everyone how I would attempt to change the constitution because of religion, thus making me look like an untouchable dictator.

I'm 27, and if I was running for President (yes I know you have to be 45, just bear with me) and said "everyone 27 and under dont have to pay taxes, and im going to ammend the constitution because thats in my religion", you don't think I wouldn't tick a few people off? Id have my supporters, but Id have people who wouldn't support me too. And since when did I come off as the spokesman for 27 year olds and under? What gives me the right to just go saying what I would do to the constitution, the USA's most precious document, just to amend something because of my own personal beliefs?

He doesn't want to change the constitution for the good of the American people. He wants to do it because he's selfish. He want's to incorporate his beliefs into government Those two don't mix. That's my problem.