Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Location: By the sea, by the sea, by the beautiful sea
68,330 posts, read 54,419,437 times
Reputation: 40736
Advertisements
Quote:
Originally Posted by Yeledaf
Please. "Theocratic tendencies"? Because he is an unashamed Christian? I think you just have a problem with people with faith. Be careful -- that category includes Hillary and Barack Obama, among others...
For me, not because he is an unashamed Christian but beacuse he has said things like he wouldn't support states' rights on moral issues, and because he's willing to deny science when every president needs to make defense, energy, etc. decisions that are largely based on science.
For me, not because he is an unashamed Christian but beacuse he has said things like he wouldn't support states' rights on moral issues, and because he's willing to deny science when every president needs to make defense, energy, etc. decisions that are largely based on science.
Watch him. If he becomes a serious contender, his views will become more nuanced.
Please. "Theocratic tendencies"? Because he is an unashamed Christian? I think you just have a problem with people with faith. Be careful -- that category includes Hillary and Barack Obama, among others...
There is a huge difference!!!!! Neither Hillary or Obama find fault with the Constitution of the United States of America, and recommend that it be made into a Christian document in accord with the "word of the living God"; The United States was never intended to be a Christian country and our Constitution was specifically written to prevent that outcome. We neither want or need a Christian ayatolla for President.
There is a huge difference!!!!! Neither Hillary or Obama find fault with the Constitution of the United States of America, and recommend that it be made into a Christian document in accord with the "word of the living God"; The United States was never intended to be a Christian country and our Constitution was specifically written to prevent that outcome. We neither want or need a Christian ayatolla for President.
I just googled the Huckabee website and found this...
"The First Amendment requires that expressions of faith be neither prohibited nor preferred. We should not banish religion from the public square, but should guarantee access to all voices and views. We should share and debate our faith, but never seek to impose it. When discussing faith and politics, we should honor the "candid" in candidate - I have much more respect for an honest atheist than a disingenuous believer."
I just googled the Huckabee website and found this...
"The First Amendment requires that expressions of faith be neither prohibited nor preferred. We should not banish religion from the public square, but should guarantee access to all voices and views. We should share and debate our faith, but never seek to impose it. When discussing faith and politics, we should honor the "candid" in candidate - I have much more respect for an honest atheist than a disingenuous believer."
Doesn't sound like an Ayatollah to me.
I don't want to belabor the point, but need to say that if a candidate ever said he or she wanted to amend the constitution to make it conform to Shiria Law as found in the Koran, or to conform to the vision of Vishnu; everyone would have a right to oppose it. Same with making the Constitution conform to Huckabee's version of "the word of the living God". We need to elect a President and not a Preacher.
I am not a southern Baptist and their version of the Bible has no authority for me. Why should the Constitution have to conform to their scripture. Next thing we will have to stone adulterers and that could be bad for many if not most of our politicians and preachers.
I don't want to belabor the point, but need to say that if a candidate ever said he or she wanted to amend the constitution to make it conform to Shiria Law as found in the Koran, or to conform to the vision of Vishnu; everyone would have a right to oppose it. Same with making the Constitution conform to Huckabee's version of the word of the living God. We need to elect a President and not a Preacher.
It's academic. No individual can amend the Constitution. I am unfamiliar with the Huckabee quote which you papraphraising, but I would wager that he was speaking metaphorically.
Please. "Theocratic tendencies"? Because he is an unashamed Christian? I think you just have a problem with people with faith. Be careful -- that category includes Hillary and Barack Obama, among others...
Go back to his website and look at some things he has proposed. Passing the FMA would be a step toward a theocracy and I imagine he would want to take us even further.
Actually, no--one of the authority figures in my life I admire and try to emulate the most is a minister.
Watch him. If he becomes a serious contender, his views will become more nuanced.
I think you're right about that. I don't think he could win the support of a majority of the American people otherwise. But toning it down doesn't indicate that he's changing the way he feels. He's the same person pretending to be more moderate to get as many votes as possible.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
