Huckabee wants the Constitution to match ‘God’s standards’

[no name 1]

The United States Constitution, the foundation of our system of government and a model for the world for more than two centuries, is an entirely secular document. It doesn’t mention God or any specific faith tradition, it only mentions religion at all to separate church and state.

Apparently, that’s not quite good enough for Mike Huckabee.

For those of you who can’t watch clips online, the video shows Huckabee, speaking to an audience in Michigan yesterday, arguing, “I have opponents in this race who do not 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. 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 so it lines up with some contemporary view of how we treat each other and how we treat the family.”

Now, I should note that I haven’t seen the full context, and have only seen what MSNBC showed this morning on the air. But it’s very difficult to imagine the circumstances that could make these comments acceptable. Indeed, in case there were any doubts, there was no indication that Huckabee was kidding. (First Read added that the context was Huckabee expressing his support for constitutional amendments discriminating against gays and banning abortion.)

Huckabee whined at a recent debate that he, a former Baptist minister, gets more questions about religion than any of the other Republican presidential candidates. As he sees it, that’s unfair.

But Huckabee is, in more ways than one, terribly confused.

When we have an evangelical candidate publicly arguing that we should change the U.S. Constitution to bring it in line with his views of “God’s standards” — and then he criticizes his GOP rivals for disagreeing — we’re looking at a candidate who probably isn’t receiving enough questions about religion.

On MSNBC, Willie Geist noted after showing the clip that if a typical American made similar remarks about changing the Constitution, “he’d be dismissed as a crackpot, but he’s Mike Huckabee and he’s basically the front-runner.”

Maybe, but I’m still pretty comfortable calling Huckabee a crackpot anyway.

Once in a while, I hear liberals refer to the “Taliban wing of the Republican Party.” I should admit that I’ve never been entirely comfortable with the phrase, in part because I think it’s overused. The Taliban believes there should be no secular law — that all rules of government should be based on a specific religious worldview. Most Republicans reject that kind of thinking.

But that’s exactly what makes Huckabee’s remarks so startling. If the video clip is accurate, he was coming a little too close to a Taliban-like approach to the law. The Constitution, Huckabee seemed to be arguing, isn’t good enough the way it is; we need to fix it, by making it conform to “God’s standards.” And who’s going to decide exactly what standards God prefers? Presumably, Huckabee and his evangelical supporters will.

I don’t care how charming Huckabee is. It’s irrelevant whether he can be funny on The Colbert Report. Anyone who believes the U.S. Constitution is flawed because it insufficiently meets “God’s standards” is almost certainly living in the wrong country.

source

[w¡n9Nµ7 §£@¥€r 123]

I don't know the answer to this, but I would like to know: how did Huck's Christian faith impact his performance as governor of Arkansas?

[Amby 490]

what? I didn't even read it all because I thought the beginning was too much

[Sister Fracas 5]

scares me that he's even a consideration with comments like these... *shudder*

[no name 1]

scares me that he's even a consideration with comments like these... *shudder*

I know. Scary as he!!.

[almaty 19]

wow, i guess, seperation of church and state are not in his constitution

[Peikko 1,575]

Worse, what it boils down to is man's interpretation of what God's Standards might be and not a generally recognised, well argumented version, but some personal interpretation put forward by a small section who believe in literal intepretations of a book that is clearly a work flawed by human intepretation from the get go. Well, 2008 could well be a huge step in the wrong direction.

However, I think it's a pretty safe bet that old Huckers will not get the GOP nod.

[Alex+R 0]

wow, i guess, seperation of church and state are not in his constitution

Technically, they're not in ours, either.

[almaty 19]

In the United States, separation of church and state is often identified with the First Amendment to the United States Constitution, which states that Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof… The phrase building a wall of separation between church and state was written by thomas Jefferson

[Don_Joy's Prince 0]

wow, i guess, seperation of church and state are not in his constitution

Technically, they're not in ours, either.

Yes you are correct Alex! I wish more people would actually read what it says instead of assuming.

Huckabee has no possible chance of winning the nomination.

Our Constitution is hard to change and rightfully so. There is no need to go changing it willy-nilly to suit the taste of anyone. The Constitution will still be here after they are long dead and buried.

The phrase separation of church and does not exist in the Constitution. It was taken from a letter written by Thomas Jefferson and put into the modern lexicon by a supreme court case from the early 20th century where the justice quoted this long lost letter to support his opinion on the case before him.

Never has been in the Constitution.

[almaty 19]

wow, i guess, seperation of church and state are not in his constitution

Technically, they're not in ours, either.

Yes you are correct Alex! I wish more people would actually read what it says instead of assuming.

Huckabee has no possible chance of winning the nomination.

Our Constitution is hard to change and rightfully so. There is no need to go changing it willy-nilly to suit the taste of anyone. The Constitution will still be here after they are long dead and buried.

The phrase separation of church and does not exist in the Constitution. It was taken from a letter written by Thomas Jefferson and put into the modern lexicon by a supreme court case from the early 20th century where the justice quoted this long lost letter to support his opinion on the case before him.

Never has been in the Constitution.

In the United States, separation of church and state is often identified with the First Amendment to the United States Constitution, which states that Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof… The phrase building a wall of separation between church and state was written by thomas Jefferson

--------------------

and via the supreme court decisions ..it has stood that way///

[simple_male 1]

Let him shout as much as he can. Either it will be McCain or Romney who will be the Republican nominee.

The United States Constitution, the foundation of our system of government and a model for the world for more than two centuries, is an entirely secular document. It doesn’t mention God or any specific faith tradition, it only mentions religion at all to separate church and state.

Apparently, that’s not quite good enough for Mike Huckabee.

For those of you who can’t watch clips online, the video shows Huckabee, speaking to an audience in Michigan yesterday, arguing, “I have opponents in this race who do not 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. 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 so it lines up with some contemporary view of how we treat each other and how we treat the family.”

Now, I should note that I haven’t seen the full context, and have only seen what MSNBC showed this morning on the air. But it’s very difficult to imagine the circumstances that could make these comments acceptable. Indeed, in case there were any doubts, there was no indication that Huckabee was kidding. (First Read added that the context was Huckabee expressing his support for constitutional amendments discriminating against gays and banning abortion.)

Huckabee whined at a recent debate that he, a former Baptist minister, gets more questions about religion than any of the other Republican presidential candidates. As he sees it, that’s unfair.

But Huckabee is, in more ways than one, terribly confused.

When we have an evangelical candidate publicly arguing that we should change the U.S. Constitution to bring it in line with his views of “God’s standards” — and then he criticizes his GOP rivals for disagreeing — we’re looking at a candidate who probably isn’t receiving enough questions about religion.

On MSNBC, Willie Geist noted after showing the clip that if a typical American made similar remarks about changing the Constitution, “he’d be dismissed as a crackpot, but he’s Mike Huckabee and he’s basically the front-runner.”

Maybe, but I’m still pretty comfortable calling Huckabee a crackpot anyway.

Once in a while, I hear liberals refer to the “Taliban wing of the Republican Party.” I should admit that I’ve never been entirely comfortable with the phrase, in part because I think it’s overused. The Taliban believes there should be no secular law — that all rules of government should be based on a specific religious worldview. Most Republicans reject that kind of thinking.

But that’s exactly what makes Huckabee’s remarks so startling. If the video clip is accurate, he was coming a little too close to a Taliban-like approach to the law. The Constitution, Huckabee seemed to be arguing, isn’t good enough the way it is; we need to fix it, by making it conform to “God’s standards.” And who’s going to decide exactly what standards God prefers? Presumably, Huckabee and his evangelical supporters will.

I don’t care how charming Huckabee is. It’s irrelevant whether he can be funny on The Colbert Report. Anyone who believes the U.S. Constitution is flawed because it insufficiently meets “God’s standards” is almost certainly living in the wrong country.

source

[w¡n9Nµ7 §£@¥€r 123]

Again, no matter what Huck might believe about God, in the many years he was Governor of Arkansas, did he ever impose his faith on the people of that state?

I do not know the answer. I would like to know.

[no name 1]

Again, no matter what Huck might believe about God, in the many years he was Governor of Arkansas, did he ever impose his faith on the people of that state?

I do not know the answer. I would like to know.

Google it if you care so much.

[w¡n9Nµ7 §£@¥€r 123]

Again, no matter what Huck might believe about God, in the many years he was Governor of Arkansas, did he ever impose his faith on the people of that state?

I do not know the answer. I would like to know.

Google it if you care so much.

I will. Just asking the crowd if anyone knew.