All Comments (22)

>>Call is one of them protestants. They're all heretics and subject to be drawn and quartered, put to the rack, burned at the stake and hurt real bad otherwise. Thou shalt not protest the pope's God given authority.

As far out in outer space as bgone sounds sometime...I think he's really starting to grasp that religious confusion is man's problem...not God's. He's just letting his children learn at their own request in their own way. It has certainly become a quasi-entertaining rollercoaster.

Won't the family of man be dumbfounded when the day comes ....like, duh.

kudos, my friend.

>>Huck and Cal's book also have some pretty harsh things to say about folks who practice my religion.

No wonder. Millions who see the error in pagan practices, witchcraft, etc. -- they're all wrong?
..I dont think so. The society that accepts them as 'normal' begins their fall.

>>As it stands now, it's illegal in certain parishes of my state to earn a living by giving Tarot readings. It's perfectly legal, however, to earn a living as a Christian counselor.

Its not rocket science for even the simplest of human beings to understand why the above comments are true....and right. Most human beings prefer a 52 card deck and you can always depend on what a diamond, club, spade or heart is.

Here is a link to the CNN website, about a Christian critic of Christianity; take a look at it, if you care to:

http://www.cnn.com/2008/LIVING/wayoflife/01/24/best.selling.christian.ap/index.html?imw=Y&iref=mpstoryemail

like hell, bgone that was why we had the Thirty Years War to tell the pope to take his bastardized form of Christianity straight to hell along with him.;)

Mad Love:

A kinder gentler theocracy.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Good start. Add -run by Jesuits.

Jesuits never draw blood but do get a good clean confession before they turn those sinners over to the authorities.

Call is one of them protestants. They're all heretics and subject to be drawn and quartered, put to the rack, burned at the stake and hurt real bad otherwise. Thou shalt not protest the pope's God given authority.

i read this as "first, consider thee with text", am i right?

http://newsweek.washingtonpost.com/onfaith/2008/01/god_and_the_constitution/comments.htm

Thanks Fate,

I checked out your link and several others. I see what Cal is saying now, but I also see how it could be viewed as a slap at the constitution which is concerning. Basically, I think Huckabee is just pandering to his base. Politicians do it all the time in the primaries.

A kinder gentler theocracy.

None of the things you mention, abortion, gay marriage or judgments/courts are in "we need . . . 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."

Maybe you should read it, the topic again? I was hoping you could fill us in on God's standard. And, the source of God's standard --which is?

http://www.hoax-buster.org/sellyoursoul has the skinny on the supernatural being that's behind the Bible if that's where you think God's standard can be found. That's Devil's standard.

Are you aware that those who utter the word God and have in mind the being in the burning bush blaspheme? Yeah, blaspheme. God's punishment for Adam and Eve was eviction. For Cain who murdered his brother there was banishment to Nod where he live the good life -big house etc. But those who declared Lucifer to be God and thus blasphemed were thrown into hell.

Maybe we should remove "under God" from the pledge and help 86% of Americans to stop blaspheming when they recite it.

Your Huckabee-apologetics-fu is weak Cal Thomas.

As a card carrying atheist, I'm actually relieved with Huckabee's comments. Part of the nature of our constitution is its ability to be changed through a well defined constitutional process. In our past, we have in fact changed the constitution in order to form "a more perfect union," e.g ending slavery and granting African American's the right to vote. If Huckabee wishes to use the democratic process in order to change the constitution, the more power to him. I will of course vehemently disagree with him, and lobby so that no such change will occur. Huckabee however is honest in his aims, and his arms are legal. Instead of engaging extra-legal or quasi-legal means such as packing the court which are difficult to counter via democratic means, he wishes to legally change America into a theocracy. This is not my America, but if he wants to argue that fact, then I wish him the best of luck.

Cal obviously has a reading comprehension problem. That explains a lot.

That's because the Bible is great for the economy - take from the poor, give it to the meek pastors and preachers! The meek inherit the Earth (and low-income housing), and the pastors get - a Benz!

Huck and Cal's book also have some pretty harsh things to say about folks who practice my religion. Seems to me that "bringing the Constitution more in line with (Huck's) God's word" would not be compatible with maintaining freedom of religion.
So would Huck set out to promote legislation mandating the destruction of all non-Christian churches and temples? Would my possession of Goddess statuary and Tarot cards become a crime? As it stands now, it's illegal in certain parishes of my state to earn a living by giving Tarot readings. It's perfectly legal, however, to earn a living as a Christian counselor.

Ghostbuster,

I haven't found the full speech yet, but here is Huckabee on CNN being asked about the quote, which he defends, adding that the Constitution is a "living, breathing document" designed for change. It includes footage of Huckabee making the statement in question. Click on the link and then the YouTube window to play. You will see that Huckabee never mentions activist judges or the courts as Cal uses as an excuse. He's talking about shreading the constitution to make it in line with scripture. A scary thing to watch from a presidential candidate.

http://hotair.com/archives/2008/01/18/video-huckabee-says-the-constitution-is-a-living-breathing-document/

Cal, as usual you got it completely wrong. This is what Huckabee said while campaigning in Michigan:

"[Some of my opponents] 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."

Now Cal says he was just talking about changing the courts. He was talking about changing the constitution Cal! And amending it to conform to God's standards, which means Huckabee believes the Consitution currently violates God's standards. I think this is the first time in history a presidential candidate has said he does not regard the constitution's validity. If he were elected president his statement means he could not in good conscience swear to an oath to defend the Constitution. Our worthless journalists haven't asked Huchabee about that little problem though.

Now Huckabee's comment was not just a flip remark. It has real meaning. In GA and CO there are people pushing amendments to their state constitutions to add an amendment saying that "personhood" applies to all humans from the moment of fertilization. There is also a push to place this as an amendment to the US Constitution. The result would be that an embryo, even those in freezers, would have the same rights as the guy or gal standing next to you. A miscarriage could be grounds for indictment for homicide. Abortion of course would be what evangelicals have always called it, murder, even using the morning after pill. In other words, the embryo a woman carries becomes equal with the mother. If she gets cancer, no chemo, no radiation, since it would harm the embryo. If the pregnancy needs to be terminiated or the mother will die, well, no law allows the killing of a person to save another. These people are insane and Huckabee is courting them plain and simple.

It seems clear to me, that Huckabee is the only candidate getting evangelical votes, so he's going whole-hog to get them, using code words to get the message across that he is with them. That remark, which Cal completely misconstrues, was such a code sent to evangelicals. Make no mistake, Huck intends to capture enough support among evangelicals that he will become the VP nominee of a desperate republican presidential hopeful.

Can anyone provide a link where I can read the full quote, in context?

I'd like to check it out for myself.

thanks

The US Constitution and its Bill of Rights already are the Standards of the Singularity and Humankind. And these Standards provide a shining beacon for backward, Dark Age, Islamic theocracies to someday follow.

And comments like those of "Preacher Huck" will also be discarded in the future by the enveloping knowledge concerning the errors in the foundations of all religions.

Note the right wing spin here. Cal says that Huckabee's comments should be viewed as only commenting on abortion and same-sex marriage. But the basis for Huckabee's conclusion on those two points was an argument for conforming the Constitution to God's word, an argument that applies to many more issues than those two. Even Cal recognizes how dangerous Huckabee's broad argument is, so he tries to minimize it.

There is no stuffing that monster into a box. Huckabee is a dangerous, unamerican theocrat.

Norrie:

What has actually bothered me about both sides of the political spectrum is that they say that States should have the ability to make their own decisions, as long as they agree with us.

It's an interesting position, and neither side seems to like it when a State actually does practice this right and does something that the respective party doesn't like.

The Constitution gives authority to the State on any decision that isn't granted to the Federal government. But yet, if gay marriage is approved by Massachusetts, Republicans decry this decision. Yet, if gay marriage is made illegal in a state, they cheer for the ability of states to make their own decisions, and doing it right.

I see Democrats doing the same thing on different issues, though. It's always baffled me. You're either for States' rights or you're not. But if you're for it, you can't complain when a state makes a decision that you personally don't like.

But, back onto the point, I don't get where Huckabee thinks that he should be able to rework the Constitution to conform to his view of what the Bible says. The framers of the Constitution made it very clear that that was not to happen. Also, since we should have no religious test of a political candidate, if one Christian is allowed to adjust the Constitution to align with the Bible, what is to prevent a Jewish President (if one were to ever be elected) from changing it again to match the Torah?

Cal,

While I respect your right to have your opinion of what was said, I do think that you didn't read the whole statement. Huckabee actually said that the Constitution should be fixed to match up with the Bible. I don't really know how to take that as making laws match up with the Constitution. He actually thinks that the Constitution should be changed to better reflect what the Bible says.

And that is a fine opinion to have, but I want that kind of talk kept away from any officer which, when sworn in, vows to defend the Constitution.

Note that Governor Huckabee says that he's for states' rights and letting the states decide all sorts of things for themselves without being restricted by the Constitution or the courts.

Yet his proposed federal constitutional amendments would prohibit the states (including my State of Vermont) from permitting civil unions or allowing abortions.

His "New States Rights Constitution" would presumably also allow South Carolina and other states to reestablish segregation and Jim Crow.