quote:

---

Huckabee: Amend Constitution to be in 'God's standards'

David Edwards and Muriel Kane
Published: Tuesday January 15, 2008

The United States Constitution never uses the word "God" or makes mention of any religion, drawing its sole authority from "We the People." However, Republican presidential candidate Mike Huckabee thinks it's time to put an end to that.

"I have opponents in this race who do not want to change the Constitution," Huckabee told a Michigan audience on Monday. "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 -- 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."

---

excerpt:

He wants to create a marriage amendment which says that marriage is between a man and a woman. The Bible doesn’t exactly say that, but he could create an amendment that would better conform to the marriage customs of that period, (and we’d need to know which period he’s referring to – pre-Eden or post-Eden? Before Jesus, during Jesus, after Jesus?)

excerpt:

He has also asked for an amendment about the sanctity of life. Since there is nothing in the Bible about abortion, except perhaps Numbers 5:12 which seems to be for abortion, not against it, since it allows a priest to cause a miscarriage (depending on the translation – see above) the amendment would need to state that abortion would be prohibited, except in instances when the husband accuses the woman of being pregnant with another man.

excerpt:

This would also need a clear amendment against adultery, which would need extra government money for more sex police (since the homosexual police wouldn’t be on the same adultery patrol, since homosexuals wouldn’t be married and therefore couldn’t commit adultery.) And, it would eliminate several of the Republican candidates or would-be candidates and put them in jail (Good-bye Rudy, and don’t run Newt!)

excerpt:

Polygamy, of course, would need to be reinstated. Slavery also and slaves, and women, would need to be subject to their masters – white men! Women would need to stop wearing pants and men would need to grow beards. (See Deuteronomy and various other verses in the Hebrew Scriptures.)

excerpt:

In order to gain favor with a king, Abraham said that his wife was his sister, and offered her to the king for sex. This happened twice (Genesis 12:11 and Genesis 20:2). Isaac did a similar thing (Genesis 26:6-10). And Lot (Genesis 19:8) once offered his virgin daughters to be used by a mob at Sodom. (St. Peter called Lot a "righteous man", 2 Peter 2:8)

[ 17 January 2008: Message edited by: oldgoat ]

Well, so have I. In fact, I spent a year studying it quite intensively for 12 hours a day. In the original Hebrew. Plus the entire oral Bible as well. And I get the impression that he has no idea what the hell he's talking about.

First of all, while the written Bible doesn't even talk about abortion, the roal Bible does and actually allows it in certain cases. So I don't know where he's even getting this viewpoint from.

I also have no idea what means when he says he wants a return to the "Biblical" view of marriage. He thinks we should have multiple wives, like Avraham and Yaakov? Does it mean that he'll lower teh age of marriage? Can a father appoint an emmissary to go and choose a wife for his young daughter, as is taught in Masecta Kedushin? Will the legal contract for marriage conform to the specifications of Masecta Ketuba? Can a man refuse to grant his wife a divorce as is also advocated? If my brother dies, am I obligated to them marry his wife? Even if I already have a wife of my own? This is clearly spelt out in Masecta Nedarim, afterall. How is all of this going to be enforced? The Bible spells out that these matters can only be enforced by the Sanhedrin, the rabbinical court. I wonder if he can get Scalia converted in time to be chief justice.

I feel sorry for gay people though. Vayikra/Leviticus clearly spells out that they should be put to death. At least they won't be alone on death row, though. After all, if you work on the Sabbath, that's a capital offence too.

quote:

---

The process of amendment: Explicitly denied by the Bible. Rather than creating a living, dynamic system of laws that can be improved and mended as society sees fit, the Bible claims that its laws are eternal and immutable, literally set in stone, and can neither be added to nor changed. The Old Testament says that each of its laws "shall be a statute forever" (Leviticus 23:41), and the New Testament says that anyone who suggests a different gospel should be accursed (Galatians 1:8-9).
Religious freedom: Explicitly denied by the Bible. Far from granting people the right to worship as they see fit, the Bible says that anyone who encourages believers to serve other gods, or anyone who speaks "blasphemy", should be killed (Deuteronomy 13:6-9, Leviticus 24:16). God himself joins in on many occasions by slaughtering people who worship different gods (Exodus 22:20). Although Jesus does say that people should "render to Caesar the things that are Caesar's" (Mark 12:17), there is no indication that any non-Christian should enjoy the same freedom of worship as believers.
Freedom of speech, assembly, press and petition: Explicitly denied by the Bible. As above, the Bible does not grant freedom of speech, but rather threatens death for those who speak in unapproved ways. Ancient Israel had no concept of the press, but there are also many cases in which people were killed for unapproved assemblies or for questioning their leaders (Numbers 16:35).

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Sineed:
From Daylight Atheism.org:

---

These people don't strike me as very well-informed.

ETA: doubtless someone will interpret the above as agreement with Huckabee. It is not.

[ 17 January 2008: Message edited by: RosaL ]

Also from Daylight Atheism:

quote:

---

Protection from cruel or unusual punishment: Explicitly denied by the Bible. One of the most common punishments prescribed by the Bible is stoning - bludgeoning a person to death by smashing in his head and face with rocks. This penalty is prescribed for crimes such as disobeying one's parents (Deuteronomy 21:21), picking up sticks on Sunday (Numbers 15:36), or being gay (Leviticus 20:13). This is "cruel and unusual" punishment by any rational definition of that term.
Equality of all people under the law: Explicitly denied by the Bible. The Bible makes it clear that the Israelites enjoyed special favor as compared to everybody else, and were treated differently by the Mosaic law code. For example, foreigners taken as slaves could be kept indefinitely, while Israelite slaves were freed every seven years during Jubilee (Leviticus 25:39-46). Even among Israelites, there were stark divisions: women are worth considerably less than men (Leviticus 27:1-7), and the handicapped are discriminated against (Leviticus 21:17-23). Even Jesus joins in by making statements comparing non-Jews to dogs (Mark 7:27).

---

If the US Constitution becomes a religious document, that difference goes away.

Edited to add: On second thought, there's one more difference -- who gets to appoint the people who interpret the respective authoritative documents.

[ 17 January 2008: Message edited by: Proaxiom ]

quote:

---

I think the radical view is to say that we’re going to change the definition of marriage so that it can mean two men, two women, a man and three women, a man and a child, a man and animal.

---

http://tinyurl.com/243unl

And the scary thing is that Huckabee is viewed with suspicion as a moderate in the Southern Baptist Convention.

http://blog.beliefnet.com/castingstones/2007/12/baptist-civil-war-fallout-or-w.html

[ 17 January 2008: Message edited by: josh ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Sineed:
I don't know enough about the Bible to critique these statements. Are they incorrect?

---

On the other hand, one has to understand that, at the time, it was Jesus's people who were the downtrodden and the oppressed. I'm not very up on my classical history, but I think it was the Romans who were the oppressors at the time, and I have no idea where Greeks came into that.

Some people have also interpreted his remarks to refer to her gender. Why feed the dogs (women) when children (men) need to be fed? I'm not sure I agree with that, as he did have female disciples.

The old Testament is far older than the new, of course, and many of its doctrines date from 900 years before Christ, and before.

To claim that "the Bible" endorses inequality, as is done above, is about as silly as can be imagined. Many later Jewish prophets, and certainly Christ himself, explicitly endorsed the equality of all human beings.

In Galatians, New Testament, Paul writes:

quote:

---

"There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus."

---

"In Christ" there is no distinction between people, but in society there certainly was, and Paul upheld it. He's saying everyone can become a Christian, but he's not saying everyone is equal.

[ 17 January 2008: Message edited by: Michelle ]

[ 17 January 2008: Message edited by: remind ]

quote:

---

Anyhow, as for the outrageously cruel and unusual punishments - it's true, the Bible definitely did endorse them, and for absolutely ridiculous "crimes". However, the Bible (and we're talking Old Testament) also had some elementary justice rules in it too, with "eye for an eye". This sounds horrid today, but at the time, if I remember my theology right, I think it's commonly thought to have been to set a LIMIT on punishment. So, if someone smacks you across the face, you don't get to kill them in return - you can do anything up to smacking them back. If someone knocks out your tooth, you don't get to cut off their arm.

---

All likely lifted from Hammurabi's Code.

so, if you have news for me, it will also be news to most political writers on the concept of equality.

the idea that everyone is equal 'before god' many not explicitly say they are also equal within society, but it totally undermines any argument that society is justified in maintaining inequality.

hat's probably why the first feminists in the united states, and among the first abolitionists of slavery, the grimke sisters, wrote;

quote:

---

Yes, "it is all one," for our books and papers are mostly commentaries on the Bible, and the Declaration. Read the Bible then, it contains the words of Jesus, and they are spirit and life. Judge for yourselves whether he sanctioned such a system of oppression and crime.

---

[ 17 January 2008: Message edited by: jeff house ]

[ 17 January 2008: Message edited by: Michelle ]

here's one i have read.

Jeremy Waldron, God, Locke and Equality: Christian Foundations of Locke's Political Thought, Cambridge University Press, 2002, 263pp, $22.00 (pbk), ISBN 0521890578

quote:

---

Originally posted by remind:
It is Galatians 3:28 to which Jeff is referring. And I too believe it is a statement of equality of all.

---

It must be pretty ambiguous in the original Greek. It took a couple thousand years of poring over that passage before a few Christian groups started ordaining women. And believe it or not, I hear there are still some New Testament worshipping sects that don't do so.

ETA:

quote:

---

Originally posted by jeff house:
no one is saying that equality is the only doctrine to be found within the 2000 years of christian thought, only that it is silly to claim the bible excludes equality.

---

Quite correct. It's not the Bible that has excluded equality for thousands of years. It is religion.

[ 17 January 2008: Message edited by: unionist ]

quote:

---

32 All the believers were one in heart and mind. No one claimed that any of his possessions was his own, but they shared everything they had.

33 With great power the apostles continued to testify to the resurrection of the Lord Jesus, and much grace was upon them all.

34 There were no needy persons among them. For from time to time those who owned lands or houses sold them, brought the money from the sales

35 and put it at the apostles' feet, and it was distributed to anyone as he had need.

---

This is nonsense, even if there is sound historical linkage. It is extremely difficult to argue that rights could not have emerged without religion.

Same goes for morality. Christian tradition would have us think that before Moses lugged some big rocks down a hill, people thought theft, murder and adultery were AOK. Prior to that, God hadn't said anything about 'right' and 'wrong' so how were we to know?

quote:

---

Originally posted by unionist:
It must be pretty ambiguous in the original Greek. It took a couple thousand years of poring over that passage before a few Christian groups started ordaining women. And believe it or not, I hear there are still some New Testament worshipping sects that don't do so.

---

Well, the response to this is buttressed by your final comment really.

People could not read en masse, until very recently in historical terms, and thus never had access to The Bible to read and interpret for themselves. And of course was the fact, until the advent of the printing press, copies of the The Bible were not readily available and people had to take others word of what was said within.

Then we had the Catholic Church repressing knowlege and skewing things, and they actually never used a language that the majority of Catholic people understood until recently either.

Which leads us to your comment:

quote:

---

Quite correct. It's not the Bible that has excluded equality for thousands of years. It is religion.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by kropotkin1951:
I too dislike organized religion however I do like Acts 32 ... which many accept as the basis of liberation theolgy in the Catholic tradition.

---

quote:

---

So it's ok to slather a squirrel in oil and fry it on a popcorn popper, but not to marry and have sex with it? That hardly seems fair.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by jeff house:
no one is saying that equality is the only doctrine to be found within the 2000 years of christian thought, only that it is silly to claim the bible excludes equality.

---

Jesus and the Syro-Phoenecian woman (Mark 7:24-30): it's a disturbing story. But it seems that Jesus had second thoughts even in this particular episode. Perhaps he learned something in this encounter.

It's notable in this story that the woman's behaviour towards him (a male and a Jew) was, by the social norms of the time and place, considered to be scandalous and to shame him. She has, by the standards of the time, insulted him. Yet he concedes that she has won the argument (the only occasion in all 4 gospels when Jesus loses an argument, it is to a pagan woman) and does what she asks. He seems, in the end, to accept the appropriateness of her behaviour and of her request. The significance of this should not be overlooked.

Right after this episode, according to Mark, he takes a route through non-Jewish territory, presumably carrying on his work there, amongst the pagans. The rest of his practice was remarkably accepting of outcasts, foreigners, and "the dregs of society".

[ 17 January 2008: Message edited by: RosaL ]

quote:

---

Among Huckabee's leading evangelical backers is Pastor John Hagee, head of a Pentecostal congregation in San Antonio, Texas, with 18,000 members and the executive director of Christians United for Israel, a national lobbying group that organizes against a two-state solution to the Israel-Palestine crisis and in favor of a military strike on Iran.

Hagee's zealous support for Israel is kindled by his belief that Jesus will one day return to "biblical Israel" to usher in a kingdom of Heaven on Earth. "As soon as Jesus sits on his throne he's gonna rule the world with a rod of iron," Hagee told his congregation in a sermon this December. "That means he's gonna make the ACLU do what he wants them to. That means you're not gonna have to ask if you can pray in public school.... We will live by the law of God and no other law."

Huckabee made a pilgrimage to Hagee's Cornerstone Church just one week after the pastor's anti-ACLU jeremiad. During the first of two sermons Huckabee delivered there, he was greeted with a thunderous standing ovation. The candidate returned the sentiment, hailing his gracious host, Hagee, as "one of the great Christian leaders of our nation."

---

In this article you can also read about how he had a rapist released from jail because the man converted to a born-again Evangelical in prison, and went on to kill a couple of women before being re-arrested, eventually dying in prison.

Edited for grammatical sins.

[ 17 January 2008: Message edited by: Sineed ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by kropotkin1951:
I too dislike organized religion however I do like Acts 32 ... which many accept as the basis of liberation theolgy in the Catholic tradition.

---