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

[Big Bang]

http://rawstory.com/news/2007/Huckabee_Amend_Constitution_to_meet_Gods_0115.html

If this guy wins I will become a Born-Again kkkristian just so I have someone to pray to to save me from this crazy asshole.

He's obviously pandering. I hate this guy...

[Desillusioned]

http://rawstory.com/news/2007/Huckabee_Amend_Constitution_to_meet_Gods_0115.html

If this guy wins I will become a Born-Again kkkristian just so I have someone to pray to to save me from this crazy asshole.

He's obviously pandering. I hate this guy...

lol i saw this a little bit earlier. Ron Paul 08! Fuckabee is not going to win.

[Professor Chaos]

lol i saw this a little bit earlier. Ron Paul 08! Fuckabee is not going to win.

After further researching Ron Paul, I might still prefer Huckabee over him. Ron Paul is dangerous.

[GodlessHeathen]

Ron Paul 08!
Yeah, because an evolution denier is SOOOooooo much better. . . :rolleyes:

[DrunkMonkey]

Neither Ron Paul nor Huckabee thinks evolution is true. Neither believes in the separation of church and state either.

[VladTheImpaler]

After further researching Ron Paul, I might still prefer Huckabee over him. Ron Paul is dangerous.

Dangerous? Explain?

[nkb]

Neither Ron Paul nor Huckabee thinks evolution is true. Neither believes in the separation of church and state either.
That's like trying to decide between banging Rosie O'Donnell or Rosanne Barr.

[Irreligious]

The only thing that shocks me here is Huckabee's candor. It's certainly not a stretch to me that the Huckster would prefer a theocracy over a representative democracy.

I hope Huckabee continues to be this candid throughout the campaign instead of pandering to a broader audience when it's convenient by backtracking and saying things he doesn't actually believe or support.

How else are folks with half a brain supposed to glean what a retard this guy is if he's not honest about it. Go Huckabee! Straight to hell in a handbasket.

[Coletrain]

The worst part?

People applauded him.

[PhilOchsLives]

The worst part?

People applauded him.

Brainwashed fuckheads applauded him.

Of course most of the USA consists of brainwashed fuckheads.

Ron Paul sucks ass.

[nkb]

The only thing that shocks me here is Huckabee's candor. It's certainly not a stretch to me that the Huckster would prefer a theocracy over a representative democracy.

I hope Huckabee continues to be this candid throughout the campaign instead of pandering to a broader audience when it's convenient by backtracking and saying things he doesn't actually believe or support.

How else are folks with half a brain supposed to glean what a retard this guy is if he's not honest about it. Go Huckabee! Straight to hell in a handbasket.
I agree, it's amazing that he is breaking out the big guns now.

Either he is a hopeless idealist, saying what he truly believes, and hoping that people will vote for him because of his honesty, or he believes the religious vote is strong enough to carry him, regardless of how many of the rest he scares the livin' Bejezus out of.

I can't decide whether Huckabee or Romney would be the ideal Republican candidate (and by ideal, I mean, no chance in hell of winning, even against Hillary).

[Livingstrong]

Brainwashed fuckheads applauded him.

Of course most of the USA consists of brainwashed fuckheads.

Ron Paul sucks ass.

Indeed.

[Livingstrong]

Yeah, because an evolution denier is SOOOooooo much better. . . :rolleyes:

Agreed with ya GH.
Ron Paul is an idiot, and an idiot will never accept evolution.

[Choobus]

what are "god's standards" anyway? I think it would be wrong to have a constitutional right to assfuck choirboys.

[ghoulslime]

what are "god's standards" anyway? I think it would be wrong to have a constitutional right to assfuck choirboys.

Besides a high tolerance for stupidity, God expects two fingers up the ass and a reach around. It is a matter of common courtesy.

[Sternwallow]

what are "god's standards" anyway? I think it would be wrong to have a constitutional right to assfuck choirboys.
See, that's where you are wrong. God's standards mandate assfucking choirboys. J'a never watch "South Park"?:D

[Choobus]

J'a never watch "South Park"?:D

Actually I don't. I appreciate the humour, but I simply cannot stand some of the voices.

[Philboid Studge]

BeliefNet: Is it your goal to bring the Constitution into strict conformity with the Bible? Some people would consider that a kind of dangerous undertaking, particularly given the variety of biblical interpretations.

HUCKABEE: Well, I don’t think that’s a radical view to say we’re going to affirm marriage. 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. Again, once we change the definition, the door is open to change it again. I think the radical position is to make a change in what’s been historic.

So teh gays = polygamy/paedophile/bestiality. Fuckabee's awesome!

[Professor Chaos]

Taking a page from the old Santorum playbook, I see. It worked so well for him!

[Irreligious]

BeliefNet: Is it your goal to bring the Constitution into strict conformity with the Bible? Some people would consider that a kind of dangerous undertaking, particularly given the variety of biblical interpretations.

HUCKABEE: Well, I don’t think that’s a radical view to say we’re going to affirm marriage. 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. Again, once we change the definition, the door is open to change it again. I think the radical position is to make a change in what’s been historic.

So teh gays = polygamy/paedophile/bestiality. Fuckabee's awesome!
True to form, the grinning bastard with the alleged puppy dog eyes resorts to subterfuge, backtracking and verbal sleight of hand. He wasn't asked about affirming marriage. He was asked specifically about his claim to support changing the U.S. Constitution to conform to his interpretation of the Bible and he dodged the question.

And speaking of non sequiturs, why is radical change necessarily a bad thing? Why doesn't someone ask the Huckster that? The fucking United States of America itself was a radical departure from rule by the British monarchy. The 14th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution was a radical departure from the previous clause in the Bill of Rights that defined an African-American slave as 3/5th of a person. Are these radical departures from previous conventions bad things to Huckabee?

And what about the radical departure from 18th century technology? Does the Huckster travel by covered wagon while on his campaign trail? Does he speak only to print reporters and shun those from the electronic media?

I recently saw a digital photograph (!) of him working out on an electronically-powered treadmill. Isn't that a radical departure from running on a dirt road, the way Thomas Jefferson and the other founding fathers had to? The Huckster definitely needs to be called on his bullshit.

[nkb]

I recently saw a digital photograph (!) of him working out on an electronically-powered treadmill. Isn't that a radical departure from running on a dirt road, the way Thomas Jefferson and the other founding fathers had to? The Huckster definitely needs to be called on his bullshit.
I thought TJ and friends had their slaves do their running for them.

[nkb]

What annoys me the most in these discussions is that nobody makes the distinction between state-sanctioned marriage and religious marriage.

Because the same word is used (with corresponding religious baggage) for both, Christians get all uptight, because it sounds like we're attacking their version of it.

I bet a significant percentage of Christians would care a lot less if that distinction was clear.

[Rhinoqulous]

Because the same word is used (with corresponding religious baggage) for both, Christians get all uptight, because it sounds like we're attacking their version of it.

Christians themselves don't use their own version of "marriage". The "tradition" that homosexual marriage threatens is one that is not very old at all. No divorce, Women as property, men being "in charge" of the marriage, etc., are traditions that have (for the most part) been thrown out the window. If some aspects of the "traditional" marriage can change without the institution collapsing, why would this change suddenly make a mockery of something that already does not resemble what it was 100 years ago?

[whoneedscience]

I bet a significant percentage of Christians would care a lot less if that distinction was clear.

Ah, but then they wouldn't be as easy to take advantage of by devious, lying sacks of shit politicians

[nkb]

Christians themselves don't use their own version of "marriage". The "tradition" that homosexual marriage threatens is one that is not very old at all. No divorce, Women as property, men being "in charge" of the marriage, etc., are traditions that have (for the most part) been thrown out the window. If some aspects of the "traditional" marriage can change without the institution collapsing, why would this change suddenly make a mockery of something that already does not resemble what it was 100 years ago?
Well, you could make the argument that, even though it has changed, the foundational principle (male-female only) would completely redefine it (just playing devil's advocate).

But, the changes proposed have absolutely nothing to do with their version of it. Discriminate all you want in your churches, but stop imposing your church standards on a secular process.

[nkb]

Ah, but then they wouldn't be as easy to take advantage of by devious, lying sacks of shit politicians
Absolutely. And don't forget the two-faced, self-serving, piles of dog shit preachers and ministers.

[Irreligious]

I thought TJ and friends had their slaves do their running for them.
I wouldn't be at all surprised if the Huckster resents the radical departure from this 18th century convention, as well. He'd never own up to it publicly, of course.

[whoneedscience]

Another bit of news:

Republicans want to create an "American Religious History Week (http://www.alternet.org/stories/73778/)"

Another source here-Resolution 888. (http://baltimorechronicle.com/2008/011508Leopold.shtml)

What happened to atheist island?

[Sternwallow]

What annoys me the most in these discussions is that nobody makes the distinction between state-sanctioned marriage and religious marriage.

Because the same word is used (with corresponding religious baggage) for both, Christians get all uptight, because it sounds like we're attacking their version of it.

I bet a significant percentage of Christians would care a lot less if that distinction was clear.
I definitely agree. The state has a clear interest in such things as inheritance financial responsibility and child care in any mutually agreeable commitment among people. The church has an interest in souls and tithes. The two should be kept entirely separate. And the state should permit and mediate, like any contract, any relationship that involves the state interests noted above. In particular, if you and I sign and file an agreement stating that I can visit you in the hospital if you are sick, that is relevant to the law and not to the (any) church.

[Sternwallow]

Christians themselves don't use their own version of "marriage". The "tradition" that homosexual marriage threatens is one that is not very old at all. No divorce, Women as property, men being "in charge" of the marriage, etc., are traditions that have (for the most part) been thrown out the window. If some aspects of the "traditional" marriage can change without the institution collapsing, why would this change suddenly make a mockery of something that already does not resemble what it was 100 years ago?
Even further, if golfers have used golf clubs for ten thousand years (or whatever) and some guys come along who want to play a version of golf using whiffle bats, how does that change or threaten any existing or future golf players?

I know that the religious are automatically threatened by any (apparently unpunished) transgressions against their special little subset of Biblical rule mongering. It is a clear expression of their own insecurity in their belief about God and an afterlife.

"Oh, my, what if that serial killer is not punished, but only dies of natural causes after years of captivity? What if he is not (horribly) punished in the (eternal) afterlife either? What kind of divine justice would that be?"

They haven't the faith to just let their just God sort it all out.

[Sternwallow]

Another bit of news:

Republicans want to create an "American Religious History Week (http://www.alternet.org/stories/73778/)"

Another source here-Resolution 888. (http://baltimorechronicle.com/2008/011508Leopold.shtml)

What happened to atheist island?
I'm on it, but, so far, there is only room here for one so I'm all alone.

[Philboid Studge]

It would be tragic if lesbians weren't allowed to play golf. The LPGA would be an empty ghost town.

[Irreligious]

The Lesbian Professional Golf Association would cease to exist without any members, wouldn't it?

[Professor Chaos]

They'd still have Ben Roethlisberger's ex-girlfriend, and my future ex-wife, Natalie Gulbis.

http://www.goodatgolf.com/natalie-gulbis.jpg
http://www.abc.net.au/reslib/200707/r164032_605571.jpg


Besides, they're obviously not all lesbians.

http://www.bootsandsabers.com/images/uploads/Golf_Trophy.jpg

[Irreligious]

Are you saying lesbians can't be beautiful blonds?

[Choobus]

I have a number of videos that prove that they can (although they also imply things about pizza delivery that may be innacurate)

[Professor Chaos]

Are you saying lesbians can't be beautiful blonds?

No, just saying lesbians generally don't date NFL quarterbacks. :)

[Irreligious]

No, just saying lesbians generally don't date NFL quarterbacks. :)
Well, not while they're being lesbians.

[Professor Chaos]

Well, not while they're being lesbians.

So when they're not being lesbians they're still lesbians?

[Irreligious]

So when they're not being lesbians they're still lesbians?
I'm no lesbian, but I wasn't straight while I was married to woman. I did put up the best front I could muster, however.

Anyway, I hope you do realize I'm kidding about all lady golfers being lesbians. However, I do suspect that all lesbians, if given half a chance, would make excellent golfers. ;)

[Professor Chaos]

I'm no lesbian, but I wasn't straight while I was married to woman.

Elton?

[Irreligious]

Elton?
John?

Though I prefer to be addressed by my formal name: Sir Reginald Kenneth Dwight. It's what the queens call me. Well, one in particular.

[Professor Chaos]

I went to see Elton John with a friend of mine about eight years ago. Young'ins don't realize that before he decided to do nothing but shitty Disney movie songs and rewrite Candle in the Wind every time some blonde broad dies, he used to actually rock out pretty decently, all things considered.

It was just Elton John and his piano. He had no band with him, and he was still able to get everyone on their feet during Honky Cat, Funeral for a Friend/Love Lies Bleeding, and Take Me to the Pilot, among others. He's probably the last musician able to rock like that with just a piano.

Anyways, it was only after the concert that my friend Greg and I realized that the two of us just went to see Elton John together alone, which is probably the gayest thing that I'll publicly admit I've ever done. Not that there's anything wrong with that. :)

[ubs]

Apparently Huckabee, in spite of his religious convictions, loves the Confederate flag, and wants to put things in people's butts
Huck Wants A Flagpole In The Ass of Every American (http://wonkette.com/346234/huck-wants-a-flagpole-in-the-ass-of-every-american)

[Irreligious]

Yeah, and Sir Elton John was the first white rock artist to appear on Soul Train on May 24, 1975. David Bowie followed with an appearance on the show in November of that year.

Edited: I suppose I should have flagged my post with this: :offtopic: It was pleasant for a minute to forget that this is still the Huckabee thread.

[Gnosital]

I did put up the best front I could muster, however.

;)

Irr, you got mad punning skilz.