Posted on 03/29/2008 6:54:19 PM PDT by wastedpotential
Of all the factors that led to Mike Huckabee's demise in the 2008 presidential sweepstakes (insufficient funds, lack of foreign policy experience), there's one that has been largely overlooked: Huckabee's disbelief in the theory of evolution as it is generally understood – without the involvement of the Creator.
Perhaps you're thinking: What's evolution got to do with being president? Very little, as Huckabee was quick to remind reporters on the campaign trail. But from the moment the former Baptist minister revealed his beliefs on evolutionary biology, political commentators and scientists lambasted him. Some even suggested those beliefs should disqualify him from high office.
We believe most Americans
(Excerpt) Read more at worldnetdaily.com ...
The Fair Tax is regressive and unfair to low income families. Some would argue that socialism requires regressive taxes.
The Fair Tax is less regressive than the system we now have when you include the social security and medicaid taxes.
(2) Why did he lose the nomination?
As to question (1), go to your library, or take some college classes, or just peruse the internet. There's a wealth of information out there and it certainly wouldn't fit into a single response here, which I suspect you'd categorically reject anyway.
As to question (2), he didn't get enough votes.
Raptor Jesus on FR?
Memes are out of control.
We will disagree on Huckabee, I liked him as a candidate. I don’t think the Fair Tax is regressive (that is a discussion that takes more time than we have in this forum to have) and believe the positive economic effects to our country would help the rich, middle class and poor alike by encouraging people to actually generate income.
As for his record on taxation, he did raise taxes, but he also cut several and balanced his budgets every eyar. Other Republicans have had far worse fiscal records (I would argue Mitt’s record in MA was worse), but they were not been villified for it as he was. He was also the author of the Tax Me More Fund that earned him parise from Club for Growth and other conservative tax organizations. THe ACU even gave him the “Friend of Taxpayers” award. This idea that he was a “tax and spend” liberal was new to this year’s election process. Heck, he was a “Freeper” Governor, participating in our forum occasionally and earning praise while governor, while in office and his band played at the Freeper inaugural ball!
He was right on WOT, the one comment was made that most of us disagreed with, but it had no implications for his policy. He actually stated he would go into Pakistan without their permission to get Bin Laden, something Bush won’t do. He was going to stay in Iraq, just like McCain and everyone else but Paul. The soft on crime tag is a weak one, as he also put to death 16 times more than anyone else in his state’s history. The laws in AR make it easier to file for clemency. As for the anti-school choice, we agree on that one, but that is not a federal issue, so I had no problem voting for him as president.
True, but don't forget that many low income people do receive government benefits that others would not. That mitigates any extra burden they may face due to paying social security and medicaid taxes.
Best I can tell, he rules out much of geology, physics, cosmology, astronomy and most of biology.
The notion that conservatives are waging a "war on science" has gained much traction in the media lately. And the anti-evolution position of some conservatives has, as National Review Editor Rich Lowry has written, "play[ed] into the image of Republicans as the anti-science party."
Its not just an "image" -- its a fact. This website is a prime example. Most scientists have left in disgust. They probably got tired of being told that they were going to hell, or being compared to nazis.
But the scientific community has nothing to fear from candidates like Mike Huckabee, for on many important public policy issues, religious conservatives have become the true champions of science.
Pure BS. "Religious conservatives," as shown by many on this website, are more likely to be champions for ID or YEC than science. Some appear to want a theocracy in place of our republic. See the Wedge Strategy for details. That's what the Discovery Institute meant when they wrote,
We are building on this momentum, broadening the wedge with a positive scientific alternative to materialistic scientific theories, which has come to be called the theory of intelligent design (ID). Design theory promises to reverse the stifling dominance of the materialist worldview, and to replace it with a science consonant with Christian and theistic convictions [emphasis added].
McCain viewed Romney as his biggest threat, as he had the personal fortune to wage a strong campaign. Huckabee viewed him as his biggest obstacle to getting the conservative vote against McCain. That, my friend, is politics.
The thing is, after Fred Thompson got out, to argue that Mitt should get the conservative mantle was laughable, just looking at his record and flip flops.
So just because he doesn’t accept the ToE as defined by the FRevos, he rejects ALL science? And you know this how?
You’re extrapolating at best, but that’s not surprising from someone who believes in evolution, because that’s what you have to do with the fossil record to arrive at the ToE.
In reality, you’re assuming.....
1. You seem to be unaware that evolution is not about origins and that a theory (like the theory of gravity) is a s solid as it gets in the sciences.
2. Are you equating intelligent design and Bibical Creation?
My point was that while I personally disregard the fittest will survive tale, it was NOT the reason why Huckabee lost. Huckabee demonstrated he did NOT have what was required to survive... politically speaking.
I have spent countless hours researching the subject of evolution and have found this - there is no “smoking gun” or “missing link” that changes evolution from theory to proven science. In fact, the theory of evolution and its components have had to change dramatically to meet new scientific findings. Some have even disproven previously “accepted facts” of evolution that then were changed and swept away to fit with the new science.
This is not the forum for a debate on Intelligent Design vs. Evolution, but I was curious why you believe it. I find it to be very laughable that we have been duped into accepting this as fact when the science behind it is very weak and is also open to other interpretations, since none of it can be observed or proven by experimentation (the basic tenets of science).
I am open to debate and explore this topic. My first question is this: How has science demonstrated through either (a) observation or (b) experimentation that evolution is proven scientifically?
Boo hoo. Cry me a river.
The *scientists* did their own share of comparisons, too, regularly comparing anyone who believed in creation to the Taliban who want to take us back to the Dark Ages.
*Talibornagain* is the phrase I seem to recall seeing on other websites. :)
LOL
You have a serious mistake in your understanding of "theory" and "proof" in science. Absolutely nothing is considered "proved" in science. A theory is the highest form of documentation -- for definitions see my FR homepage (some posters here hate it when I post the definitions of terms as they are actually used by scientists).
This is not the forum for a debate on Intelligent Design vs. Evolution, but I was curious why you believe it. I find it to be very laughable that we have been duped into accepting this as fact when the science behind it is very weak and is also open to other interpretations, since none of it can be observed or proven by experimentation (the basic tenets of science).
There is a tremendous amount of evidence supporting the theory of evolution. The science is not weak, and is only open to "other interpretations" when you start with the idea that the bible trumps science, evidence, the scientific method and all the rest. See, as good examples of this, the statements of belief of the Creation Research Society, the Institute for Creation Research, the Creation Studies Institute, Answers In Genesis, and Creation Ministries International. What they are doing is not "weak science" but pure religion.
If you have studied evolution, as you have claimed, you would know that perhaps half of all sciences do not use experimentation. These sciences are often called forensic sciences, and they work quite well within the scientific method. Within this method, the evidence supporting the theory of evolution is overwhelming.
As for "proved" -- see my prior post and the definitions on my FR homepage.
that’s a lie and you should know it...but maybe you don’t in your over educated state of mind. Those groups are connecting the dots of scientific discoveries including the amazing dna code which is more complex than a computer code, and showing how they lead to a creator. Totally logical and scientific too. You and others like you who are so high minded think that you can sort of self righteously divorce God from science not understanding that they cannot be...many of our present scientists and great ones of the past knew this, including Sir Issac Newton.
“We’ve had preachers as presidents before. James Garfield was an ordained Presbyterian minister, for example.”
True. And when the news was released that he had won the election, his Mother wept and lamented, “To think that he would stoop from being a Minister of the Gospel to being President.”
I wonder if it would be considered as big a stoop today?
Which is a lie?
Those groups are connecting the dots of scientific discoveries including the amazing dna code which is more complex than a computer code, and showing how they lead to a creator. Totally logical and scientific too.
Really? AiG is doing science when they require their members to agree to the following?
Summary of the AiG Statement of FaithFor a slightly more detailed copy of the Statement of Faith, please make your request in writing.
(A) PRIORITIES
(B) BASICS
- The scientific aspects of creation are important, but are secondary in importance to the proclamation of the Gospel of Jesus Christ.
- The doctrines of Creator and Creation cannot ultimately be divorced from the Gospel of Jesus Christ.
(C) THEOLOGY
- The 66 books of the Bible are the written Word of God. The Bible is divinely inspired and inerrant throughout. Its assertions are factually true in all the original autographs. It is the supreme authority in everything it teaches.
- The final guide to the interpretation of Scripture is Scripture itself.
- The account of origins presented in Genesis is a simple but factual presentation of actual events and therefore provides a reliable framework for scientific research into the question of the origin and history of life, mankind, the Earth and the universe.
- The various original life forms (kinds), including mankind, were made by direct creative acts of God. The living descendants of any of the original kinds (apart from man) may represent more than one species today, reflecting the genetic potential within the original kind. Only limited biological changes (including mutational deterioration) have occurred naturally within each kind since Creation.
- The great Flood of Genesis was an actual historic event, worldwide (global) in its extent and effect.
- The special creation of Adam (the first man) and Eve (the first woman), and their subsequent fall into sin, is the basis for the necessity of salvation for mankind.
- Death (both physical and spiritual) and bloodshed entered into this world subsequent to and as a direct consequence of manÕs sin.
(D) GENERAL
- The Godhead is triune: one God, three Persons--God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Spirit.
- All mankind are sinners, inherently from Adam and individually (by choice) and are therefore subject to God's wrath and condemnation.
- Freedom from the penalty and power of sin is available to man only through the sacrificial death and shed blood of Jesus Christ, and His complete and bodily Resurrection from the dead.
- The Holy Spirit enables the sinner to repent and believe in Jesus Christ.
- The Holy Spirit lives and works in each believer to produce the fruits of righteousness.
- Salvation is a gift received by faith alone in Christ alone and expressed in the individual's repentance, recognition of the death of Christ as full payment for sin, and acceptance of the risen Christ as Saviour, Lord and God.
- All things necessary for our salvation are either expressly set down in Scripture or may be deduced by good and necessary consequence from Scripture.
- Jesus Christ was conceived by the Holy Spirit and born of the virgin Mary.
- Jesus Christ rose bodily from the dead, ascended to Heaven, and is currently seated at the right hand of God the Father, and shall return in person to this Earth as Judge of the living and the dead.
- Satan is the personal spiritual adversary of both God and man.
- Those who do not believe in Christ are subject to everlasting conscious punishment, but believers enjoy eternal life with God.
- The only legitimate marriage is the joining of one man and one woman. God has commanded that no intimate sexual activity be engaged in outside of marriage.
- Scripture teaches a recent origin for man and the whole creation.
- The days in Genesis do not correspond to geologic ages, but are six [6] consecutive twenty-four [24] hour days of Creation.
- The Noachian Flood was a significant geological event and much (but not all) fossiliferous sediment originated at that time.
- The "gap" theory has no basis in Scripture.
- The view, commonly used to evade the implications or the authority of Biblical teaching, that knowledge and/or truth may be divided into "secular" and "religious," is rejected.
- No apparent, perceived or claimed evidence in any field, including history and chronology, can be valid if it contradicts the Scriptural record.
Hmmmm. Doesn't look like much room for science and the scientific method there. Looks a lot more like religion, in fact, than science.
You still do not seem to be replying to what I wrote.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.