He’s advocating the passing of constitutional amendments. When you pass a constitutional amendment, it changes the constitution. The courts keep overturning restrictions/bans on abortion, which many people’s religious belief(s) instruct is wrong. We can either wait for a Supreme Court that will uphold restrictions/bans on abortion, or amend the constitution and ban the procedure now. All arguments supporting the procedure are now null and void in the face of the law, as the procedure is now unconstitutional.
The amendment is state support for a religion, you say? Well, let’s read what the constitution says about it. Nope, nothing about religion in the amendment, all it says is that the medical procedure, abortion, is banned.
>>
“...why does he even bother to make such foolish statements?”
>>
Because there are voters out there who will vote for him because he says such things.
Gee, think of all the wonderful countries who have adopted this very policy.
Saudi Arabia, Afghanistan, Iran,....
mark
I like him.He has to change his mind about a few things.I like everybody but Rudy and Paul.
If Huckabee fizzles, his followers will be looking for another prolife evangelical to fill the void. Hunter fits that bill, no one else in the race is evangelical.
The GOP doesnt get it. They need to let this faction find a home. The amount of invective aimed at evangelicals is surprising, but then everyone wants their votes.
Huckabee has surged because he won a couple of debates and hes got evangelical support. If a quick rise can happen to the liberal pro-life evangelical Huckster, it can happen to the conservative pro-life evangelical Hunter.
Prolife evangelicals will be very comfortable in Hunters camp, since hes a prolife evangelical staunch conservative.
.
.
.
.
On Poll Results and the End of Conservatism
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1951282/posts
This from the preacher that can’t confirm that Christians are the only ones saved.
I'd love to see Huckabee defend his 30% consumption (sales) tax as "within God's standards"...
ping for later
A constitutional amendment cannot be unconstitutional. Once adopted, it’ part of the Constitution.
That said, I support the principle of separation of church and state — and I’m more than a little leery when a politician proposes to write “God’s standards,” as he defines them, into the law.
I am NO fan of Huckabee's attempt to paint God's Standards as merely being WWJD as though there are two Gods, one of the OLD and then a NEW one. The Ten Commandments still hold even to this day, even if the majority of Americans gleefully try to hide them out of sight.
==========No matter how he phrases it, Huckabee surely knows that his desire to amend the Constitution to reflect practices, beliefs he calls God’s Standards violates the separation of Church and State================
There is nothing about amending the Constitution that violates the “separation of Church and State.” The Constitution itself has numerous elements of Judeo-Christian faith and law already built in.
Silly.
“Huckabee surely knows that his desire to amend the Constitution to reflect practices, beliefs he calls God’s Standards violates the separation of Church and State and that being unconstitutional has zero chance of ever getting out of the gate.”
Let me guess. You went to a public school, right?
Newsflash: there is nothing unconstitutional about amending the U.S. Constitution to state (1) that “personhood” begins at conception or (2) that marriage shall be legally recognized as only between one man and one woman.
Perhaps it escaped your notice that dozens of states have already done one or the other of the above re: their state constitutions.
You new here? Welcome, and good luck with that.
HUH!
God says “Thou shalt not steal”; does that mean laws against theft are unconstitutional?
God says “Thou shalt not kill””; does that mean laws against murder are unconstitutional?
Besides which, you need to read the first amendment to the constitution again, you are confused. There is no separation of church and state amendment. If fact it does say that the government shall make no laws against religion “or the free exercise thereof”.
Listen to the holster thumb-straps unsnapping.
Must be a religion thread . . .