Oh man, I can't pass this one up - Ladies and Gentlemen, Your Republican Frontrunner:
Huckabee: Amend Constitution to be in 'God's standards'
David Edwards and Muriel Kane
Published: Tuesday January 15, 2008
Raw Story
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."
[Meanwhile, all the hosts at MSNBC could come up with is the tepid...]
Scarborough finally suggested that while he believes "evangelicals should be able to talk politics ... some might find that statement very troubling, that we're going to change the Constitution to be in line with the Bible. And that's all I'm going to say."
[More at link]
ETA: There's some limited context from First Read, here. In particular, he's talking about amendments mandating discrimination against same-sex relationships (and, by the very nature of such things, removing queers from equal protection law) and to eliminate recognition of abortion rights, which would - by the nature of the way they do these things - would almost certainly strike against most forms of contraception as well.
Huckabee: Amend Constitution to be in 'God's standards'
David Edwards and Muriel Kane
Published: Tuesday January 15, 2008
Raw Story
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."
[Meanwhile, all the hosts at MSNBC could come up with is the tepid...]
Scarborough finally suggested that while he believes "evangelicals should be able to talk politics ... some might find that statement very troubling, that we're going to change the Constitution to be in line with the Bible. And that's all I'm going to say."
[More at link]
ETA: There's some limited context from First Read, here. In particular, he's talking about amendments mandating discrimination against same-sex relationships (and, by the very nature of such things, removing queers from equal protection law) and to eliminate recognition of abortion rights, which would - by the nature of the way they do these things - would almost certainly strike against most forms of contraception as well.
no subject
Date: 2008-01-15 08:38 pm (UTC)Kali? That would be cool.
no subject
Date: 2008-01-15 08:43 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2008-01-15 08:53 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2008-01-15 08:54 pm (UTC)YA THINK?
no subject
Date: 2008-01-15 08:55 pm (UTC)Why would Huckabee bother changing the Good, Honest Hemp? (never forget that; the Declaration and Constitution are written on hemp paper; it's the best you can get. Nevermind that it's illegal to make it here anymore. But I digress.)
Because then he would have the moral authority, that's why. Good preaching is one thing, but if it's written down, then it's the Gospel according to Mike, and *no one* can even *think* of arguing with it. It makes his job as torturer-in-chief much, much easier. Anybody stands up to argue, and it's "HERETIC! Guards! Off with his head!" No expensive trial, no muss, no fuss, vive la guillotine.
Dear God, please protect me from those who consider themselves Your followers. Amen.
*sigh*
no subject
Date: 2008-01-15 08:58 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2008-01-15 09:04 pm (UTC)I knew the guy was a little off, but thought that we could do worse.
Now, I'm pretty sure that while we could do worse, I really don't want to want to live in that world.
I understand that peoples fear of difference and uncertainty can push them to desire a clear and consise understanding of "the rules", but to think that we live in a world where a man like H could not only rise high in public office, but aspire which a chance of winning the presidency of the United States... well it's scary. Very scary
I'm boggled. I'm sitting at work and am absolutely boggled.
no subject
Date: 2008-01-15 09:12 pm (UTC)And while you're at it, read Song of An Emerald Dove.
A.
no subject
Date: 2008-01-15 09:25 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2008-01-15 09:27 pm (UTC)The book isn't in the King County Library System yet. Foo.
no subject
Date: 2008-01-15 09:34 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2008-01-15 09:41 pm (UTC)You're now my official source for scary political news.
Also: the land mass that became this country was settled by oppressive religious extremists looking for sanctuary to continue practiciing their oppressive religious extremism, because England of their day was just too damn lib'rul.
FHuckabee is just continuing a long tradition of intolerant ignorance.Even if by some odd lapse of American judgment he gets into office, he still has to contend with Congress. And only Congress can change the Constitution - the President, even if it's our current one, is not given czar-like powers over the law of the land.
Checks. Balances. They exist for just this eventuality.
no subject
Date: 2008-01-15 09:58 pm (UTC)It might be a slightly different story if they try the ratifying-convention method -- essentially trying to ratify by referendum -- but I still think the attempt would fail.
Assuming we're able to pull back from the authoritarian swing we're in and get back to being a country ruled by laws, the Constitution's firewall on amendments is a good thing to avoid getting swamped by this sort of thing. It's annoying when things we want don't get passed, but a relief when nutcases propose what amounts to a State Religion with the proposer as Maximum Leader.
no subject
Date: 2008-01-15 10:07 pm (UTC)Yeah, no problem could possibly come up with that congress in play.
no subject
Date: 2008-01-15 10:46 pm (UTC)I used to post even more of that kind of thing. I've been backing off, because I'm pretty convinced it just doesn't do any fucking good at all.
And as per
no subject
Date: 2008-01-16 02:22 am (UTC)y llyfr
Date: 2008-01-16 02:32 am (UTC)Re: y llyfr
Date: 2008-01-16 02:55 am (UTC)Re: y llyfr
Date: 2008-01-16 04:01 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2008-01-16 06:53 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2008-01-16 06:57 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2008-01-16 12:06 pm (UTC)On the other hand, I think we're getting to the point where these folks have to get repudiated somehow. He needs to be the nominee, and he needs to get absolutely crushed.
Nothing else is going to break the back of the fundie vote.
no subject
Date: 2008-01-16 03:02 pm (UTC)Or Aphrodite's, maybe.
Or Orgiastia. (I just made her up)
Those are the constitutional standards we need!
(Oh, I'd seen this posted a couple of other places before I got down to here, but this was the first one that mentioned Scarborough; just had to mention I had a poetry writing class w/him in college; I was a sophomore & he was a senior, I think; I dunno what has happened to him since cause he was actually a really nice guy back then, and even wrote a (pretty good, performed in the auditorium) musical about the evils of televangelism and people pretending to Christianity for material gain, & such (clearly from a Christian perspective, yes, but from the sort of Christian perspective that appeals to those things I like about Christianity. Again, I have no idea what happened in the years since.)
no subject
Date: 2008-01-16 03:09 pm (UTC)The guy is just too much of a nut w/too much baggage, even if he reigns in the craziness for the general election, and he doesn't *think* he's a nut, so he's gonna spout off the craziness unfettered.
no subject
Date: 2008-01-16 03:11 pm (UTC)Seriously, you have no idea how great these things are, or how appreciated.
no subject
Date: 2008-01-16 08:54 pm (UTC)Also
Date: 2008-01-16 09:48 pm (UTC)Re: y llyfr
Date: 2008-01-16 09:53 pm (UTC)(In which case I can ask for it on inter-library loan.)
no subject
Date: 2008-01-16 09:54 pm (UTC)Re: Also
Date: 2008-01-16 10:22 pm (UTC)Re: y llyfr
Date: 2008-01-16 10:34 pm (UTC)I do have a reviewing-copy; it is available on abe.com for dollars 14.86, which seems a bit stiff for something that might well not be to your taste in reading; free from the library is a much better deal if possible. They've got more dosh than the likes of us would, as witness their expensive flights of architectural fantasy..... ^_^
Re: Also
Date: 2008-01-17 07:14 pm (UTC)Romney plays to the fundies for votes but he's not one of them. Nominating and defeating him would 1) show the fundies they don't even have control of the Republican Party, and 2) almost certainly elect a Democratic president, who openly opposes their agenda and will block everything they try to do. That's winning.
no subject
Date: 2008-01-17 07:31 pm (UTC)The religious right vote is already starting to splinter, because not all religious conservatives believe that a focus on gays and abortion is the best way to represent their religion. That's particularly clear so long as their strategy of taking over the GOP has so clearly failed. To the extent they've taken power, they've abandoned their own goals, and to the extent they've maintained their goals, they've failed to gain power. They're just about to fall apart; they just need to be marginalized for a couple of more election cycles. Nominating Huckabee only serves to confirm that their decades-long strategy might finally be working after all. We need to avoid leaving that impression at all costs.
Re: y llyfr
Date: 2008-02-24 07:50 am (UTC)