Posted on 01/15/2008 4:59:40 PM PST by america4vr
Huckabee's closing argument to voters here this evening featured a few new stories and two prolonged sections on illegal immigration and Christian values.
These two topics usually feature prominently in Huckabee's stump speech, but last night he got specific, promising to build a border fence within 18 months if elected and elaborating on his belief that the constitution needs to be amended.
"[Some of my opponents] do not want to change the Constitution, 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 is to amend the Constitution so it's in God's standards rather than try to change God's standards," Huckabee said, referring to the need for a constitutional human life amendment and an amendment defining marriage as between a man and a woman.
Huckabee often refers to the need to amend the constitution on these grounds, but he has never so specifically called for the Constitution to be brought within "God's standards," which are themselves debated amongst religious scholars. As a closing statement he asked the room of nearly 500 supporters to "pray and then work hard, and in that order," to help him secure a victory in Tuesday's GOP primary.
Tomorrow Huckabee will visit two polling places in the morning before taking off for South Carolina where he will watch Michigan's returns come in.
(Excerpt) Read more at firstread.msnbc.msn.com ...
“Conservative is when you restrict yourself to amending the Constitution by constitutional means . . . rather than by simply declaring that the Constitution means whatever you find convenient.”
Indeed.
And on abortion and marriage, Huckabee merely proposes doing the former, specifically to prevent the Supremes from doing the latter.
And my apology for piling on long after you had conceded the point. I was just reading down the string chronologically and fired away based on your earlier posts, long before I got to your concession. Point made. Sword withdrawn.
I anoint you the Undisputed Champion of Irrefutable Close-Mindedness and Religious Dogma.
Good post. You nailed it.
This has nothing to do with the issue, just leave The Constitution alone. The amendments we have are more than enough.
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”.
Unfortunately, I had unsheathed my Sword without ample time to know you had your Sword withdrawn and therefore am compelled to reciprocate in kind with an apology of my own. :-)
Unfortunately, I had unsheathed my Sword without ample time to know you had your Sword withdrawn and therefore am compelled to reciprocate in kind with an apology of my own. :-)
Listen to the holster thumb-straps unsnapping.
Must be a religion thread . . .
Thank you! I don't get a lot of compliments of FR for some reason.
He's a preacher, not God. Can't God grant salvation to whomever He wants? Why would a country preacher try to put limits on God?
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;...First Amendment, Constitution of The United States.
Thank you for your post. I will vote for Fred if he is the nominee, but you will have to determine the kind of people he will support for the Courts based on all of his history. Fred is in truth "a good ol' boy", He lives through networking with others like him in a mixture of loyalty, friendship and you scratch my back, and I'll scratch yours. Howard Baker, a pro-federally funded abortion, pro-affirmative action "moderate" Republican is his mentor and has gotten him into politics on three seperate occassions. Fred returned the favor by supporting Baker over Reagan in 1980 for the Presidency. Baker was luke warm on Bork and was responsible for his name becoming a verb. McCain is his other mentor and friend--Keating 5, McCain Feingold, Gang of 14, McCain-Kennedy McCain. Fred was one of 4 senators to support McCain against W in 2000. Fred's supporters say that it just shows that he is loyal and they like that. To me it shows that he puts personal relationships above America's best interest. I would rather have a candidate guided by God's law, than one guided by Baker and McCain.
God said: Mark 16:16 “He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned.” What is there to interpret from this statement? There is no “but” in this statement. So why is there conjecture as to what God may or may not do? False hope? Yes. Another devil’s ploy.
And on abortion and marriage, Huckabee merely proposes doing the former, specifically to prevent the Supremes from doing the latter.
Yes.But I have an issue even with that - the reality is that if SCOTUS can trample on the understood meaning of the Constitution as it is now, nothing stops them from trampling on a new amendment.
Therefore the sovereign remedy for SCOTUS malfeasance is impeachment. And that requires no higher a standard of political coherence than a constitutional amendment does.
That is what Huck believes too. That's why he became an ordained minister in a Baptist church. However, you wander into dangerous theological waters (pun intended) when you imply that what man is constrained by also constrains God. God is all-powerfull and may grant grace regardless of what the Bible says if He wants to. Do you deny that he has that power?
No dispute between us on that one. Nor is it an either-or choice.
Huckabee said in his speech to the Values Voter Summit that federal judges should be impeached if they ever use foreign court precedent to interpret the U.S. Constitution.
God has said. I take that to be truth. God does not go back on His Word. If he has, please enlighten me.
If you believe that there is “possibly” other ways to be saved than what God has stated then why believe and abide by His Word? Talk about opening a pandora’s box. I mean opening the devil’s toolbox.
If Huckabee believes the literal Bible than why did he refuse to answer the question about Christians being the only ones saved?
Ephesians 2:8 “ For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God:”
So what part of this verse leaves it open to be saved by means other than the Christian faith?
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.