Dems Hold Fire On Huckabee; See 'easy Kill' In General Election

Probably not the best place to ask since it's off topic; but why is evidence sufficient to support a theory but proof is required to support faith? Is there a difference between being an atheist and an anti-theist? Are atheists' criticisms directed towards the actions of organized religion or the concept of religion itself?
Click to expand...

As an athiest if I were presented with real scientific evidence of the existence of a god I would admit my error. Atheism is not faith.

Faith means that you will believe in the tenants of your religion no matter what. No evidence will sway you. People may say they allow their faith to be questioned but if they refuse to allow for the possibility that it is entirely fabricated then they are not being honest with themselves.

Evidence = Proof There is no real evidence of religion in any form being anything more than the creation of man to explain what he does not understand and comfort him with his mortality. Perhaps I would have more respect for religion if it did not have such an outstanding track record of attacking any scientific discovery disproved any tenants of their faith. God has been pushed further and further back with each passing century. He used to be in the clouds making rain, the fields making wheat. He caused the sun to revolve around the earth, the moon to eclipse the sun and winter to turn into spring. As each step was taken forward in science, showing the real actions of the universe and why these things happenned, the uniform response from religion has always been denial, resentment and persecution.

With that now said perhaps you can see why I have issues with a man whose sworn his life to the service of a religion as an ordained minister. Looking at Huckabee I see nothing more than this gentleman:

ch-pota-newest26.jpg

Doctor Zaius: Minister of Science and Chief Protector of the Faith

Of course we could ammend the title to Chief Law Enforcer and Protector of the Faith for Huckabee... No thanks. You want to be a minister then I would hope that most Americans would be smart enough to keep you out of government. Sadly that has failed to happen already. If enough people here are short sighted enough to actually make a minister, with a vested interest in the protection of his faith, President then we are well on the way to having a nation run by religion. This nation was set up with religion firmly separated from government. Of course in a democracy the greates threat to the people is the people. There is no stopping it if enough rightously religious people believe their solution is the one true way. Putting a priest in charge of government is that path.
 
There is no real evidence of religion in any form being anything more than the creation of man to explain what he does not understand and comfort him with his mortality.
Click to expand...
Actually there's quite a bit of evidence if one is willing to at least consider it. I have a book to recommend as posting excerpts won't do it justice. I know atheist want to poke holes in it, but read it objectively and decide for yourself.

http://www.amazon.com/Dont-Have-Enough-Faith-Atheist/dp/1581345615
 
Sorry but looking at the reviews it certainly does not appear to be evidence to me. It may be evidence in the "This is what I know is right so let's put together any information we have that supports my contention while ignoring anything that discredits it" sense of the word. Looking at the dissection given to the work by the one star reviewers I see the book is but another attempt to rationalize religion.

We are going two different directions here. I am an athiest but do not think you have to be. I also think a Christian, Jew, Muslim or even Satanist should be allowed by law to become president.

What I do not like is that a person whose life is devoted enough to his religion to become a minister is attempting to become president. There is a difference between a person who attends church on Sunday becoming president and the guy running the service doing so. I believe Rudy when he says his Catholic faith will not control his actions as president (though I still don't want him!). I do not believe that is possible with a priest.

Religion always has and always will attempt to "take over" if given enough power. Once you can use the legal system to tell people to do what your God wants we are in trouble. Many don't fell that though.

There are few things that could make me vote for the Hildabeast. Hitler or Bin Laden running against her would be two cases. Any priest would be a third. She may be a pathalogical liar and manipulator but she is at least not a religious zealot who will use the position to legislate faith.
 
It actually examines some of the arguments put forth by atheist. Like I said, read it objectively and decide for yourself. I'll even buy it for you if you'll actually read the entire book. I wouldn't put much faith (pun intended) in others' less-than-objective views who consider it a threat to their belief system.
 
Last edited:
If being a faithful and devoted Christen is his most worrying trait then you have little to concern yourself with unless you have a problem with Christian. Your working hard to make it seem as if he has been evangelizing all he encounters and pressing his faith of others. He's been a Governor for a decade and I don't see Arkansas flying a Christian flag of holding anyone to Christian proclamation for access to State government.

Tacit Christian bigotry is still bigotry. You not expressly condemning Christianity but you did lump it in with Satanists in your analogy and suggest a connection with ignorance.

I'll take a Christian that is open about it over a Marxist that veils it any time.

BTW...We ALL have a God...they just go by different names. We all worship, but call it something else. So to claim atheism is only to proclaim that your god isn't a spiritual deity.

I believe that pressure and condemnation of their Christian faith is what brought the colonists to this continent. Also, the truisms that make Christianity indelible are folded into the Constitution and BOR. Christianity doesn't bind up or enslave as so often misrepresented. It doesn't force it's self on others or hate based on others non-belief. So to decry a candidates Christianity is as much bigotry as to say Obama can't help but favor Blacks and will be likely to push pro-black legislation and legislation that gives preference to blacks.

Consider there is more then hearsay to consider about any topic, including Christianity. To disregard the contents of a book based on a few reviews may be less then evidencery and more intentional avoidance. To count someones value system because it is based in Christianity is odd unless you've pre-determined Christianity is bad.

Singles often dismiss marriage as 'a piece of paper' until they meet that one person that completes the package. They then realize the depth and breadth of marriage and understand. Without the experience there is no means of communicating the profoundity.

There are of course those that intentionally avoid marriage. They are typically th most outspoken about it's lack of profoundity.
 
Last edited:
BTW...We ALL have a God...they just go by different names. We all worship, but call it something else. So to claim atheism is only to proclaim that your god isn't a spiritual deity.
Click to expand...

Utter nonsense. You obviously have no idea what atheism is.

For those of you that haven't, George Washington's farewell address is quite remarkable in it's discussion of the need for faith. Sadly it isn't taught in the schools anymore, even though it is an important speech.

I am wary of anyone that says that they have spoken with God, or claims to know the intent of God. Huckabee is saying that, Bush said it.. it is about 0 steps away from voices in your head. Sadly, it is perceived as a POSITIVE by the Christian right, yet a more obvious lie I couldn't imagine.
 
Last off-topic post, to some their God is money, power, the Constitution, government, something they find that provides them with a sense of that right standing will result in safety and/or justice. What you do to glorify that is worship.
 
Priest should stick to being priests. Politicians should stick to being politicians. One wants to control your public life and the other your private. After all they believe both God or the electorate want them to. The two of them combined into one scares the hell out of me.
Click to expand...
You don't seem to understand that it's PRINCIPLES that happen to come from the Bible that actually work!

Things like not stealing, not killin, not lying, those kinds of things.

Remove the principles found in the Bible from the public square, like all you liberals want to do, and you will cause stealing, killin, and lying to become common ways of acting among the people.

If you want proof of that, just compare the United States now to 40 or 50 years ago and you'll find that since we cannot talk about the principles found in the Bible much anymore, this nation is ripe with crime, corruption, murdering babies & each other, etc, etc.

We're alot worse off now than we were back then, so it seems that we need to get back to the foundation that this country was founded on...or, kiss it goodbye...which would suit the liberals just fine because they want a one world government anyway.

Bottom line: this nation is about to reap what we've been sowing over the past half century so we need to go back to planting something we want to come up, so we don't reap destruction.
 
Rockrz, you're implying two things. One, that the Bible contains the only moral standard in which killing, stealing, and lying are wrong. You're also suggesting that the only thing that will keep people from killing, stealing, and lying is faith in a higher power (of any religion). This also implies the corollary that faith in a higher power will prevent people from doing the above.

Both/all three are wrong. Absolutely wrong.

Christians do not have the market cornered on being good people. And lying, killing, and stealing still happens in religious cultures, including in the past in more predominantly Christian cultures. So athiests/agnostics don't have the market cornered on being bad people, either.
 
One, that the Bible contains the only moral standard in which killing, stealing, and lying are wrong.
Click to expand...
Then what is the moral standard against which right and wrong is measured? Man? Not possible because then what Hitler did would just have been a matter of opinion. Humans do not determine right and wrong, they discover it. Moral law existed before humans discovered it just like the law of gravity existed before it was discovered.

You're also suggesting that the only thing that will keep people from killing, stealing, and lying is faith in a higher power (of any religion). This also implies the corollary that faith in a higher power will prevent people from doing the above.
Click to expand...

Christians do not have the market cornered on being good people.
Click to expand...
He didn't say either and to state he implied it is a bit of a stretch. The point was Christianity is based on a moral standard which all people, Christian or not, are incapable of achieving. But does that mean we should not continue to strive for it?

Moral Law is God's standard and helps us adjudicate between the different moral opinions people may have. To say otherwise would be implying that right and wrong are relative and I don't think anyone really wants to go down that road.

But back on topic; what will do in Huckabee will not be his religion, but his weakness on foreign policy.
 
Moral Law is God's standard and helps us adjudicate between the different moral opinions people may have. To say otherwise would be implying that right and wrong are relative and I don't think anyone really wants to go down that road.
Click to expand...

Until you can show actual evidence that God exists, "Moral Law" is just what is written in one book rather than another.

But back on topic; what will do in Huckabee will not be his religion, but his weakness on foreign policy.
Click to expand...

Both are pretty big weaknesses actually, though the demographic they affect largely overlaps. But if you think there aren't a lot of people turned off by Bush's constant calls to religion over the last seven years, you're quite mistaken. I think the last thing a lot of people want to see as an actual ex-minister in the office.
 
Until you can show actual evidence that God exists, "Moral Law" is just what is written in one book rather than another.
Click to expand...
Are you saying since there's no legitimate moral law (moral compass, standard, or whatever you wish to call it), no one can justify why anything is morally right or morally wrong or that any accepted moral principles arose from nothing? I believe there is a moral standard beyond human beings. I can prove it no better than you can disprove it.

C.S. Lewis wrote, "These then are the two points that I wanted to make. First, that human beings, all over the earth, have this curious idea that they ought to behave in a certain way, and can not really get rid of it. Secondly, that they do not in fact behave in that way. They know the Law of Nature; they break it. These two facts are the foundation of all clear thinking about ourselves and the universe we live in."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/C._S._Lewis#Universal_morality

So the question is… if there is no moral law, why do we make excuses for violating it? Making excuses for immoral behavior is a tacit admission that Moral Law exists. Even atheists have a conscience and will try to justify or rationalize behavior they know is wrong.

BTW, I’ll make you the same offer. If you will objectively read the book I mentioned (the entire book), I'll buy it and have it shipped to you.

Is there anyway we can make this discussion a separate topic? It's not exactly L&P and doesn't fit into the gen discussion because it's not exactly gun related unless someone wants to base it on our (God-given) right to defend ourselves.
 
Last edited:
I appreciate the offer, but I already own it. ;)

We may not agree, but I don't think our moral compasses point in wildly different directions.

So....Huckabee? :D

EDIT: My "point" (I'll use the term loosely) is that it should not be the job of the government to legislate or enforce morality, but rather to simply protect my rights against others. There are some areas where the two intersect, including at least one issue that I'll not go into...but unfortunately some seem to want to venture further than I'm comfortable with.

And somebody who specifically admits they cannot separate their religion and politics (as Huckabee, IIRC, has)...seems likely to fall into that camp.
 
See 'easy Kill' In General Election
Click to expand...

Huckabee is an easy kill if the Dem's get more votes than him in a general election. He is not an easy kill if they don't. Votes count more than crystal ball gazing...that's just the way it works.:cool:
 
Huckabee is an easy kill if the Dem's get more votes than him in a general election. He is not as say kill if they don't. Votes count more than crystal ball gazing...that's just the way it works.
Click to expand...

Sometimes it's easy to forget just how far off the election actually is.
 
Last edited:
it should not be the job of the government to legislate or enforce morality,
Click to expand...
I’ll agree it probably shouldn't be their job but that’s all they do.

Morality is about right and wrong and all legislation is an attempt to set a moral standard. Name one law that doesn’t declare one behavior right and its opposite wrong. And everyone in politics — conservatives, libertarians, liberals, atheist, religious, et al — is trying to legislate morality. The reason for all the problems is determining whose morality should be legislated.
 
Right, I am a liberal intent on destroying western civilization...:p

Strange that I have since being eligible to vote have supported

Bush, Perot (oops), Dole, Bush & Bush.

Strange also that being a godless atheist (isn't that an oxymoron) I also have the most well behaved child in her class. I am not bragging but simply stating what her teachers have told us for two years now. Somehow my wife and I manage to do that without the guidance of an imaginary friend or fear of eternal damnation.

Concepts such as "Don't kill your neighbor and steal his stuff" were in pretty strong circulation before the tenants of Judaism came about. Likewise the representative republic our nation is structured upon is based on concepts of democracy from pre-Christian Rome and Greece. If anything religion helped perpetuate the despotic hereditary monarchies of old Europe and our good old buddy King George still carried the title "Defender of the Faith" at the time of that incident known as the revolutionary war. Remember, to rebel against ones divinely chosen king was to rebel against God!

I have read enough Christian psuedo science and really don't need any more. In the end all of religion must come down to blind faith and no amount of "walking with dinosaur" museums and books looking for the last crevice of reality in which God can hide will change that.

Back on topic. Huckabee is an easy kill. I don't think Bill Clinton should be preaching scripture from the pulpit and Mike Huckabee should not be running the government. If a "liberal" like me is so opposed to the dawning of a religious oligarchy here I am pretty certain there will be a fair share of others with similar idea.

I would like to see him answer if he believes Jews killed Jesus...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top