How can 2A supporters vote for Huckabee?

Status
Not open for further replies.
P

Playboypenguin

Moderator
I do not care what his stance on guns reportedly is...I care about his lack of loyalty to the constitution and the country. He has made it very clear with his statements in recent weeks that his loyalty lies with his faith and his church and not the constitution nor the country. He said...
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."
Click to expand...
So how can anyone loyal to this country and the constitution it is based on vote for such a man?
 
scares me a lot I mean a lot

Simply mentioning the idea that the Constitution should be changed to reflect more Christian values is enough to get me writing a check to any of the other candidates. I'm not aginst the religion I just envision alll the other things the religious right would change while there fixing the Constitution. I'm sure banning those evil guns would be on the list.
 
While I have no opposition to what is generally considered "Christian values" and I even support them, I do not feel that the Constitution needs rewriting to reflect them. My main issue is the question of whose version of them should be reflected; as a Baptist, presumably Huckabee would be in favor of resurrecting the Volstead Act.

But as for a RKBA supporter voting for him, they may be placing more weight on his RKBA stance than on the other things. I still wonder how a RKBA person could cast a ballot for Obama, Romney, Kerry, Clinton, Gore, or any of them, but clearly some have done so because they have decided other issues overshadow the negative RKBA record.

The right to keep and bear arms is not necessarily in conflict with "Christian values," or even in conflict with a viewpoint that would set aside the first, fourth, or even third amendments. The Second Amendment is one out of ten, and it also is completely agnostic when it comes to religion.
 
I am of the same religious beliefs as him and see nothing wrong with his quote, sorry, that just reinforced my voting for him
Click to expand...
So you agree that christianity should be our national religion and that the constitution is secondary to the bible?
 
Huckabee was talking specifically about abortion. He is against it, feels it should be illegal, as do even many non-religious people.

For myself ... I belief strongly in the concept that church should be separated from state. I'd rather vote for an atheist I agreed with 90% than a devout Christian I agreed with 70%, and I don't want morality legislated.

But wherever you stand on abortion, it is an important matter. And we come from a Christian/judao based culture that reflects that background. So ... when it comes to laws based on morality, like should a man be able to strike his wife (as long as he follows the limits of the Koran and breaks no bones) or should a couple be able to openly have sex on a public bus ... the laws passed WILL reflect the background of a given culture.

No way around it ... and when a moral principle has been accepted by an entire culture it's no longer just a relgious principle. It's a cultural principle.
 
Huckabee was talking specifically about abortion.
Click to expand...
Regardless of what issue he was speaking of at that moment, he made his stance clear that the law of god is above the constitution.
No way around it ... and when a moral principle has been accepted by an entire culture it's no longer just a relgious principle. It's a cultural principle.
Click to expand...
In absolutely no way did he present this as a cultural issue. He clearly stated it as a "Law of God" issue. To try and construe it as such is backpeddling at best blatant deceit at worst.
 
Whether you agree that an amendment would be helpful or not, why would it alarm you to learn that he recognizes that the Constitution can properly be amended but the Bible cannot? He did not say anything romotely approaching the idea of replacing the Constitution with the Bible. Sheesh, read your own citation word for word. Use your head. Procedures for amending the constition exist, he is not making them up, nor is he suggesting that the Constitution be replaced, or that we would have a national religion. It scares me that some people are so scared of the Bible. The man is solid on the second amendment, doesn't that tell you something about how he views individual rights?
 
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.
Click to expand...

Actually, this statement is a strict constructionist, pro-Constitution statement.

He is talking about amending the Constitution, not passing federal laws that may or may not conflict with it.

There is nothing un-Constitutional about amending the Constitution. That is in fact the essence of the Constitution.

The Consitution was not thought to be perfect, nor was it meant to be a static document. If the founders felt it was perfect and should not be changed, they would not have given us the mechanism by which it should be amended.

So I am Ok with Huckabee trying to amend the Constitution. Of course, he will be unsuccessful, but at least he is going about it in the only legal way.
 
Amendment I
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, [and here is the part the left likes to leave out] or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;

He's not Congress, and unless Ron Paul supporters uncover some secret cloning conspiracy, he never will be, so unload clear and lock. Relax.
 
The Second Amendment is primarily about tyranny and self-defense, not hunting. The Founding Fathers wanted us to be able to defend ourselves from our own government, if need be, and from all threats to our lives and property. Second Amendment rights belong to individuals, not cities or states. I oppose gun control based on geography. I consistently opposed banning assault weapons and opposed the Brady Bill. As Governor, I protected gun manufacturers from frivolous law suits. I was the first governor in the country to have a concealed handgun license.

From: http://http://www.mikehuckabee.com/?FuseAction=Issues.View&Issue_id=18

http://http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=53BE93_0gJc

Huckabee is on target with the intent and meaning of the 2A. The statement you quoted you not only cherry picked it, you took it way out of context. Huckabee was talking about abortion. He was not saying, endorsing or proclaiming that Christianity is or that he wants it to be a National Religion. How you connnected the dots on that one is beyond me.

I like most things about Huck, not all, but most. I voted for him in the primary. I prefer him over McCain, for several reasons.
 
Huckabee is on target with the intent and meaning of the 2A. The statement you quoted you not only cherry picked it, you took it way out of context.
Click to expand...
How is it out of context. He is clearly stating that the word of god is superior to the constitution since the constitution can and should be re-written to conform to the laws of god. That clearly demonstrates his belief that the constitution is secondary to biblical teachings. That would open the door to illegalizing alcohol, sex outside of marriage, inter-racial marriage, single parent births, and a ton of other things.
 
I have to disagree with you. What question was he being asked? What was the topic of conversation? Abortion, IIRC. Its a cherry picked statement, plain and simple. His views on the 2A are out there, google is your friend, as well as his record in his state.
 
How does the topic change the meaning of his words? He did not say "abortion is immoral or against the values of the American citizen" he clearly chose to say that the issue was against gods law and therefore the constitutaion needs to be re-written to "god's standard"...not the standard of the citizens of this country.
 
http://http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2008/01/15/579265.aspx

From NBC/NJ's Adam Aigner-Treworgy
WARREN, Mich. -- 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.
 
Like I have said...the topic does not change the measure. He was using "God's standard" as the measure...not the will of the people. That shows where his priorities lie.

What you are doing is trying to dilute his comment.
 
Evangelical stance on gun

Kobia said churches around the world view the U.S. administration’s pro-gun position during international negotiation as a major obstacle in effective global regulation of small arms and light weapons. Although acknowledging that there are other factors involved, the ecumenical leader said U.S. arms manufacturing and sales policies have violent consequences not only in the United States but abroad. http://www.christianpost.com/articl..._Gospel's_Changing_Power,_Not_Gun_Control.htm

While that is only the opinion of one Evangelical it indicates my concern that when adjusting the Constitution for one reason a lot of other adjustments can get tossed into the works. By itself I do not believe the amendments sought by many of the religious siders will get passed without the support of others. To get support for others you have to offer them something. Give the anti gun votes a chance of removing the 2nd amendment and they'll vote for whatever it takes to get the legislation. The religious side will vote anti gun if that what it takes to get their amendment. That is how political compromise works in the end.
 
He was using "God's standard" as the measure...not the will of the people. That shows where his priorities lie.
Click to expand...

He is using God's standard to determine his position. However his statement implies that he understands that the law is determined by the will of the people. He seems to understand that the people will be in charge of deciding whether the Constitution should be changed or not.

I would say it is much better to try to amend the Constitution than it is to pass federal laws that conflict with it.

His statement is perfectly in tune with the essence of constitutional government. He is doing exactly what the writer's of the Constitution intended for people to do... to change the Constitution through the Amendment process, not through activist judges, or passing lesser federal laws that conflict with the Constitution.
 
So how can anyone loyal to this country and the constitution it is based on vote for such a man?
Click to expand...

Very easily.

Huckabee was referring to changing the Constitution via an amendment defining what is a valid marriage.

There is absolutely nothing about a marriage amendment that is "unconstitutional." It merely codifies what has already been the definition of a valid marriage and puts a stop to a lot of activist judges' end run around overwhelming public sentiment on this issue.

Huckabee was NOT trying to establish a State religion.
 
The religious side will vote anti gun if that what it takes to get their amendment. That is how political compromise works in the end.
Click to expand...

Huckabee has a very solid pro-second amendment record. Better in fact than any of the present or former Republican candidates. Vastly better than McCain's.

Huckabee would not under any circumstances sign an amendment to the Constitution that "repeals" the second amendment.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top