This site is not maintained. Click here for the new website of Richard Dawkins.

← Huckabee Wants A 'Faith-based' Constitution

Huckabee Wants A 'Faith-based' Constitution - Comments

Darwin's badger's Avatar Comment 1 by Darwin's badger

Depressingly predictable, I'm sad to say. :(

Wed, 16 Jan 2008 00:24:00 UTC | #106600

MuNky82's Avatar Comment 2 by MuNky82

WTF!

EDIT: I agree with some of the comments on the original websites - I hope this fascist would be the Republican nominee, so that horrible party would fail dismally. At least the guy speaks what he thinks...

Wed, 16 Jan 2008 00:26:00 UTC | #106601

Szkeptik's Avatar Comment 3 by Szkeptik

Does he want an ammendment about stoning disobidient children? If he gets elected and starts the ammending, I will keep demanding the childrenstoning taken up too.

Wed, 16 Jan 2008 00:30:00 UTC | #106602

octopus's Avatar Comment 4 by octopus

I am a little bit concerned that when it comes to "God's standards" we might end up playing that old game "that is not my God you are talking about".

Wed, 16 Jan 2008 00:41:00 UTC | #106603

helen sotiriadis's Avatar Comment 5 by helen sotiriadis

how can this person be even in the position to be a serious nominee for the presidency?

Wed, 16 Jan 2008 00:51:00 UTC | #106605

Ben Jennings's Avatar Comment 6 by Ben Jennings

Hmm no wonder Hitch referred to him as a "smirking hick".

Wed, 16 Jan 2008 00:56:00 UTC | #106606

madame_zora's Avatar Comment 7 by madame_zora

I really hope we're all paying attention. While the sober among us would like to laugh him off, I wonder what percentage of America he speaks to? I'm afraid we might be about to discover an ugly truth.

Wed, 16 Jan 2008 01:07:00 UTC | #106610

BAEOZ's Avatar Comment 8 by BAEOZ

To quote Roger Water's from Pink Floyds masterful album; The wall:

Tear down the wall! Tear down the wall!

NOT!

Cretinous fool!

Wed, 16 Jan 2008 01:10:00 UTC | #106613

alfonso's Avatar Comment 9 by alfonso

No no, you don't understand, that god is the *REAL* one.

Is the whole of US so deluded or are there still places that can be considered havens against these tides of irrationality?

Wed, 16 Jan 2008 01:11:00 UTC | #106615

gcdavis's Avatar Comment 11 by gcdavis

Is it really conceivable that America could elect a moron like Huckabee, can they not see what a disaster Bush's two terms have been to America's reputation? Neither men have any understanding of immense responsibility that the office of president involves, they behave (or will behave) like bulls in the china shop thrashing around breaking stuff that has taken centuries to develop, they surround themselves with sycophants and retards rather than subjecting their ideas and policies to objective scrutiny.

When I see Bush on TV I have pinch myself that this man really is the President of the United States of America, can your politics really have sunk this far?

Wed, 16 Jan 2008 01:13:00 UTC | #106619

Quetzalcoatl's Avatar Comment 10 by Quetzalcoatl

How is anyone surprised by this? The optimistic side of me hopes that the crap he's just spouted will galvanise people against him, but my cynical side thinks otherwise. How many people in America will right now be applauding Huckabee for having the courage of his convictions?

Wed, 16 Jan 2008 01:13:00 UTC | #106618

black wolf's Avatar Comment 12 by black wolf

...they behave (or will behave) like bulls in the china shop...


Isn't it funny that in Germany the same proverb states 'like elephants in the china shop'?

Wed, 16 Jan 2008 01:31:00 UTC | #106624

irate_atheist's Avatar Comment 13 by irate_atheist

Fucktard.

Wed, 16 Jan 2008 01:32:00 UTC | #106625

YssiBoo's Avatar Comment 14 by YssiBoo

To all american atheists: If your country becomes a theocracy (theocrazy?) you are welcome to seek political refuge in my country. We need more good atheists in Norway as well.

Wed, 16 Jan 2008 01:58:00 UTC | #106627

Peacebeuponme's Avatar Comment 16 by Peacebeuponme

Just make sure you don't vote the dickhead in.

Wed, 16 Jan 2008 01:59:00 UTC | #106629

epeeist's Avatar Comment 15 by epeeist

Michael Chertoff was on R4 this morning saying that Europe could be the source of the biggest threat to US security. He wants more checks on people traveling to the States (the implication was that they want European money, but would prefer not to have the people).

Given this and the possible election of a theocrat does any one actually want to travel to the States. The Mexicans and the Canadians might be advised to consider building big walls to stop immigration.

Wed, 16 Jan 2008 01:59:00 UTC | #106628

YssiBoo's Avatar Comment 17 by YssiBoo

Off topic:

gcdavis: your avatar needs a language clean-up. It says Thor and Woden, while the Norse gods really are called Thor and Odin.

Fun fact: Wednesday is named after Odin and means Odin's day, while Thursday is Thor's day.

Wed, 16 Jan 2008 02:04:00 UTC | #106630

Peacebeuponme's Avatar Comment 18 by Peacebeuponme

And thats what we need to do is amend the Constitution so it's in God's standards
...and how do you propose to work out what those standards are, Mike?

Maybe the new US constitution will include details of just how long a woman remains unclean after childbirth, or menstruation, along with the right number of chickens to sacrifice in various circumstances.

Wed, 16 Jan 2008 02:05:00 UTC | #106631

Logicel's Avatar Comment 19 by Logicel

...is amend the Constitution so it's in God's standards rather than trying to change God's standards so it lines up with some contemporary view of how we treat each other and how we treat the family.
_______

Just as Christians are sensitive to criticism of religion in general and of their's in particular, they are equally sensitive to 'criticism' (which apparently is the actual existence of freely chosen lifestyles other than that of the traditional family) of the family. If their God and His notion that the family is important and necessary for good Christian living, then what is the problem? Its good points will be able to allow the family to continue because it is a system that works, despite the fact that others might not embrace that lifestyle. Why are other lifestyles anti-family?

Their inability to allow their lifestyle to flourish alongside other lifestyles shows their dogmatic rigidity. No one is asking them to give up their family-based lifestyle. Nor should they demand others to give up their lifestyle. Creepy Christians are a bunch of meddling paranoids!

Wed, 16 Jan 2008 02:18:00 UTC | #106632

DamnDirtyApe's Avatar Comment 20 by DamnDirtyApe

Just as long as the new constitution meets the standard of the Buddah, Allah, Thor, Cthulhu, Xenu...

Man, I can't wait for the 2011 census in the UK...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_England_from_the_2001_United_Kingdom_census#Religion

Given we've probably got at least 15% of the pie, maybe as high as 21% back then, i'm hoping that figure shoots up dramatically. I'm sure there might be confusion with new religions like 'pastafarian' or 'CofFSM' being put down as 'other' though. We might need to keep it simple.

Maybe that's something we need to organise for. Have a big campaign to promote no religion for the next uk census. I'd hope for nearly 30% as 'no religion'. Let's stand up and be counted to make sure that this type of nonsense doesn't infect politics in the uk. We're the largest minority and lets make it count.

Wed, 16 Jan 2008 02:20:00 UTC | #106633

Dinah's Avatar Comment 21 by Dinah

People who want 'God' to be brought into their Constitution or politics evidently know nothing about history. God was inseparable from politics in Europe for centuries, resulting in wars, persecution, repression of women and the suppression of scientific ideas to name but a few. Not content with persecuting people of other faiths, Christians then turned on each other – Catholic against Protestant, Protestant against Catholic, Catholics and Protestants against Puritans and other dissenters. And this is the point – which version of God would be the accepted one in this new theocracy? You can bet your life it wouldn't be long before Christians pursuing the 'wrong' kind of Christianity would soon find themselves on the wrong side of the law along with the atheists, Jews, Muslims, et al.

Wed, 16 Jan 2008 02:21:00 UTC | #106634

PJG's Avatar Comment 22 by PJG

I think we (the UK) should do a deal with the US.

We'll take all your not-worthy-of-being-called-American-citizen atheists and you can have all our deluded Bible/Koran-bashers. In this way, everyone could be happy and Britain would have some lovely buildings to convert into homes!

Wed, 16 Jan 2008 02:30:00 UTC | #106636

Galactor's Avatar Comment 23 by Galactor

Can someone familiar with American politics please throw a blanket of comfort over me and assure me that the actual amendment of the constitution along the lines that Huckleberry advocates would be a very, very hard thing to do indeed?

The one thing I fear about the current uprise and upsurge of atheist lobbying is the backlash it will effect by galvanizing the religious moderate community to side with this kind of nutcake. If someone like Huckabee gets into office, it'll be disasterous.

Wed, 16 Jan 2008 02:34:00 UTC | #106637

Fanusi Khiyal's Avatar Comment 24 by Fanusi Khiyal

Just shoot me now

Wed, 16 Jan 2008 02:46:00 UTC | #106639

Oromasdes1978's Avatar Comment 25 by Oromasdes1978

But I believe it's a lot easier to change the Constitution than it would be to change the word of the living God.


Yes Mr Huckabee, that would explain how Unicorns ended up in the King James Bible or that the divinity of Jesus was VOTED on BY MEN in 325 in Nicaea. Just a couple of examples, ask if you need more!

Idiot!

Philip

Wed, 16 Jan 2008 02:51:00 UTC | #106640

epeeist's Avatar Comment 26 by epeeist

Comment #111922 by Fanusi Khiyal


Just shoot me now

So the Dominionists aren't a problem are they Fanusi?

Wed, 16 Jan 2008 02:52:00 UTC | #106641

Nighttripper's Avatar Comment 27 by Nighttripper


Galactor wrote:
The one thing I fear about the current uprise and upsurge of atheist lobbying is the backlash it will effect by galvanizing the religious moderate community to side with this kind of nutcake.


That was exactly what I was thinking. Just as republican are almost invariably chosen whenever the US is at war, or close to war. Religious people in the US might feel so cornered by the new surge of Atheism that they would do something stupid like vote a man like this for president *Shiver*. I think that any candidate who announces that he is going to stop the advance of atheism can trust on getting a huge block of religious voters, defending themselves like a cornered cat.

This of course is not any reason to soften up or back down but it's a scary thought...

Wed, 16 Jan 2008 03:06:00 UTC | #106644

jaytee_555's Avatar Comment 28 by jaytee_555

It looks to me as if Huckabee realises he has no chance of winning anything; so before he returns to obscurity, he is trying to set himself up with a nice little sinecure by identifying and ingratiating himself with the knuckle-draggers who support the Falwalls and Robertsons of this world.

Wed, 16 Jan 2008 03:06:00 UTC | #106645

PJG's Avatar Comment 29 by PJG

It looks to me as if Huckabee realises he has no chance of winning anything; so before he returns to obscurity, he is trying to set himself up with a nice little sinecure by identifying and ingratiating himself with the knuckle-draggers who support the Falwalls and Robertsons of this world


The knuckle-draggers who support the Falwalls and Robertsons of this world have votes ... and there are a lot of them.

Wed, 16 Jan 2008 03:14:00 UTC | #106647

gtcc's Avatar Comment 30 by gtcc

It appears that Huckabee probably will not get the nomination - BUT!!! Latter day saint Mitt Romney is a mormon - Is not that worse??? At least Huckabee is kind of honest about being a bible thumper.

It seems absurd arguing about which of the clowns will become president, one is as bad as the other.

If Hillary wins, we will have Deepak Chopra running the world, now that is a scary thought!

Wed, 16 Jan 2008 03:22:00 UTC | #106649