Forums | MacLife

Has this quote gotten much publicity? I checked MSNBC yesterday and there was no mention of it on their website and it happened on Morning Joe, which is their own freaking show!

I wonder if it will have much effect on the electorate if no one is covering it.

I find it fascinating that this religious rhetoric has become so accepted in American politics. There are few countries in the world where that kind of talk is a political asset.

res wrote:

God's standards are higher than man's standards.

Man interprets what god is supposed to have caused to be written, so those are actually man's standards, too.

And they apply ONLY to the members of that sect. The Constitution of the United States applies to ALL of us. Religious laws have no place in it.

user wrote:

Ribtorus wrote:

I'd still like to see what Huckabee could do as president. The right's Faustian bargain with the christian voter should be brought to it's ultimate conclusion; a preacher-president.

Well, you can certainly afford to be sanguine about that prospect.

There would be a smackdown by congress and the senate of presidential power, and leave no doubt where christian dogma ends and secular power takes over. Secularism would win so convincingly that it would set back the "American taliban" for decades.
This assumes Huckabee wins by a slim margin, which I think would have to be the case. If he or someone like him won by a landslide, then you're screwed. But that just wouldn't happen.

Last edited by Ribtorus (2008-01-16 9:42 am)

I for one encourage this kind of talk by a candidate such as this. The more he talks, the more people will see him for what he is.  Problem solved.

If America were any kind of normal country with a functioning western democracy this would crush any hope of Huckabee ever becoming president. This embodies what the US is (supposed to be) against.

[Tycho?] wrote:

If America were any kind of normal country with a functioning western democracy this would crush any hope of Huckabee ever becoming president. This embodies what the US is (supposed to be) against.

Might you be willing to entertain the possibility, however briefly, that the prevalence of religious fundamentalists in the political system is actually a reflection of popular will?

ShnickyShnack wrote:

[Tycho?] wrote:

If America were any kind of normal country with a functioning western democracy this would crush any hope of Huckabee ever becoming president. This embodies what the US is (supposed to be) against.

Might you be willing to entertain the possibility, however briefly, that the prevalence of religious fundamentalists in the political system is actually a reflection of popular will?

I think it's kind of like a peer-pressure kind of thing.

Like people value religion, but they're not religious themselves, so they see supporting the supposedly religious candidate as a token move they can do to "better" their standing with God.

I think Obama catches some of this affect in a way, with some people who feel "guilty" about racism.

The Islamic Republic is a system based on belief in:

1.the One God (as stated in the phrase "There is no god except Allah"), His exclusive sovereignty and the right to legislate, and the necessity of submission to His commands;
2.Divine revelation and its fundamental role in setting forth the laws;
3.the return to God in the Hereafter, and the constructive role of this belief in the course of man's ascent towards God;
4.the justice of God in creation and legislation . . .

Huckabee and his followers might consider the Article 2 of the Iranian constitution as a starting point. Wasn't there some symbolic act passed in 2007 affirming the place of god, or christianity, in American public life? It's a start.

I say go for it.

user wrote:

There's a lot of people who have no idea about the history of religion and the founding of our country and who naively assume that any religion injected into a process is good.

Just remember, America is a country founded upon the principle of religious intolerance! Half the colonies were intolerant of one or another religions. At least one was as near to a theocracy as we have ever come. They haunt our present as well.

It is a paradox that the greatest secualr democracy in history is also a fundamentalist, theocratic, oppressive society.

yeah, like Rhode Island.

agedgruel wrote:

This kind of quote begs the question wtf were the Iowa republicans thinking?

Duke, do you care to speak on behalf of your state?

Sure, if I knew what they were thinking. I'm not a Republican so I'm obviously not thinking the same thing, whatever that is. My first "significant other" was a right-wing Republican, however, so I have some insight into their thought patterns I guess.

They're just fanatical fun-haters is all it really boils down to. I'm pretty certain (98% at least) that none of them had heard this more recent comment at the time they were in the ballot booth, or they'd have prob'ly picked someone less fanatical, rather than more. McCain is generally popular, and I'm kind of surprised he didn't take Iowa, to be honest. It's probably because the Democrats I've talked to lately seem to like him more than the Republicans do, but that's always been kind of the case with him. Obviously not a lot of Democrats who like McCain are going to be at the Republican primary, now are they?

Edwards is really popular in Iowa as well. I've not heard a lot of Republicans bad-mouth him either. He's been working us over for the last 4 years, too...stopping by the small towns like mine and having town meetings in coffee shops and smurf like that. I guess right before the primary Obama was in my town having lunch.

Most of the fanatical religious zealots I know around here are either old or dead. Not all, but a lot. Huckabee's victory here looks to me like the last electoral gasp of a dying breed, really.

Last edited by Duke Stratosphere (2008-01-16 5:37 pm)