Mike Huckabee Says God's Laws Are Above Supreme Court Rulings

[Political Junky]

Mike Huckabee The Supreme Court can t overrule God - CNNPolitics.com

"I respect the courts, but the Supreme Court is only that -- the supreme of the courts. It is not the supreme being. It cannot overrule God," he said. "When it comes to prayer, when it comes to life, and when it comes to the sanctity of marriage, the court cannot change what God has created."

He'd love it in Iran.

He'd love to be Ayatollah.

 

[hipeter924]

And the religious loons will line up to vote for this guy. Amazing.

Well, for a while, till the GOP eventually vet him out as too crazy and divisive to win in swing states.

 

[AntiParty]

Mike Huckabee The Supreme Court can t overrule God - CNNPolitics.com

"I respect the courts, but the Supreme Court is only that -- the supreme of the courts. It is not the supreme being. It cannot overrule God," he said. "When it comes to prayer, when it comes to life, and when it comes to the sanctity of marriage, the court cannot change what God has created."

This is what my America needs to learn about this topic that we should have learned long ago, not years, decades ago.

Christians were being oppressed so they decided to find a new land where they wouldn't be. They risked their life to find this new place of "freedom" beyond Religious Oppression.

They discovered America

Then they made a Constitution due to this specific history stating "Freedom of Religion".

The big confusion today is also ironical to the reason for Freedom Of Religion law. Us Christians are confused why we can't force others to think or act like us even though "Our Country was founded on this religion". Christians think Freedom of Religion is their freedom to force it on others.

"They stopped school prayers to Jesus!". Strange. It's almost like they are stating we should not force the other 4200 Religions to submit to ours?

ARE YOU BECOMING THE VERY THING WE RAN FROM?

I'm positive the Indians and Hitler might have some insight on this topic.

All this being said, Huckabee is one of the top 3 smartest Right Wingers. His flaw is he FORCES religion into politics in a Country that is "Freedom of Religion". Christianity teaches free will. Not laws to force you to act the way we do.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Huckabee wants a theocracy.

Then why didn't he do that as the Governor of Arkansas?
Our Courts would strike it down as unconstitutional so don't worry about anyone trying to run the country as a theocracy.

Oh he tried.

Governor Won t Sign an Acts of God Bill - NYTimes.com

Governor Won't Sign an 'Acts of God' Bill
Published: March 21, 1997

"LITTLE ROCK, Ark., March 20— The Arkansas Legislature scrambled today to rewrite a bill intended to protect storm victims after Gov. Mike Huckabee, a Baptist minister, objected to language describing such natural phenomena as tornadoes and floods as ''acts of God.''

Mr. Huckabee said that signing the legislation ''would be violating my own conscience'' inasmuch as it described ''a destructive and deadly force as being 'an act of God.' '' The Governor, a Republican, said the legislation was an otherwise worthy bill with objectives he shared...."

Long story short, he's a relgious nut.

Nice to see you admit again that religious practices CAN be unconstitutional.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Huckabee wants a theocracy.

Then why didn't he do that as the Governor of Arkansas?
Our Courts would strike it down as unconstitutional so don't worry about anyone trying to run the country as a theocracy.

Pfffttt..... they live in a world far removed from reality.

The man says he wants God's law to be supreme over the Constitution and we're the ones removed from reality?

lol, good one.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Huckabee wants a theocracy.

Then why didn't he do that as the Governor of Arkansas?
Our Courts would strike it down as unconstitutional so don't worry about anyone trying to run the country as a theocracy.

Cuz he can't do it doesn't mean he didn't want to.

ROFLMNAO!

Isn't it cool how forbidding deviant behavior, somehow represents a theocracy?

(The Reader should realize that such a perversion of reason, is a presentation of the mental disorder which also presents as sexual deviancy... . )

You should learn what theocratic means.

 

[NYcarbineer]

They'd have to give up their voodoo economics too. Although....I'm sure the talking heads could fool enough low info voters into thinking the GOP has a good record on the economy.

The above exchange is the intellectual equivalent of homosexual mutual materbation... OKA: a shameful waste of energy.

The gay activities of gay folks can't concern me too terribly much. I lack the interest, and the taste for specially cultivated outrage.

However, there is a great deal of interest in homosexuals among the self-described conservatives/Republicans/right-wing on this board.

I'm figuring it's some kind of secretly hopeful envy.

Explain your obvious interest in queer folk.

There's also a great deal of interest in the flu, cancers and heart disease. But I wouldn't say that such are any more of a concern than mental illness.

Does that explain your obvious interest in queer folk?

Yes, it does.

It is foolish to expect that viable policy from those whose very existence is unviable.

What is reasonable to expect from allowing the unviable to set public policy is an unviable public... thus an unviable culture. And I'm against that. So I speak out against it, a lot.

Given the overwhelming support for gay rights in this country,

your views are the new deviancy.

 

[Kondor3]

Mike Huckabee The Supreme Court can t overrule God - CNNPolitics.com

"I respect the courts, but the Supreme Court is only that -- the supreme of the courts. It is not the supreme being. It cannot overrule God," he said. "When it comes to prayer, when it comes to life, and when it comes to the sanctity of marriage, the court cannot change what God has created."

The American Taliban. Worship as we do or our God's law will deliver justice. Stop thinking, start believing.

What tripe.

I agree.

Your characterization of Christians as Taliban is, indeed, tripe.

Not Christians, but Fundamentalist Christians. Just as the Taliban is made up of fundamentalist Muslims.

The trouble with that is...

Fundamentalists merely wish to return to the Fundamentals of their Faiths...

The fundamental teachings of Jesus of Nazareth are simply Love Thy Neighbor and Turn the Other Cheek...

The fundamental teachings of Muhammed are complex and involve lots of Kill the Unbelievers and Polytheists and Idolaters -type stuff...

I'll take the former over the latter any day of the week...

 

[Kondor3]

The above exchange is the intellectual equivalent of homosexual mutual materbation... OKA: a shameful waste of energy.

The gay activities of gay folks can't concern me too terribly much. I lack the interest, and the taste for specially cultivated outrage.

However, there is a great deal of interest in homosexuals among the self-described conservatives/Republicans/right-wing on this board.

I'm figuring it's some kind of secretly hopeful envy.

Explain your obvious interest in queer folk.

There's also a great deal of interest in the flu, cancers and heart disease. But I wouldn't say that such are any more of a concern than mental illness.

Does that explain your obvious interest in queer folk?

Yes, it does.

It is foolish to expect that viable policy from those whose very existence is unviable.

What is reasonable to expect from allowing the unviable to set public policy is an unviable public... thus an unviable culture. And I'm against that. So I speak out against it, a lot.

Given the overwhelming support for gay rights in this country,

your views are the new deviancy.

Don't kit yourself...

Look at the large numbers of Marriage Defense Laws that surfaced across the country, many of them spawned as public referenda...

It required activist judges to overturn those State -level laws...

Given a different Supreme Court interpretation of the Constitution as it pertains to Gay Marriage - thereby clearing the way for a revisiting of State -level Marriage Defense laws - via public referenda - it seems entirely likely that the voters in a great many States would, once again, as they have in the very recent past, serve-up referenda results in defense of Marriage in the traditional man-woman framework.

All the people of this country need, to head down that path again, is a sign from the judicial branch of their government, that their mandate will not be swept aside and ignored next time, and that so-called 'overwhelming support' ya'll love to cite, will evaporate faster than a drop of water spilled into a hot fry-pan...

Pffffffftttt...

 

[Kondor3]

Huckabee has the support of those who think we should be more like Iran or Saudi Arabia.

No, Huckabee has the support of some who want a return to a more God-fearing and Christian -like social and cultural and legal framework in this country - such as we had for the first couple of centuries of our national existence...

Without all the politically correct horseshit, without abortion, without the welfare state, and with deviants and perverts (homosexuals) stuffed back into the closet.

My guess is, that's pretty much the extent of it.

All this likening to Iran, Saudi Arabia, et al, is merely hyperbole.

 

[NYcarbineer]

The gay activities of gay folks can't concern me too terribly much. I lack the interest, and the taste for specially cultivated outrage.

However, there is a great deal of interest in homosexuals among the self-described conservatives/Republicans/right-wing on this board.

I'm figuring it's some kind of secretly hopeful envy.

Explain your obvious interest in queer folk.

There's also a great deal of interest in the flu, cancers and heart disease. But I wouldn't say that such are any more of a concern than mental illness.

Does that explain your obvious interest in queer folk?

Yes, it does.

It is foolish to expect that viable policy from those whose very existence is unviable.

What is reasonable to expect from allowing the unviable to set public policy is an unviable public... thus an unviable culture. And I'm against that. So I speak out against it, a lot.

Given the overwhelming support for gay rights in this country,

your views are the new deviancy.

Don't kit yourself...

Look at the large numbers of Marriage Defense Laws that surfaced across the country, many of them spawned as public referenda...

It required activist judges to overturn those State -level laws...

Given a different Supreme Court interpretation of the Constitution as it pertains to Gay Marriage - thereby clearing the way for a revisiting of State -level Marriage Defense laws - via public referenda - it seems entirely likely that the voters in a great many States would, once again, as they have in the very recent past, serve-up referenda results in defense of Marriage in the traditional man-woman framework.

All the people of this country need, to head down that path again, is a sign from the judicial branch of their government, that their mandate will not be swept aside and ignored next time, and that so-called 'overwhelming support' ya'll love to cite, will evaporate faster than a drop of water spilled into a hot fry-pan...

Pffffffftttt...

lol, how many states had anti-miscegenation laws when the Supreme Court struck them down?

 

[NYcarbineer]

Huckabee has the support of those who think we should be more like Iran or Saudi Arabia.

No, Huckabee has the support of some who want a return to a more God-fearing and Christian -like social and cultural and legal framework in this country - such as we had for the first couple of centuries of our national existence...

Without all the politically correct horseshit, without abortion, without the welfare state, and with deviants and perverts (homosexuals) stuffed back into the closet.

My guess is, that's pretty much the extent of it.

All this likening to Iran, Saudi Arabia, et al, is merely hyperbole.

So Huckabee wants to build a bridge to the 19th century. Has he warned black Americans about this plan?

 

[Mac1958]

Could someone provide a practical example of how this would manifest?

Is there a situation in which a Supreme Court ruling would be ignored because of something in the Bible?

Seems like a legitimate question and a legitimate concern.

.

 

[Seawytch]

There's also a great deal of interest in the flu, cancers and heart disease. But I wouldn't say that such are any more of a concern than mental illness.

Does that explain your obvious interest in queer folk?

Yes, it does.

It is foolish to expect that viable policy from those whose very existence is unviable.

What is reasonable to expect from allowing the unviable to set public policy is an unviable public... thus an unviable culture. And I'm against that. So I speak out against it, a lot.

Given the overwhelming support for gay rights in this country,

your views are the new deviancy.

Don't kit yourself...

Look at the large numbers of Marriage Defense Laws that surfaced across the country, many of them spawned as public referenda...

It required activist judges to overturn those State -level laws...

Given a different Supreme Court interpretation of the Constitution as it pertains to Gay Marriage - thereby clearing the way for a revisiting of State -level Marriage Defense laws - via public referenda - it seems entirely likely that the voters in a great many States would, once again, as they have in the very recent past, serve-up referenda results in defense of Marriage in the traditional man-woman framework.

All the people of this country need, to head down that path again, is a sign from the judicial branch of their government, that their mandate will not be swept aside and ignored next time, and that so-called 'overwhelming support' ya'll love to cite, will evaporate faster than a drop of water spilled into a hot fry-pan...

Pffffffftttt...

lol, how many states had anti-miscegenation laws when the Supreme Court struck them down?

From Wiki:

In 1967, 17 Southern states (all the former slave states plus Oklahoma) still enforced laws prohibiting marriage between whites and non-whites. Maryland repealed its law in response to the start of the proceedings at the Supreme Court. After the ruling of the Supreme Court, the remaining laws were no longer in effect. Nonetheless, it took South Carolina until 1998 and Alabama until 2000 to officially amend their states' constitutions to remove language prohibiting miscegenation. In the respective referendums, 62% of voters in South Carolina and 59% of voters in Alabama voted to remove these laws.[27]

And public opinion in 1967? Take a look:

 

[Seawytch]

Could someone provide a practical example of how this would manifest?

Is there a situation in which a Supreme Court ruling would be ignored because of something in the Bible?

Seems like a legitimate question and a legitimate concern.

.

How is that even remotely a legitimate question? You don't get to ignore the laws of our country because of something any religious text says.

 

[Kondor3]

...lol, how many states had anti-miscegenation laws when the Supreme Court struck them down?

Oh, but you characters DO love to pretend an equivalency between Racial Discrimination and Abhorrence of Sexual Perversity.

Racial admixture is not an Evil, and is not banned by various religious dogma nor backed by thousands of years of active teaching that it is wrong.

Sexual deviants and perverts (homosexuals) do not enjoy that same advantage.

Rightly so.

 

[Kondor3]

Huckabee has the support of those who think we should be more like Iran or Saudi Arabia.

No, Huckabee has the support of some who want a return to a more God-fearing and Christian -like social and cultural and legal framework in this country - such as we had for the first couple of centuries of our national existence...

Without all the politically correct horseshit, without abortion, without the welfare state, and with deviants and perverts (homosexuals) stuffed back into the closet.

My guess is, that's pretty much the extent of it.

All this likening to Iran, Saudi Arabia, et al, is merely hyperbole.

So Huckabee wants to build a bridge to the 19th century. Has he warned black Americans about this plan?

Nobody said anything about the 19th Century... merely a return to some of its values... the better ones, worth saving.

The less-worthy ones, like racial discrimination, can be safely left in the past.

Any pretense that so-called 'fundamentalists' are pursuing or advocating a return to the slave-era is just that - pretense - partisan pretense.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Huckabee has the support of those who think we should be more like Iran or Saudi Arabia.

No, Huckabee has the support of some who want a return to a more God-fearing and Christian -like social and cultural and legal framework in this country - such as we had for the first couple of centuries of our national existence...

Without all the politically correct horseshit, without abortion, without the welfare state, and with deviants and perverts (homosexuals) stuffed back into the closet.

My guess is, that's pretty much the extent of it.

All this likening to Iran, Saudi Arabia, et al, is merely hyperbole.

So Huckabee wants to build a bridge to the 19th century. Has he warned black Americans about this plan?

Nobody said anything about the 19th Century... merely a return to some of its values... the better ones, worth saving.

The less-worthy ones, like racial discrimination, can be safely left in the past.

Any pretense that so-called 'fundamentalists' are pursuing or advocating a return to the slave-era is just that - pretense - partisan pretense.

There are plenty of conservatives on this board who believe that a business should have the right to refuse service to anyone for any reason,

so racism is alive and well on the right.

 

[Seawytch]

...lol, how many states had anti-miscegenation laws when the Supreme Court struck them down?

Oh, but you characters DO love to pretend an equivalency between Racial Discrimination and Abhorrence of Sexual Perversity.

Racial admixture is not an Evil, and is not banned by various religious dogma nor backed by thousands of years of active teaching that it is wrong.

Sexual deviants and perverts (homosexuals) do not enjoy that same advantage.

Rightly so.

Funny, the anti miscegenationists felt exactly like you do. They felt wholly justified in their bigotry just like you do.

Almighty God created the races white, black, yellow, malay and red, and he placed them on separate continents. And but for the interference with his arrangement there would be no cause for such marriages. The fact that he separated the races shows that he did not intend for the races to mix. ~ trial judge Leon Brazile.

Same bigots, different decade.

 

[NYcarbineer]

...lol, how many states had anti-miscegenation laws when the Supreme Court struck them down?

Oh, but you characters DO love to pretend an equivalency between Racial Discrimination and Abhorrence of Sexual Perversity.

Racial admixture is not an Evil, and is not banned by various religious dogma nor backed by thousands of years of active teaching that it is wrong.

Sexual deviants and perverts (homosexuals) do not enjoy that same advantage.

Rightly so.

Homosexuality is not a 'deviancy' in the sense you use the word.