The fact (if it is) that a presidential candidate would state this, let alone believe this, is utterly disturbing. He then changes his tune to suit another audience? That in itself is very telling isn't it? A man not to be trusted. Hmmm, I can so far think of only one man that doesn't change his tune to suit his captive audience!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

The words from Huckabee's sermon are not all that surprising. Christians have used this analogy since St. Paul. And 150 years ago Abolitionists sang the "Battle Hymn of the Republic", proclaiming, "He hath loosed the fateful lightning of His terrible swift sword", etc.

And the criticism of Huckabee giving his life over to Christ isn't much of an insult. In fact you can count Jimmy Carter in that group also.

This is where we miss the mark when we criticize people like Huckabee. It is more important to challenge them with the language that they use. So instead of questioning his use of military language, it is more important to ask what he is fighting for and against. Challenge him to fight the things that Jesus fought - poverty, oppression, religious arrogance, sexism, xenophobia, abuse of children, etc. And to work for the things that Jesus worked for - love of enemies, healthy body and spirit, compassion, forgiveness, inclusion, feeding the poor, freeing the prisoners, etc. Those important questions are the difference between the exclusionary language of Bush and the service language of Carter.

Any other approach will simply fuel the "us" verses "them" mentality that the religious right loves.

Incidentally, I also think the same approach needs to be taken with fundamentalists in Islam. Why is it we don't emphasize the compassion for the poor and inclusion of all in a community that is found in the Koran? We keep trying to argue in a language that they do not use.

Anything else is just hurling insults at each other.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

ALL religions are dangerous, not just the extreme ones. I just started reading
"The End of Faith" by Sam Harris. Sam Harris is correct in saying that it isn't just
radical religion that is dangerous, it is all religion that is dangerous. Any belief in
any religion causes or enables war, horror and terror. Religion is obsolete and we
should say so. Religion could easily lead to the fall of civilization or the
extinction of Homo Sapiens. I recommend Sam's book.

Religion is caused by any one or more of about half a dozen mental illnesses.
The truth about religion can be found in these books:

"The Neuropsychological bases of god beliefs" Dr. Michael A. Persinger MD,
psychiatrist 1987 "Religious people are just like my temporal lobe patients"

"The Origin of Consciousness in the Breakdown of the Bi-Cameral Mind" Julian
Jaynes Professor, Harvard University 1976 "Religious people are just like
schizophrenic patients"

"The Psychiatric Interview in Clinical Practice" Roger A. MacKinnon, M.D.,
Robert Michels, M.D. W. B. Saunders Co. 1971 "Religiosity is a common
symptom [of] schizophrenic patients"

"The God delusion" by Richard Dawkins. "Religion is caused by a kind of
computer virus that infects the living computer, the human brain."

"The Science of Good and Evil" by Michael Shermer, 2004 "Morality and Ethics
are now in the jurisdiction of Science and greatly improved thereby."

Many books in the new science called "Sociobiology": Morals and ethics are
instinctive and they evolved.

"God: The Failed Hypothesis" by Victor Stenger Scientific proof that god does
not exist.

"The God Part of the Brain" by Matthew Alper 1996. "The USA is anomolusly
religious because many early founder groups were religiously insane and fleeing
prosecution in Europe."

"The Accidental Mind" by David J. Linden, 2007 Belknap Press of Harvard
University Press. Religion is caused by the extreme klugeyness of the "designed"
by evolution brain.

"Scientists Confront Intelligent Design and Creationism" edited by Petto &
Godfrey, 2007. The ID and creationist crowd are trying to do away with science.

"Manufacturing Belief" by Lewis Wolpert
http://www.salon.com/books/feature/2007/05/15/lewis_wolpert/

"Breaking the Spell: Religion as a Natural Phenomenon", by Daniel Dennett
Let's do scientific research on religion and find out what causes it.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Religion is a fact of life for most Americans, and insofar as it informs their values and ethics there need not necessarily be a problem. But theocracy is dangerous, and for that reason our Founding Fathers wisely made it unconstitutional. Carter tried to apply his moral insights in matters of foreign policy (at times, anyway), but GW Bush has gone further, such as when he claimed that God had instructed him to attack Iraq. Huckabee, Thompson and Romney are all theocrats, comfortable imposing their beliefs on the country in private matters such as abortion and sexual orientation, as well as interfering with science and sex education. Fortunately the majority of Americans have realized that the Christian fundamentalists' morality includes support for torture, forced disappearance, murder, targeting of civilians in war, denial of healthcare to children and other outrages. I'd be very suprised if the US elected a theocratic president again.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Although badly trampled on, disregarded and sneered at, this country still has a founding document entitled "The Constitution of the United States of America". This document applies to ALL citizens, from the approximately 4 million in Washington's times to the approximately 300 million today; and it applies equally. Mr Huckabee and the many like him should return to their churches and congregations and gatherings and rule and be obeyed there as they may see fit.

Wishes for a unified National Religion, express or implied are certainly not necessary in our times. When the State imposes morality, especially from a single source, what we have is not a republican form but a full-blown theocratic one.

Mr Huckabee loves to raise his view of involvement in politics as "vertical" and "not horizontal". A 'vertical' line in this country can only be drawn from the Constitution to the Consent - and not Obedience- of the People. Mr Huckabee's "verticality" is one of Divine Rule, and that struggle was fought and resolved as expressed in the Declaration Of Independence.

'Election' in the theological realm is very, very different than Elections at the ballot box. It's dangerous to conflate the two, especially with regard to justice, liberty, dignity and equality.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

What's your problem? He was at a church, not at a poltical rally. He was preaching a religious sermon not a giving a political stump speech. It's hysterical reactions like this article that give the public the grossly misleading impression that democrats and other assorted liberals and leftists are not and cannot be religious. Many of us are very much so. Including me. So cool it already.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Religion exists and was very strong at the beginning of christianity because oppressed people without power needed some hope.

It exists today and is strongest in areas where the common folk are forever in bondage to despots. Americans may be loosely defined as "free," but we are still forced to serve our society's politically powerful.

In our present society, there are almost no lo-term social support networks for individuals, couples and families because of the defects of the economy, especially the world of work, which has led to the destruction of those earlier networks.

Fewer extended families exist and remain within easy meeting distance and now, when we are most separated, their caring existence is necessary for the physical and emotional support of young families, the sick and disabled and aging persons.

Community churches, friendly neighbors and family friends are attempting to fill the role of extended family right now because that is one of the most pressing social needs in our cold society. In terms of history, I believe we are generally as far apart from actual human contacts as the original pioneers were.

Even in large cities, teeming with people, there is no constantly reliable means of discovering true relationships.

Television, Email and other means are therefore necessary to stand in for normal relationships. That's why businesses are investing so heavily in them. They know they can turn a fantastic profit from the awful loneliness we all experience at various times in our lives.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

What is even more disturbing then this article are those who commented on it. For one, isn't the glory of blogs so wonderful so that someone completely ignorant of relgions can rant on about someone giving their lives or as he put it "signed his life over to Christ." At least someone mentioned that this theory is a foundation to just about every monotheistic religion and merely states that you have chosen one God who you intend to fight for and if necessary would give your life. That same doctrine is on every piece of currency and is in our pledge of allegiance. "one nation under God" again pledging our lives to a country.

Now, to address those who think religion causes war, religion doesnt CAUSE war, power hungry people cause war. Government is all just a big dick measuring contest and everyone thrives for power, whether in your place of employment, your house, or you want to take over the world. whatever. What religions gives is an answer to the hunger. Sin. Sin causes war, religion is what is an attempt to fight this sin. Let me also remind you that Christianity believes in a man named Jesus. Jesus did not create Christianity, humans did. Also, religions dont save, Jesus does.

To say religion enables war is just outright flawed in its theology. Anything enables war. I could go on for hours about this. But its clear if you can rationalize that you are far beyond comprehension of an actual intelligent book. Their is more proof for intelligent design, there is three times more proof for Jesus Christ then their is for Shakespeare. You want good reading? Ill give you all the reading you need.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Now you do.
THIS is a terrorist.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

president of the US must strike educated Americans, Europeans and others as the worst sort of sick joke. Regression to the Dark Ages, anyone?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Most people endorse the ethical sayings of Jesus (the Social Gospel) because they're decent and make sense -- they're the basis of any enlightened humanism.

It's the childish Santa Claus metaphysics of Christianity (spouted mostly by so-called Fundamentalists), and the linking of these metaphysics to Christian social ethics that is intolerable - especially in a politician.

Religious metaphysics[i.e., unproven declarations of Jesus's - or Allah's-- divinity and cosmic authority] are Arguments from Authority and, as such, pure BS; they reduce the public mind to idiocy, fear, and bogus-power worship. Enlightenment philosophy, which formed the basis of America's political culture & Constitution, rightly meant to retire these fradulent forms of human epistemology.

The Social Gospel, per se, isn't in conflict with Enlightenment principles. What's in conflict with them, is Huckabee's and other's attempts to overthrow Reason for THEIR PERSONAL, Magically Received Knowledge.

It's a sign of widespread public mental decline that such (absolutist metaphysical) baloney is tolerated in our country's political discourse.

As I tried to note elsewhere: You needn't be an atheist to fear the idiocy of theocracy.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]