Huckabee: US moving towards "criminalization of Christianity"

[SWE]

Couldn't you just take the exact thing you just said, replace the word gays with Christians and maybe begin to see where people like Mike Huckabee are coming from?

... no?

[Abraham Reagan]

Couldn't you just take the exact thing you just said, replace the word gays with Christians and maybe begin to see where people like Mike Huckabee are coming from?

... no?

Before: "Gays should not be upset because in some places of the world they're murdered"
After: "Christians should not be upset because in some places of the world they're murdered"

You seriously don't think it could apply to both? If gays can decry their social situation here, why can't a Christian who feels like he's being demonized for his beliefs do the same?

[SWE]

Couldn't you just take the exact thing you just said, replace the word gays with Christians and maybe begin to see where people like Mike Huckabee are coming from?

... no?

Before: "Gays should not be upset because in some places of the world they're murdered"
After: "Christians should not be upset because in some places of the world they're murdered"

You seriously don't think it could apply to both? If gays can decry their social situation here, why can't a Christian who feels like he's being demonized for his beliefs do the same?

Because a Christian who feels like they're being demonized in America is an idiot?

[Abraham Reagan]

Couldn't you just take the exact thing you just said, replace the word gays with Christians and maybe begin to see where people like Mike Huckabee are coming from?

... no?

Before: "Gays should not be upset because in some places of the world they're murdered"
After: "Christians should not be upset because in some places of the world they're murdered"

You seriously don't think it could apply to both? If gays can decry their social situation here, why can't a Christian who feels like he's being demonized for his beliefs do the same?

Because a Christian who feels like they're being demonized in America is an idiot?

Ok, we're obviously not having a real conversation here if you think you can generalize such a large number of people as idiots.

[SWE]

I'm sorry if saying that people who believe in stupid things are idiots offends you

[Abraham Reagan]

Says the guy who believes in a failed ideology that people cross oceans to get away from.

[SWE]

Says the guy who believes in a failed ideology that people cross oceans to get away from.

Oh darn. I guess you've got me there!

[CountryClassSF]

Couldn't you just take the exact thing you just said, replace the word gays with Christians and maybe begin to see where people like Mike Huckabee are coming from?

... no?

Before: "Gays should not be upset because in some places of the world they're murdered"
After: "Christians should not be upset because in some places of the world they're murdered"

You seriously don't think it could apply to both? If gays can decry their social situation here, why can't a Christian who feels like he's being demonized for his beliefs do the same?

*applause*

[Sopranos Republican]

Says the guy who believes in a failed ideology that people cross oceans to get away from.

Says the guy who believes that memorializing both Abraham Lincoln and Ronald Reagan at the same time is somehow compatible.

[Adam Griffin]

Couldn't you just take the exact thing you just said, replace the word gays with Christians and maybe begin to see where people like Mike Huckabee are coming from?

... no?

Before: "Gays should not be upset because in some places of the world they're murdered"
After: "Christians should not be upset because in some places of the world they're murdered"

You seriously don't think it could apply to both? If gays can decry their social situation here, why can't a Christian who feels like he's being demonized for his beliefs do the same?

One group in America is the overwhelming majority and always has been; has practically all of the institutions controlled by its members, always has, for a long period into the foreseeable future will; and has shaped the country's culture in a myriad number of fundamental ways.

The other group in America is a relatively tiny minority; has minimal acknowledged representation in most institutions; has been forced historically to hide itself for fear of financial loss, lack of acceptance or overt physical danger; and every time it tries to alter a cultural inequality from total bias to a mere lack thereof, is accused of waging a "cultural war", "radical agenda", and so forth.

On the surface, your analogy may seem equivalent. Sorry, but you're just confusing persecution with butt-hurt over not being the sole arbiter of literally 100% of political outcomes, cultural dynamics and public dialogues.

[Abraham Reagan]

Couldn't you just take the exact thing you just said, replace the word gays with Christians and maybe begin to see where people like Mike Huckabee are coming from?

... no?

Before: "Gays should not be upset because in some places of the world they're murdered"
After: "Christians should not be upset because in some places of the world they're murdered"

You seriously don't think it could apply to both? If gays can decry their social situation here, why can't a Christian who feels like he's being demonized for his beliefs do the same?

One group in America is the overwhelming majority and always has been; has practically all of the institutions controlled by its members, always has, for a long period into the foreseeable future will; and has shaped the country's culture in a myriad number of fundamental ways.

Your point about Christians being a majority and shaping the country is absolutely right and only serves to support my point. Why should the majority of the nation be forced to hide and feel ashamed of values that have always, up until recently, been uplifted and celebrated?

[🐒Gods of Prosperity🔱🐲💸]

Couldn't you just take the exact thing you just said, replace the word gays with Christians and maybe begin to see where people like Mike Huckabee are coming from?

... no?

Before: "Gays should not be upset because in some places of the world they're murdered"
After: "Christians should not be upset because in some places of the world they're murdered"

You seriously don't think it could apply to both? If gays can decry their social situation here, why can't a Christian who feels like he's being demonized for his beliefs do the same?

One group in America is the overwhelming majority and always has been; has practically all of the institutions controlled by its members, always has, for a long period into the foreseeable future will; and has shaped the country's culture in a myriad number of fundamental ways.

The other group in America is a relatively tiny minority; has minimal acknowledged representation in most institutions; has been forced historically to hide itself for fear of financial loss, lack of acceptance or overt physical danger; and every time it tries to alter a cultural inequality from total bias to a mere lack thereof, is accused of waging a "cultural war", "radical agenda", and so forth.

On the surface, your analogy may seem equivalent. Sorry, but you're just confusing persecution with butt-hurt over not being the sole arbiter of literally 100% of political outcomes, cultural dynamics and public dialogues.

You think practicing Christians control practically all corporate, media and legal institutions?

Mike Huckabee's first problem is that what he is referring to as Christianity does not describe universally held Christian beliefs, at least not in the contemporary context. He would have more validity if he was speaking of what is faced by certain forms of Christianity.

[Rockefeller GOP]

Says the guy who believes in a failed ideology that people cross oceans to get away from.

Says the guy who believes that memorializing both Abraham Lincoln and Ronald Reagan at the same time is somehow compatible.

I disagree with all of what they've said and I really like you as a poster ... but the party switching myth is for simpletons.

[publicunofficial]

The fact that he is allowed to say that disproves his point.

Well he's allowed to say it because freedom of speech is a basic American freedom, but what he means is that there's becoming a cultural criminalization of Christianity, not a legal one (obviously). A criminalization to the point where Christians are pretty much told to shut up and keep their "hateful values" to themselves so that society can move "forward".

Sounds nice.

[🦀🎂🦀🎂]

I support the decriminalisation of Christianity, but I wouldn't go as far to support its full legalisation. I mean COME ON.

[CountryClassSF]

Huckabee has higher favorability than any GOP candidate and potential crossover support. Christphobes have the sadz?

Not my first choice for President because of amnesty issue, but we DO need a President to stand up for conservative voters

[Ebsy]

Huckabee has higher favorability than any GOP candidate and potential crossover support. Christphobes have the sadz?

Not my first choice for President because of amnesty issue, but we DO need a President to stand up for conservative voters

He has no crossover support.

[CountryClassSF]

Huckabee has higher favorability than any GOP candidate and potential crossover support. Christphobes have the sadz?

Not my first choice for President because of amnesty issue, but we DO need a President to stand up for conservative voters

He has no crossover support.

"Using results compiled from 11 recent polls, The Wickers Group determined no Republican appeals to as many likely voters as Huckabee."

http://www.westernjournalism.com/comprehensive-polling-data-shows-huckabee-leads-in-favorability-among-gop-contenders/

[Xing]

Oh, poor Huck, I'm sure you have it much worse than Atheists and Muslims in America.

[Fuzzy Bear]

Couldn't you just take the exact thing you just said, replace the word gays with Christians and maybe begin to see where people like Mike Huckabee are coming from?

... no?

Before: "Gays should not be upset because in some places of the world they're murdered"
After: "Christians should not be upset because in some places of the world they're murdered"

You seriously don't think it could apply to both? If gays can decry their social situation here, why can't a Christian who feels like he's being demonized for his beliefs do the same?

One group in America is the overwhelming majority and always has been; has practically all of the institutions controlled by its members, always has, for a long period into the foreseeable future will; and has shaped the country's culture in a myriad number of fundamental ways.

The other group in America is a relatively tiny minority; has minimal acknowledged representation in most institutions; has been forced historically to hide itself for fear of financial loss, lack of acceptance or overt physical danger; and every time it tries to alter a cultural inequality from total bias to a mere lack thereof, is accused of waging a "cultural war", "radical agenda", and so forth.

On the surface, your analogy may seem equivalent. Sorry, but you're just confusing persecution with butt-hurt over not being the sole arbiter of literally 100% of political outcomes, cultural dynamics and public dialogues.

You think practicing Christians control practically all corporate, media and legal institutions?

Mike Huckabee's first problem is that what he is referring to as Christianity does not describe universally held Christian beliefs, at least not in the contemporary context. He would have more validity if he was speaking of what is faced by certain forms of Christianity.

It is a minority of Americans who are truly "Christian", to the extent that they (A) believe in the Bible as the literal Word of God, (B) view belief in the death of Jesus and his Resurrection as the sole means by which man can be saved from sin and have eternal life ("I am the Way, the Truth, and the Life; No man cometh unto the Father but by Me."), and (C) that the ultimate Eternal outcomes for mankind are either Eternity in Heaven with God or Eternal separation from God in Hell.  This is what a Biblical Christian believes.  I've tried to make this as brief as possible, but there are many people who call themselves Christians for whom Jesus is a part of their religious beliefs, but who do not believe that Jesus is a Living Savior.  They do not believe that Jesus is whom he claims to be in Scripture.  I will not be so presumptuous as to insinuate what God may think of such people, but these are people who (A) don't agree with significant points of Scripture, and (B) are not bound by Scripture as to issues such as sexual mores.

Christianity is not a religion of Jihad (forcible conversion), but it IS a religion where Jesus commands his followers to share the Gospel with others and to instruct believers in Christian living.  It also commands believers to be the Salt of the Earth and the Light of the World.  We are to share our faith with others, and we are not to misrepresent God to imply that he's OK with sexual practices that His Word in Scripture explicitly forbids and condemns.

We were once a "Christianized" nation.  We have never had a majority of folks truly believe in Biblical Christianity, but the effect of Christians on public life was once far more apparent.  The Ten Commandments were, in my youth, a standard of public morality, even for unbelievers and non-Churchgoers.  Today, we are none of this; we have become a Libertine nation, where avant garde behavior of all kinds are to be tolerated, while even the expression of Biblical morality (in the minds of some) ought to be kept to one's self, in both verbal and non-verbal expression.  It is the main reason schoolchildren are told they cannot pray in school when, in fact, they can pray, alone, and with others, during free times, read and discuss Scripture, and other things. 

Huckabee gets this, and, frankly, I view it as a good thing in a President to get this. 

[YaBoyNY]

Couldn't you just take the exact thing you just said, replace the word gays with Christians and maybe begin to see where people like Mike Huckabee are coming from?

... no?

Before: "Gays should not be upset because in some places of the world they're murdered"
After: "Christians should not be upset because in some places of the world they're murdered"

You seriously don't think it could apply to both? If gays can decry their social situation here, why can't a Christian who feels like he's being demonized for his beliefs do the same?

One group in America is the overwhelming majority and always has been; has practically all of the institutions controlled by its members, always has, for a long period into the foreseeable future will; and has shaped the country's culture in a myriad number of fundamental ways.

The other group in America is a relatively tiny minority; has minimal acknowledged representation in most institutions; has been forced historically to hide itself for fear of financial loss, lack of acceptance or overt physical danger; and every time it tries to alter a cultural inequality from total bias to a mere lack thereof, is accused of waging a "cultural war", "radical agenda", and so forth.

On the surface, your analogy may seem equivalent. Sorry, but you're just confusing persecution with butt-hurt over not being the sole arbiter of literally 100% of political outcomes, cultural dynamics and public dialogues.

You think practicing Christians control practically all corporate, media and legal institutions?

Mike Huckabee's first problem is that what he is referring to as Christianity does not describe universally held Christian beliefs, at least not in the contemporary context. He would have more validity if he was speaking of what is faced by certain forms of Christianity.

It is a minority of Americans who are truly "Christian", to the extent that they (A) believe in the Bible as the literal Word of God, (B) view belief in the death of Jesus and his Resurrection as the sole means by which man can be saved from sin and have eternal life ("I am the Way, the Truth, and the Life; No man cometh unto the Father but by Me."), and (C) that the ultimate Eternal outcomes for mankind are either Eternity in Heaven with God or Eternal separation from God in Hell.  This is what a Biblical Christian believes.  I've tried to make this as brief as possible, but there are many people who call themselves Christians for whom Jesus is a part of their religious beliefs, but who do not believe that Jesus is a Living Savior.  They do not believe that Jesus is whom he claims to be in Scripture.  I will not be so presumptuous as to insinuate what God may think of such people, but these are people who (A) don't agree with significant points of Scripture, and (B) are not bound by Scripture as to issues such as sexual mores.

Christianity is not a religion of Jihad (forcible conversion), but it IS a religion where Jesus commands his followers to share the Gospel with others and to instruct believers in Christian living.  It also commands believers to be the Salt of the Earth and the Light of the World.  We are to share our faith with others, and we are not to misrepresent God to imply that he's OK with sexual practices that His Word in Scripture explicitly forbids and condemns.

We were once a "Christianized" nation.  We have never had a majority of folks truly believe in Biblical Christianity, but the effect of Christians on public life was once far more apparent.  The Ten Commandments were, in my youth, a standard of public morality, even for unbelievers and non-Churchgoers.  Today, we are none of this; we have become a Libertine nation, where avant garde behavior of all kinds are to be tolerated, while even the expression of Biblical morality (in the minds of some) ought to be kept to one's self, in both verbal and non-verbal expression.  It is the main reason schoolchildren are told they cannot pray in school when, in fact, they can pray, alone, and with others, during free times, read and discuss Scripture, and other things. 

Huckabee gets this, and, frankly, I view it as a good thing in a President to get this. 

lol

[Fuzzy Bear]

Couldn't you just take the exact thing you just said, replace the word gays with Christians and maybe begin to see where people like Mike Huckabee are coming from?

... no?

Before: "Gays should not be upset because in some places of the world they're murdered"
After: "Christians should not be upset because in some places of the world they're murdered"

You seriously don't think it could apply to both? If gays can decry their social situation here, why can't a Christian who feels like he's being demonized for his beliefs do the same?

One group in America is the overwhelming majority and always has been; has practically all of the institutions controlled by its members, always has, for a long period into the foreseeable future will; and has shaped the country's culture in a myriad number of fundamental ways.

The other group in America is a relatively tiny minority; has minimal acknowledged representation in most institutions; has been forced historically to hide itself for fear of financial loss, lack of acceptance or overt physical danger; and every time it tries to alter a cultural inequality from total bias to a mere lack thereof, is accused of waging a "cultural war", "radical agenda", and so forth.

On the surface, your analogy may seem equivalent. Sorry, but you're just confusing persecution with butt-hurt over not being the sole arbiter of literally 100% of political outcomes, cultural dynamics and public dialogues.

You think practicing Christians control practically all corporate, media and legal institutions?

Mike Huckabee's first problem is that what he is referring to as Christianity does not describe universally held Christian beliefs, at least not in the contemporary context. He would have more validity if he was speaking of what is faced by certain forms of Christianity.

It is a minority of Americans who are truly "Christian", to the extent that they (A) believe in the Bible as the literal Word of God, (B) view belief in the death of Jesus and his Resurrection as the sole means by which man can be saved from sin and have eternal life ("I am the Way, the Truth, and the Life; No man cometh unto the Father but by Me."), and (C) that the ultimate Eternal outcomes for mankind are either Eternity in Heaven with God or Eternal separation from God in Hell.  This is what a Biblical Christian believes.  I've tried to make this as brief as possible, but there are many people who call themselves Christians for whom Jesus is a part of their religious beliefs, but who do not believe that Jesus is a Living Savior.  They do not believe that Jesus is whom he claims to be in Scripture.  I will not be so presumptuous as to insinuate what God may think of such people, but these are people who (A) don't agree with significant points of Scripture, and (B) are not bound by Scripture as to issues such as sexual mores.

Christianity is not a religion of Jihad (forcible conversion), but it IS a religion where Jesus commands his followers to share the Gospel with others and to instruct believers in Christian living.  It also commands believers to be the Salt of the Earth and the Light of the World.  We are to share our faith with others, and we are not to misrepresent God to imply that he's OK with sexual practices that His Word in Scripture explicitly forbids and condemns.

We were once a "Christianized" nation.  We have never had a majority of folks truly believe in Biblical Christianity, but the effect of Christians on public life was once far more apparent.  The Ten Commandments were, in my youth, a standard of public morality, even for unbelievers and non-Churchgoers.  Today, we are none of this; we have become a Libertine nation, where avant garde behavior of all kinds are to be tolerated, while even the expression of Biblical morality (in the minds of some) ought to be kept to one's self, in both verbal and non-verbal expression.  It is the main reason schoolchildren are told they cannot pray in school when, in fact, they can pray, alone, and with others, during free times, read and discuss Scripture, and other things. 

Huckabee gets this, and, frankly, I view it as a good thing in a President to get this. 

lol

Glad I made you laugh!

I'm a native New Yorker, and I was a member of my county's Democratic committee at the age of 18 in NY.  I'm an independent voter these days,, but I voted for Kerry in 2004 and Obama in 2012, and I'm a registered Republican, but an undecided voter.  (FL requires party registration, and I'd be disenfranchised in local elections if I didn't register Republican.)

I am, however, a fundamentalist Christian, and the Democratic Party (or, at least, some of it's members) are overtly anti-Biblical Christian.  There was room for pro-life Democrats in 1976; there isn't now.  Abortion, gay rights, and a number of "social issues" are litmus tests for Democrats that weren't so in 1976, and this should concern any Christian.

Now the GOP has an un-Blblical position regarding the poor.  They have also been the architects of undermining the middle class with anti-union activities and "free trade" agreements that have exported manufacturing jobs.  They have also been the War party; we have fought one unnecessary war after another under the Republicans, and, sadly, many of my brethren support these wars to the point where unbelievers wonder how Christians can refer to Jesus as the Prince of Peace when his followers are such obvious cheerleaders for wars. 

I'm also pretty thick skinned, but I fully recognize when folks are insinuating that Christians should keep their opinions to themselves.  I get the agenda when discussing what Scripture says about homosexuality is derided as "hate speech".  There are a number of folks that would very much like to impose civil, if not criminal, penalties for those who would preach against SSM.  I get that, and I'm not trying to knock down bedroom doors, harass and shame individuals, or deny folks employment and opportunity based on how they (lawfully) live their private lives.  But I'm not going to concede that many on the left are resentful that Christians would publically share their faith, and I'm not going to pretend that the de-Christianization of American public life has been a positive thing.

[CountryClassSF]

Above poster inspirational. Proof positive as to why the GOP needs to do a better job going after conservative Democrats.  And that's how you win places like Pennsylvania and Ohio.
Values issues cannot be abandoned.

[RFayette]

Couldn't you just take the exact thing you just said, replace the word gays with Christians and maybe begin to see where people like Mike Huckabee are coming from?

... no?

Before: "Gays should not be upset because in some places of the world they're murdered"
After: "Christians should not be upset because in some places of the world they're murdered"

You seriously don't think it could apply to both? If gays can decry their social situation here, why can't a Christian who feels like he's being demonized for his beliefs do the same?

One group in America is the overwhelming majority and always has been; has practically all of the institutions controlled by its members, always has, for a long period into the foreseeable future will; and has shaped the country's culture in a myriad number of fundamental ways.

The other group in America is a relatively tiny minority; has minimal acknowledged representation in most institutions; has been forced historically to hide itself for fear of financial loss, lack of acceptance or overt physical danger; and every time it tries to alter a cultural inequality from total bias to a mere lack thereof, is accused of waging a "cultural war", "radical agenda", and so forth.

On the surface, your analogy may seem equivalent. Sorry, but you're just confusing persecution with butt-hurt over not being the sole arbiter of literally 100% of political outcomes, cultural dynamics and public dialogues.

You think practicing Christians control practically all corporate, media and legal institutions?

Mike Huckabee's first problem is that what he is referring to as Christianity does not describe universally held Christian beliefs, at least not in the contemporary context. He would have more validity if he was speaking of what is faced by certain forms of Christianity.

It is a minority of Americans who are truly "Christian", to the extent that they (A) believe in the Bible as the literal Word of God, (B) view belief in the death of Jesus and his Resurrection as the sole means by which man can be saved from sin and have eternal life ("I am the Way, the Truth, and the Life; No man cometh unto the Father but by Me."), and (C) that the ultimate Eternal outcomes for mankind are either Eternity in Heaven with God or Eternal separation from God in Hell.  This is what a Biblical Christian believes.  I've tried to make this as brief as possible, but there are many people who call themselves Christians for whom Jesus is a part of their religious beliefs, but who do not believe that Jesus is a Living Savior.  They do not believe that Jesus is whom he claims to be in Scripture.  I will not be so presumptuous as to insinuate what God may think of such people, but these are people who (A) don't agree with significant points of Scripture, and (B) are not bound by Scripture as to issues such as sexual mores.

Christianity is not a religion of Jihad (forcible conversion), but it IS a religion where Jesus commands his followers to share the Gospel with others and to instruct believers in Christian living.  It also commands believers to be the Salt of the Earth and the Light of the World.  We are to share our faith with others, and we are not to misrepresent God to imply that he's OK with sexual practices that His Word in Scripture explicitly forbids and condemns.

We were once a "Christianized" nation.  We have never had a majority of folks truly believe in Biblical Christianity, but the effect of Christians on public life was once far more apparent.  The Ten Commandments were, in my youth, a standard of public morality, even for unbelievers and non-Churchgoers.  Today, we are none of this; we have become a Libertine nation, where avant garde behavior of all kinds are to be tolerated, while even the expression of Biblical morality (in the minds of some) ought to be kept to one's self, in both verbal and non-verbal expression.  It is the main reason schoolchildren are told they cannot pray in school when, in fact, they can pray, alone, and with others, during free times, read and discuss Scripture, and other things.  

Huckabee gets this, and, frankly, I view it as a good thing in a President to get this.  

lol

I actually sympathize with Fuzzy Bear here and don't see how an "lol" is warranted.  The culture has changed a lot, and it is a tough transition for a lot of folks.  It is true that Christianity has historically been privileged compared to other religions/races/classes, but psychologically, being taken down from the 10th floor to the 9th floor feels just as bad as going from the 2nd floor down to the 1st.

[Sopranos Republican]

Says the guy who believes in a failed ideology that people cross oceans to get away from.

Says the guy who believes that memorializing both Abraham Lincoln and Ronald Reagan at the same time is somehow compatible.

I disagree with all of what they've said and I really like you as a poster ... but the party switching myth is for simpletons.

Oh don't worry. I'm under no illusions like many of our red avatared friends that Lincoln would be a Democrat today either. The point I was making, was that Abraham Lincoln was quite radical, which obviously also means he wasn't a liberal, and would not find the feel good no substance message of the democratic party compatible with his beliefs either. My point really was that the GOP since Reagan has let the original great founding ideals of the party fly out the window, to become a southern party dominated by religion, something that Lincoln would not be okay at all with.