Mike Huckabee (1 Viewer)

[iron error]

"God's Army", Good Vs. Evil and an ability to utterly reject reason and fact when it doesn't suit one's preconceived ideology.

Yeah, that's the finger I want on The Button.


PS: With the possible exception of Romney (depending on how narrowly one defines "Christian") every single one of the Presidential candidates is a Christian. This has been the case for every election in my lifetime.

IIRC, there's only one or two non-monotheists at the federal level in any elected position.

This has beaten to death already, and we all understand your view that those who do not believe in a higher power and believe that we evolved from microscopic pieces of dust have the monopoly on human intellect and are elite in their ability to function in a complex and scientific world.

That said, they may not be in your circle of friends, but there are many people that share Huck's views that are at every level within every level of government in this country, at all levels of industry and business, and they do just fine. Somehow, you feel that those same type of people are not fundamentally competent to govern, even be President.

 

[Pure Energy]

Thanks guys. I was just trying to get a feel for it. To answer some questions:

I have nothing against Christians as I am one and it is the most important thing in the world to me. I DO, however, believe in evolution, as do most of my Catholic friends, and I honestly would have a little trouble voting for someone that denounces it. I'm sorry to anyone who does not believe in it but, to me, if you turn a blind eye to all of those facts than your must be turning a blind eye to a lot of other stuff, too.

I know that there are those people who hate everything religion and as soon as they hear someone is religious its all stereotyping and 'all they do is bad' crap ensues and I havn't heard Huckabee mention to much religious stuff during the debates. I just wanted to get a feel for it.....and I don't see how a ex-minister giving a sermon at a non-political event is bad either....

As for Paul, I like some of his ideas. My brother has his doctorate in Political Science and is a huge supporter of his. I just can't do it. A lot of the time he just seems like he's spacing out and rambling. I think he would make a great advisor, maybe even VP, but not the head of a country for me.

Don't assume anyone who doesn't believe in the theory of Evolution* hasn't done their homework. I believe the contrary. My guess is Mike Huckabee (along with the other candidates who raised their hand that they disagree with the Theory of Evolution have done more research on the topic than you and I combined). Since the theory of Evolution is taught in schools most people accept it as fact and never do any independent research to validate or see the points of controversy on the topic.

Here's what I think is important:

1. A theory is not a fact but simply a hypothesis (someone's best guess as to why something happened or happens.
2. The Theory of Evolution has been around so long many now accept it as fact.
3. To my knowledge Darwin's theory does not address the concept of ensoulment.

Have you done your own research outside of what was taught to you in HS or College?



* - Although there are many aspects to Darwin's theory of Evolution--the major item debated is whether Man evolved from Apes.

 

[johnnyd]

seems like someone needs to learn the difference between a theory and a hypothesis.

 

[Jonesy77]

Don't assume anyone who doesn't believe in the theory of Evolution* hasn't done their homework. I believe the contrary. My guess is Mike Huckabee (along with the other candidates who raised their hand that they disagree with the Theory of Evolution have done more research on the topic than you and I combined). Since the theory of Evolution is taught in schools most people accept it as fact and never do any independent research to validate or see the points of controversy on the topic.

Here's what I think is important:

1. A theory is not a fact but simply a hypothesis (someone's best guess as to why something happened or happens.
2. The Theory of Evolution has been around so long many now accept it as fact.
3. To my knowledge Darwin's theory does not address the concept of ensoulment.

Have you done your own research outside of what was taught to you in HS or College?



* - Although there are many aspects to Darwin's theory of Evolution--the major item debated is whether Man evolved from Apes.

Isn't gravity still a theory?

I can prove natural selection. Look at a poodle. (I know, it's a "man-made" evolution, but it shows how certain traits can manifest themselves over time to create a completely unique animal)

 

[Taurus]

This has beaten to death already, and we all understand your view that those who do not believe in a higher power and believe that we evolved from microscopic pieces of dust have the monopoly on human intellect and are elite in their ability to function in a complex and scientific world.

That said, they may not be in your circle of friends, but there are many people that share Huck's views that are at every level within every level of government in this country, at all levels of industry and business, and they do just fine. Somehow, you feel that those same type of people are not fundamentally competent to govern, even be President.

I'm well aware that government is chock-full of Christians, even Creationists. Every candidate I've ever voted for has been a Christian. It isn't about someone being a Christian. It's about their ability to separate that aspect of themselves from the duties they must perform in office. And their ability to evaluate the evidence at hand and come to an objective conclusion. Someone who sees Armageddon as a good thing and who will happily drag the rest of us along for the ride shouldn't weild that kind of temporal power.

Kerry, for instance, made no attempt to hide his religion (though he didn't insist on bringing it up every chance he got) but made it clear that he understood that the President governs a land of Christians, Muslims, Hindus, atheists, Pagans, Wiccans...every religion under the Sun and as President you have to make your decisions with that in mind.

Even if Huckabee and Romney say they understand that principle, I don't believe it for a second.

In addition to which, someone that far gone into religion is ridiculously easy to manipulate.

 

[iron error]

Don't assume anyone who doesn't believe in the theory of Evolution* hasn't done their homework. I believe the contrary. My guess is Mike Huckabee (along with the other candidates who raised their hand that they disagree with the Theory of Evolution have done more research on the topic than you and I combined). Since the theory of Evolution is taught in schools most people accept it as fact and never do any independent research to validate or see the points of controversy on the topic.

Here's what I think is important:

1. A theory is not a fact but simply a hypothesis (someone's best guess as to why something happened or happens.
2. The Theory of Evolution has been around so long many now accept it as fact.
3. To my knowledge Darwin's theory does not address the concept of ensoulment.

Have you done your own research outside of what was taught to you in HS or College?



* - Although there are many aspects to Darwin's theory of Evolution--the major item debated is whether Man evolved from Apes.

paging Taurus, et al.

Evolution will never be proven, but is accepted as fact. It is accepted as fact by the faith that it could be proven by scientific method in concept. Not that is can ever be proven for a fact, since it won't ever be, but that it "could" be. IMO, that is enough for many to accept the theory as fact, even if by faith, the fact that it "could" be.

All the same, God or matters of faith will never be proven either in this lifetime and realm at least. The scientific method does not apply well to things beyond science. Even still, IMO, there are plenty of things we experience every day, that are difficult to cram into that science "box", like why I have this thing called love so much for my kids. Yet, these things are accepted every day without question.

Back to the thread, I do not understand why people think evolution and matters of faith should be mocked one way or the other. And why they would exclude someone from being able to govern or lead people or an organization.

 

[Taurus]

Don't assume anyone who doesn't believe in the theory of Evolution* hasn't done their homework. I believe the contrary. My guess is Mike Huckabee (along with the other candidates who raised their hand that they disagree with the Theory of Evolution have done more research on the topic than you and I combined). Since the theory of Evolution is taught in schools most people accept it as fact and never do any independent research to validate or see the points of controversy on the topic.

Here's what I think is important:

1. A theory is not a fact but simply a hypothesis (someone's best guess as to why something happened or happens.

1. Then you need to go back to school. A scientific Theory (note the capital letter) is much, much more than that.

   [*]The Theory of Evolution has been around so long many now accept it as fact.

   The ToE is both theory and fact. It is a fact that the genetic makeup of a population changes over time. As sound and observed a fact as the Sun rising in the East. The reason the ToE has been around so long is that is has passed every test thrown at it. It could be falsified, but in 150 years of aggressive experimentation, it hasn't.

   [*]To my knowledge Darwin's theory does not address the concept of ensoulment.

Have you done your own research outside of what was taught to you in HS or College?

Have you done any?. Why on Earth would a scientific theory address something as nebulous as "ensoulment"? What could ensoulment possibly have to do with the origin of species?

* - Although there are many aspects to Darwin's theory of Evolution--the major item debated is whether Man evolved from Apes.

Whether apes and hominids (us) share a common ancestor. A vast quantity of evidence shows that we do. If, for whatever religious reason, someone wants to think that sentience (or a soul, if you prefer) is something special, granted from a Higher Power...fine, whatever. But you've still got to keep your eyes open and grant that physically, apes and humans are incredibly similar. And you've got to have your eyes squeezed tightly shut to deny that speciation happens, has happened in the past and shows no sign of stopping anytime soon.

 

[Taurus]

Back to the thread, I do not understand why people think evolution and matters of faith should be mocked one way or the other. And why they would exclude someone from being able to govern or lead people or an organization.

I addressed that earlier. It has to do with the ability to rise above what one wishes were true and look at the evidence objectively.

 

[Jonesy77]

The scientific method does not apply well to things beyond science. Even still, IMO, there are plenty of things we experience every day, that are difficult to cram into that science "box", like why I have this thing called love so much for my kids.

Love is actually pretty easy to fit into the science box. A chemical stimulus in the brain that helps procreation and survival of species during an otherwise vulnerable period.

The more difficult scientifically to me is homosexuality. That has to have been created by God.

 

[iron error]

I'm well aware that government is chock-full of Christians, even Creationists. Every candidate I've ever voted for has been a Christian. It isn't about someone being a Christian. It's about their ability to separate that aspect of themselves from the duties they must perform in office. And their ability to evaluate the evidence at hand and come to an objective conclusion. Someone who sees Armageddon as a good thing and who will happily drag the rest of us along for the ride shouldn't weild that kind of temporal power.

Kerry, for instance, made no attempt to hide his religion (though he didn't insist on bringing it up every chance he got) but made it clear that he understood that the President governs a land of Christians, Muslims, Hindus, atheists, Pagans, Wiccans...every religion under the Sun and as President you have to make your decisions with that in mind.

Even if Huckabee and Romney say they understand that principle, I don't believe it for a second.

In addition to which, someone that far gone into religion is ridiculously easy to manipulate.

All the same, a candidate who accepts as fact that I evolved from a piece of elemental dust, could affect my view towards their ability to be manipulated.

I think you are overrating the concept of how these religious people govern all the people, even those who do not agree with them. As Americans, as humans, we understand that we all have different viewpoints. It is something you deal with your whole life and manage to prosper in. Why is governing any different?

Regardless, if we were giving power to a dictator for life, then you may have to take your approach, but we are not. It is a leader within a set of laws and rules, etc. You accept care from doctors, lawyers, engineers, teachers, that do not let there personal viewpoints affect their leadership and duty. They are also limited by laws and rules.

 

[iron error]

Love is actually pretty easy to fit into the science box. A chemical stimulus in the brain that helps procreation and survival of species during an otherwise vulnerable period.

The more difficult scientifically to me is homosexuality. That has to have been created by God.

Ok...

why do you love your spouse, your grandma, your friend...OTHER kids.

I don't think it is easy at all. The human condition of love IMO cannot be simply relegated to the chemical process that occurs symptomatically with the feeling.

 

[Jonesy77]

All the same, a candidate who accepts as fact that I evolved from a piece of elemental dust, could affect my view towards their ability to be manipulated.

I think you are overrating the concept of how these religious people govern all the people, even those who do not agree with them. As Americans, as humans, we understand that we all have different viewpoints. It is something you deal with your whole life and manage to prosper in. Why is governing any different?

Regardless, if we were giving power to a dictator for life, then you may have to take your approach, but we are not. It is a leader within a set of laws and rules, etc. You accept care from doctors, lawyers, engineers, teachers, that do not let there personal viewpoints affect their leadership and duty. They are also limited by laws and rules.

How about this: Whose judgment would you trust more? Someone who admits to believing things that are told to them without evidence (i.e. the definition of faith) or someone who admits they don't know the answers, but are in constant search of truth?

I think it could be argued that the first would be more prone to take bad advice and not question advisors if something didn't make sense

 

[Taurus]

Exactly.

I happen not to think that Mike Huckabee is capable of compartmentalizing in that regard.

 

[Pure Energy]

Have you done any?. Why on Earth would a scientific theory address something as nebulous as "ensoulment"? What could ensoulment possibly have to do with the origin of species?

The Questioner identified himself as a Christian. Therefore the concept of a soul is probably relevant to him.

 

[Pure Energy]

How about this: Whose judgment would you trust more? Someone who admits to believing things that are told to them without evidence (i.e. the definition of faith) or someone who admits they don't know the answers, but are in constant search of truth?

I'm certain you did not mean to imply people of Faith are not in constant search of knowledge.