Huckabee: US moving towards "criminalization of Christianity"

[Fuzzy Bear]

Christians who claim the "persecution" and "criminalization" of the faith in the United States belittle the actual persecution of Christians in places such as Syria, Iraq, Saudi Arabia, Nigeria, and North Korea.

Agreed, Huckabee should be deported to Darfur to learn what actual Christian persecution is.

While I am not a big Huckabee fan, I am a fundamentalist Christian, and I certainly think that Gov. Huckabee knows the difference between what occurs in America and what occurs in Darfur.

What has been going on over the last 20 years has been a redefinition of terms.  SSM isn't "marriage equality", it's redefining the definition of marriage from something that has been accepted by virtually every culture and religion on Earth to something it has never meant before.  However one views the issue, intellectual honesty demands that acknowledgement.  The "marriage equality" argument is an attempt to equate the issue to the issues of civil rights for blacks and gender equality issues, and it's just not the case.  From a Biblical point of view, Scripture cites homosexual behaviors as specifically  (and unequivocally) prohibited practices.  From a scientific point of view, there is no proof that persons are "born gay"; it's an assertion, it's believed by people, and it may, someday, be demonstrated as fact, but that's not the case right now.

What has also been redefined is "tolerance".  Tolerance used to mean that I will respect your right to be you, but I'm not required to acknowledge that your beliefs/practices are morally acceptable.  Tolerance used to mean that I'm not going to advocate government jackboots knock down your doors for your private sexual activities, but I have the right to preach openly that the Lord our God will judge Biblically defined sexual immorality, and the persons who practice it.  Now, however, tolerance requires that I hold my peace on these issues, even as Christians are freely portrayed as narrow-minded oppressive zealots.  Faith is expected to be kept private, while sexual practices of all kinds are to be brought out in the open, and are not to be criticized.  (Anyone who believes that there is NOT such a push from one side of this argument is intellectually dishonest, or in extreme denial.)

Now if you believe that Bible is not the Inspired Word of God, but merely a work of fiction, a book of Fairy Tales, or a bunch of some kind of stuff and nonsense, I get that.  I have respect for folks who flat out tell me that they think the Bible is a bunch of crap and that I am full of beans.  I have less respect for the intellectually dishonest who deny what Scripture actually says on sex, marriage, and sexuality.  It's a dishonest attempt to have it both ways; to appear pious while rejecting Scriptural standards of piety.  I'm more OK with folks who flat out deny the authority of Scripture than those who seek to misrepresent its contents while invoking its authority.

The societal pressures to keep religious faith private (even when such faith calls for evangelism and proselytizing) is something Christians ought to resist, and Christians are not wrong in being open to those in political life who choose to guard the free exercise of religion that does not impede on the enumerated Constitutional rights of others.  Students DO have a right to bring Bibles to school, pray and join with others to pray AT SCHOOL during free times, wear crosses, etc. in the absence of a defined dress code.  Christians ARE entitled to preach the Gospel, the ENTIRE Gospel, including those verses defining homosexual practices as sin, without legal sanction of any kind.  They are not entitled to have people agree with them, or validate their point of view, but there is unmistakable pressure being applied to silence Christians on these issues.  Tolerance does not mean that I have to affirm your viewpoint as being equally valid as my own.  Huckabee gets that, and it's not a trivial issue.

[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. 

[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.

[Fuzzy Bear]

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.

Very true.  Values issues are the only reason I would vote Republican, as I am not a Club for Growth guy, and I am a union shop steward.  Folks can call me a RINO, but some of us make up the GOP primary day constituency knowing that we well may not be able to support the primary winner.  (Republicans shouldn't be outraged; they think that kind of primary day Democrat is just swell.) 

The frustrating thing for me is that for so many years the GOP talked the pro-life line, but did nothing about it substantially, effectively abandoning the Human Life Amendment in fact long before the 2012 GOP Convention.  The economic agenda came first.  Now, there is no possibility of a pro-life Constitutional amendment, or an anti-SSM amendment getting through 38 state legislatures, as national attitudes have changed radically on both of these issues.