Saturday, January 19, 2008

Reflections: Christian ReconHUCKionism?

This is going to be straight from the hip. I founded my blog to have a place where I could ruminate, and perhaps occasionally discuss, topics other than politics; particularly literature and religion. But when politics enters the sphere of religion, as it has with the campaign of Mike Huckabee, then politics becomes fair game here. My concern with this topic was awakened again this morning, when I went to the NY Times online to read the Sunday Book Review section, which is a Saturday morning ritual with me. On the front page, I found this. (File under: "Things That Make You Go 'Hmmmm'...")

I have noted elsewhere my uneasiness with the following statement made in a recent stump speech given in Warren, Michigan:

I believe it’s a lot easier to change the Constitution than it would be to change the word of the living God,” Huckabee said Monday night in Warren, Mich. “And that’s what we need to do, is to amend the Constitution so it’s in God’s standards, rather than try to change God’s standards.

While that statement may, or may not, have been specifically in reference to abortion law, my uneasiness prompted me to do a little googling in an effort to find out just what kind of Christians Huck hangs out with when the cameras aren't on him and he needs a bit of baksheesh to pay the bills at the Ramada Inn. I will be the first one to affirm a strong belief that we all could use a little more--hell, a lot more--religion in our daily lives. But, that said, I am also (God help me!) a strict constructionist where it comes to the Establishment Clause and the existence of a firewall between sectarian religion and government as guided by secular law. So when Huckabee came out with the above, I flinched. Does Huckabee have connections to folks who call themselves Dominionistists, or to the Christian Reconstructionist movement?

In politics it's always a matter of share-shay the friggin' moolah, am I right? While it's clear that the MSM has not yet become interested in this story, there are quite a few bloggers out there who are. Some of them are just anti-Christian bigots. But some of them treat the topic with a bit of even-handedness and intelligence. This one was particularly disturbing.

I don't know about you, but I do not want a POTUS, or even a Veep, who is beholden to people whose project is to "reconstruct" the United States of America as a theocracy. If that's what you want, grow a beard and go to any one of several available Muslim utopias. I pride myself on being unreconstructed, thank you very much.


brandon field said...

This is why Natural Law is such a helpful construction to bring to this discussion: Laws are only authentic laws if they are founded in the Natural Law of God. As such, there is not so much a strict separation, but a dependence. I'm not sure how Huckabee's Baptist tradition deals with Natural Law; modern Baptists I have seen don't always understand the various layers of God's Laws.

Rodak said...

I'm not concerned with Huckabee as a Baptist. My concern is with his possible ties to a political movement the goal of which is an American theocracy.
And, make no mistake, it would be a Protestant theocracy.

William R. Barker said...

Yes, Rob, as I've noted all along, Huckabee - while definitely *NOT* a contender for the #1 spot - is no doubt on the short list of Giuliani and Romney for the VP shot should one of them win. (I can't see McCain picking Huckabee.)

But on a brighter note... Huckabee is by no means a shoo-in for the second slot. Me... I still like Duncan Hunter. If RAG were to indicate his choice, it might be Brownback. (*SHRUG*)

So... don't hit the panic button yet my friend - that's all I'm saying.


Rodak said...

The time for optimism, it seems to me, has phased into the time for "eternal vigilance."

brandon field said...

the time for "eternal vigilance."

I believe Madeye Moody's phrase was "Constant vigilance!"

Rodak said...

Eternal vigilance is the price of liberty. is, I believe, attributed to Founder, T-Jeff.
I've also heard it attributed to others, and in the form The price of liberty is eternal vigilance.
Who knows?

John R.P. Russell said...

Rodak writes (emphasis mine),

"If that's what you want, grow a beard and go to any one of several available Muslim utopias."

Do you believe that theocracy is alien to Christianity?

Rodak said...

Do you believe that theocracy is alien to Christianity?

Mr. Russell--
Not at all.
In fact, I often wonder if true Christianity is possible without it.
What I must believe, however, is that the concept of theocracy runs counter to the philosophy upon which this nation was founded.
If groups of individuals wish to withdraw, within our borders, into self-contained communities ruled by religious, rather than by secular, law, those groups have my full support and admiration.
If, however, persons choose to live in society-at-large, then by that choice they are indicating their consent to be governed by secular law as written by the legislative branch of government and interpreted by the judicial branch.

Royale said...

His comment frightened the heebie geebies out of me too.

However, I came to a very different conclusion.

Statements like that might be great to get the Christian social conservative base behind him. But fret not, it frightens the swing vote moderates.

I say let Huckabee become the nominee. Statements like that will make him lose and lose bad.

He's a gonner. That statement was a nail in the coffin.

(ps I think he was referring to the gay marriage amendment, but the statement is so vastly broad to be nothing less than crazy)

Rodak said...

Actually, Huckabee was apparently referring to both gay marriage and to abortion law when said the scary words. I agree that he has marginalized himself in the process. He seems to have lost some momentum since.
That said, Huckabee represents a worrisome trend precisely because he is not a Pat Robertson. You vote for Pat Robertson, you know what it is that you're voting for. Call me paranoid, but I am always trying to look behind the curtain, to see who's turning the crank that's projecting the pretty pictures on the screen.

Franklin said...

My goodness!!! He wants to amend the Constitution of the United States? Considering that there is no mechanism for amending the Constitution and that it has never been changed in the history of our great nation, this truly is a stupendous thing.

Thank the Good Lord there are men working to get the word out on such dangerous men as those who would dare amend the Constitution. Such a threat MUST. NOT. BE. COUNTENANCED!!!

Rodak said...

It is clearly not that Huckabee would employ the mechanisms of constitutional amendment to which I object. It is that he would amend the constitution in such a way as to erode the foundations of the Establishment Clause.
One of the primary reasons for the relative stability and cohesion of the American state has been the lack of social conflict due to the imposition of one group's religious beliefs on those with differing beliefs.
That, I oppose.

NOTE: I had to delete this comment one time, in order to fix a typo.