Huckabee: If the GOP switches on gay marriage, evangelicals walk

Huckabee: If the GOP switches on gay marriage, evangelicals walk. We think they already walked anyway. There was a large number of Republican voters who voted in 2008 who didn’t vote in 2012. We think they weren’t going to vote for a Mormon President and didn’t want to vote for Obama, Gary Johnson, Ron Paul or Roseanne Barr, so they plain didn’t vote. They probably gave the election to Obama. We say no one will really notice if they’re gone because in spite of all the noise they make, they’re never here when you need them anyway.

This post was last modified on April 12, 2021

CO2Insanity: Tired of the CO2 BS and all the other BS in the US and the world.

View Comments (73)

  • The thing N O B O D Y is taling about, marriage is not mentioned anywhere in the constituion. It's NOT A FEDERAL issue, it's a state issue. That's why there were different ages of consent in different states. So whether it's traditional or same sex, does'nt matter, it's not a federal issue. DOMA means nothing as well, since it's federal. Hell, get the gov't out of the marriage buisness, since all it does is force you to pay for a marriage license, thus making money for whoever you are paying. Marriage is a religious institution, & should stay that way.

    • So when your neighbor decides to marry a 12-year-old, will you still say the government should stay out of the marriage issue? Of course not. Clearly the government has a role in protecting society from stuff that is harmful to society as a whole: murder and pedophilia are obvious examples. Less obvious are things that don't harm directly but harm indirectly, like polygamy and marriage between people of the same sex. Those things hurt children and hurt the overall physical health of society.

      • Govt must have very limited ways to deal with these issues but I dont think they should be any special. What I mean: If a set of parents find that their 12 year old was kidnapped and "married" to a pedophile that wants to validate his "right to marry". They will obviously call the police. Any "right" that the pedophile thinks he has cannot overpower the TRUE rights of the child to not be kidnapped and raped. Now let's say that parents sell their child to a pedophile and "consent" that the child is married to the pedophile, again obviously because the child is a child the police should get involved here, but they would have gotten involved anyway and the pedophile nor the parents have protections because of a right to marry. Being sold is against the law and so on.

        The issue of right of marriage has no bearing here. A crime is a crime. Making sure that the issue of marriage between consenting adults stays in the states or the communities and out of federal control, is not a bad point. Sure some influence but again if there is a crime it wouldn't be any different than under normal circumstance without the spectre of created laws that shouldn't be.

      • No, I think what he means is the FEDERAL government. The Constitution does not even mention the word marriage; therefore, any laws pertaining to it would fall under the purview of the 10th Amendment. Each state has a minimum age of consent to marry so the 12 year old is protected by state law just as the framers intended since the marriage question was left to the states. The 14th Amendment's equal protection clause is where a decision may originate. Not the intent of the clause but that has never stopped SCOTUS from making horrendous decisions in the past under the guise of equal protection under the law. Roe v Wade being the worst of those decisions, IMO.

      • They sure could do a better job. I still get PO'ed when they allow NAMBLA meetings in public libraries and allow pervs to watch porn in public libraries in full view of everyone.

  • Great thread. (Hey, I'm enjoying it even if nobody else is.) But we are slightly off track. Huckabee is saying if the GOP switches on gay marriage the evangelicals walk. Somehow we got off on a false tangent about them walking in the last election. According to Michael Medved, they did not walk last year. According to Medved, Romney got more evangelical votes than Bush in 2004, both in absolute numbers and as a percentage.

    • I don't see where this guy has much to back his statements up. Exit polls can be notoriously incorrect. Were they really asking white voters in exit polls if they were evangelical or born again Christians?

      • Yeah, when I write stuff I try to include links. It's a pain the ass but helps readers decide whether I'm full of shit. I wish Medved had documented his claims.

  • Middle eastern mythology aside, this, like all of the so called, "social issues" is clearly a 10th amendment issue to be resolved at the state level.

    I wish today's religious types would take the road of the framers, who were also for the most part religious, and keep it out of the Constitution and the laws that flow from it.

    • But JustAl, the right to life is the foundation of all human rights and not just a religious issue. If we don't have a right to life, what rights do we have that can't be taken away? What rights did the Jews have in Europe during World War II once their right to life was taken away? When government doesn't protect the right to life, it isn't even doing its first and most important duty.

      "The care of human life and happiness and not their destruction is the first and only object of good government." -Thomas Jefferson

    • Agreed.. if it must become Constitutionally protected, pass an Ammendment. Unfortunately, SCOTUS judicial review has become a quick way to short-circuit

      • My predictions usually suck but I think Prop 8 goes back to California and DOMA is struck down under Marbury v Madison. Stupid Clinton Era act anyway for the reasons stated above.

    • The framers were careful to not create a theocracy but they never intended for faith to be forcefully removed from the fabric of our communities and regulated to a myth in our schools.

  • I think that many Evangelicals think that they are hastening the Rapture and the Second Coming by staying home. They're not considering that they are going to be held to account for all of the evil that is being done in their name, that they are doing nothing to prevent. They are proving Burke right. ("All that is necessary for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing.")

    • I belong to a church that does teach the importance of the vote. Many Christians are apathetic about whats going on politically and it is a big part of the problem. A true Christian choice at the voting booth will stir up the Christian vote but the way things are headed I don’t see somebody like Santorum getting the nomination.

      • There simply are not enough of you anymore, especially amongst the young. Off the top of my head, i believe atheism (or at least no-religious preference) is the fastest growing "faith" demographic. Globally, Islamists like to contest this metric, but its significant across the planet as well. Its part and parcel of the evolution of the Internet. Even the changes from 5 years ago are striking

  • TIP LINE STORY: http://tinyurl.com/bpqygnh
    This is what we get. Professional attention-whores in rainbow tutus. And they think THIS is how to convince people to treat them the same as everyone else? 50 Years ago, this guy would have been in a rubber room. And should be today.

  • The evangelicals in 2012 reminded me of a bumper sticker I saw many years ago, "To All Virgins, thanks for nothing." So Obama is better than a Mormon in the White House? Jesus Christ!

    • I wouldn't answer this way necessarily, but here's how a 2012 sit-at-home evangelical might answer:

      "Obama better than a Mormon? Maybe. Communists and Mormons are both opposed to God but at least the communist is open about it. Christians and atheists can sit down and have a discussion. In fact, they frequently do. Mormonism, on the other hand, is a mockery of Christianity. They call themselves Christian but clearly they are not. It's almost impossible to sit down and discuss the matter because they insist there's nothing to discuss. They have disguised themselves as Christians to mislead people who truly seek the redemption of the Savior into a place where they worship false gods. Yes, better a communist than a Mormon."

  • If the Republicans nominated a Catholic like Rubio, Ryan, Christie or someone else, I wonder how many Evangelicals would peel off once again? If the Democrats get to the point to where they don't think they can lose the White House, how long do the Evangelicals think they'll retain their religious freedom? How much longer will Scalia and Thomas last on the court? What if by the time the 100% pure candidate shows up, it's just too late?

    • I think you have your question backward. Evangelicals would have a lot less problem with a Catholic than with a Mormon. Catholics are Christians, unlike Mormons. Catholics can in fact be evangelicals - there are evangelical priests and they tend to be very popular with parishioners. Your question should be directed at Catholics: "Right now you're part of the power structure, but once the left cements its power over the federal government they'll marginalize you just like they did the Protestants - how long before they start mocking and ridiculing you, too?"

      • JP you're right. The Mormon issue was a big one, let's face it. I live in the SF area, the Mormon thing IMHO didn't please anyone on any side of the fence. The gays out here (and elsewhere) are terrified of Mormons. The liberals, many whose religion is communism can't stand them either. Name your mainstream religion, they don't like them either. It really doesn't matter whether they're Evangelicals, Protestants, Presbyterians, Catholics or name your Christian religion. Romney just wasn't the right guy to run - period. You can probably thank a-holes like Karl Rove for this.

        Now for the bet. I bet if Rove and his cronies are still a force in a few years the idiots will run John Huntsman, another Mormon. Einstein was right.

        • The sad thing is, I like Mitt Romney and voted for him. But I voted for him in spite of his religion and I'm pretty sure there were millions of people for whom his Mormonism was a bigger lump in their craw than it was for me. People think when I'm obsessing about the lack of Protestants in the Washington power structure that I have a problem with Catholics and Jews. Far from it. I was raised Protestant, had a born again experience as a child before I ever heard the words "born again" or knew what they meant, converted to Catholicism as an adult, and had a grandmother who was Jewish (we think). I'm almost a perfect example of the messed up and wonderful American religious experience. I just think it's really really weird that Protestants, the majority, have been marginalized in Washington. Call me crazy, but I can't help attributing the situation to demonic forces.

          • "Call me crazy, but I can't help attributing the situation to demonic forces."

            And me, too.

            Just as RINO candidates have hurt the party, CINOs (Catholic in Name Only) have as well. Their embrace of Obama and the purposeful misunderstanding of the Church's commitment to "social justice" is appalling. I threw up a little in my mouth the day it was announced that Nancy Pelosi and Joe Biden were leading the US delegation to Rome for Pope Francis's installation Mass.

            And honestly speaking, as a conservative Catholic - especially for SF - the Church would be better off with more marginalization; a rejection of being part of that power structure you mentioned above. The American Church pushed to slough off the shackles of its 'otherness' in the mid 20th Century and what did it get us? Watered-down Masses, poorly catechized members and apathy.

            PS: love the story of your "messed up and wonderful American religious experience". Glad you made it across the Tiber.

          • Snafu:"the Church would be better off with more marginalization"

            At one point before he was pope, Cardinal Ratzinger (Pope Benedict XVI) said that maybe a smaller Catholic Church with true believers would be better than the one now filled with CINOs. Some Catholic leaders are starting to tell their flocks to start to prepare for persecution and maybe even martyrdom. Isn't the HHS mandate a sign that we're entering an era of the trampling of religious freedom? The Soviet Union and the Eastern Bloc grew tired of that nonsense in the late 80s, but now it's apparently going to be tried a decade plus into the 21st century here.

            The latest news is that Pope Francis may not move into the papal apartments. He's staying in a suite in the Church-owned hotel where the cardinals stay during Conclaves. This suite is smaller and much less lavish than the papal apartments. I'm starting to wonder if by his no-frills papacy, he is trying to send us a message that believers might be stripped of the world's goods shortly if we don't go along with what he has already as pope called the "tyranny of relativism"? Benedict called it the "dictatorship of relativism". Blessed John Paul II spoke of a "culture of death".

          • "Some Catholic leaders are starting to tell their flocks to start to prepare for persecution and maybe even martyrdom."

            Father John Zuhlsdorf (Fr. Z) has been noting this consistently in his blog over the last year or so. I think he's right. It's no small coincidence that many of the newer, more traditional clerical orders are gaining recruits to the point where they're busting at the seams. This, combined with the quiet, but growing numbers of Catholics taking advantage of the return of the Latin Mass to more general use is having an effect.

            Interesting take on Pope Francis and his no-frills ways. You may very well be right, and while I see the logic in it, it saddens me to see the glorious vestments which Benedict used be shunted aside. I'm a sucker for ceremony and tradition. But actions speak louder than words. He's walking the walk.

          • Yeah, maybe we should stop calling certain members of the political leadership in Washington "Catholics." By what conceivable measure are Kathleen Sebelius and Nancy Pelosi and Joe Biden Catholics? They're politicians who pretend to be Catholics so they can get some Catholic votes.

            On the other hand, people like Clarence Thomas, Paul Ryan, and Antonin Scalia seem to be sincere Catholics. John Boehner? Your guess is as good as mine.

          • "Call me crazy, but I can’t help attributing the situation to demonic forces."

            You can call me crazy too.

    • If Christie was nominated, it wouldn't be his Catholicism that chases me off! It'll be his RINO-ism! It'll be the fact that when Muslims need their feet cleaned they know he'll happily stick out his tongue! It'll be his sickening bromance with Chairman Zero!

      He talked tough to a union once and we all got excited... and then he let us down with amazing frequency. He's a fraud.

  • Message to Evangelicals from an Evangelical: render unto Caesar what is Caesar's and render unto God what is God's.

    Get out and vote you dopes.

    • As conservatives, we always remark about how the Democrat Party takes the black vote for granted - so much for granted they don't even try to help black people achieve success in life. We laugh about it. We mock black people for wasting their votes. Yet Republicans do the same thing with the evangelical vote - they just assume it's theirs and they don't have to work for it. Difference is, evangelicals aren't falling for the scam. Instead of pointing the finger of accusation at evangelicals, I think the finger should be pointed at the Republican Party.

      • True. There is fault on all sides. The Republican party should try to go back to what it was and allow a bigger tent and DONT neglect the people in the tent before, as many people tend to be MORE than ONE thing. Blacks can be evangelicals as well as hispanics. Sometimes other than to come to them because they are blacks or hispanics perhaps they should be reached through their common belief systems.

      • As a Born Again Christian I feel you have the Christian vote pegged. I don't like the term evangelical, it's a label the MSM likes to use because it makes us seem domineering. Presbyterians, including the Baptist denomination of which I am a member, consider ourselves Born Again Christians. It is a very large voting block, especially in the south.

        I voted for Romney but it was a lesser of two evils thing. If the Republican party pulls away from the moral direction that this country and it's families needs more than anything else, the faithful of the Church will not follow. That will include the Presbyterians, Catholics, Mormons, and everything else in between.

        Whats hurts us the most is the social indoctrination in our schools and through the MSM and liberal entertainment. Many kids raised to be productive citizens at home go off to college and come back looney liberals. Progressives hell bent on saving the world. Large blocks of what would be conservative working class are brainwashed into thinking the Democrats and government are their only hope.

        I believe the only hope for the Republican party is a moral compass and true conservative leaders that are not afraid to stand up to the lies and moral decay of the left that is destroying this country. It is the Truth that will set us free, Spiritually and physically.

        • I was up too late last night. Protestants, instead of Presbyterians, is the word I should have used above. Presbyterian is another major denominational family of the Protestant branch of the Christian faith.

    • If you want to avoid spiritual issues and talk practical politics, according to Pew there are approximately 92 million evangelicals in the United States. It amuses me to watch politicians bend over backward and violate every principle they claim they had in order to appeal to much smaller segments of the population... while ignoring the biggest voting bloc of all. There's probably only 3 or 4 million gays, but the politicians are falling all over themselves to bend over for them. (Pun intended) Like I said in an earlier comment: it's downright weird.

      • They are bending over for the apparent reason that they believe their pandering will equate to votes on voting day. For whatever reason, those 92 million evangelicals are convinced that all parties are the same...all politicians are the same...my vote does not count/make a difference...much easier to remain at home.

        • Before the current president, I used to think the pols were all the same. I was wrong. This is something quite different. I get that it becomes a moral dilemma to vote against religious/moral conscience but to not vote and thereby offer a half a vote to Obama is unconscionable if one is moral and believes in natural law versus law of man. By giving half votes to Obama times millions an ardent socialist with a profoundly strong affinity to Islam was reelected despite having the worst accomplishment record in history. That makes no sense to me.

  • I could not bring myself to vote for McCain, but I did for Romney, and I had tremendous issues with his religion. I voted for President, not spiritual leader.

Related Post
  1. DALLAS POLICE SHOOTING: ‘ZOMBIE APOCALYPSE ASSAULT VEHICLE AND TROOP TRANSPORT’
  2. Kim Jong-un was a child prodigy
  3. Top GOP Leader Promises Total Amnesty In 2015