I pray to all the deities that he doesn't win. He's made his intentions fairly clear that HE won't separate religion from his politics. "Winning the nation back to Christ" is an extremely disturbed statement for a politician.
2007-12-29 07:57:02
·
answer #1
·
answered by Aravah 7
·
3⤊
0⤋
we could learn the entire exchange. "you already understand, Michael, countless the failings it fairly is troubling is that persons see a Natalie Portman or another Hollywood starlet who boasts of, 'hi look, you recognize, we are having little ones, we are actually no longer married, even although we are having those babies, and so that they are doing purely spectacular,'" Huckabee suggested. "yet there are not rather countless single mothers available who're making 1000's of greenbacks each and each twelve months for being in a action picture." maximum single mothers are very detrimental, uneducated, can no longer get a job, and if it weren't for government guidance, their babies must be starving to dying and in no way have wellbeing care. and that's the story that we are actually no longer seeing, and it rather is unlucky that we glorify and glamorize the assumption of out-of-little ones wedlock," Is what he suggested so undesirable. different than for he's a preacher, of direction he's going to denounce it. Atleast he's no longer turn floping on it. he's on a superb stance.
2016-11-26 01:35:33
·
answer #2
·
answered by ? 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
It's not the world, Just the United States which still is approximately
75% Christian.
2007-12-29 07:52:16
·
answer #3
·
answered by punch 7
·
2⤊
0⤋
On the very off chance he does win, I'm gone. You people can have your twisted theocracy, but I want no part of it.
Also, you do know there are conservative Christians who want to keep church and state separate, right? Pinning everything on your favorite scapegoat is a teeny bit moronic.
2007-12-29 11:54:28
·
answer #4
·
answered by chibisqueak 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
No one really takes this Huckleberry guy seriously, do they? We have had preachers as presidents before, but that was in the 19th century and they acted as badly as anyone else. Today it would be too much for many. Revolutions have been started for less.
2007-12-29 07:57:31
·
answer #5
·
answered by Lionheart ® 7
·
2⤊
0⤋
European Catholics will not vote for Mike Huckabee since Mike Huckabee is not a Catholic (my view). Recently the European Pope said all USA Protestants go to hell.
2007-12-29 07:55:52
·
answer #6
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
2⤋
He doesn't need to win a world; he only needs to win a country. Furthermore, if the polls are any indication, he stands a good chance at doing just that. He's actually leading in Iowa right now.
2007-12-29 07:52:26
·
answer #7
·
answered by En79 3
·
2⤊
2⤋
My two cents:
"Separation of church and state" doesn't mean that a politician's faith, or lack thereof, isn't going to influence decisions. That's just unrealistic.
And, I don't think gay rights is going to be a big issue come 2008- it's going to be Iraq, Iraq, a little abortion, and more Iraq.
2007-12-29 07:53:13
·
answer #8
·
answered by Kelsey H 6
·
3⤊
1⤋
I hope he does lose. A super-religious nutjob that wants to turn America into a theocracy is the last thing that this country needs.
2007-12-29 07:52:31
·
answer #9
·
answered by funkeepickle 2
·
5⤊
2⤋
No, he must not win.
We must all vote to get the ignorant fundies out of our government.
2007-12-29 07:57:07
·
answer #10
·
answered by Gorgeoustxwoman2013 7
·
3⤊
0⤋