Mike Huckabee has gained significantly in recent polls and I believe he is likely to become the Republican nominee, mainly because he has garnered the support of social conservatives. You know, the people that think gays are out to destroy marriage and all that.
Huckabee’s personal views on gay rights seems to be pretty much in line with such right-wing leaders as James Dobson of Focus On The Family. In fact, some of his statements read like something that we could have easily overheard on Christian talk radio.
Huckabee believes that homosexuality is a sin:
“I feel homosexuality is an aberrant, unnatural, and sinful lifestyle, and we now know it can pose a dangerous public health risk.”
Huckabee compares homosexuality to lying and stealing:
When asked if homosexuality is sinful, he replied, “Well I believe it would be - just like lying is sinful and stealing is sinful. There are a lot of things that are sinful. It doesn’t mean that a person is a horrible person. It means that they engage in behavior that is outside the norms of those boundaries of our traditional view of what’s right and what’s wrong. So, I think that anybody who has, maybe a traditional worldview of sexuality would classify that as an unusual behavior that is not traditional and that would be outside those bounds.”
Huckabee thinks that allowing gay marriage would destroy civilization:
“I don’t think the issue’s about being against gay marriage. It’s about being for traditional marriage and articulating the reason that’s important. You have to have a basic family structure. There’s never been a civilization that has rewritten what marriage and family means and survived. So there is a sense in which, you know, it’s one thing to say if people want to live a different way, that’s their business. But when you want to redefine what family means or what marriage means, then that’s an issue that should require some serious and significant debate in the public square.”
Devilstower from Dailykos has the following to say about that last statement:
So, I’m wondering, who were these civilizations that re-wrote the meaning of marriage or family, and met some horrible doom. Was it the many civilizations were marriage was arranged and decided long before children were of marriageable age? Was it the Jewish civilizations of Jesus’ day where brothers were required to marry their brother’s widows? Was it civilizations that allowed siblings to marry? How about first cousins? Could be it civilizations who adopted the silly idea that you should marry for love. Perhaps it was the Mormons who decided to practice polygamy. Perhaps it was those who decided to stop. Or maybe it was the polyandrous cultures in many mountainous or arctic regions.
The truth is that every society rewrites the rules of marriage and family. That’s what happens to all our social values as they respond to changes in how we live, what we know, and our available resources. Yes, friction occurs when the boundaries of a social convention no longer match those of a society in which it’s embedded, but the societies that survive are exactly those which demonstrate the flexibility to change and adapt.
We stand at the end of a long line of rule-changers, of civilizations that have made institutions like marriage work for them, instead of against them. The dust under our feet is composed of all the civilizations that just the kind of rigidity that Huckabee wants for us now. The civilizations who fail are not those who acknowledge changing conditions and reshape their rules, but those who don’t.
I couldn’t have said it nearly so well myself.
9 Comments
Anyone wanting to know a bit more about the history of marriage should check out the documentary “Tying the Knot.”
About the degradation of marriage and family: our ability to be faithful to each other is far more critical to social stability than whether there are two penises in a relationship or just one.
http://www.liberty.edu/libertyjournal/index.cfm?PID=15758&ArtID=42
LOL! Endorsing Huckabee, Jerry Faldwell Jr. said, “if this candidacy really took off it would have to be a God thing.”
I’ll have to tell that to the Jehovah’s Witnesses.
I wish we could get the God out of politics. I wish people could realize that religion is a personal, subjective, experience, something to be shared with but not forced on others. I love the quote. It says it all so well.
There’s never been a civilization that has rewritten what marriage and family means and survived.
Stuff like this cracks me up. Apparently he wasn’t paying attention in history class when we learned that the first King Henry CREATED HIS OWN RELIGION so that he could divorce his wife. Before that, annulments were absolutely forbidden by the church. It’s a good thing he didn’t rewrite the rules of marriage otherwise we’d have more divorces than successful marriages today. Oh wait…
Judge Leon Bazile was trying to uphold Virginia’s Racial Integrity Act when he ruled against an interracial couple who wanted their rights recognized across state lines. Of course, he played the God card: “Almighty God created the races white, black, yellow, Malay and red, and he placed them on separate continents. And but for the interference with his arrangement there would be no cause for such marriages. The fact that he separated the races shows that he did not intend for the races to mix.”
Did “activist judges,” as conservatives like to call them, on the Supreme Court not change and reshape marriage in Virginia and other states in 1967? Come on, marriage is not a static, stable institution. There’s not really any such thing as a traditional American marriage unless you just want to perpetuate patriarchy and white supremacy.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loving_v._Virginia
@ Karen: You’re right. Tying The Knot did a wonderful job of explaining the history of marriage. I wish more people would take the time to watch it.
@ fightingwindmills: I think I’ve heard it all now! Craziness.
@ randomyriad: I agree completely.
@ Stephanie: It cracks me up, too, when it doesn’t make me angry.
@ fightingwindmills: We’ve used God and scripture to justify discrimination far too long, and you’ve provided an important example.
Again, why does everyone attack gay marriage but not the divorced lifestyle, single-parent homes, and families with alcoholism, domestic abuse problems, and the like?!? Aren’t these things a little more centuries’ old and still need to be resolved as well?
When I found out my son was a heroin addict I would much rather have found out that he were gay. As a gay young man he could lead a happy life and accomplish his goals, have a family. As a heroin and crack addict he’s got nothing. Fortunately he is now a year into recovery but his life will never be the same. He still smokes pot, he still comes to us for money, which we finally learned not to give him. I still and always will love him no matter what he is but he still has the addictive personality. If he were gay he could still live with me but I won’t live with an addict. He still lies and tries to manipulate me but I am learning. It seems to me that drugs should have a much higher priority then who marries who. It’s nobody’s business who marries who or who falls in love with whomever. But it is our business when so many of our children are doing hard drugs. My son’s ex-girlfriend died of an overdose of heroin in Sept. I don’t know why I just wrote all this to you. I suddenly needed to vent and there was your blog plus you are a friend of Wendy’s (Life with Buck). I’ve known her personally since our son’s have been best friends since they were 7 and they are now 26. Have a great day!!!
@ joanharvest: Many years ago, I had a friend that would do anything to get high. It was a trying experience for me, since loving him made me want to give him my last dime, but loving him also made me not want to facilitate his habit. I can somewhat sympathize with what your going through, but it must be much harder when it’s your child. My heart goes out to you.
Feel free to vent here anytime.