GOD’S STANDARD

In a recent speech, Mike Huckabee, who is hoping to be the Republican Party’s candidate for President of the United States, suggested that the Constitution of the United States should be changed and brought up to God’s standard. Mike is an ordained minister for the Southern Baptist Convention and obviously feels that we need to start measuring up to God’s standard and reflect that standard in our country’s constitution.

This line of thinking is not new to me. I was raised by parents who always were advising me to consider what Jesus would do as I made decisions and to remember that every decision I made had a consequence that I would have to live with for bad or good. Just to make sure all the bases were covered, my dad also advised me that if the police ever notified him that I had become an embarrassment to the family I would be punished both by the law’s standard and his standard.

Mike Huckabbee has said that the two areas in which he would like to see God’s standard reflected are abortion and marriage. As I listen to him speak on these two topics I believe he would fight to repeal Roe VS Wade, and would introduce Amendments to the Constitution that protect the lives of the unborn and prohibit gay marriage.

Many people would probably be sympathetic to such amendments, particularly those who are religiously devout.

However, applying God’s standard to the Constitution would set a precedent and have repercussions that Mike Huckabee and others haven’t thought about. First of all, what about Separation of Church and  State, and who decides what God’s standard is, Mike Huckabee, the Southern Baptist Convention, the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, Catholics, Lutherans, Methodists, Presbyterians, Muslims etc.?. Maybe a committee made up of members from all religious denominations could be established to come up with a consensus of what God’s standard is, but would Mike Huckabee be willing to include those he has denounced as not being Christians? Actually, the Nicene Creed was the result of over 200 years of the committee approach to determining religious doctrine and succeeded only in determining that God is incomprehensible. Read it sometime if you like the committee approach.

Personally, I don’t want the government telling me what God’s standard is. I don’t believe that is the role of government. Neither did the founding fathers.  

 Second, on the issue of abortion, don’t most of us who generally are pro-life feel that abortion is acceptable in cases of incest, rape, or if the mother’s life is in danger. I and my father who was a medical doctor and a High Priest in his church had many conversations on this issue. I came to believe that there was no conflict between God’s standard and abortions in certain extreme circumstances. What I learned from my father as well as my own research has made me more compassionate towards the problems some have had to face while still believing in responsibility and the sanctity of life.

Third, although I do not condone homosexual activity or gay marriage, I don’t believe in persecuting, harassing, or harming anyone because they are different than me. I do claim the right to believe that marriage should be between a man and woman and to associate with those I choose to associate with and to caution my children and grandchildren as to whom they should associate with and who they should avoid. I do not believe that homosexuals should be discriminated against unfairly, but I do support prudent decisions by employers and others regarding their particular circumstances.

I do believe that issues and legislation regarding homosexual relationships should be left to the states and not the Federal Government.

I commend Mike Huckabee and others in government who are religiously devout. I believe religiously devout people will generally try to do well. I also believe in Separation of Church and State because I have traveled enough to have visited countries where the state religion has a great deal of influence and in some cases power. Our Founding Fathers decision that there would be no state religion came from hard experience.     

Hillary Clinton: Historical Revisionist

Since Hillary Clinton has now won in New Hampshire, I felt I ought to look at her campaign more closely. The problem was where to start? What should I review? What didn’t I know that I ought to know?

I felt that I already knew quite a bit about what is publicly known about both Hillary and her husband Bill. I finally decided to focus on her claim to be the most experienced candidate among the Democratic hopefuls.

Hillary Clinton’s experience supposedly comes from being a first term junior senator from New York and her eight years as the First Lady during the time Bill Clinton was President. As a first term Senator from New York, Hillary’s accomplishments are no better than and probably not as significant as Barack Obama’s accomplishments as a first term junior Senator from Illinois. John Edwards has at least been in the United States Senate where he has at least wrestled with both international problems as well as domestic issues. It would seem that John Edwards should have a broader background and better understanding of the issues facing the President of the United States than a couple of junior state Senators. But wait, wasn’t Hillary also the wife of the President of the United States for eight years? Shouldn’t that experience have given her a unique understanding of the issues facing a president? Good question. Since Hillary did not have a security clearance, it is doubtful that she knew much about the day to day problems and issues Bill was dealing with other than what he could legally tell her. If Bill discussed classified information with her, he would have been breaking several federal laws. There is no evidence that Bill discussed sensitive issues with his wife and he is not currently languishing in Leavenworth, so I’m going to continue to assume he didn’t discuss those issues with Hillary. If Hillary would like to set the record straight and explain exactly how Bill’s eight years in the White House gave her the experience to be President of the United States, at the risk of having to visit Bill in Leavenworth, Kansas for the rest of his life, I sure would be willing to listen.

I was about to conclude this blog with my opinion that Hillary’s claim that she is the most experienced candidate has no basis in fact, when I ran across an interesting article by Kathy Miller for, The Hillary Project, which can be down loaded at: www.hillaryproject.com .

It appears there is a lot that Bill and Hillary would like the rest of us to forget. Hillary was not involved in everything mentioned, but she was involved in some of them. I won’t try to copy the whole article but will hit some highlights that interested me.

During the Clinton administration:

No action was taken after the first World Trade Center attack in 1993.

There was proof of a third terrorist with connections to Middle Eastern terrorists in the Oklahoma City bombing that was not fully investigated. (The Northeast Intelligent Network)

No action was taken after the 1996 attacks on Kohbar Towers in Saudi Arabia.

No action was taken after the bombing of the U.S. Embassy in Peru in 1998.

No action was taken after the attacks on the USS Cole in 2000.

THE CLINTON ADMINISTRATION

Bill Clinton was the only President ever impeached on grounds of personal Malfeasance.

The Clinton Administration had the most number of cabinet officials to come under criminal investigation. (Where did he find these guys?)

The Clinton Administration had greatest number of witnesses to flee the country or refuse to testify.

The most witnesses to die suddenly.

The first U.S. President sued for sexual harassment.

The first U.S. President accused of rape.

Hillary was the first, First Lady to come under criminal investigation.

The largest plea agreement in an illegal contribution case

The first president to establish a legal defense fund.

The first president to be held in contempt of court.

The first president disbarred from the U.S. Supreme Court and a state court.

Bill Clinton’s administration was investigated by the Starr/Ray Investigation and the Smaltz Investigation.

CLINTON MACHINE CRIMES FOR WHICH CONVICTIONS WERE OBTAINED

Drug trafficking (3) Racketeering, extortion, bribery (4) Tax evasion, Kickbacks, Embezzlement (2) Fraud (12) Conspiracy (5) Fraudulent loans, Illegal gifts (1) Illegal campaign contributions (5) Money laundering (6)

Miller ends her article by writing, “Bill and Hillary are revisionists when it comes to history and they are continuing to rewrite their own."

Maybe what Hillary really meant was that she sure had a lot of experience in what not to do if elected.