Community | September 17, 2008 | 37 comments

Huckabee says God Created Marriage

source: http://www.venturacountystar.com/news/2008/sep/15/god-created-marriage-huckabee-says/

Image
kaecvtionr
Changing the definition of marriage would be like making Mona Lisa blond or touching up her smile, former presidential candidate Mike Huckabee said Sunday morning in Newbury Park.

The former Arkansas governor and Southern Baptist preacher spoke from the pulpit of Calvary Chapel Thousand Oaks in two services focused on Proposition 8, a state constitutional amendment to ban gay marriage. He told about 1,000 people that marriage was created and defined by God, just as the Mona Lisa was created by Leonardo da Vinci.

"God doesn't want me to take my brush and paint over his masterpiece," he said.

Huckabee, 53, spoke and played his bass guitar at Calvary Chapel in March not long after conceding the Republican nomination to Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz. He said he returned to address Proposition 8 because its ramifications reach way beyond California.

He again accompanied the worship band on bass before taking the pulpit.

Dressed in a dark suit coat and a pink shirt, he said he didn't come to confront or oppose gay people, rather to urge people to do a better job of explaining what marriage represents.

"The purpose of marriage is not for you to be happy," Huckabee said. "The purpose of marriage is so God can teach us how to love, like he loves us."

Jay Smith, executive director of the Ventura County Rainbow Alliance, said that while some people define marriage as a godly contract, it is also a contract with the government. Same-sex couples, he said, are entitled to the same civil rights as anyone else.

"This has moved beyond the discussion of marriage," he said. "It's a discussion of equality ... equal rights."

The Sunday services attracted current and former officials, including state Assemblywoman Audra Strickland, R-Moorpark, her husband and state Senate candidate Tony Strickland, Ventura County Supervisor Peter Foy and former Ohio Rep. Bob McEwen.

Federal tax laws don't prevent churches from addressing or endorsing initiatives but do prevent them from backing specific candidates, said Joe Conn of Americans United for Separation of Church and State.

McEwen urged people to vote for the Stricklands when he was introducing Huckabee from the pulpit.

"That's a personal opinion," he added.

Huckabee said he wasn't there to tell people how to vote on Proposition 8. But he told people that laws related to both life and marriage will determine the future of the universe.

"We will break ourselves by rejecting what would have given us the platform of success," he said.

Do you agree with Huckabee, do you believe marriage was created by God?
  1. groups:
    Community,   Sex and Love,   Religion,   God
  2. tags:
    News,  Sex and Love,  Religion,  Election 08,  6 more
  3.     
    |

37 comments // Huckabee says God Created Marriage

  • Rahonda
    • 0
      Rahonda  

    • echoz...do you claim faith as a christian?
      please don't...your example is screwing it up for the rest of us.

      as for huckabee...well, marriage has evolved through the millenia just like any other social function... King David had eight wives.

    • 2 years ago
  • Chuck_st_chuck
  • Humdrum
    • 0
      Humdrum  

    • Apparently I was right in assuming you wouldn't have anything intelligent to say.
      How is it that I am misrepresenting the first amendment?
      How is it that you should have a say in my civil rights, when it doesn't concern you in the least?
      Allowing everyone to have equal rights in the legal arena is not "celebrating homosexuality."
      It's called "minding your own #$%^ing business."

      Never mind; you obviously don't want to answer these questions, because I've already asked them, and you've already ignored them.

      As always, you either ignore or do not grasp what I am saying. You are definitely avoiding my points, and resorting to baseless, childish insults to back up your opinion.
      You are a waste.

      Tip:

      "In God We Trust" wasn't put onto US currency until the Civil War, coinciding with increased religious sentiment (civil wars will do that).

      It wasn't put onto paper money until the mid-late 1950s, along with "Under God" in the pledge.
      This period of time is marked by overt racism, religious discrimination, political oppression, and blatant fear of "godless communism."

      In 1956, the national motto was changed from "From Many, One" to "In God [/government] We Trust."

      It is very far from being "American," as the founding fathers saw it.

      Get informed before you mouth off, you ignorant child.

    • 3 years ago
  • echoz
    • 0
      echoz  

    • what an idiot... your argument was based on the history of marriage not being a Xstian "institution" you tergiversating pedantic fq

      However, in Western civilization, where we still print on our coinage "In God We Trust" how can you deny the obviously and predomonantly Xstian influence, even in government as with marriage particularly where it's defined as between one man and a woman? It's quite freakn undeniably biblical. hence...your typical and expected avoidance and denial, you phukn demagogue.

      And yet once again, your misleading references to the 1st Amendment like you're any fuckn authority... Xstians HAVE A VOICE and a CHOICE in their government as much as faggots like you hope to. Religion doesn't exclude anyone from participating asshole! It's called "democracy"..."look it up." We can respectfully or disrespectfully disagree numbnuts, but we ALL have a place...and maybe yours should be in that freakshow called California despite the fact you have no tangibly real stake in marriage at all even to begin with aside from some philosophical bs in your hollow head. but maybe in Cali you can finally feel really free and really good about your homosexuality like it's the best thing that could ever be about you (how sad).

      But the rest of America needn't be required to celebrate your gay "pride" any more than fags are required to be a Xstians or celebrate heterosexuality or to go to church...god forbid anything could be more important than your "lifestyle" or your own preference for mere sex. but get back to your fisting...i'm SO sorry I to have inconvenienced you

    • 3 years ago
  • Humdrum
    • 0
      Humdrum  

    • echoz

      "and what's your point? change for the sake of change? because a minority wants to impose on the majority???"

      Have you even been listening?
      a) Change for the sake of equal civil rights. Stranger things have happened.
      b) Tell me how the f*ck gaining equal marriage rights "imposes on the majority." Go ahead. I'll wait.

      "Many gays who want their own party, are indeed persecuting religious views in literally any forum they find it expressed...and at that particularly Christian views are singled out. "

      Tell me how Christians have been "persecuted." Disagreeing with their stance on an issue (or many) isn't persecution.
      Cry me a river.

      "as for the "best way" to avoid religious persecution, you're no surely authority on the subject, yourself recognizing that an adult "secular" video store has more right and respect than any synagogue or temple..."

      Is that all you've got? "You're wrong, na-na-na."
      I was merely referring to the constitution of the United States, a document that many people of your type just love to cut apart, keeping the bits they agree with and sh*tting on the rest. Same thing you do with the doctrine of Jesus.
      Disgusting.
      Also, tell me where exactly I said that churches shouldn't have any rights. The only thing I've ever said is that they have no right to force their views into government. Marriage in terms of law is a LEGAL matter, not a religious one. Stop confusing things.

      "it's in the phukn constitution asshole, it's called democracy where people have a right to express their views and beliefs to their representatives however they g'dam choose, and whether you like it or not!!!!"

      Last time I checked, one of the many things the constitution did was protect minorities. If you honestly believe that the majority should be allowed to trample the rights of the minority at their leisure, for no other reason than their personal opinion on a matter that has absolutely nothing to do with them, then I think it is you who are the "asshole."
      The Law of the Jungle (might = right) is still alive and well, it seems.
      Try evolving.

      "Truthfully, most gays aren't even interested in marriage! "

      You are a fool to think you know the minds of millions of people. What's more, you have no point, and no way to prove your laughably prejudiced allegation.
      Do you assume you know everything there is to know about black people because you've seen a few rap videos?

      "pure avoidance"

      I'm not avoiding anything. It is you who are too dense to grasp what I was trying to say.

      I'll put it simply:

      Religion is religion, no matter what religion it is, or what culture spawned it.
      When it comes to legal rights for individuals, religion has no say in whether or not that individual gets those rights.
      It says so in the 1st amendment - separation of church and state - which you have repeatedly avoided addressing, for some odd reason.
      Same-sex marriage/ civil union does not trample on anyone's rights. If you feel it does, explain why.

      Just so we're clear here, we are talking about a LEGAL matter.
      We are not talking about forcing a Christian church to marry same-sex couples.
      It is not the government's job to enforce religious doctrine.
      Again - 1st amendment.

      PS -
      The last paragraph of your rant just shows what an ignorant, bigoted sphincter you are.
      Thank you.
      Don't bother replying unless you have something intelligent to say, or some points to debate.
      I realize this could take a few years, if not decades.

    • 3 years ago
  • chilipeppers675
  • Chuck_st_chuck
    • 0
      Chuck_st_chuck  

    • I find it funny that IM the republican conservative and i find this stance stupid from HUck
      Marriage has nothing to governments
      they can't say who you can marry

      and the stand of god and politics
      I believe if the religious people want to put they're two cents in how government should be ran they should do it like everyone els does
      Pay their taxes and vote.

      they sure like to vote but not pay the taxes.
      so therefore why should i listen to them

      if you dont pay taxes you shouldn't be allowed to vote

    • 3 years ago
  • echoz
    • 0
      echoz  

    • heh... and here's humdrum...*sigh* that's what you'd like to keep maintaining ostensibly as though somehow the polemic, waxing sagaciously, Superiusly scholarly, and yet...heh...this is *WESTERN* civilization, which has a far different, largely, largely, predominantly Judeo-Christian world-view and has for so very very much of it's short brief (comparative) history. And it's only been in the recent past that homosexuals specifically, singularly, have deliberately targeted and challenged that as status quo for the honest majority of Americans, hoping to sculpt if by slow degrees, the popular view, if you will.

      Yet, taking your pretentious view, should we now accept what was a common form of marriage in polygamy, simply because it was in your inalienable "time-honoring" historical past if just to deny any Judeo-Christian origin? Well, it is in the "historical" past, isn't it! ...where you'd like to live, I guess, although I'd imagine those of your "persusasion" would probably have had a much much harder time of it, though you'd easily rail against "Christianity" and "Christians" today who are probably much more tolerant in the larger scheme of things.

      Oh well... it's probably good to remember that the U.S. was also formed to avoid religious persecution. And that's an indisputable fact. And probably most I'd venture, were Christian, or Protestant or what-have-you... Disagree though I'm sure you want to for prejudice to your own "parochial" view to history as you'd like to "befittingly" see it. Others may not be so fooled.

    • 3 years ago
  • Humdrum
    • 0
      Humdrum  
    • echoz:

      If your only point is "the majority is always right, and we should keep doing exactly what we've been doing for thousands of years, simply because we've been doing it for thousands of years," then I commend you for being a perfect herd animal, choosing the first shepherd that ever batted his eyes at you over the possibility of wolves.

      As to the ideals this country was founded on, yes, avoidance of religious persecution had plenty to do with it - and the best way to do that was to keep religion out of the government, in order to keep the government from persecuting any one religion.

      I wasn't railing against Christianity - just those Christians - and any other religious nut - who want to mix church and state. I've explained this to you before.

      Other than that, I fail to see where, in your rambling, you addressed any of my points (per usual for your type).

      And sorry if I confused you with my vocabulary. It's just how I type.
      Here, I'll translate:

      seprationz uv churchez n statez iz n r constitushiunz
      look it up

    • 3 years ago
  • echoz
    • 0
      echoz  
    • echoz:

      >If your only point is "the majority is always right, and we should keep doing exactly what we've been doing for thousands of years, simply because we've been doing it for thousands of years," then I commend you for being a perfect herd animal, choosing the first shepherd that ever batted his eyes at you over the possibility of wolves.

      and what's your point? change for the sake of change? because a minority wants to impose on the majority??? don't give me the affront that you'd commend me for your deliberate stupidity.

      >As to the ideals this country was founded on, yes, avoidance of religious persecution had plenty to do with it - and the best way to do that was to keep religion out of the government, in order to keep the government from persecuting any one religion.

      you always skirt the issue in typical denial. Many gays who want their own party, are indeed persecuting religious views in literally any forum they find it expressed...and at that particularly Christian views are singled out. You're an absolute idiot to deny this. as for the "best way" to avoid religious persecution, you're no surely authority on the subject, yourself recognizing that an adult "secular" video store has more right and respect than any synagogue or temple...you're nothing but noise...as usual for 'your type'

      >who want to mix church and state...

      it's in the phukn constitution asshole, it's called democracy where people have a right to express their views and beliefs to their representatives however they g'dam choose, and whether you like it or not!!!! I don't expect state or national congress to conduct mass or issue the eucharist, but I expect they'd understand the sanctity of marriage between a man and a woman particularly as required for procreation at least, since homos will never procreate naturally, and that really separate maybe MAYBE one or two gays in millions of people might want to get "married", so who's issue are you really arguing? Truthfully, most gays aren't even interested in marriage!

      >...rambling

      pure avoidance because you're phukn dumbass argument about the history of marriage, particularly as neglecting the honest history of WESTERN culture, is completely phukn bogus! your 'whatever' is mutual freak. you're lacking and flooding at the same time, like a roach who can't find his back to a dark corner to hide himself fast enough.

      >sorry for confusion...

      don't apologize to me for your own confusion and tergiversations... YOU look it up foo, and don't call it rambling because your too lazy and dumb to educate yourself. My bet is that America doesn't WANT to be a nation known for overly preening pretentious fags and dumbass freaks begging and bitching for rights most of them never intend to use for the exercise of mere perversions!

    • 3 years ago
  • Humdrum
    • 0
      Humdrum  

    • Is he aware of...history? Prehistory? The fact that it goes way past 10,000 years?

      Marriage has always been a social institution, as well as a tool of politics (the church indeed fell into both of these categories in the past - still does to an extent).
      Marriage isn't a Christian institution. Societies throughout history practiced marriage. The majority did not worship a single creator, but a pantheon. They definitely weren't of the Judeo-Christian persuasion.
      May as well say Hera created marriage, or Frigga, or Hathor.

      Why is knowledge frowned upon - worse, twisted or ignored when it seemingly goes against one's adopted belief system?
      Personally, I don't think someone with views like this should be ruling a modern secular society - at least not someone willing to inject their exclusive religious beliefs into a supposedly secular government.
      See: the 1st amendment.

    • 3 years ago
  • soleil10
    • 0
      soleil10  
    • Humdrum:

      Huckabee said that God created marriage, speaking to a Xstian audience.

      That makes much sense within that context

      99% of all faiths and civilizations agree with marriage.

      The last 40 years of liberalism that are destroying the family are a very small dot on the radar of History.

      Homoseuality has exited for many years. It was not associated with marriage.

      America istself came out of Judeo Xstian culture.

    • 3 years ago
  • Humdrum
    • 0
      Humdrum  
    • Humdrum:

      "Huckabee said that God created marriage, speaking to a Xstian audience.
      That makes much sense within that context"

      True, but it doesn't make the statement true.

      "99% of all faiths and civilizations agree with marriage."

      As do I. I wasn't attempting to make a case against marriage; I agree that it's vital to the health of a society. We just have disagreements on who is entitled to a legal marriage license.

      "The last 40 years of liberalism that are destroying the family are a very small dot on the radar of History."

      That's your opinion.

      "Homoseuality has exited for many years. It was not associated with marriage."

      There are countless things that humanity used to hold true do that we do not hold true any more. It's called social progress/ cultural evolution/ scientific knowledge/ whatever.
      Just my opinion.

      "America istself came out of Judeo Xstian culture."

      Yes, it did - but that has nothing to do with the separation of church and state. I was using other cultures to make a point.

    • 3 years ago
  • echoz
  • unclepete
  • soleil10
  • echoz
    • 0
      echoz  
    • unclepete:

      but, in the last days, people will be lovers of pleasures more than lovers of God, and they will hardly stand for sound reason for whatever else tickles their ears, or their asses apparently.

    • 3 years ago
  • Xomeron
    • 0
      Xomeron  
    • unclepete:

      Maybe it has something to do with the fact that the Judeo-Christian god is a totalitarian egomaniac who condemns you to eternal torture if you don't worship him, even though he never gave any scientific evidence, insisting that you take the existence of an omnipotent, omniscient, and completely undetectable superdeity on faith alone. Yeah, sounds like a real nice guy to be around.

    • 3 years ago
  • soleil10
    • 0
      soleil10  
    • unclepete:

      God does not judge us. We judge ourselves.

      When it comes to love, God is not omnipotent.

      He gave us free will and as a parent He suffers when His children go astray, misbehave, kill each other,are selfish etc...

      It take two for love to blossom. It is the same for God. He cannot experience Love alone.

      This idea of God on a throne is wrong

    • 3 years ago
  • soleil10
    • 0
      soleil10  

    • His argument is very logical.

      Marriage teaches us how to love:
      1) Children learn to love their parents
      2) Brothers and sisters learn to love each other
      3) Husband and wife too
      4) Finally, parents learn to love their children.

      The family is the school of love, the 4 realms of heart.
      Parental, fraternal, conjugal etc.

      God is the designer. His creation is a work of art

    • 3 years ago
  • samanthadian
    • 0
      samanthadian  
    • soleil10:

      actually we started out as clans and groups. immediate families didn't start until personal property became more important than the group.

      The point of family is to socialize the individual so that they become a functioning member of society.

      Learning to love is only one part of the process. You also should be learning responsibility for yourself and tolerance of others.

    • 3 years ago
  • soleil10
  • JanaPokana
    • 0
      JanaPokana  

    • It is just outrageous that such simplistic and overtly illogical arguments are actually used by supposedly intelligent people in this world. How can you compare a man-made work of art to an abstract concept such as marriage? It is idiotic!

    • 3 years ago
  • soleil10
    • 0
      soleil10  

    • I do agree with Governor Huckabee 100%.

      As the family goes so the nation.

      The right of children to a father and a mother far exceed the right of homosexuals.

      Banning the word bride and groom to Party A and Party B, from marriage certificates shows the truly inhuman character of a state that alienate itself from what is in the deepest heart of people.
      A country run by the ACLU, "unplanned motherhood" and gays activists will not survive.

    • 3 years ago
  • mynameisevan
  • ii386
    • 0
      ii386  
    • soleil10:

      I think that the quality of life for children of unplanned mothers and homosexual couples is not and will not be at stake, as you deem it to be.

      What is in the deepest heart of the people? What are you talking about? Religion?

      By saying that this nation will not survive if the American Civil Liberties Union, "unplanned motherhood," and gay rights activists run things...well... i don't see how they do run anything.
      Demanding equal treatment and equal rights is what everyone deserves.

      Civil unions should be agreed upon by everyone as fair treatment and equal rights. religious folk get all upset about marriage being religious and "from god."

    • 3 years ago
  • soleil10
    • 0
      soleil10  
    • soleil10:

      There are civil unions and domestic partnerships. People are reacting to the hidjacking of marriage because, marriage is legally a unique union that can create families where children are directly born from their father and mother. It creates a lineage

      Garriage (Gay marriage) is the opposite. Protecting marriage is now a self defense issue.

      It is not about tolerance or equality.

    • 3 years ago
  • jimwiz3416
    • 0
      jimwiz3416  

    • The intrusion of government into almost every area of our lives has become practically a cliche... From birth to marriage and death we need a license or certificate - read "permission" - for almost everything we do.

      The wisest solution to this debate that I've heard is to take marriage out of the government's hands completely.

      We've become so indoctrinated in government regulations and laws that freedom feels like a foreign and frightening concept. It's not. It's our heritage...

    • 3 years ago
  • echoz
    • 0
      echoz  
    • jimwiz3416:

      tsk, but LAW and legislating this celebrated "gaydom" is important to all phgtz so that they can "LORD" it over the rest of us how self-important they are, this even though they are only a very slim minority compared to the rest of us who procreate and actually keep up the very population they seek to dominate and "tax" for "special" needs victims like alternate sexualities et al. And so, invariably to show the rest of us "huh! NOW see how literally powerless you are to simply, even peacefully, disagree with us, you heterosexual generational procreators!! What rights do YOU have NOW???? Law is greater than God, because we can pervert it OUR way!" =P

      soon they'll seduce school children by the power of "suggestion" and sex "education" enough that you won't have a word to say about it...calling it a "hate" crime, even if you have religious beliefs which they constantly discriminate against though this country was founded to protect against religious discrimination... go figure. most of the lot are selfish bassturdz in my not so humble view.

    • 3 years ago
  • Chuck_st_chuck
  • echoz
  • Humdrum
    • 0
      Humdrum  
    • Chuck_st_chuck:

      What about his statement doesn't make sense to you, echoz? Have you read the 1st amendment? It's 2008, and you still can't grasp the intelligence of what the founding fathers grasped over 200 years ago?

      By the way, it's spelled "faggots."
      Be proud of your bigotry. Honest, at the very least.
      Or, just learn to spell.

    • 3 years ago
  • echoz
    • 0
      echoz  
    • Chuck_st_chuck:

      and what about mine doesn't make sense to you, humdrum. I'd imagine it's that retard part that gets you going huh? =D or would it be that tax demanded douching you'd like to get away from? And can't one be as creative as you in redefining whatever they fuq they want to??? be it, marriage, or killing religion so you can MAKE others "agree" with you, even if they don't...hell, spelling should be a walk in the park for you! =) Yeah, it all makes perfect sense...to such a complete fool like...(here's a hint...like mine, it rhymes!) =D so much like "U" =D like see ya, would never wanna be ya... what wasted time tsk...

    • 3 years ago
  • Humdrum
    • 0
      Humdrum  
    • Chuck_st_chuck:

      Your earlier argument would make more sense if you learned some spelling and proper grammar.
      Then again...

      As to this particular little puddle of vomit:
      You either fail to grasp what I say, or you are intentionally putting words in my mouth.

      Either way, you're right about one thing: waste of time.

    • 3 years ago
  • echoz
  • Chuck_st_chuck
    • 0
      Chuck_st_chuck  

    • wow and here I thought Marriage was created by the kIngs of Men to exchange women and land in name of peace meetings or cash.
      wow thanks for the history lesson Bee
      I'll be sure the heathens hear of this

    • 3 years ago
  • echoz
    • 0
      echoz  
    • Chuck_st_chuck:

      of course it could never be any like some proverbial jack off with his babbling head, ancient archaic dark ages kinda thing that kept the race going by any preposterous notion of God-like design, even though it works so damn well ;) ...but you be sure n do that telling all your friends--just as soon as you cancel those shower stained subscriptions to your 'mens health and fitness' and 'the advocate' to help give you some credibility with the outside (oh god-forbid) 'normal' world where you got your start as a small sperm swimming up a normal canal that will never happen if you get your way in life... satisfy yourself though, like you always do.

    • 3 years ago
more from Community:
from the community

top videos