Tuesday, January 15, 2008

The Constitution According to Huckabee's God

Today, Mike Huckabee came out in favor of amending the Constitution in the name of God's standards.
"[Some of my opponents] do not want to change the Constitution, but I believe it's a lot easier to change the constitution than it would be to change the word of the living God, and that's what we need to do is to amend the Constitution so it's in God's standards rather than try to change God's standards," Huckabee said, referring to the need for a constitutional human life amendment and an amendment defining marriage as between a man and a woman.

Although I'm not a Christian myself, I think this is an extremely exciting idea. Of course, neither the Old Testament nor the New Testament define any principles or standards in relation to abortion or gay marriage. So, there's no need to change the Constitution in relation to those issues.

But the New Testament god does define a couple of standards that would make it necessary for the United States to dramatically change its Constitution.

Standard 1: Self Defense. "But I say unto you that ye resist not evil" (Matthew 5:39)--What standard in the New Testament is enunciated more clearly than this global imperative AGAINST self-defense? Jesus explains the implications of this imperative in some detail in his examples of "turning the other cheek" and actually giving those who would coerce us more than they ask for. That's why it is obvious that a Constitution that was written according to "God's Standard" would mandate against having any military establishment, any kind of police force, or any kinds of prisons. So what if our foreign enemies and domestic criminals attacked us. Jesus seems to believe that suffering makes human beings closer to God. So he wouldn't mind at all.

Standard 2: Wealth. Jesus also makes several clear statements condemning wealth. Take "Ye cannot serve God and mammon" for example. That's as clear principle that human beings should not engage in the accumulation of wealth and should probably give away any wealth they inherit. Once again, Jesus provides lots of examples lto illustrate the point. There's the rich young man with no more chance to get into heaven than a camel going through the eye of a needle, the wealthy farmer who was killed for reveling in the idea of building a new barn, or the rich man who was condemned to hell while Lazarus was taken up to heaven for no better reason than being exceedingly poor. In case, readers don't get the message from these examples, Jesus exclaims "woe unto you that are rich" in Luke 6: 24.

To bring the American Constitution up to God's Standard on wealth, the Constitution would have to be changed to mandate that wealthy Americans would have to surrender their property to the poor. Just to be safe, the Constitution should go further an have Americans disperse their wealth to poor people all around the world. Perhaps we could cal that the Global Redistribution Amendment. If wealth takes us far from God, then giving away our wealth and making ourself poor would bring us closer to God.

Perhaps we could get a Christian commentator like Ann Coulter to draw up the amendments.



13 comments:

Steve Bartley said...

Are you actually suggesting it would be a good idea for Christians to practice what the Bible preaches? Can't I just put a Jesus-fish on my car?

I was listening to AFR's Money Matters a couple of days ago (yes, embarrassingly I admit that) and the pastor/commentator said that Christians need to show their appreciation to god when they have big financial successes. Oh, surely, that means we share some of our mammon with the poor and oppressed? Well, not quite. The commentator suggested that we could take a vacation! Yeah, that sure is a Jesus-thing to do. I listened to the whole program and not one reference to charity was made!

And people are still shocked and puzzled that I'm not a Christian...


SB

Anonymous said...

Why don't we just make the Bible the constitution and select a panel of religion clerics to run the country? We wouldn't need to worry about many of our current issues. Bush and Ahmadinejad do seem a lot alike from the shadows of the bright light of the supreme Ayatollah Huckabee or supreme Ayatollah Robertson and colleagues.

obama_ohyeah said...

I think that the fact that preachers are even remotely electable sends a disturbing message about the state of the culture of america.

religion is addiction and if there is anything we americans know how to do, it is personify addiction.

things seem more polarized in this election than either of the last two. it seems the most electable candidates on both sides are the most hated by the opposition.

my college-educated fox-watching dad says that if hillary wins he's moving to australia.

im thinking denmark's the spot for me and mine if huckabee makes it.

Ric Caric said...

I hear that Sydney's a nice city. Great opera! Well, great Opera House anyway.

Jeannie said...

Dr. Caric, I thoroughly enjoy reading your religious-themed posts. I say if we want theocracy, we should go all in. God wouldn't approve of pickin' and choosin'.

Ric Caric said...

Thanks for the kind words Jeannie. Of course, countries like Saudi Arabia and Iran already have model theocracies. Perhaps we could use them as models.

Ric Caric said...

Steve must have missed the passage in Matthew where Jesus drives the money-changers out of the temple and replaces them with real estate dealers.

Steve said...

I don't recall the part about Jesus and real estate promotion.

Ric Caric said...

It's right there in Matthew 29 2:4-6.

steve said...

Which Bible version has a 29th chapter of Matthew?

Anyway, I don't think Jesus was a big fan of wealth or materialism of any type.

steve said...

Matthew 27:7-10 ?

Ric Caric said...

I'm just kidding about the 29th Book of Matthew. Come to think of it though, I'm surprised that nobody has "found" a lost book of the Bible that justifies greed.

SB said...

Oddly, I wasn't surprised at the notion of an extra Matthew chapter. John 21 is believed to have been written shortly after Ireneaus' time. So, why not still write in some chapters?