I've never reached back into my own vault of posts before today. But Quote 1 below has been floating all over the Internet, as well as being repeated on TV and radio stations, and appearing in newspapers nationwide. Quote 2 has gotten absolutely no attention anywhere. Why is that?
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.Quote 2:
Mike Huckabee, 01/14/08
I would like to propose the following Amendment to the U.S. Constitution:I'm also going to reprint a response I made to a comment, just so we don't start with this nonsense again:
Anti-Ignorance AmendmentNo person whose religious beliefs alone prevent him or her from accepting an overwhelming expert consensus relating to facts and data of science and/or history shall be eligible to the office of president. The Exterminator, 05/04/07
Yes, the Constitution argues against a religious test. But I'm not proposing one; the president should be free to practice whatever religion he or she chooses, as long as the Constitution is not endangered by his or her religious observance. (Remember: the oath of office requires the president to swear or affirm that he or she will "to the best of my ability, preserve, protect and defend the constitution of the United States.") My proposal is for an intelligence test, which establishes a bare minimum capability for effectively doing what the president must swear to do. The founding fathers worried about a mob-ocracy, and put certain checks and balances, like the Bill of Rights, in place to keep a potentially ignorant majority from running the country. If the Constitution can insist that the president be a certain age — presumably to ensure maturity — there's no reason that it can't insist on some minimal intellectual standard.