Huckabee is getting desperate, and he is getting dangerously close to emulating the Islamic religious view of government. In Michigan, he made the following statement:

“[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.

Many Muslim countries base their governments and official duties on Islamic Law:

Saudi Arabia:

Sources of Law. – Word “law” in Saudi Arabia is understood to refer to Islamic law (in Arabic, Shari’ah). All secular regulations are subject to and interpreted in accordance with Shari’ah precepts.

Chapter 1 General Principles

Article 1

The Kingdom of Saudi Arabia is a sovereign Arab Islamic state with Islam as its religion; God’s Book and the Sunnah of His Prophet, God’s prayers and peace be upon him, are its constitution, Arabic is its language and Riyadh is its capital.


Islam to be State religion

Islam shall be the State religion of Pakistan.


Chapter One: Basic Principles

Islam is the national religion and a basic foundation for the country’s laws; however, freedom of religion is upheld.


Article 4 (Islamic Principle)

Article 4 is immutable and the Council of Guardians ensures that all articles of the Constitution as well other laws are based on Islamic criteria.


Chapter 1 The State

Article 2 Religions

(1) The religion of the state of the Islamic Republic of Afghanistan is the sacred religion of Islam
(2) Followers of other religions are free to exercise their faith and perform their religious rites within the limits of the provisions of law.

Article 2 Law and Religion

In Afghanistan, no law can be contrary to the beliefs and provisions of the sacred religion of Islam.

These are just a sampling of the countries with Islam as the national state religion. Huckabee’s statements go against the very reasons many of our founders came to this country. The Constitution prohibits both an “establishment of religion” as well as the use of a “religious test” for public officials. The Huckabee clip is below.

Huckabee is the worst kind of presidential candidate. He is a cleric, he is fanatical, he campaigns with his eye to exploiting religion using his beliefs – whether sincere or not, and he sees his interpretation of the Bible and God as the correct one. When Huckabee says “We should amend the Constitution to follow God’s standards”, whose denominational standards would be talking about? Reviewing biblical passages reveals that the Bible does not mention “abortion” or “homosexuality.” But, of course, tailoring the Constitution according to God’s standards really means tailoring the Constitution to Huckabee standards.


About Charlotte A. Weybright

I own a home in the historical West Central Neighborhood of Fort Wayne, Indiana. I have four grown sons and nine grandchildren - four grandsons and five granddaughters. I love to work on my home, and I enjoy crafts of all types. But, most of all, I enjoy being involved in political and community issues.
This entry was posted in Bill of Rights, Christianity, Government, Law, Middle East, Politics, Religion, Republican Party, U.S. Constitution, Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.


  1. I sent the following letter to my local paper, the Press-Enterprise in Riverside County, CA, in response to a quote from this site included in it’s “Best of the Blogs” column. I thought I should leave it here as well:

    Charlotte Weybright’s criticism of Mike Huckabee — “he sees his interpretation of the Bible and God as the correct one” — betrays a hilarious intellectual shallowness. Would Ms. Weybright prefer Governor Huckabee knowingly cling to an errant religious position? If Ms. Weybright is expressing a preference for agnostic candidates, does she understand agnosticism is an “interpretation of the Bible and God” adherents believe is “the correct one,” as are all interpretive positions, including atheism? Would the intrepid blogger vote for a candidate who, by design, fervently held fallible positions on any subject? May we suggest sound logic as a criteria for selection to this revered Press-Enterprise column?

  2. Thank you for leaving the letter. Your opinion is your opinion. After visiting your blog, I can certainly see your slant and why you disagree.

    I have to say though, all you did in your letter to your local paper was to ask a number of rhetorical questions, which, of course, you knew you couldn’t answer.

    You may call me hilarious if you want to, but from what I read at your blog, you certainly have buried your head in the sand on a number of issues.

    Have a good day.

  3. Judy inCA says:

    I read your post with interest, as I believe you stated your position clearly. I do disagree with the premise that by being a cleric Huckabee is almost automatically a poor presidential candidate. A person’s faith, or lack thereof, should not be a deciding factor in their status as a viable candidate. However, it is fair to state that we tend to vote for people who most closely represent our own values. As the US becomes more religiously diverse, I would hope our representatives would also show more diversity. When people quit acting on ‘labels’ but more on ‘actions’ we will all be much better represented!

Comments are closed.