Originally Posted by skipster  Spider,
I understand that people may think about things differently. Strict literal interpretation of the Bible does not necessarily deny ALL scientific evidence. Maybe it would deny some scientific evidence, but we should remember that the Bible is full of literary allegories, allusions, and analogies. It was never meant to be taken by the letter on everything, and Huckabee has said that. Huckabee and his record as a governor have shown us that faith and government can peacefully and successfully coexist.
|
I agree with that 100%, and if that's what Huckabee really believes, then I misjudged him. Again, I have no problem with a religious candidate, no matter what the religion, as long as he doesn't in any way allow his religious beliefs to influence his presidential decisions. I know that it's often hard to determine where pure morality ends and religion begins since they do overlap, but I will again offer an example of what I feel to be the difference:
It's okay for an elected official to object to gay marriage because he feels that it is inherently immoral, like having sex with an animal, but it is not okay for an elected official to object to it because the Bible condemns homosexuality or because a particular religion calls it a sin.
. . . and by the way, who said I was going to vote for Obama? I'm still undecided, and the choice of running mates will play a role in my decision.