Huckabee hates America

The BBQ Pit
261

[QUOTE=Mellivora capensis]
I’m genuinely curious, is there a cite for that?
[/QUOTE]
There are lots of cites, but they all stem from a single one: an interview with Nabil Shaath in a 2005 BBC documentary, Elusive Peace: Israel and the Arabs.

Those who mention the incident, however, seldom mention that the White House officially denied it. Shaath eventually backpedalled a bit by conceding that the alleged statements came across to them as metaphorical anyway, and not something they took literally as reported. One would think that Bush, of all people, would have stuck to his guns if he had really been convinced of such a thing. He has a reputation for being, well, stubborn.

262

The Bush White House denying something equals hard confirmation as far as I’m concerned.

263

[QUOTE=Liberal]
There are lots of cites, but they all stem from a single one: an interview with Nabil Shaath in a 2005 BBC documentary, Elusive Peace: Israel and the Arabs.

Those who mention the incident, however, seldom mention that the White House officially denied it. Shaath eventually backpedalled a bit by conceding that the alleged statements came across to them as metaphorical anyway, and not something they took literally as reported. One would think that Bush, of all people, would have stuck to his guns if he had really been convinced of such a thing. He has a reputation for being, well, stubborn.
[/QUOTE]
Bush makes no bones about his religious convictions and his relationship with god, right? When asked if he consulted his father when considering the invasion of Iraq, he reportedly responded that he consulted a “higher father.”

It seems pretty plausible that he received a response, then, doesn’t it? Who asks a question if they don’t expect a response (except for people looking to stay on unemployment)?

Finally, would George Bush lie about something if it was in political interest to do so? Of course he would.

264

I’ve been thinking about the implications of the fact that Bush consulted a “higher father” and that he was told to invade Iraq. What does this mean for us in terms of selecting future leaders who assert that god will have some role in their decision making process?

It is pretty clear that it was a mistake to invade Iraq. God therefore issued a faulty directive to Bush, and we collectively have suffered as a result.

Of course, a plausible alternative to the above is that George Bush is fallible, and that he misunderstood the response that he received from god. However, it is not possible for us to know whether or not the transmission was garbled. It isn’t even possible for Bush to know whether or not he misunderstood god’s directive to invade Iraq. What is clear is that the only one capable of knowing whether Bush misunderstood his directive, and who could have corrected the matter before the tragic outcome is god himself.

Yet god did not.

One possible explanation for this is that god exists, but does not attempt to provide corrective feedback, and thus his intent is that we muddle along, make choices and figure things out ourselves.

If this is so, should we not reject out of hand anyone who claims that god should or would be involved in their decision making as president (or is requisite for our worldly freedom), since this would be in contradiction to god’s desire that we figure things out ourselves?

A second alternative is that god does not exist. We should therefore reject candidates who claim to commune with him and receive guidance from him due to their misguided and faulty decision making and reality testing capabilities.

A final alternative is that god did tell Bush to invade Iraq, knowing and desiring the outcome. In this case, it is my opinion that we should reject those who claim to receive guidance from god because they are in league with a subhuman psychopath. (This also contradicts the assertion that god is necessary for freedom, since some humans’ freedom has been cruelly revoked by god. One would have to amend the statement to say that god is necessary for limited or selective freedom, but I think this undermines the typical connotation of freedom.)

265

[QUOTE=Diogenes the Cynic]
The Bush White House denying something equals hard confirmation as far as I’m concerned.
[/QUOTE]
Yes, that went without saying actually.

266

[QUOTE=Hentor the Barbarian]
I’ve been thinking about the implications of the fact that Bush consulted a “higher father” and that he was told to invade Iraq.
[/QUOTE]
The “fact”? Now you’re just trolling. Your “facts” are in dispute as proved above. Your trichotomy is also boring, predictable, and ignorant. You’re so convinced that Bush is a pathelogical liar, and yet you did not even consider Bush lying as one of your three possibilities.

ETA:

I would go further to add that I no longer believe you are an atheist. Your attacks on Him are too ad hominem for a nonbeliever. You take Him quite personally in every way from irrational screeds about how He hurts your feelings to petty and deliberate misspellings of His name. You do believe in God. And you hate Him.

267

[QUOTE=Hentor the Barbarian]
Bush makes no bones about his religious convictions and his relationship with god, right? When asked if he consulted his father when considering the invasion of Iraq, he reportedly responded that he consulted a “higher father.”
[/QUOTE]

He was obviously talking about Cheney.

268

So, we’ve gone from “Huchabee hates America” to “Hentor hates God”.

269

[QUOTE=Liberal]
I would go further to add that I no longer believe you are an atheist. Your attacks on Him are too ad hominem for a nonbeliever. You take Him quite personally in every way from irrational screeds about how He hurts your feelings to petty and deliberate misspellings of His name. You do believe in God. And you hate Him.
[/QUOTE]
Wow, you are going off the rails on your crazy train. It’s too bad you are unable to rationally respond to my post.

270

[QUOTE=Hentor the Barbarian]
I’ve been thinking about the implications of the fact that Bush consulted a “higher father” and that he was told to invade Iraq. What does this mean for us in terms of selecting future leaders who assert that god will have some role in their decision making process?

It is pretty clear that it was a mistake to invade Iraq. God therefore issued a faulty directive to Bush, and we collectively have suffered as a result.

Of course, a plausible alternative to the above is that George Bush is fallible, and that he misunderstood the response that he received from god. However, it is not possible for us to know whether or not the transmission was garbled. It isn’t even possible for Bush to know whether or not he misunderstood god’s directive to invade Iraq. What is clear is that the only one capable of knowing whether Bush misunderstood his directive, and who could have corrected the matter before the tragic outcome is god himself.

Yet god did not.

One possible explanation for this is that god exists, but does not attempt to provide corrective feedback, and thus his intent is that we muddle along, make choices and figure things out ourselves.

If this is so, should we not reject out of hand anyone who claims that god should or would be involved in their decision making as president (or is requisite for our worldly freedom), since this would be in contradiction to god’s desire that we figure things out ourselves?

A second alternative is that god does not exist. We should therefore reject candidates who claim to commune with him and receive guidance from him due to their misguided and faulty decision making and reality testing capabilities.

A final alternative is that god did tell Bush to invade Iraq, knowing and desiring the outcome. In this case, it is my opinion that we should reject those who claim to receive guidance from god because they are in league with a subhuman psychopath. (This also contradicts the assertion that god is necessary for freedom, since some humans’ freedom has been cruelly revoked by god. One would have to amend the statement to say that god is necessary for limited or selective freedom, but I think this undermines the typical connotation of freedom.)
[/QUOTE]

You know, if my God were as small and petty as you believe him to be, I’d become an atheist as well. It would spare me a lot of tough thinking.

271

[QUOTE=Mr. Moto]
You know, if my God were as small and petty as you believe him to be, I’d become an atheist as well. It would spare me a lot of tough thinking.
[/QUOTE]
You know, I am actually curious about how people respond to the issues I raised above. I wish someone could formulate an actual reply to it.

As to your snark, I’ve said in the past that one of the reasons I don’t find the construct of god to be particularly believable, or in this case desireable, is that I am a better person than god is. I’ve never ordered anyone’s death. I don’t demand that anyone feel any particular way about me. I’m more tolerant of diversity. I don’t play cruel tricks on people.

Just for example, you know.

272

[QUOTE=Hentor the Barbarian]
Wow, you are going off the rails on your crazy train. It’s too bad you are unable to rationally respond to my post.
[/QUOTE]
A rational post is prerequisite for a rational response.

273

[QUOTE=Hentor the Barbarian]
Wow, you are going off the rails on your crazy train. It’s too bad you are unable to rationally respond to my post.
[/QUOTE]

I will.

On the whole “God told me to invade Iraq” quote (if I got the quote right), I’ve always been suspicious since we’re talking about something reported 2nd or 3rd hand, from a meeting in which people were translating back and forth between English and Arabic. Not the most reliable type of situation for transmitting information without some loss of data.

However, let’s accept that Bush at least “consulted” his God before invading Iraq. I’d say that it would be on par with any other president saying he “prayed” before making an important decision, and that it wasn’t like he was going to flip a coin about invading Iraq but decided to consult God instead. He had lots of his advisers telling him he should do it, and part of his decision making process was to consult with or pray to God. Pretty much nothing out of the ordinary there. I expect most presidents would say (even if not true) that they prayed to God at times when making important decisions.

274

[QUOTE=John Mace]
He was obviously talking about Cheney.
[/QUOTE]
Wouldn’t that be the “dark father.” (Darth Vader? Nyuk, nyuk. I’ll be here all week. Try the veal.)

Thank you for considering what I wrote. I see your point. If one sets aside the idea that god responded to Bush, then it becomes more akin to “everyone does it” (consults god), and the issue is then why prayer is unreliable. (I would ask what the point is though, absent a response, other than as an exercise to organize one’s thoughts. I would suggest that people try one of those pros/cons lists instead.)

But I think that in part, one of the reasons why prayer wouldn’t work is that if a god exists, he desires humans to figure things out without his intervention or direct feedback. Thus, it remains the case that someone claiming to incorporate god into how we do things is contravening the will of god. At the very least, they would be unnecessarily including god into things he wants to be left out of.

275

I think it’s worth looking into, though, because placing political decisions in the arrena of faith transfers the ineffability that is usually applied in matters of tough religious questions to tough political questions.

Compare and contrast:

God is good, and He loves us, but Mom gets cancer. This is all part of God’s ineffable plan. We cannot pretend to know His mind. Fine, there was probably nothing you could do about Mom’s cancer anyway.

God is good, and He loves us, and it is His intention that we liberate Iraq. The early returns indicate that this may not have been such a good idea, but how can I, a fallible mortal, know God’s plan? We’d better follow through on this.

This is what concerns me about devout believers in political office. It may be entirely unfair, but as a non-devout semi-believer myself, I cannot begin to understand what goes on in George Bush’s mind when he speaks of God. He certainly seems convinced that he is right. Is this because God told him? I don’t know. The sure thing is that he seems immune to feedback.

276

Religion is all about faith, not reason. I don’t think it’s productive to try and analyze these things logically. Besides, the nuns used to make me stand in a corner when I asked questions like that. I can still remember the time in 5th grade-- the turning point in my loss of faith.

277

[QUOTE=Hentor the Barbarian]
As to your snark, I’ve said in the past that one of the reasons I don’t find the construct of god to be particularly believable, or in this case desireable, is that I am a better person than god is. I’ve never ordered anyone’s death. I don’t demand that anyone feel any particular way about me. I’m more tolerant of diversity. I don’t play cruel tricks on people.
[/QUOTE]

But that is all you choose to see of God, and therefore you limit your view of him to what you perceive are his faults.

I don’t want to open a theological discussion here, especially since I’m no theologian myself. But I find it funny when people build unflattering portraits of the Creator and then declare themselves greater than Him. It is an arrogance akin to declaring that God is on your side, frankly.

278

[QUOTE=Mr. Moto]
But that is all you choose to see of God, and therefore you limit your view of him to what you perceive are his faults.

I don’t want to open a theological discussion here, especially since I’m no theologian myself. But I find it funny when people build unflattering portraits of the Creator and then declare themselves greater than Him. It is an arrogance akin to declaring that God is on your side, frankly.
[/QUOTE]
I didn’t build it, mate. It was already written down long before I got here.

279

[QUOTE=Liberal]
Your trichotomy is also boring, predictable, and ignorant.
[/QUOTE]

I don’t see what Hentor’s throat surgery has to do with anything.

280

[QUOTE=Hentor the Barbarian]
I didn’t build it, mate. It was already written down long before I got here.
[/QUOTE]
Since it made no scriptural references, are you saying you plagiarized your post #264?