Minister of Death?

Parent Cafe
1

<p>I thought Huckabee seemed amiable at the debate. Since he is the only other pro-life candidate besides Ron Paul, I decided to research him further. I was very disconcerted to find that he is evidently in alignment with Hagee’s vision of orchestrating events to bring about “Armageddon” so that “Jesus will return.”</p>

<p>I find these views very disturbing. How is it that a significant segment of the evangelical Christian population thinks it’s ok to start wars, kill thousands of innocent people, and maybe even cause WWIII, in order to manipulate events so that they follow their perceived version of biblical prophecy?</p>

<p>Wasn’t Jesus the Prince of Peace?</p>

<p>If there are any evangelical Christians here at cc who share these views, I would be very interested in how you are able to justify violence to somehow fulfill biblical prophecy. Doesn’t that contradict the message of peace, love and forgiveness that Jesus espoused?</p>

<p>[Scoop:</a> Michael Collins: Mike Huckabee - Minister of Death](<a href=“http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/HL0712/S00059.htm]Scoop:”>Michael Collins: Mike Huckabee - Minister of Death | Scoop News)</p>

<p>This is some really scary stuff. Huckabee is being promoted as this gentle, wise pastor, but from what I’ve been reading, I now conclude that he’s more scary than bush, in terms of promoting a violent agenda based on an extreme religious agenda.</p>

<p>People are concerned about Romney making political decisions based on his Mormon religion (which, incidentally, he said he wouldn’t do) but where is the outcry over Huckabee? It seems that, while both merit concern, Huckabee’s agenda is more blatant.</p>

2

<p>why do you think most evangelicals were in favor of Iraq invasion? It was a prelude to Armageddon.</p>

3

<p>Right. Why aren’t non-evangelical Christians, and non-Christians, waking up to what they’re doing? Do we have to get dragged into WWIII because of their religious views?</p>

4

<p>and now this</p>

<p>Huckabee wanted to isolate AIDS patients</p>

<p>LITTLE ROCK, Ark. - Mike Huckabee once advocated isolating AIDS patients from the general public, opposed increased federal funding in the search for a cure and said homosexuality could “pose a dangerous public health risk.”</p>

<p>As a candidate for a U.S. Senate seat in 1992, Huckabee answered 229 questions submitted to him by The Associated Press. Besides a quarantine, Huckabee suggested that Hollywood celebrities fund AIDS research from their own pockets, rather than federal health agencies.</p>

<p>“If the federal government is truly serious about doing something with the AIDS virus, we need to take steps that would isolate the carriers of this plague,” Huckabee wrote.</p>

<p>“It is difficult to understand the public policy towards AIDS. It is the first time in the history of civilization in which the carriers of a genuine plague have not been isolated from the general population, and in which this deadly disease for which there is no cure is being treated as a civil rights issue instead of the true health crisis it represents.”</p>

<p>When asked about AIDS research in 1992, Huckabee complained that AIDS research received an unfair share of federal dollars when compared to cancer, diabetes and heart disease.</p>

<p>“In light of the extraordinary funds already being given for AIDS research, it does not seem that additional federal spending can be justified,” Huckabee wrote. “An alternative would be to request that multimillionaire celebrities, such as Elizabeth Taylor (,) Madonna and others who are pushing for more AIDS funding be encouraged to give out of their own personal treasuries increased amounts for AIDS research.”</p>

<p>Huckabee did not return messages left with his campaign.</p>

<p>When Huckabee wrote his answers in 1992, it was common knowledge that AIDS could not be spread by casual contact. In late 1991, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention said there were 195,718 AIDS patients in the country and that 126,159 people had died from the syndrome.</p>

<p>[Huckabee</a> wanted to isolate AIDS patients - Yahoo! News](<a href=“http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20071208/ap_on_el_pr/huckabee_aids]Huckabee”>http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20071208/ap_on_el_pr/huckabee_aids)</p>

5

<p>Oh wow. Creepy!</p>

6

<p>lealdragon - I honestly think most evangelical Christians are not aware of this agenda. Most of them do not research web pages and the like; they are so caught up in their day-to-day survival, attending their house of worship, and yes, keeping very busy doing a lot of good volunteer work. Many only look at whether a candidate is pro-life or not, and assume if they are not, then the rest of that politician’s policies are not in line with what they wish for a president (yea, I know… this will get the single issue vote discussion going again). </p>

<p>In my middle-class, mostly white suburban area, I know many people who attend Willow Creek (the originator of mega churches), and love it. Willow does some awesome ministry; they bring them in in droves and engage people using entertainment such as drama and music… and it’s very well received. But if I were to ask most of those people if they know that leaders of the evangelical movement subscribe to a belief that our political policies should support anything that hastens the return of Jesus, then they would probably express disbelief. It’s not something that’s preached from the pulpit (at least not directly), and for the average Joe Schmo who trusts that his/her pastor has more knowledge of biblical prophecies than the member does, they have no reason to confront their pastor as to why their beliefs support certain governmental interventions.</p>

<p>What I think is funny, is that members of the early church anxiously awaited Jesus’ return, and thought it was imminent then. If you look back at church history, many decisions and life choices were made based on an expected return of Jesus at any moment. You’d think that people today would learn from those early church members that people are often wrong when it comes to trying to predict (or manipulate) Jesus’ return. </p>

<p>But honestly, I don’t think the average evangelical Christian wants to know that the beliefs held by their leaders have such a significance in our government. They are comfortable where they’re at and want to leave the big stuff to those who ‘know more about it.’</p>

7

<p>Sadly, you are quite right. Unfortunately, in modern times, with weapons capable of destroying the whole planet, and those who would take advantage of the masses’ ignorance and use them as pawns on a cosmic chessboard, to bring about their own corrupt evil agenda, it is a far more serious matter than ever before.</p>

8

<p>(Side note) Willow Creek tries to stay away from political agendas. I attended for 18 years, and both of my parents worked there. There were times when politcal activists decided to use Willow Creek for their agendas, but the church tried to stick to Biblical topics and leave modern politics to individuals.</p>

9

<p>most evangelical churches stay away from political agendas directly, but if you are able to nail down a pastor/leader and get them to address issues related to politics, they will tell you that they believe certain events need to happen in order for Jesus to return again, and that the bible says so (and the bible, according to them is inerrant).</p>

<p>Willow has actually been very courageous in not promoting any specific political agenda/candidate, but their theology is conservative; they just don’t advertise it as much as some other evangelical churches do.</p>

<p>Believe me, I think Willow does some amazing stuff; I remember the controversy they endured with some of their members when they officially defined the place of women in ministry, which believes in the full equality of women in regards to status and giftedness. It was quite an ordeal, and they lost members over it. </p>

<p>When it all boils down, Willow’s belief in inerrant scriptures is the same basis of belief that all evangelicals use, and from which they create and support policies that are so deadly in the Middle East. Willow just won’t make any official statements.</p>

10

<p>Re: HIV Isolation.</p>

<p>The maker of one of the noninvasive HIV tests was down the street from where I worked. They tested the product in a high infected country in the SE Asian region. It was calculated at that time in the mid 80’s that if the rate in that country was not controlled that in a relatively few generations (I forgot the number) that country would literally be decimated. Along with that thinking, the spread of HIV from that country would be almost uncontrollable because of the sex trade, open borders, and easy transportation. Identification of infected people and possible quarantine was talked about openly. </p>

<p>Today in Africa, there are countries where infection rate is very very high. If you give blood, today, a visitation to many underdevelop countries for any reason will flag your donation. </p>

<p>We forget how many people who have died from blood transfusion in the 80’s, because the causation and control of HIV is unknown. </p>

<p>My sister was an ER nurse in a less desirable hospital and neighborhood in LA in the 80’s. When scientists discovered how HIV was transmitted and how to identify carriers, there was a mass screening of medical professionals. They were not afraid of being carriers themselves, but worried if one of the needle pricks or body fluid contact had infected them in the previous years. </p>

<p>CDC recently released a report (heard thu NPR) that there is an annual increase of HIV of 20,000 people per year in these United States. </p>

<p>Remember that CDC advertisements in the late 80’s about the last sexual encounter you had.</p>

11

<p>Re: Religion and Politics.</p>

<p>A good Texan made this law:
[Charities</a>, Churches and Politics](<a href=“http://www.irs.gov/newsroom/article/0,,id=161131,00.html]Charities”>http://www.irs.gov/newsroom/article/0,,id=161131,00.html)</p>