Huckabee's Views On Women Scrutinized

GOP Hopeful Signed 1998 Statement Backing Idea That Wives Should "Submit Graciously" To Husbands

(AP)  Republican Mike Huckabee's record on women's rights is coming under increased scrutiny, including his endorsement of the Southern Baptist Convention's stance that women should "submit graciously" to their husbands and his opposition to sending women into combat.

Huckabee, an ordained Southern Baptist minister, defended his record Thursday, saying he appointed many women to high positions in state government and on his staff during his 10½ years as Arkansas governor.

"If you look at my cabinet, I had more women in my cabinet and on my staff in key positions, including chief of staff, than any other governor probably in Arkansas history," Huckabee said on ABC's "Good Morning America."

Huckabee had been asked on the TV show about his support of the Baptist convention's statement of beliefs on marriage. The former Arkansas governor and his wife Janet signed a full-page ad in USA Today in support of the statement with 129 other evangelical leaders in 1998.

"A wife is to submit graciously to the servant leadership of her husband even as the church willingly submits to the headship of Christ," the convention says in its statement of faith. Baptist Press reported that the 1998 ad was addressed to denomination leaders and said: "You are right because you called wives to graciously submit to their husband's sacrificial leadership."

Huckabee was supported by 17 percent of women in a nationwide AP-Ipsos poll earlier this month, making him roughly even with Rudy Giuliani and John McCain for the lead among female voters among GOP presidential contenders.

Huckabee has faced questions before over his support of the marriage statement, with a rival in his 1998 re-election campaign citing the statement and accusing Huckabee of opposing equal pay for women.

"It's one thing for Mike Huckabee to think a wife should submit graciously to her husband, but it's another to have her work for less than she's worth," Democratic challenger Bill Bristow said in a 1998 ad.

Huckabee's campaign then cried foul and accused Bristow of taking a swipe at Southern Baptists.

In 1992, when Huckabee was a candidate for the U.S. Senate, he said in a 229-question survey submitted by The Associated Press that he opposed placing women in combat roles in the military "because of my strong traditional view that women should be treated with respect and dignity and not subject to the kinds of abuses that could occur in combat."

However, Huckabee's traditional view of women apparently doesn't extend to the political arena.

In the same survey, Huckabee was asked about the number of women serving in the House and Senate. He wrote: "I really cannot say whether or not the presence of so few women has made any difference in Congress, but women are certainly as capable as men of serving in the Senate."

That view also extends to the White House. Huckabee said Thursday in the ABC interview that he fully expects a woman will be elected to lead the country someday - he just hopes it won't be next year since he wants the job.

"Will there be a female president? Of course there will. And should there be? Absolutely," Huckabee said.

[rowdytexan2]

My only question to Mr. Huckabee is how he separates his faith from the workplace.

The Southern Baptist Convention has held the position that women should not be allowed leadership positions in the church...aka should not be clergy. Many southern Baptist churches do not even allow females to pray in open congregation. Mr. Huckabee being a proponant of the SBC, obviously holds and supports this position.

Fortunately our laws do not allow such discrimination in the workplace and government.

So, can the man separte the position of his church, remember he''s a STRONG supporter of the SBC, and his position as president.

Will womens rights issues be addressed and carried forward, or will they be put on the back burner while he''s busy supporting the Neocon regime and war, and hatred and chaos?

It should be a huge question for women in this election.

[asngirl]

jankebenz:

Where does it say in the Bible "til death do us part"? I''ve read the Bible from cover to cover and have not seen a single reference like that.

And, do you really believe that marriage is a religious institution? Because the Chinese have been getting married thousands of years before the Bible was written, and they certainly were not the chosen people. Do you believe that their marriages were all frauds?

[asngirl]

jankebenz:

Where does it say in the Bible "til death do us part"? I''ve read the Bible from cover to cover and have not seen a single reference like that.

And, do you really believe that marriage is a religious institution? Because the Chinese have been getting married thousands of years before the Bible was written, and they certainly were not the chosen people. Do you believe that their marriages were all frauds?

[asngirl]

jankebenz:

Where does it say in the Bible "til death do us part"? I''ve read the Bible from cover to cover and have not seen a single reference like that.

And, do you really believe that marriage is a religious institution? Because the Chinese have been getting married thousands of years before the Bible was written, and they certainly were not the chosen people. Do you believe that their marriages were all frauds?

[oldpilot954]

Everyone seems to whine about the idea of asking a woman to submit to her husband. Nobody seems to notice that the same passage says for the husband to love his wife like Christ loved the church. In the context of the passage, that means that he looks out for her good -- all the way to the point of dying for her. The concept is for the woman to have respect for the husband more than servantude. It''s been my experience that when a man loves his wife in a way that tells her he will do absolutely anything (even die)for her best interest never mentions submission. Both inside and outside of Christianity, it is the man who only loves himself and wants the wife to be his doormat that tries to yell about a wife being in submission.

[kevzgrl]

Mr. Huckabee (c''mmon - President HUCKABEE, how STUPID does THAT sound???) needs to get his head out of his a-ss and into the 21st century. Women are not 2nd class citizens any longer - and as such, deserve just as much respect and dignity as men do. My husband and I joke about the vows that said honor and OBEY, and it works BOTH ways, guys. The Bible says wives should submit themselves to their husbands, and husbands should submit themselves to their wives. You can "cherry-pick" as much as you want in the Bible, finding bits here and there that fit this and that viewpoint - but if EVERYONE treats EVERYONE ELSE with respect and dignity, that''s the way life should be lived. Mr. Huckabee asked about Jesus and the Devil being brothers, too - doesn''t that make his beliefs and ideas just a little bit scary to anyone else???

[kansas1946]

GOP Hopeful Signed 1998 Statement Backing Idea That Wives Should "Submit Graciously" To Husbands
******************************************

LOL. Well, I hope Mike will "submit graciously" to defeat when women graciously pull the lever for the other guys!

[sgtrds]

My wife and I have been together 32 years and I can assure you that if we didn''''t each have a sense of humor about our marriage we would''''ve killed one onther a long time ago.

Posted by realpatriot1 at 09:15 PM : Dec 14, 2007


RAmen. My wife has said many times that she married me for my sense of humor. Sometimes the laughter is a bit bitter or ironic, but it''s what keeps a marriage alive and worth the effort.

[sgtrds]

Since unfortuatly you have been blinded to the truth and rejected God, I''''ll let you have the last word. We have been here before with various posters, and I see the futility of going on.Just ask yourself though,what if I made the wrong desision? As an ex christian, you know the rest of the story!

Posted by jankebenz at 05:39 PM : Dec 14, 2007

I have absolutely no doubt whatsoever that I''m right. I have no fear of a god that doesn''t exist.

[realpatriot1]

I think the saddest thing I''ve read in quite a while is the comment here that humor has nothing to do with marriage.

My wife and I have been together 32 years and I can assure you that if we didn''t each have a sense of humor about our marriage we would''ve killed one onther a long time ago.

[kansas1946]

Who cares about the bible. This country is not based on the bible, but on the US Constitution. The bible says a lot of things. Has nothing to do with electing a presidential candidate that would view wives as second class citizens.

[jankebenz]

I have read it. Several times in fact. Was actually a hardcore christian for a good chunk of my life-
Posted by SgtRDS at 04:34 PM : Dec 14, 2007

Since unfortuatly you have been blinded to the truth and rejected God, I''ll let you have the last word. We have been here before with various posters, and I see the futility of going on.Just ask yourself though,what if I made the wrong desision? As an ex christian, you know the rest of the story!

[sgtrds]

Time to read the bible,Moses did not write the commandments(God did) ,keep the Israelites in the desert 40 years(God did),conquer any lands(he never got to enter Canaan), nor did he author judges.Know you''''re facts before you spout off about somthing you apparantly know little of

Posted by jankebenz at 04:08 PM : Dec 14, 2007

I have read it. Several times in fact. Was actually a hardcore christian for a good chunk of my life. It doesn''t hold up to historical scrutiny. the old testament, up to the time of Moses was written by Moses and some of the other men of his cult. Since there is no god (the concept of a god, any god, is strictly a man made idea and it appears in many cultures as a way to try to explain things to simple people), it could not have been written by a creature that does not exist. It''s nothing more then a set of rules that Moses used to keep his cult in line and several fairy tales he made up (creation, Noah, etc) to try to explain complex ideas to an illiterate desert tribe. as for not being a conquer, yes it''s true that Joshua did the actual conquering because Moses died, but that doesn''t make him any less of a despotic cult leader. And speaking of which, isn''t it funny that this supposed god gave all of this land to the Jews, but forgot to clear off the rightful owners first? One would think that if there was a God he would have given his followers land that didn''t require them to murder the residents of it.

[jankebenz]

Oh and Moses was no different then any other ruler. He kept his people isolated in the Sinai for 40 + years (you didn''''t really think they were lost did you?) to build an army of conquest, just like every other despotic ruler before him. He wrote the ten commandments, Genesis, Judges, Numbers, etc. to keep his people in line and make them easier to control, just like every other ruler before him. He''''s no different then any other bloody, murderous conqueror of his time or before or after. He was the Middle-East''''s Ghengis Khan or Attila the Hun.

Posted by SgtRDS at 03:34 PM : Dec 14, 2007

Time to read the bible,Moses did not write the commandments(God did) ,keep the Israelites in the desert 40 years(God did),conquer any lands(he never got to enter Canaan), nor did he author judges.Know you''re facts before you spout off about somthing you apparantly know little of

[sgtrds]

Now I know that we have a chimp in office now but hey that was a mistake.

Posted by antoniof123 at 04:03 PM : Dec 14, 2007

RAmen

[antoniof123]

Huckabee''s Views On Women Scrutinized

What else is knew this guy has about as much chance of wining the office of President as a monkey does. Now I know that we have a chimp in office now but hey that was a mistake.

[sgtrds]

As for whats taught in schools now is a real joke,ie homosexuality, individualism,eastern religions (but not God),safe ***,evolution(but not creation),ect.We''''re slipping farther and farther away from truth, justice,and commonsense. It all was predicted

Posted by jankebenz at 03:49 PM : Dec 14, 2007

What''s taught in schools these days is respect for individuals and the lives they lead. The schools do not teach homosexuality (you can''t teach it since it''s not a choice), they teach that if a person is Ga*y then they have a right to be respected for who they are. As for Eastern religions, yes the are taught as part of history or philosophy, as is Christianity. They are not taught as fact. Yes creationism is taught in schools, but not as part of science since it has no basis in science at all. Not even a little. It''s taught as a philosophy, as it should be.

[jankebenz]

I don''''t believe in Santa Claus either, but I suppose that the fact that some children do doesn''''t make him any more real or unreal. Personally if you want to believe in a fairy tale like god or Santa Claus then I have no problem without. Just as long as you don''''t try to force the gospel according to Rudolf the Red Nosed Reindeer to be taught in public schools or force other people to live according to Santa''''s version of naughty and nice.

Posted by SgtRDS at 03:17 PM : Dec 14, 2007

No, I won''t try to force anything on anyone, so long as the opposite is respected.As for whats taught in schools now is a real joke,ie homosexuality, individualism,eastern religions (but not God),safe ***,evolution(but not creation),ect.We''re slipping farther and farther away from truth, justice,and commonsense. It all was predicted

[sgtrds]

"The only law that existed before Moses was what the emperor,pharoh, ruler,or king decreed it to be,and that would change as he saw fit to his wants,or what the next ruler wanted."

Oh and Moses was no different then any other ruler. He kept his people isolated in the Sinai for 40 + years (you didn''t really think they were lost did you?) to build an army of conquest, just like every other despotic ruler before him. He wrote the ten commandments, Genesis, Judges, Numbers, etc. to keep his people in line and make them easier to control, just like every other ruler before him. He''s no different then any other bloody, murderous conqueror of his time or before or after. He was the Middle-East''s Ghengis Khan or Attila the Hun.

[sgtrds]

Baloney! The only law that existed before Moses was what the emperor,pharoh, ruler,or king decreed it to be,and that would change as he saw fit to his wants,or what the next ruler wanted. The ten commandments were for all! to observe forever. Just like you, many have rebelled at these universal laws,and/or God and pay the price.Just look at what a mess society is in.

Posted by jankebenz at 03:24 PM : Dec 14, 2007

Well I can''t enlighten one who refuses to open his eyes to the truth. The plain and simple historical fact is (you do know don''t you that the old testament is not historical fact, right?) is that these laws were very common in the time before Moses. If you don''t like history that''s fine with me though. I mean hey, some people still think the Earth is flat and that the sun and universe revolves around it.