Antioch Road

Obama and McCain Stand Together Against the Federal Marriage Amendment

There was an interesting and revealing exchange on marriage and the Constitution between Rick Warren and Barack Obama and then later between Warren and John McCain during Warren's presidential candidates' forum on August 16. First, Obama:

WARREN: Define marriage.

OBAMA: I believe that marriage is the union between a man and a woman. Now, for me as a Christian -- for me -- for me as a Christian, it is also a sacred union. God's in the mix. But --

WARREN: Would you support a Constitutional Amendment with that definition?

OBAMA: No, I would not.

WARREN: Why not?

OBAMA: Because historically -- because historically, we have not defined marriage in our constitution. It's been a matter of state law. That has been our tradition. I mean, let's break it down. The reason that people think there needs to be a constitutional amendment, some people believe, is because of the concern that -- about same-sex marriage. I am not somebody who promotes same-sex marriage, but I do believe in civil unions. I do believe that we should not -- that for gay partners to want to visit each other in the hospital for the state to say, you know what, that's all right, I don't think in any way inhibits my core beliefs about what marriage are. I think my faith is strong enough and my marriage is strong enough that I can afford those civil rights to others, even if I have a different perspective or different view.

It does not speak well for the University of Chicago Law School (one of the most highly regarded) that Barack Obama was a lecturer there for a dozen years, for this is plainly a very stupid answer, no matter which view one takes of the federal marriage amendment.

I have quoted Obama's entire answer, so I am not being unfair.

Additionally, it will not do for anyone to claim that Obama was hindered by having to provide a quick response. He has undoubtedly previously thought about this question, given how prominent the issue is in American politics.

He really, actually, and without a doubt did tell the audience that he opposed a federal marriage amendment because we have "historically" not defined marriage in our federal constitution. Instead, we have reserved the issue of marriage to the states.

To see how ridiculous an answer this is, all we have to do is apply the stated principle to other issues. If Obama applied his principle consistently, he would have opposed all constitutional amendments. After all, the only reason to amend the Constitution is to include something that has not "historically" been a part of the Constitution.

Applied more specifically, Obama's principle would require him to have opposed the 13th Amendment. Slavery was an issue "historically" left to the discretion of the states.

Unfortunately, John McCain (though not the former law school lecturer like Obama) gave a similar answer:

I strongly support preserving the unique status of marriage between man and woman. And I'm a federalist. I believe that states should make those decisions. In my state, I hope we will make that decision, and other states, they have to recognize the unique status between man and woman. And that doesn't mean that people can't enter into legal agreements. That doesn't mean that they don't have the rights of all citizens. I'm not saying that. I am saying that we should preserve the unique status of marriage between one man and one woman. And if a federal court -- if a federal court decided that my state of Arizona had to observe what the state of Massachusetts decided, then I would favor a constitutional amendment. Until then, I believe the states should make the decisions within their own states.

McCain does at least omit the "historically" part of Obama's answer and leaves open the possibility of supporting the amendment in the future. But, for now, his answer is essentially the same.

Federalism is a system. It is not a principle on which to base decisions.

Meeting Mike Huckabee

I had the chance to shake hands with Mike Huckabee this morning at a campaign event at the Blue Strawberry Coffee Co. in downtown Cedar Rapids. Gov. Huckabee was as engaging, funny, and well spoken as he appears on television. After shaking hands, he spoke on a number of topics for about twenty minutes in front of a crowd of about 25 people. He then stressed the importance of the August 11 Ames straw poll, urging supporters to find and bring other supporters. He noted that if one obscure governor of Arkansas can become president, then so can he.

He then asked for questions on issues and ended up taking two, one from me on health care. I told him that I agreed with his statement that we do not have a health care problem in this country, we have a health problem, and asked him what he envisioned the federal government's role to be in improving citizens' health. He initially explained the basis for his belief that there is a health problem in this country, not a health care problem. He said that we have great health care, but we are too focused on intervention rather than prevention. He noted that much of the problem is chronic disease and that can be attributed to three things: 1) overeating; 2) under-exercising; and 3) smoking. Other politicians do not focus on prevention because it will involve a cultural attitude shift that will not happen in the span of a presidential term. Gov. Huckabee then discussed, in general terms, shifting incentives away from fixing health problems and toward preventive health care and the success he had in Arkansas doing that.

Gov. Huckabee closed the event by noting that God has richly blessed our nation, but that He will not continue to do so if we do not honor Him. He asked us to pray for his campaign.

The Huckabee campaign has a blog post up about the event already. In the picture taken by the campaign, you can (barely) see me sitting down in the back of the far right of the picture.

Book Review: From Hope to Higher Ground: 12 STOPs to Restoring America's Greatness

I have never read a "campaign" book before. I was handed this one for free after having a conversation with Mike Huckabee's Iowa Political Director at the annual NICHE conference. Gov. Huckabee's From Hope to Higher Ground is eminently readable and insightful.

"Hope" refers to Hope, Arkansas, where Gov. Huckabee is from. "Higher Ground" can be a metaphor for many things, including improving ourselves, improving our families, and improving our nation, not to mention to Gov. Huckabee's presidential ambitions. It is a metaphor that works well in this quick 196-page read.

The book gives us 12 "Stops" to restoring America's greatness. The stops refer to things that we must stop doing, which is interesting because the book not only serves to introduce us to Gov. Huckabee's beliefs and political positions, but provides us with sound advice. The book will thus have resonance beyond 2008, as do, I am sure, his earlier titles: Quit Digging Your Grave with a Knife and Fork and Character Makes a Difference.

For instance, we should stop "being cynical," stop "abusing our planet," stop "robbing the taxpayers," stop "the heat and turn on the light for hot issues," stop "the loss of America's prestige at home and abroad," and--my favorite--stop "being a selfish citizen," among others. Gov. Huckabee interweaves into each chapter specific standards we ought to hold our political leaders accountable to and specific principles by which we ought to be governed. He also tells stories from his life, including his ten-and-a-half years as Governor of Arkansas, to illustrate his stops. At the end of each chapter, Gov. Huckabee lists "12 Action Steps" to stop doing whatever the subject of the chapter is. For example, in "STOP the Culture of Chronic Disease," he lists, "Eliminate processed sugar from your diet as much as possible, if not totally;" in "STOP Being Cynical," he lists "have regular conversations with people very unlike you." I appreciate the specificity of the suggestions, which tell us much about the type of person Gov. Huckabee strives to be.

Gov. Huckabee comes across in this book--which he wrote without a ghost writer--exactly like he comes across in debates, speeches, and campaign stops: articulate, humorous, kind, humble, and right on the important issues of the day. If you are interested at all in Gov. Huckabee's campaign, this book will give you good insight into the man. If you are not interested in his campaign, this book will still give you good insight into "restoring America's greatness."

Disclosure: I support, but am not involved in, Gov. Huckabee's campaign for the GOP nomination for president.

Support the Parental Rights Amendment

My wife and I attended the annual Network of Iowa Christian Home Educators conference this past June 8-9. One of the keynote speakers was Michael Farris, founder of the Home School Legal Defense Association and of Patrick Henry College. He is promoting a proposed amendment to the United States Constitution called the Parental Rights Amendment. You can learn more about the amendment, and the need for it, here.

The proposed Amendment expressly sets forth the fundamental right of parents to direct the upbringing of their children. The United States Supreme Court has in the past ruled that there is implied in the Constitution such a right. However, there are justices on the current Supreme Court who would likely overturn those decisions if given the chance. Additionally, "international law" may one day intefere with our parental rights and duties. For instance, the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child has been ratified by just about every country but ours. Courts in other countries have used this treaty to prevent parents from directing the upbringing of their children. A number of the current presidential candidates likely support this treaty. The proposed Amendment would prevent the treaty, if the United States ever ratifies it, from trumping our parental rights and duties.

This amendment will help protect your parental rights whether you send your children to public school or private school or if you homeschool. For instance, there are circuit court of appeals opinions that have held that once you drop your children off at the school house door, the school has absolute control over what your children are taught.

If you are interested in supporting this constitutional amendment, you can sign up to join ParentalRights.org (the dues are $25). Or, you can sign up to be a citizen co-sponsor of the amendment for free, here.

An audience member asked Michael Farris which presidential candidates supported the Parental Rights Amendment. He said that Mike Huckabee and Sam Brownback were strongly leaning toward supporting it. No other candidate had made a commitment.

Pataki Speaks to Cedar Rapids Chamber of Commerce

New York Governor George Pataki, in what I believe is his second visit to Iowa this year, was the keynote speaker at the 87th Annual Luncheon of the Cedar Rapids Area Chamber of Commerce today, which I had the opportunity to attend. Gov. Pataki spoke of his recollections of 9/11 and the immediate government response to those attacks. His only real substantive statement during the speech was a criticism of those who are criticizing the governmental response to Hurricane Katrina now instead of lending a helping hand. He received a round of applause for that statement.

The Gazette reports that Gov. Pataki "deflected questions about his presidential ambitions" at a news conference this morning before the luncheon. "Today is not a political day," the Gazette reports him as saying. "There will come a time for politics, but 2008 is a long ways away."

UPDATE (9/14/2005 1:25am): So what's the deal with this?: "New York Gov. George Pataki said in Iowa Monday [(9/12)] that the government's response to Hurricane Katrina was clearly "inadequate," and he plans to deliver a speech in Cedar Rapids today highlighting his own leadership . . . ." (Hat tip: State 29.)