I saw that interview. I cannot understand why a person who is called to preach and becomes an ordained minister would want to switch to be a politician.

In my theologically educated opinion and also in my educated to be a public school teacher (and certified, too) opinion, men should stay out of trying to control women.

Of course, since Huckabee is a Southern Baptist, he probably agrees that women should have minority status in public life just like the women in the churches. The SBC is anti women preachers now.

Did we see the same interview? I was impressed with the thoughtfulness of both Huckabee and Stewart. It seems we could show some similar thoughtfulness in our responses.

I agree. As I watched It was like the first time I have heard people on different sides discuss this issue without name-calling, self-righteous digs or demonizing other views. In other words, they behaved like grorwn-ups.I

Though I did not see the interview, I offer these comments in defense of Joe:

1. He makes no remarks about the interview itself.

2. In paragraph 1, he expressed his lack of understanding of how an ordained minister would want to switch to that of a politician. All politicians must make compromises; ministers should not.

3. In paragraph 2, he simply states his opinion about the realtionship between men and women (with no direct reference to Huckabee).

4. In paragraph 3, he simply states a fact. The last time that I checked, the SBC was opposed to women preachers.

So, as the lady in the Wendy's commercial asked, "Where's the beef?"

With respect to SisterMarie, my beef is that neither Joe's comment, nor your comment below (about Huckabee's comments re: the flag), addresses the actual blog post. I applaud both Huckabee and Stewart for having a civil debate about an issue that is often the cause of serious conflict, even among friends. I agree with Jim that the interview is excellent proof that we can discuss difficult issues with respect and decency.

To completely ignore the point of the post, and of the interview itself - preferring to attack Huckabee for unrelated reasons - does nothing to improve the debate. Instead, it divides yet again.

I do not agree with many of Huckabee's positions, but I will certainly give him credit for this interview, and for his civility. I think others, the two of you included, could learn something from Huckabee's demeanor that night. Stay on point; stay civil; show respect for the opinions of others, even while disagreeing.

Dear SisterMarie,
With respect to your par. 2, I think ministers are called upon to make compromises every day and do so out of love for their congregants. In my mind, that's what Jesus would do and did. If he didn't compromise, he wouldn't have taken Peter back -- or any of us.
Your paragraph 3 misses the point. Huckabee and Stewart talked briefly about the issue of men controlling women, so Joe is addressing what he thinks is Huckabee's position. In doing so, you and he miss the point of the author of this piece. Both Huckabee or Stewart avoided the cliched responses like Joe's.
My problem with your paragraph 4 is it ignores Joe's categorization of Huckabee based upon which denomination he belongs to. As a former SBC Baptist, I can say that not all SBC Baptists agree with the SBC position on women preachers, so Joe should not jump too quickly to his conclusion regarding Huckabee, even though the SBC as an organization is opposed to women preachers. Moreover, it is a gross exaggeration to suggest that the SBC position on women preachers means that Huckabee or any other Baptist would suggest that women "should have minority status in public life."

My initial post was in response to several comments that took Joe took task and was intended to point out that nothing that he wrote was false. And it was not necessarily challenging the SBC's right to hold to those views. It's just that when you leave the church arena and enter politics, you might be called to account for the views that your church has adopted. I was a senior in high school when John Kennedy was repeatedly queried by members of the SBC as to what influence the Pope would have if he were elected. And as late as last year, Obama was forced to respond as to how his views might differ from those of his pastor. If Huckabee is serious about mounting another campaign in 2012, he may need to explain how his views of women's equality differs from those of his denomination - especially since he has done more than simply attend the church. In all fairness to the SBC, I know very few preachers who would tell anyone what they could do with the pole. For clarification, below is a statement of the SBC:

While both men and women are gifted for service in the church, the office of pastor is limited to men as qualified by Scripture.
– Article VI. The Church.
By explicitly defining the pastoral office as the exclusive domain of males, the 2000 BF&M provision becomes the SBC's first-ever official position against women pastors.
Autonomous local congregations are not required to adopt male-only pastors as their theological position. Neither the BF&M nor the SBC provides any mechanism to trigger automatic expulsion of congregations that adopt practices or theology contrary to the BF&M. However, going against the SBC's official gender protocol that SBC defends on biblical grounds opens a local Baptist congregation to severe criticism and even further penalties. Some SBC churches that have hired a woman as pastor have been excluded from fellowship and membership in their local associations of Baptist churches. Fewer such expulsions have taken place within annual meetings of state conventions.[40]
While this language is new to BF&M, it does not represent an innovation in Southern Baptist thought. At the time the Baptist Faith and Message was revised in 2000, only .08% of all SBC churches were pastored by women. The BF&M gender restrictions inherently discourage any increase in that percentage.[41] A woman's role in ministry was one of the issues causing the Cooperative Baptist Fellowship (CBF) to break from the SBC.[42]

There is a scripture somewhat related to Mike Huckabee and his leaving the ministry as a pastor.

Luke 9:62 NIV - Jesus replied, "No one who puts his hand to the plow and looks back is fit for service in the kingdom of God."

The "plow" here is a metaphor for following Jesus and doing what he has called you to do. If Huckabee felt that God through the power of the Holy Spirit called him to he ministry and to be a pastor and he left it for politics, he "looked back" to do worldly things.

For those who might not remember Governor Huckabee's comments in defense of flying the confederate flag in South Carolina, here is what he said:

"You don't like people from outside the state coming in and telling you what to do with your flag. In fact, if somebody came to Arkansas and told us what to do with our flag, we'd tell 'em what to do with the pole; that's what we'd do."

Some Baptist preacher.

That was one of the most hyppocritical things I have heard, as he fiercely criticized Massachussetts for legalizing gay marriage. Can't tell states what to do with their flags, but you sure can tell 'em what to do with their fags...I digress...However, I don't think that helps out the point of the issue at hand. There are some things that I abhor in what I've seen in Huckabee the politician, and other things that I simply find quite charming. The discussion that he had on abortion with John Stewart was one of the latter. I think that we could all learn a lesson from the approach to their conversation.

My added (sort of off topic comments) were related to Mr. Huckabee himself.

Jon Stewart is a Jew by inheritance; but, he doesn't speak like a person who ought to be a Jew in the spiritual sense.

About all the "interview" accomplished is that the expression "we can agree to disagree."

The Southern Baptist Convention (the denominational name) keeps getting more and more right-wing fundamentalist and more like Jerry Falwell's version of Baptist.

Once again.
Two men trying to understand
something they
can't actually do or experience
themselves.

Would you same the same of Rev. Jesse Jackson?

Mscynthia-- Why so dismissive? No, men can't carry children in the womb but they do participate in their creation, and (ideally at least) in their growth in "wisdom and age and grace." And I'd sure rather they be trying to understand what they cannot do than have them dismiss it as unimportant or make judgments about it without even an attempt at understanding. I don't think that the discussion on abortion in this country would be improved by excluding all men from it. Our female ability to nourish and sustain life within our bodies does not make us wiser or better people all by itself. It may give us a different perspective and I believe that perspective is important, but our perspective alone is not all that is important.

I thought the discussion was refreshing in the humility of both gentlemen and I think that credit ought to be given them where it is due. I hope to see many more discussions between many more men and women on this issue and I pray that they are all conducted with such grace and forbearance.

For one, I was impressed by the discussion between Stewert and Huckabee. Let me ask a question. What would those who seek to outlaw abortions like the world to look like after this change had taken place? Merely changing the laws will not solve the problem. Beyond preventing pregnancies, what would make it better for women to have their babies and raise them, or give them to another family if they can not? Where can we jump past the "legal" question, and make real progress toward good options for women so they don't feel the need to have an abortion? I think this is where common ground can be found.