"[Some of my opponents] do not want to change the Constitution, but I believe it’s a lot easier to change the constitution than it would be to change the word of the living God, and that’s what we need to do is to amend the Constitution so it’s in God’s standards rather than try to change God’s standards," Huckabee said, referring to the need for a constitutional human life amendment and an amendment defining marriage as between a man and a woman.
As she notes, the thought behind the statement is defensible ("God’s standards" can, for example be conceived as the "laws of nature and nature’s God," which are accessible to all those created in God’s image). But getting there from the statement requires too much explaining. And, as she further notes, there are oodles of plain old political and potential theoretical problems with what he says:
In one sentence he’s just
*ceded the ground to those who would make the Constitution into anything they want (that’s what he’s doing after all);
*agreed with the Left that people who want to stick to the original meaning of the Constitution are elevating it to the level of a holy text;
*made the grounds of the defense of marriage and human life a matter of Revelation rather than reason and natural law;
*and arguably called for theocracy (that’s how it will play in the attack ads should he be the nominee).
If he can’t get past his Southern Baptist roots enough to walk this back to a ground that even non-evangelicals can share, he’s not up to the task of defending his political cause. Stated another way, even if he speaks "the language of Zion" as his first language, he needs to become bilingual, if he wants to be President. Otherwise, he might just be a darn good pastor, even if he only does praise services.
Update: You couldn’t ask for a better succinct statement on the subject than this.