Posted on 08/25/2006 7:47:48 PM PDT by Alex Murphy
ORLANDO, Fla. _Rep. Katherine Harris said this week that God did not intend for the United States to be a "nation of secular laws" and that a failure to elect Christians to political office will allow lawmaking bodies to "legislate sin."
The remarks, published in the weekly journal of the Florida Baptist State Convention, unleashed a torrent of criticism from political and religious officials.
Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz, D-Fla., said she was "disgusted" by the comments "and deeply disappointed in Rep. Harris personally."
Harris, Wasserman Schultz said, "clearly shows that she does not deserve to be a Representative . . ."
State Rep. Irv Slosberg, D-Boca Raton, demanded an apology, saying the statements were "outrageous, even by her standards.
"What is going through this woman's mind?" said Slosberg. "We do not live in a theocracy."
The criticism was not limited to Democrats.
Ruby Brooks, a veteran Tampa Bay Republican activist, said Harris' remarks "were offensive to me as a Christian and a Republican."
"To me, it's the height of hubris," said Brooks, a former Largo Republican Club president and former member of the Pinellas County Republican Executive Committee.
And Jillian Hasner, executive director of the Republican Jewish Coalition, said: "I don't think it's representative of the Republican Party at all. Our party is much bigger and better than Katherine Harris is trying to make it."
The fallout follows an interview published in the Florida Baptist Witness, the weekly journal of the Florida Baptist State Convention. Witness editors interviewed candidates for office asking them to describe their faith and positions on certain issues.
Harris said her religious beliefs "animate" everything she does, including her votes in Congress.
She then warned voters that if they do not send Christians to office, they risk creating a government that is doomed to fail.
"If you are not electing Christians, tried and true, under public scrutiny and pressure, if you're not electing Christians, then in essence you are going to legislate sin," she told interviewers, citing abortion and gay marriage as two examples of that sin.
"Whenever we legislate sin," she said, "and we say abortion is permissible and we say gay unions are permissible, then average citizens who are not Christians, because they don't know better, we are leading them astray and it's wrong . . ."
Harris also said the separation of church and state is a "lie we have been told" to keep religious people out of politics.
In reality, she said, "we have to have the faithful in government" because that is God's will. Separating religion and politics is "so wrong because God is the one who chooses our rulers," she said.
"And if we are the ones not actively involved in electing those godly men and women," then "we're going to have a nation of secular laws. That's not what our founding fathers intended and that's (sic) certainly isn't what God intended."
Harris campaign spokesman Jennifer Marks would not say what alternative to "a nation of secular laws" Harris would support. She would not answer questions about the Harris interview and, instead, released a two-sentence statement.
"Congresswoman Harris encourages Americans from all walks of life and faith to participate in our government," it stated. "She continues to be an unwavering advocate of religious rights and freedoms."
The notion that non-Christians "don't know better," or are less suited to govern disturbed Rabbi Rick Sherwin, president of the Greater Orlando Board of Rabbis.
"Anybody who claims to have a monopoly on God," he said, "doesn't understand the strength of America."
Sherwin and others also said Harris appeared to be voicing support for a religious state when she said God and the founding fathers did not intend the United States to be a "nation of secular laws."
The alternative, they said, would be a nation of religious laws.
"She's talking about a theocracy," said Sherwin. "And that's exactly opposite of what this country is based on." A clause in the First Amendment prohibits the establishment of a state religion.
Ahmed Bedier, the Central Florida Director of the Council on American Islamic Relations, said he was "appalled that a person who's been in politics this long would hold such extreme views."
Bedier said most Christians would find such comments "shameful."
Harris has always professed a deep Christian faith and long been popular with Christian conservative voters.
In the Senate primary race, she has heavily courted that voting bloc, counting on them to put her into the general election against Democratic Sen. Bill Nelson.
But publicly, she rarely expresses such a fervent evangelical perspective.
University of Virginia political analyst Larry Sabato said the comments will appeal to Christian fundamentalists who typically turn out for Republican primaries.
But he said the strong evangelical tone could alienate non-Christians and more moderate Republicans who had been thinking of supporting Harris.
"It's insane," he said. "But it's not out of character for Katherine Harris."
Harris, a Republican from Longboat Key, is running against Orlando attorney Will McBride, retired Adm. LeRoy Collins and developer Peter Monroe in the GOP Senate primary.
McBride and Collins also did interviews with Florida Baptist Witness. Both said faith is an important part of their lives, but Harris' responses most directly tie her role as a policy maker to her religious beliefs.
Ruby Brooks, the Tampa area GOP activist, said such religious "arrogance" only damages the party.
"This notion that you've been chosen or anointed, it's offensive," said Brooks. "We hurt our cause with that more than we help it."
"Theologically speaking, I don't see the United States mentioned in the Bible. The people of Bible had no knowledge of this land. The only prophetic utterances that deal with it are Genesis 49:22-26 and John 10:16, which are often cited by Mormons as a link to the Book of Mormon peoples. Even those scriptures only refer to the New World in general, not the United States specifically.
The Founders'intent was to create a climate of freedom where moral people could live according to the dictates of their conscience. If the people abuse freedom and abandon morality, then it's the whole "sow the wind, reap the whirlwind" thing. The problems with today is not that we don't have righteous laws; the problem is that people don't follow righteousness.
And you could set up a "LOL" macro to automate your postings, with no significant loss of substance.
Don't get all down-in-the-dumps on me, now. Look on the positive side - your briefs are surely the briefest in the history of briefing. One original sentence. Perhaps a footnote if you're feeling especially loquacious. That's gotta be worth something, right? At the very least, you've probably gone from hourly billing to flat-rate work, no?
Forced virtue is not virtue at all. And from a Jewish perspective, Christians are polytheists, and thus it is supremely ironic for you to insinuate that I am a pagan.
Anyway, if you care to familiarize yourself with the Bill of Rights, you might notice a prohibition on the establishment of religion by the government. So your opinion of the Founding Fathers' intent is 180 degrees off the mark; their intent was the precise opposite of what you state. America was intended to be a nation of secular laws for a religious people, not religious laws for a secular people. The reason for this is that they recognized, as you would be well to, that a virtue coerced is not a virtue at all.
Don't mumble.
Well, as fun as this has been, let me close by reminding you that I'm not laughing with you when I type "LOL".
That being said, you can have the last word - I assume it'll be just a single word, yes?
It's official. She's nuts.
Then you're going to have to get Article VI, Clause 3 taken out of the Constitution: "The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the Members of the several State Legislatures, and all executive and judicial Officers, both of the United States and of the several States, shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation, to support this Constitution; but no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States."
That horse isn't kneeling! Must be one of the humanist, secular horses! Probably gay, too!
She right stupid. Too bad your are going who will lead us down the wrong path. Why don't you join the Godless DEMS?
George Washington is.
You can be a horse.
It's because of horses like that -- elitest, godless metrosexual, liberal horse -- that the troops had such a hard time at Valley Forge!
Madison also said, "Who is it who cannot see that the same who would consecrate Christianity above all other religions would then have to consecrate a particular sect of Christians above all other sects?"
If you want horses for leaders, vote accordingly.
No, she's dead wrong, any anyone with a passing familiarity with the First Amendment would know that.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.