She can beat Nelson. The polls are bogus. Nelson's approval rating is not that high & when she gets done informing Floridians that he's been doing nothing for 6 years but voting with the liberals.....she will be elected!
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."
It's like it is being run by people who want to lose.
No viable candidate wants to be a speed bump. So you put up a disposable candidate. She's basically Kleenex.
I think she's just so desperate that she feels she's gotta pull out all the stops.
Exactly -- it is all about looks because it certainly cannot be adoration of her brainpower!
Her campaign is terrible. A good friend of mine cannot believe anyone on here is still defending her! My only hope is that someone will come up and beat her in the primary!
I hope that, too. But with Leroy Collins, Jr. being pro-abort and Will McBride supporting open borders, all that leaves is the completely unknown Peter Monroe.
"It's like it is being run by people who want to lose."
That's what common sense Freepers have been thinking. If I were conspiracy-minded, I would swear that she was being mind-controlled by the left nto deliberately losing this race.
Did you catch this one?
This is classic "stoopid party," priceless
Courts didn't "make up" the law.
Time to refute your sourceless falsehood again.
"As we have seen the basis of Common Law was custom. The itinerant justices set out by William the Conqueror examined the different local practises of dealing with disputes and crime, filtered our the less practical and reasonable ones, and ended up with a set of laws which were to be applied uniformly throughout the country."
That's sorta what I already said.
(and deciding which local custom, practices, etc., to use and not to use).
Arbitrarily? Source, please.
who were these itinerant justices??? Why, judges of the court set forth by the Crown.
and what do you call the process these judges of the court were engaged in whereby they examined, filtered, the customs and practices as to ended up with laws to be applied??? Why, they were making up laws via this process.
Arbitrarily? Source, please.
Did the orignal poster say "arbitrarily" anywhere in his reply? Or did you just arbitrarily altered someone else's reply?
To use your own quote again "As we have seen the basis of Common Law was custom. The itinerant justices set out by William the Conqueror examined the different local practises of dealing with disputes and crime, filtered our the less practical and reasonable ones , and ended up with a set of laws which were to be applied uniformly throughout the country."
filtered our the less practical and reasonable ones certainly sounds like (and deciding which local custom, practices, etc., to use and not to use).
Just the fundies who want to eject all non-Christians, especially those who don't believe in a creator like tham there hindooos, boodists, and maybe even them joooos, since they don't belong in a Christian Nation.
Maybe she can guarantee the Bucs a playoff spot...
I tell you what....
For someone whose campaign and associated harpies seem to LOVE TO rail against the media for causing all of her problems, she certainly knows how to give them more ammo to use against her.
I'm for someone WINNING against Nelson which Harris can't do. McBride or Collins for me. I'm sort of leaning towards Collins because of the name recognition factor plus his dad actually was a good governor.
She can beat Nelson. The polls are bogus. Nelson's approval rating is not that high & when she gets done informing Floridians that he's been doing nothing for 6 years but voting with the liberals.....she will be elected!
So if Harris will win the primary anyway, then it doesn't hurt to vote for Collins, right?
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.