Katherine Harris: God Didn't Want Secular U.S.

NewsMax ^ | 27 August 2006

[Aussie Dasher]

U.S. Rep. Katherine Harris told a religious journal that separation of church and state is "a lie" and God and the nation's founding fathers did not intend the country be "a nation of secular laws."

The Florida Republican candidate for U.S. Senate also said that if Christians are not elected, politicians will "legislate sin," including abortion and gay marriage.

Harris made the comments - which she clarified Saturday - in the Florida Baptist Witness, the weekly journal of the Florida Baptist State Convention, which interviewed political candidates and asked them about religion and their positions on issues.

Separation of church and state is "a lie we have been told," Harris said in the interview, published Thursday, saying separating religion and politics is "wrong because God is the one who chooses our rulers."

"If you're not electing Christians, then in essence you are going to legislate sin," Harris said.

Her comments drew criticism, including some from fellow Republicans who called them offensive and not representative of the party.

Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz, D-Fla., who is Jewish, told the Orlando Sentinel that she was "disgusted" by the comments.

Harris' campaign released a statement Saturday saying she had been "speaking to a Christian audience, addressing a common misperception that people of faith should not be actively involved in government."

The comments reflected "her deep grounding in Judeo-Christian values," the statement said, adding that Harris had previously supported pro-Israel legislation and legislation recognizing the Holocaust.

Harris' opponents in the GOP primary also gave interviews to the Florida Baptist Witness but made more general statements on their faith.

Harris, 49, faced widespread criticism for her role overseeing the 2000 presidential recount as Florida's secretary of state.

State GOP leaders - including Gov. Jeb Bush - don't think she can win against Democratic Sen. Bill Nelson in November. Fundraising has lagged, frustrated campaign workers have defected in droves and the issues have been overshadowed by news of her dealings with a corrupt defense contractor who gave her $32,000 in illegal campaign contributions.

[4Runner]

No, no, no. All the Barbary Treaty is saying is that the U.S. will continue to trade and do business with these nations despite their following of and adherence to an errant sect. That doesn't prove secularism. If you read St. Augustine or St. Thomas Acquinas, they address the need for Christians to act pragmatically in the world where not only God but also the devil entwines itself regularly and prominently in human affairs. The point being, according to these theologians, that God expects us to have sufficient knowledge and spirituality to know the damned difference and to act--in events where it is necessary for us to do so--appropriately. That is the problem with atheism. It doesn't know the difference between good and evil. It treats God and Devil the same way.

[ChessExpert]

Thanks for the many quotes from Madison. They are very valuable.

Yet it seems to me that one must make some effort to see these words in context of the times. When Madison wrote, religion was not excluded from the public affairs, for example, the schools. This suggests to me that words that had limited extent then have been given more emphasis and power today. We did not have public schools through twelfth grade then and, in general, the public sphere has grown. So banishing religion from the public sphere means more today than it would have in Madison's time, even if that had been the practice, which it was not.

[rmlew]

It would help if you read the Constitution and understood the men who wrote it.
Even the less religious expected a religious oriented society.
Virtually every state had an organised church, protected by the First Ammendment.

[Dave S]

Deny the Creator, and deny your Natural Rights. It's really very simple.

Where is that in the constitution? I would be very interested in reading it. I bet you cant even post a biblical quotation to support that piece of trash you just made up.

[BillyBoy]

>> Bigotry has nothing to do with it. So for example Jews, Orthodox Greeks, Russian Orthodox, Roman Catholic, Baptist, Episcopalian, all fit the definition of Christian <<

Jews fit the definition of Christian?? News to me. Ask any devout Jew if Christ is their savior and they'll tell you NO. They're still waiting for the "messiah". Jews, by definition, are NOT Christian. Christianity was started by a Jew but anyone who kept the Jewish faith "as is" did not follow him. Calling a Jew is a Christian is like saying Baptists are Muslims.

Note that Katherine Harris did not say we have to elect people with "Judeo-Christian values". She said specify that ONLY Christians should be elected and others need not apply. If she "meant" to say "Judeo-Christian values", then she should come out and clarify her remarks to include non-Christians.

FYI, I still wouldn't agree with it, since I see nothing wrong with electing Buddhists, Sikhs, Shintos, etc., who share my views on the issues.

[Non-Sequitur]

It would help if you read the Constitution and understood the men who wrote it.

I have read it, including Article VI. Have you?

[Dave S]

Have none of you heard of the "Judeo-Christian ethic"? It is what unites Jews and Christians. It is what they share from Abraham. Does this frighten you?

If Harris had said Judeo-Christian, I might have given her a pass but she didnt. And dont give me that crap about people often use Christian for Judeo Christian. Maybe the Christian Identity kooks or other nut cases but few people that I know. As far as the jews and Christians sharing the same tradition from Abraham, you left out out the Muslims. The Old Testament is part of the Koran and Jesus is considered a prophet. I dont hear Harris calling it the Islamic tradition.

[Dave S]

Methinks a lot of people on this thread need to study some metaphysics

Me thinks you should spend your time studying the Constitution and not metaphysics. I dont know that the Knights Templar are going to help you in your understanding of the US constitutional system.

[hoosierham]

Katherine Harris just insured her loss.

She is correct there is no sperartion of church and state other than the requirement of no official church by the Congress. States were not forbidden to recognize official churches until the expansion of federal over states rights following the WBTS. The irony is that by fighting for ,or at least under,the baner of "states rights" the Confederates gave the Federalists another excuse to destroy those rights. Conservatives may not have flaws; that is only tolerated in liberals.

[Dave S]

This strawman "It says absolutely nothing about the United States being officially Christian" proves my point succinctly. Any newbie Constitutionalist knows that. You're dismissed. Don't bother me with your nonsense any longer.

So lose the argument, change the debate and then flee. Seems an amused spectator is a coward not willing to standup for his foolish beliefs. Now go back to Sunday School little man before I give you a spanking.

[Dave S]

You are still endowed with that inalienable right, whichever it may be, because not even YOU, the possessor, has the power to dispose of that right. That is powerful stuff.

Good luck on getting the courts to back you up on any claim you make based under inalienable rights given you by God. ROFWL.

[Dave S]

You know, I'd argue with you, but it's not worth it. If you're so far gone that you think that the Constitution doesn't apply to people not like you, then there really isn't any help for you at all.

Dont worry about him. He's saved, dont you know. He dont need no stinkin constitution. (Sarcasm intended)

[A. Pole]

Congregational church was the official established church of Massachusetts well into XIX century. As many Congregationalists turned liberal and then secular they carried their Puritan zeal into todays civil religion.

[4Runner]

You have cut off my statement to fit your response. Previous posters have addressed the entire statement as it was written.

I specifically stated the grouping was Judeo-Christian, not just Christian, for the reason that there is a "terrain of fraternal encounter" between Jews and Christians. That terrain is known as the Judeo-Christian ethic. Many tenets and rules for behavior are shared by Judaism and Christianity. Neither countenances atheism.
It is not just about the "Messiah".

[curiosity]

"If you're not electing Christians, then in essence you are going to legislate sin," Harris said.

This has got to be one of the stupidest statements I have heard in a long time, and I'm a Christian.

Christians are not incapable of sin, and there are non-Christians capable of discerning the natural law. That's the beauty of natural law: it can be known without the aid of revelation.

The fundie influence over our party must be turned back, or we're going to end up alienating the 70-80% of the non-fundie population.

[4Runner]

You are in over your head. I did not say that God wrote the Constitution. Are you mad? The creator endows the right--the U.S. Constitution guarantees the inalienability. You need background. Try the Magna Carta for starters. No U.S. court can override the concept of inalienability. Lesson over.

[an amused spectator]

I have it right here. What part do you need help with?

So, if you possess copies of the General and Special Theories of Relativity, you implicitly understand them?

Good grief, man.

[BillyBoy]

>> You have cut off my statement to fit your response. Previous posters have addressed the entire statement as it was written. I specifically stated the grouping was Judeo-Christian, not just Christian <<

You have altered Harris' own statement to fit your spin.

Harris didn't say:

"If you're not electing people with a Judeo-Christian ethic, you're going to legislate sin"

She said:

"If you're not electing Christians, you're going to legislate sin"

If she MEANT to say the first version (which I don't agree with anyway), she needs to issue a press release saying so, not talk about how she co-sponcered holocaust memorials.

The phrase "Christian" is not interchangeable with "Judeo-Christian values". If I said "If you're not electing Catholics, you're going to legislate sin", you wouldn't just ASSUME I was also including Protestants who share simular "values" to Catholics.

[rmlew]

I presume that you are refering to Article VI, Section 3:

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.

This protects people of all denominations, but does not change the makeup of the people who founded this country or the social basis they considered necessary for its survival, or even the fact that most states did have organized churches.

[Luis Gonzalez]

That's a full-blown retreat in the face of Madison's quotes on the intent of the Founders to maintain a wall of separation between religion and goverment.