Do you all remember Katherine Harris, the Secretary of State of Florida who certified George W. Bush as the winner of the 2000 Presidential Election? Well, she's a Congresswoman now and she's making waves yet again.
Quote:
Katherine Harris: Separation Of Church And State Is A 'Lie'
POSTED: 1:43 pm EDT August 27, 2006
MIAMI -- U.S. Rep. Katherine Harris, R-Fla, is under fire once again for controversial comments about the separation of church and state.
She told a periodical that such a separation is a "lie" because, as she put it, "God is the one who chooses our rulers."
Harris said God and the nation's founding fathers did not intend the country be "a nation of secular laws."
The Republican candidate for the U.S. Senate also said that, if Christians are not elected to political office, politicians will "legislate sin." She cited abortion and gay marriage as two examples.
"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. They can legislate sin. They can say that abortion is alright. They can vote to sustain gay marriage. And that will take western civilization, indeed other nations because people look to our country as one nation as under God and whenever we legislate sin 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."
The comments have drawn criticism in recent days from Democrats and Republicans.
The comments were in the Florida Baptist Witness, the weekly journal of the Florida Baptist State Convention. The publication interviewed political candidates, asking them questions about religion and their positions on issues.
The interview also included Harris' reasons for running and response to issues like stem cell research, the Terri Schiavo case and other topics.
Harris has been trailing in recent polls and has also faced the resignations of campaign staff members.
File this under "Scary People Who Should Not Be Voted Into Office."
Deborah
I was glad to read the last sentence of the article.
André in Zuid-Afrika
Quote:
"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. They can legislate sin. They can say that abortion is alright. They can vote to sustain gay marriage. And that will take western civilization, indeed other nations because people look to our country as one nation as under God and whenever we legislate sin 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."
That's just shit! :? :shock: That's "Christianity" according to her. She sounds like our African Christian Democratic Party (which thankfully only has about two percent support) who believe they're the only real Christians, and therefore have the right to decide for all of us. :x
Quote:
File this under "Scary People Who Should Not Be Voted Into Office."
Agree with that!
Joanne
I can hardly wait until mid-term elections... :x This broad'll be out like stone washed denim.
Walker
What a caricature! And she's a Congresswoman?! Damn... Much shall one hear before one's ears fall off!
greg in noord-frankrijk
Why such medievally religious people are electable at all ??? :shock:
KSa
greg in noordfrankrijk wrote:
Why such medievally religious people are electable at all ??? :shock:
:) DEMOCRACY :)
Elaine
greg in noordfrankrijk wrote:
Why such medievally religious people are electable at all ??? :shock:
Because medievally religious people vote for them. :? This country is full of them. :(
Joanne
Elaine wrote:
greg in noordfrankrijk wrote:
Why such medievally religious people are electable at all ??? :shock:
Because medievally religious people vote for them. :? This country is full of them. :(
...And because it's Florida. Florida is a weird place. If it wasn't, Carl Hiaasen's books wouldn't be so good ;)
Ugh. If this trash wins the Senatorial seat, we're going to have to pay her salary out of our federal taxes :? Come on, Florida, do something sane, for once...
greg in noord-frankrijk
KSa wrote:
greg in noordfrankrijk wrote:
Why such medievally religious people are electable at all ??? :shock:
:) DEMOCRACY :)
Democracy or democrature or demagoguery ? :lol:
KSa
Elaine wrote:
greg in noordfrankrijk wrote:
Why such medievally religious people are electable at all ??? :shock:
Because medievally religious people vote for them. :? This country is full of them. :(
I had a dream that she gonna be the next president... :P
Loic
I am sure she's not as odious as she sounds. The only serious character defect in her brand of religiosity is that she probably bases her perception of religion on teachings of her specific church and lacks catholicity in acceptance by believers from other groups as well as non Christians.
Benjamin [inactive]
loic wrote:
I am sure she's not as odious as she sounds. The only serious character defect in her brand of religiosity is that she probably bases her perception of religion on teachings of her specific church and lacks catholicity in acceptance by believers from other groups as well as non Christians.
Agreed totally. I believe that it is this unfortunate attitude from some Christians which has, at least in part, led to the current situation in my church, where only about half of us consider ourselves to be Christians now (and in our sister church in the US, it's only about 10%). I'm not really sure whether I see myself as a Christian or not; I'm not sure if I think it's that important either.
Loic
That's a little funny, Benjamin. I suppose this identity crisis can be easily resolved if one pauses to consider that a loose definition of a Christian is easily someone who accepts Jesus Christ as his Lord and Saviour. If your church adheres to these basic tenets, you would be as Christian as ancient outposts such as the Orthodox Church in Ethiopia or the Coptic ones in the Middle East.
I am sure even the heretical Church of the Latter-Day Saints consider themselves as Christians, even if others beg to disagree.
Therein lies the fundamental problem of blurring the boundaries between church and state - no church can fully represent the aspirations of the electorate. For example, I am against abortion and yes, my convictions are based primarily on religious teachings. However, I would not like any politician, well-meaning he or she may be, to push for a ban on abortion on purely religious grounds. Any reasons offered must appeal to the rational side of our character and they must obviously be founded on scientific evidence e.g. foetuses showing signs of human behaviour even in the first trimester.
However, there would be countries with a long tradition of the church playing a supporting if not a symbolic role to the state. This is acceptable as long as far as local traditions and customs are concerned. So the Thai King is revered as the patron of Theradava Buddhism, the dominant vehicle for enlightenment in South-East Asia. So the Church of England still maintains some trappings of being a state institution.
I do not see anything wrong with it as long as these institutions do not abuse their exhalted positions for selfish gains e.g. using religion as a criterion to restrict people from entering parliament.
Porthos
:) DEMOCRACY :)[/quote]
The United States is not a democracy. It is a constitutional federal republic. You must recognize the difference. I prefer a democracy, and I think with modern communications like the internet, a fully functioning democracy is feasible. Under the present situation, powerful elite or corporate interests dictate government policy, and the politicians merely serve the designs of those who got them elected, while feeding the masses tid-bits of the satisfactory policies which they promised. But, true democracy will never exist, and the founding fathers did not intend on creating one in the first place. They feared so called "mob-rule". Perhaps this was due to the fact that they were American aristocratic landlords.
