#NCSEN Mark Harris OK with “path to legal status” for illegals
Immigration has become quite a flashpoint in American politics. It’s turned Republicans against each other — some using code words that basically mean “amnesty,” others demanding that the government simply enforce the laws on the books.
Charlotte pastor, and Republican US Senate candidate, Mark Harris got entangled in the issue thanks to a 2011 resolution drafted by the Southern Baptist Convention:
The congregation joins the choir at First Baptist Church in Uptown Charlotte singing, “God of wonders beyond our galaxy…”
It’s Sunday morning worship.
After service Pastor Mark Harris says he agrees with the Southern Baptist Convention and it’s time to talk about illegal immigration, “There needs to be a plan put in effect where we can get out of the situation we’re in.”
The situation is up to 15 Million undocumented immigrants in the country and more coming every day.
The SBC has drafted a resolution supporting a path to legal status for undocumented immigrants, allowing them to make restitution and move toward citizenship.
Pastor Harris stresses restitution is not the same as amnesty.
Across town at a Father’s Day celebration, a man who admits he’s undocumented, says the resolution is music to his ears, “It would be the greatest thing in the world.”
Enrique has been in the states for 12 years. He works, goes to church and provides for his family.
He says all he wants is a chance, “(To) prove that we are a people who loves this country too.”
Harris and the Baptist Convention came under some criticism at the time from a prominent Mecklenburg GOP leader:
But Mecklenburg County Commissioner and Former Sheriff Jim Pendergraph says no way, “We don’t reward law breakers.”
Pendergraph says the legal process is the only way to control immigration and to keep the country from being overwhelmed.
He estimates Charlotte-Mecklenburg Schools spend up to $100 Million per year educating the children of illegal immigrants.
Pendergraph says, “I think it’s a slap in the face to people who have done it the right way.”
Back at First Baptist, Pastor Harris says it’s time to start the conversation and find a middle ground.
He says, “It’s not possible or feasible for either of the two extremes of deportation or amnesty.”
The SBC resolution also calls for tighter boarder security and holding businesses accountable for hiring practices.
[…]
I will not vote for any candidate who approves of ‘legalizing’ illegal aliens. These GOP establishment candidates will some day either wake up, smell the coffee and strictly enforce our immigration laws or be out on their bums for their amnesty approach to illegal immigration. WE the people are fed up!
Spot on. I had been keeping an open mind on Harris, but with this defection on an issue of major importance, he will certainly not get my vote in the primary, and I don’t even know if I could hold my nose enough if he made it to the general election. At best, he is flip flopping on this issue, and it raises real questions of whether he could be trusted on key policy issues.
Just being a Southern Baptist, I’m appalled. No way would I support Harris’ viewpoint and the SBC, the Latter Day Saints, and the Catholic bishops need to butt out. Amnesty threatens the well-being of people living honestly in this country and immigrants legally making their home here, and these ignorant clerics will never understand that.
A country unable, or unwilling, to defend its borders, will soon not be a country. Harris’ perspective on the legalizing the law breaking illegal alien is a reflection of many things, nonetheleast of which is his Baptist faith. All these sorts of politicians want to do the Lord’s work with the public purse.
I liked Eisenhower’s approach in Operation Wetback in the 50’s. Find ’em, round ’em up and deport ’em! I will not vote for Harris.
Greg Brannon is the only TRUE conservative in the NC republican primary US Senate race!
There should be no path or process to reward illegal aliens with citizenship. I oppose this position which has also been presented by Rand Paul. “He wants to carve a compromise immigration plan with an “eventual path” to citizenship for illegal immigrants, a proposal he believes could be palatable to conservatives.” http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1112/83737.html#ixzz2C8bxV9M5
Ole liberal Brantley practicing his Alinsky style deception again. Do your research voters. Sprinkle anything with a little truth and it still is not the truth. Here is Mark Harris’ view and stance on Immigration: “Secure and protect our borders and enforce the immigration laws currently on the books. Illegal immigration is threatening the very fabric of our nation.
Washington politicians on both sides of the aisle fail to grasp just how serious this problem is and its ultimate cost to our society. We have to start by securing our borders and denying amnesty to anyone who comes illegally to our country. Our immigration system is broken. But, when fixing one of the most important issues facing our nation, we must not repeat the mistakes of the past. We are a nation of immigrants and we will welcome those who want to work hard and live the American Dream, but we must do so with respect for the rule of law and within our national tradition of legal fairness. Illegal immigrants crossing into America without our knowledge present a serious threat to our national security.” This post is not an endorsement for or against Mark Harris, his staff, or his supporters. Shame on you again Brantley!!!
It looks like Brant did his research and discovered the real Mark Harris, before the spin doctors told him what to say to try to get elected. Voters should not trust as election year flip flop like Harris has made to suddenly switch to an anti-amnesty position.
Harris being soft on illegal immigration seems to come from being a bleeding heart, something we do not need in politics. Tilli$ being soft on illegal immigration, on the other hand, comes from being corrupt and selling out to the dollars of Big Ag and other special interests, again something we do not need in politics.
*sigh of exasperation.* Ok, where to begin?
First, Isley, get my name right. You can obtain the correct spelling by looking below the headline for each post on this site.
Second, you call me a liberal while your cohort Kevin says I am a libertarian. Those are TWO DIFFERENT things. I know things can get confusing — you know, with both words starting with L-I-B-E-R.
Lefties — and Tillis supporters — have labeled me a Tea Partier. Why don’t all of you put your heads together and get your spin straight?
Third, are you really this unfamiliar with how blogs work? Most of this post is a quote from an interview the Charlotte Fox affiliate did with Harris in 2011. If you click on the link above the quote, you will be taken to a transcript of the interview posted on Fox News Latino’s web site. It’s not my wording. It’s Fox’s account of their interview with Harris in 2011.
Alinskyite? Really? I think you are merely regurgitating a word you heard Glenn Beck say. That term is actually more appropriate for your cohort Kevin and his two female accomplices (the ones with the multiple Twitter aliases).
One of the reasons I left the Southern Baptist Church and went to another church.
\THIS IS USUAL SPIN BY THE HAYMAKER LIBERTARIAN NEWSPAPER SUPPORTING LIBERTARIAN CANDIDATE IN REPUB CLOTING …GREG BRANNON
I have never met Brant personally, but he comes across as a traditional Jesse Helms conservative more than a libertarian. When it comes to amnesty, it is actually the libertarians who are usually among those wanting to sell out the country to the illegal alien invaders. If Brant were a libertarian, he would not be taking the stance he is taking on amnesty, as his stance is a traditional conservative stance and contrary to the usual libertarian stance.
Brannon is also taking a traditional conservative stance on immigration, while Tilli$ and Harris are taking a liberal Democrat stance. Brannon’s position is consistent with the national Republican platform on immigration while the positions of Harris and Tilli$ are contrary to the platform position. That makes Brannon a much better Republican than either Tilli$ or Harris.
“He says, “It’s not possible or feasible for either of the two extremes of deportation or amnesty.””
That’s always the odd straw man argument people put up to excuse their wanting to rationalize their excusing and rewarding of illegal activity…. as if those are the only two options on the table – they are not.
Oh well, I had kept an open mind about Harris, but he’s now moved clearly onto the “would never receive my support and vote” category. I will give him credit for not trying to be a “too cute” suck up and be all evasive and underhanded on the topic like Tillis has been.
This doesn’t square with his web site stance.
You’re right – your comment prompted my curiosity…
” We have to start by securing our borders and denying amnesty to anyone who comes illegally to our country. Our immigration system is broken. But, when fixing one of the most important issues facing our nation, we must not repeat the mistakes of the past. We are a nation of immigrants and we will welcome those who want to work hard and live the American Dream, but we must do so with respect for the rule of law and within our national tradition of legal fairness. ”
“That” is what his website says…. that sounds good, until you realize that he does indeed support allowing people who’ve willingly broken the rules to pay a little “restitution” and they get to keep their ill-gotten gains and all is forgiven. Sorry… you dont reward the rule breakers by letting them keep what they’ve illegally acquired. That’s not “rule of law” at all…
Tillis does the same thing…talking tough, good enough for bumper stickers and sound bites and speech taglines – until you realize he’s got in his head a very specific definition of “amnesty” that doesnt necessarily correlate with the rhetoric.
So, I suppose I do have to take back somewhat my earlier comment about Harris upfront and not being “too cute” about it. *sigh*
The website was written by spin doctors, Harris’ consultants. The quote Brant found came directly from Harris.
What quote?
The Haymaker is neither “Libertarian”, nor a “news paper”. It is a Conservative blog.
Mark Harris has had 3 years as a leader in a Charlotte Batist Church and the Southern Baptist Convention. to denounce the Southern Baptist Conventions endorsement of a Pathway To Citizenship. I have yet to see any proof that he did that.
His hastily added statement is full of all the Code words for support of Amnesty that most conservatives know to beware of. #PathwayToCitizenship = #Amnesty
This article is interesting because it describes how the ProAmnesty Political Elite are going for the Evangelical Groups to counter the conservatives fight against Amnesty. Who’s running a campaign based on the evangelical vote? Things that make you go hmmm.
http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2014/01/26/Chamber-of-Commerce-Conservatives-the-Problem-in-Amnesty-Battle
Happy Easter everyone. This article is misleading. Just go to Mark Harris’ website. He states clearly what he believes regarding immigration and a path to legalization is not it.
While I am glad to hear that, and hope that it is true, it still concerns me when Harris uses the open-borders catchphrase of ”bringing them out of the shadows”. ANYTHING that allows these interlopers to remain in the US is indeed amnesty. Another catchphrase that signals a politician is less than solid on immigration is to refer to illegal aliens as ”undocumented immigrants”.