See other Religion Articles
Title: Voters Deciding Whether To Recall Official Over Pledge(refused to say the Pledge of Allegiance before board meetings.)
Source:
denver channel 7
URL Source: http://www.thedenverchannel.com/new ... .html?subid=22100484&qs=1;bp=t
Published: Mar 23, 2005
Author: ap/wire
Post Date: 2005-03-23 11:05:29 by hfrancis
Keywords: Pledge(refused, Allegiance, meetings.)
Views: 392
Comments: 26
TheDenverChannel.com Voters Deciding Whether To Recall Official Over Pledge Estes Park Recall Election Generating Lot Of Interest POSTED: 8:46 am MST March 22, 2005 UPDATED: 9:31 am MST March 22, 2005 A recall election is scheduled in Estes Park Tuesday for a town trustee who has refused to say the Pledge of Allegiance before board meetings. David Habecker sits while others stand for the Pledge of Allegiance. David Habecker, 59, refuses to stand and say the pledge because of the phrase "under God." He said the phrase violates his religious convictions and invites religion into a government function, violating the U.S. Constitution. Those who signed the recall petition said Habecker's position on the pledge should have been disclosed before he ran for public office. "His action as a personal protest is not what we want as a representative. He's taking a personal stand as an elected official," said Richard Clark, who has pushed for the recall. "We the people believe that his actions and his verbage do not represent us as citizens for a responsible government." However, Habecker said it wasn't an issue before because the pledge was just added to the trustees' agenda early last year. The board began reciting the pledge before meetings at the suggestion of Trustee Lori Jeffrey-Clark, calling it a way to show respect for the country during wartime. SURVEY Should a town trustee be recalled because he refuses to stand up and say the Pledge of Allegiance during Town Board meetings? Yes. No. Results | Disclaimer Habecker, who's served on the Town Board for 12 years, said he doesn't oppose the meaning of the pledge, and considers himself a patriot. However, he's also agnostic. "I do not believe that this book, that this God, that this country is under that God. I believe the framers of the Constitution had a separation there," said Habecker. "I'm sad for the community, that there is that much intolerance in our community. But if the people want to have a voice in what's going on, this is their way of doing it." Four candidates are vying to replace Habecker if he's voted out. The election is generating huge interest, with 280 absentee ballots already sent out. Town Clerk Vickie O'Connor said a typical Estes Park election draws about 60 absentee ballots out of 4,000 registered voters. More Information: Town of Estes Park Previous Stories: March 3, 2005: Recall Election Over Pledge Of Allegiance Reinstated February 11, 2005: Town Official Who Won't Recite Pledge Won't Face Recall Yet December 15, 2004: Recall Election Set For Trustee Who Won't Stand For Pledge Copyright 2005 by TheDenverChannel.com. The Associated Press contributed to this report. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed. 
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
Begin Trace Mode for Comment # 18.
#14. To: All (#0)
1. To: Badeye, Cal, Trace21230, medved, Ghost of Quantrill, BrerRabbit, USConservative (#0) Just a he had the right NOT to say the pledge, and the citizens had the right to boot his ass off the council ping ... Magic posted on 2005-03-23 10:50:33 ET Reply Trace -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2. To: Magic (#0) refused to say pledge Good. Throw his ass out. Some people seem to think free speech means freedom from any and all consequences of the speech. Ghost of Quantrill posted on 2005-03-23 11:25:56 ET Reply Trace -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 3. To: Magic (#0) The recall election garnered state and national attention. Habecker, an agnostic, claimed saying the phrase "under God" in the Pledge violated the separation of church and state. That's likely what got him the boot. He made it about religion, not freedom of speech. Homeier, who voted against Habecker, said many residents did not appreciate Habecker using his position on the town board to voice his political views. He's a politician, what else is he supposed to express his views on? Cooking? duckhunter posted on 2005-03-23 11:32:43 ET Reply Trace -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 4. To: duckhunter (#3) He's a politician, what else is he supposed to express his views on? Cooking? Perhaps the town business to which he had been elected in the first place? Just a random thought ... The political version of "shut up and sing". Magic posted on 2005-03-23 11:34:07 ET Reply Trace -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 5. To: duckhunter (#3) politician Serving on a town board is apples and oranges to taking a stand on the pledge of allegiance. Ghost of Quantrill posted on 2005-03-23 11:34:33 ET Reply Trace -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 6. To: Magic (#0) HA HA r-u-n-n o-f-t posted on 2005-03-23 11:39:54 ET (1 image) Reply Trace -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 7. To: Magic (#4) Perhaps the town business to which he had been elected in the first place? Just a random thought ... You know how it is with politicians. They talk so much they just can't help but say something stupid. There are much better arguments to be made against saying the pledge than the "under God" phrase. duckhunter posted on 2005-03-23 11:40:25 ET Reply Trace -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 8. To: Magic (#0) "All the things I was taught as a child about this country, including religious tolerance, liberty and freedom, don't ring true today," he said. Got that right...the only thing paler then the sense of freedom left in this nation is it's sense of right from wrong... Homeier, who voted against Habecker, said many residents did not appreciate Habecker using his position on the town board to voice his political views. What an absolutely scary statement. He was expressing a personal view. war posted on 2005-03-23 11:43:48 ET Reply Trace -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 9. To: war (#8) What an absolutely scary statement. He was expressing a personal view. He can still express it ... no one has stopped him from doing so. He just won't be doing it on city time. Magic posted on 2005-03-23 11:44:51 ET Reply Trace -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 10. To: war (#8) scary statement.....personal view. Let me get this straight. Are you saying his constituents had no right to recall him under the recall provision? What about THEIR right to free expression? Ghost of Quantrill posted on 2005-03-23 11:45:56 ET Reply Trace -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 11. To: Ghost of Quantrill (#10) What seems to me to be the "scary" part on the part of the left is their (until now tolerated) antics are no longer being tolerated. The side which includes Dan Rather, Howard Dean, John Kerry, Hillary Clinton, Ward Churchill and assorted rabble are rightfully concerned their salad days are behind them. Magic posted on 2005-03-23 11:52:20 ET Reply Trace -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 12. To: Ghost of Quantrill (#10) Are you saying his constituents had no right to recall him under the recall provision? What about THEIR right to free expression? Yes they did. That doesn't render their reason benign. war posted on 2005-03-23 12:11:16 ET Reply Trace -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 13. To: war (#12) doesn't render their reason benign Democracy makes no provision for one person's opinion as to whether his co- voters are acting benign or malignant. Ghost of Quantrill posted on 2005-03-23 12:18:19 ET Reply Trace -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 14. To: Magic (#9) He can still express it ... no one has stopped him from doing so. He just won't be doing it on city time. Or more importantly, on the city PAYROLL. USConservative posted on 2005-03-23 12:23:11 ET Reply Trace -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 15. To: Magic (#1) Just a he had the right NOT to say the pledge, and the citizens had the right to boot his ass off the council ping ... Maybe its just me, but if the idiot hadn't outted himself as an idiot, he'd still be in a position to cast votes that affect the community. Glad he did the dumb thing....(grin) Badeye posted on 2005-03-23 12:26:07 ET Reply Trace -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 16. To: Ghost of Quantrill (#13) Democracy makes no provision for one person's opinion as to whether his co- voters are acting benign or malignant. NO...but simple observation does. war posted on 2005-03-23 12:26:54 ET Reply Trace -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 17. To: Magic (#11) What seems to me to be the "scary" part on the part of the left is their (until now tolerated) antics are no longer being tolerated. The side which includes Dan Rather, Howard Dean, John Kerry, Hillary Clinton, Ward Churchill and assorted rabble are rightfully concerned their salad days are behind them. Yep...the implosion does in fact continue...whats the latest with Chief Sitting Bulls**t, btw? Badeye posted on 2005-03-23 12:27:17 ET Reply Trace -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 18. To: USConservative (#14) Or more importantly, on the city PAYROLL. Agreed .. there is no requirement for taxpayers to subsidize this crap. He can shout it all day at his home, his business or on the street corner. Magic posted on 2005-03-23 12:28:18 ET Reply Trace -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 19. To: Badeye (#17) whats the latest with Chief Sitting Bulls**t, btw? Don't know ... as far as I know, CU is still building its case and NOT negotiating with him for an easy out. Magic posted on 2005-03-23 12:29:09 ET Reply Trace -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 20. To: Magic (#19) whats the latest with Chief Sitting Bulls**t, btw? Don't know ... as far as I know, CU is still building its case and NOT negotiating with him for an easy out. Excellent. Badeye posted on 2005-03-23 12:34:48 ET Reply Trace
To: The MORONS on LP "...but no religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office or public trust under the United States." They didn't like it when Ashcroft's religion was being challenged during his confirmation process, but hypocrisy is their strong suit so they have no problem applying a religious test when an agnostic won't say the pledge.
#19. To: Mr Nuke Buzzcut (#18)
Damn.......they're caught again!
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latestnothing but golden gems..............
#18. To: hfrancis (#14)
Replies to Comment # 18. goddamn NUKE, you know LOGIC and TRUTH doesnt sway them
#24. To: Mr Nuke Buzzcut (#18)
End Trace Mode for Comment # 18.