Atheist recalled over Pledge of Allegiance

  • Thread starter Thread starter Maranatha
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
40.png
Maranatha:
ESTES PARK, CO - Voters recalled Town Trustee David Habecker on Tuesday 903 to 605, casting him from office for refusing to stand and say the Pledge of Allegiance at town meetings.
Click to expand...
Shades of the 1950s! Let the witchhunts be resumed! Since when was there a state-requirement to say the Pledge?
 
40.png
Richardols:
Shades of the 1950s! Let the witchhunts be resumed! Since when was there a state-requirement to say the Pledge?
Click to expand...
Since the voters whom are represented by this knucklehead say so. Remember that whole “government of the people, by the people, for the people”, well evidently, the people don’t want someone who won’t stand to recite the pledge in honor of the troops representing them. Its not that he just omitted the “under God” part, but he is the only member of the board who wouldn’t stand at all and recite any part of the pledge.
 
40.png
Scott_Lafrance:
Since the voters whom are represented by this knucklehead say so. Remember that whole “government of the people, by the people, for the people”, well evidently, the people don’t want someone who won’t stand to recite the pledge in honor of the troops representing them.
Click to expand...
The Pledge of Allegiance neither mentions nor ever mentioned our military forces.
Its not that he just omitted the “under God” part, but he is the only member of the board who wouldn’t stand at all and recite any part of the pledge.
Click to expand...
The fact that a majority chose to oust him doesn’t make it any less a witchhunt. In the early 1950s, there were endless calls for people to take “loyalty oaths,” as if that were some guarantee of loyalty. I assure you that the dedicated Nazi or Communist would be the first to take those oaths to allay any suspicion of them.
 
40.png
Richardols:
The fact that a majority chose to oust him doesn’t make it any less a witchhunt. In the early 1950s, there were endless calls for people to take “loyalty oaths,” as if that were some guarantee of loyalty. I assure you that the dedicated Nazi or Communist would be the first to take those oaths to allay any suspicion of them.
Click to expand...
So now the pledge of allegiance is just a loyalty oath?

It is not a witchhunt. This man ran for office, he is an elected offical. The people have a right to recall him if they do not like what he is doing, period.

There is an error in this article.

The title say “Atheist recalled…” but in the article Mr Habecker is called an agnostic.

Agnostics are not atheists.
 
They elected him, therefore they have the right to recall him. It is time all politicians realized that they are not assured of their job for the elected term if they refuse to follow the wishes to the electorate.
 
40.png
ByzCath:
The title say “Atheist recalled…” but in the article Mr Habecker is called an agnostic.

Agnostics are not atheists.
Click to expand...
On local TV he has claimed to be an atheist.
 
40.png
ByzCath:
So now the pledge of allegiance is just a loyalty oath?
Click to expand...
Pledging allegiance is pledging loyalty, is it not?
It is not a witchhunt. This man ran for office, he is an elected offical. The people have a right to recall him if they do not like what he is doing, period.
Click to expand...
And, if he were a pro-lifer in a pro-choice community, the same may apply?
 
40.png
Richardols:
The fact that a majority chose to oust him doesn’t make it any less a witchhunt. In the early 1950s, there were endless calls for people to take “loyalty oaths,” as if that were some guarantee of loyalty. I assure you that the dedicated Nazi or Communist would be the first to take those oaths to allay any suspicion of them.
Click to expand...
As far as I’m aware, there is nothing unconstitutional about “witchhunts.” In fact, many politicans are on desparate searches for “witches.” Isn’t this how the 14th Amendment came about?
 
40.png
Richardols:
And, if he were a pro-lifer in a pro-choice community, the same may apply?
Click to expand...
Absolutely. Politicians serve at the pleasure of the citizens. He has the right to not stand during the pledge. He has the right to dissent. He doesn’t have the right to do so and be immune to the the wishes of the voters. He should be happy now.

Peace

Tim
 
40.png
Richardols:
40.png
ByzCath:
So now the pledge of allegiance is just a loyalty oath?
Click to expand...
Pledging allegiance is pledging loyalty, is it not?
Click to expand...
Not in the same way as the ones you brought up. Which by the way I have not heard of so maybe you need to provide proof that in the 1950’s a wave of “loyalty oaths” came up and the masses were ordered to take them.

As for the pledge of allegiance being a loaylty oath, if it can be considered one then it is doing nothing more than pledging loyalty to the USA which any and every elected and appointed offical of the Government should not have any problem doing. If they do then they should be recalled.
It is not a witchhunt. This man ran for office, he is an elected offical. The people have a right to recall him if they do not like what he is doing, period.
Click to expand...
And, if he were a pro-lifer in a pro-choice community, the same may apply?
Click to expand...

I do not know of many Town Boards that face abortion issues but yes. If the public recalled him then that is the right of the majority to do.

Nice try though.
 
40.png
ByzCath:
Not in the same way as the ones you brought up. Which by the way I have not heard of so maybe you need to provide proof that in the 1950’s a wave of “loyalty oaths” came up and the masses were ordered to take them.
Click to expand...
Loyalty oaths were required of teachers and government officials in many locations. Even some private businesses wanted their employees to take such oaths. It was not a requirement for the general population.

Such is self-defeating because any real enemy of the U.S. would have no problem taking the oath, and that finally dawned on those who would have imposed that requirement.
 
I want to add this comment, which was made in one of the threads on Terri.

This was in the article linked, “I sat for what I believed in and I still believe in,” Habecker said. He said he hasn’t decided whether to challenge the recall on the grounds it violated his constitutional rights to free speech.

This is a gross misunderstanding of the Constitutional right of free speech.

First, this right is not absolute. The most popular example of this is that you can not yell “Fire” in a crowded theater. Also the courts restrict people speech all the time with “gag” orders. You can see this most recently with Jay Leno’s challenge to the “gag” order he was under in the Michael Jackson trial. While Jay Leno won his challenge, everyone else involved in the case is still subject to it.

Second, this right only protects you from the Government restricting your political speech. Today the definition of what political speech has grown very broad.

This right does not mean that private institutions must let you speak. Censorship by individuals and private institutions is legal.

I do not think this recall violated his constitutional rights as no one can tell anyone how to vote or for what criteria you use when you vote. There are some people out there that vote for the “Sexiest” candidate. While I think that is wrong, I can not restrict them as that would be a violation of their constitutional right to the freedom of speech.
 
40.png
Richardols:
Loyalty oaths were required of teachers and government officials in many locations. Even some private businesses wanted their employees to take such oaths. It was not a requirement for the general population.
Click to expand...
You saying this does not make it fact. Please show some proof.
Such is self-defeating because any real enemy of the U.S. would have no problem taking the oath, and that finally dawned on those who would have imposed that requirement.
Click to expand...
All police officers, fire fighters, people who hold public office, members of the armed forces, just to name a few, take oaths of office when they are instated. I am sure he took one in the begining.

He does have a right not to recite the pledge, but the citizens also have a right to recall him.

Or are you for limiting their right to free speech?
 
40.png
ByzCath:
You saying this does not make it fact. Please show some proof.
Click to expand...
You can look it up yourself. Check out 1950s witchhunts, McCarthy Era, 1950s loyalty oaths, etc…
All police officers, fire fighters, people who hold public office, members of the armed forces, just to name a few, take oaths of office when they are instated. I am sure he took one in the begining.
Click to expand...
Yeah, just as I’m an Officer of the Court when I was sworn in as an attorney. But, an oath of office is not a loyalty oath.
 
40.png
Richardols:
Yeah, just as I’m an Officer of the Court when I was sworn in as an attorney. But, an oath of office is not a loyalty oath.
Click to expand...
And I think you will find many who do not consider the pledge a loyalty oath, at least not in the way you keep bringing up.

Just a red herring to shift the discussion.

You seem to ignore my question but I will ask it again.

What about the rights of those who elected this official?

The witchhunt here is not the way you seem to think.

The witchhunt here is the media and you attacking those of us with traditional values.
 
40.png
Richardols:
You can look it up yourself. Check out 1950s witchhunts, McCarthy Era, 1950s loyalty oaths, etc…

Yeah, just as I’m an Officer of the Court when I was sworn in as an attorney. But, an oath of office is not a loyalty oath.
Click to expand...
Bwahahahaha!!!
I’m an officer of the court as well, and I have no idea how you’re making a distinction between an oath of office and a loyalty oath. Are we to presume here that you think that no loyalty is involved when taking an oath of office!!!

I’m a young attorney, so I guess I haven’t has as many years to grow as jaded as you to approach those who take oaths with such a degree of cynicism as to doubt their integrity.

Also, thankfully, being a Catholic Christian allows and encourages me to view others in a positive light. But…if you’re content to doubt every one at their word and question their motives, etc., have at it.
 
40.png
Fiat:
Bwahahahaha!!!
I’m an officer of the court as well, and I have no idea how you’re making a distinction between an oath of office and a loyalty oath. Are we to presume here that you think that no loyalty is involved when taking an oath of office!!!
Click to expand...
I believe that it has to do with the wording of the oath in the particular state.
 
I would like to note that this issue of a (so-called) loyalty oath is something that Richardols appears to have a problem with.

The individual in question, Mr Habecker, does not seem to share that concern. His only problem is the words “under God”. He does not have to say them.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top