Powered by
Movable Type 3.2
Design by
Danny Carlton

Made with NoteTab

March 04, 2005

More from the intolerant left

From the ABC affiliate in Denver (why do these stations hide their call letters on their web sites?)

Trustee David Habecker has refused to stand and say the pledge at Town Board meetings because of the words "under God." He said it's against his beliefs and that made some voters push for a recall.

"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. "You know what people's opinion is? It's the Constitution of the United States. It is the constitution of Colorado and it is all the rules and ordinances of Estes Park."

"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 is pushing for the recall. "We the people believe that his actions and his verbage do not represent us as citizens for a responsible government."

Now were this the city itself punishing him it would be different, but a recall initiative, started by the citizens is a different matter. Notice that he didn't simply refuse to say the “under God” part, he refused to say all of it.

Now I myself, in as unobtrusive way as possible, will not say any pledge to any flag other than the US flag. It's been a long, and IMO misguided tradition in many churches to have people say a pledge to the “Christians Flag” and recently I discovered while helping with Awana's that they have also included a pledge to the “Awana's Flag”. I didn't make a stink, I simply did something else when everyone was saying their pledges to the “Christian Flag” and the ”Awana's Flag”. If they want to do that, that's fine -- doesn't bother me. I am however an American citizen, and the Pledge of Allegiance to the American flag is an important symbol of our duty to our nation. Simply omitting the two words “under God” would solve Habeker's dilemma, without making a fuss. I suspect, however, he wants the fuss.

From Oregon's WorldLink:

The state Court of Appeals ruled Wednesday there is "substantial evidence" that the Portland School District illegally discriminated against an atheist student by allowing in-school recruiting by the Boy Scouts.

The 6-3 decision is the latest development in a long-running battle by an atheist mother to prevent the Boy Scouts from recruiting in Portland schools because the organization requires a belief in God.

The new ruling sends the case back to the state school superintendent for conciliation efforts to resolve the dispute. The district, meanwhile, is considering adopting a policy that could ban Scouts from recruiting during school hours.

The controversy began in 1996, when Nancy Powell, an atheist, objected to Boy Scout recruiting visits to an elementary school attended by her son, Remington, who is now in high school.

Nancy Powell sued the school district in 1998, claiming that because the Scout oath and principles require a belief in God, the recruiting violated the Oregon Constitution's ban on government involvement with religion.

The appeals court in 2002 ruled in the school district's favor, saying the recruiting did not amount to an "unconstitutionally excessive entanglement of government with religion."

Here again we have someone who uses their hatred of religion as an excuse to deny the Constitutional rights of those they disagree with. It's okay to teach in government schools, as fact, a mythological theory of origins, offensive to most Christians, but the rights of Boy Scout must be sacrificed at the alter of Atheistic bigotry, intolerance and hatred.

Both stories illustrate the penchant the intolerant left have for demanding that Christians relinquish their Constitutional rights.

Posted by Jack Lewis at March 4, 2005 11:47 AM

Trackback Pings

TrackBack URL for this entry:


Post a comment

Remember Me?

(you may use HTML tags for style)

Security verification

Type the characters you see in the image above.