....October 1, 12:21 PM
 
 
 
Freedom Of Religion Does Not Deny Right To Question
By MICHAEL SCHENKLER


Follow me on Twitter @QueensTribune


Our “Pagan Lord” running-for-City Council in Northeast Queens story is still the buzz in political circles. To explain briefly to those of you who have been out of town for the past two weeks, we broke the story that Dan Halloran, the Republican candidate for City Council in the 19th Council District, was the head of a pagan religion in the greater metropolitan area. Halloran used the name O’Halloran when performing his role as “First Atheling,” or Leader of the Asatru-Theod faith of pre-Christian Heathen religions. He also used the pseudonym when promoting his business as a “pagan attorney” on at least one website listing.

That story was uncovered the week before the Primary election and we made a decision not to confuse the Primary and hold it. It was scheduled to run the week after the Primary no matter who won the Democratic Primary. We weren’t waiting for another news outlet to scoop us.

Our endorsement of Kevin Kim and our affiliate’s involvement in his campaign were not factors in when or why the story ran. It would have run no matter which candidate emerged victorious from the six-way Democratic Primary.

We found it surprising that Halloran took down his extensive website/blog promoting his “pagan religion” and removed his religion from his Facebook page although Asatru-Theodism is still (as of this writing) listed under the “activities” section of his Facebook info page. Throughout the web there are still references to Dan O’Halloran as the head of this religion.

We have asked him to allow us to attend their gatherings or service – he has indicated he would not welcome us until after Election Day.

If there is nothing to hide, why change your name, take down your blog, conceal your religion previously posted on Facebook or not open your pagan ceremonies to us?

In response to those critical of the Trib story, I stand by it. I am proud of it. The public has a right to know if a candidate for public office is the person in charge of a religion. (We have avoided using the word cult, as other newspapers have, but find it somewhat uncomfortable lumping it with Christianity, Judaism, Islam or other religions not hidden from public view.)

The constitution provides both Freedom of Religion and Freedom of the Press and we stand ready to defend them both. Those Freedoms and the others provided for in the Bill of Rights are the most precious things guaranteed to the people by any government.

Yes, I am devoted to those Freedoms.

Yes, I am committed to Freedom of Religion.

However, when ceremonies like “animal blood sacrifices” and other practices and beliefs inconsistent with our society are promoted by a candidate for public office in the name of religion, the people have a right to know more.

We are each a product of our beliefs and the people have a right to know more about yours, Mr. Halloran. We ask that your unedited blog and its archives be returned to the internet for the voters to review. We invite you to explain your religion.

We invite you, Dan, to write a column explaining your religion and your role as ‘First Atheling” to our readers.

Yes, the constitution guarantees us Freedoms: of Speech, Press, Religion.

That does not mean we cannot inquire, comment, disagree or discuss something spoken, printed or believed by another. Our right to speak, write and believe is sacrosanct but, so is its scrutiny and criticism.

As publisher of a newspaper, I stand behind Freedom of the Press as an absolute right. This does not protect me from those who disagree and criticize. I am used to criticism – it comes with running a newspaper. I am used to the scrutiny – it comes with running a newspaper. And I’m even used to people rejecting me because of my progressive beliefs, which are in our archives for all to read.

So to those who criticize me or this paper for reporting on the role of a political candidate who also is the head of a pagan religion in the metro New York area, c’mon.

For those who say I have no right to ask questions when Dan Halloran chooses to take down his website where he has previously promoted his religion, after it is disclosed to the voters, I say that is all the more reason to look.

If the Tribune, changed or took down its electronic archives to prevent someone from knowing what we have said in the past or what we stand for, we’d rightfully be criticized.

I don’t fault Dan for choosing a pre-Christian pagan religion or for being the leader of a sect in Metropolitan New York. I do criticize him as a candidate for public office concealing it, changing his name and hiding what he says to his followers.

The fact that followers of Astrau-Theod sects across the country are promoting Dan’s candidacy in New York is relevant. There are people posting words of support on Pagan websites because of Dan’s heathen religious beliefs and leadership role as a Pagan Lord. Should the rest of us roll over and be silent because his flocks and his party yell freedom of religion?

Dan, practice any religion you want – of course that right is yours. Be head of any sect you choose; you do not need anyone’s permission.

But as a candidate for public office, Freedom of Religion does not guarantee our silence when you are secretive about leading a religious sect and hiding it from the voters. When you change your name to hide your involvement in Theodism, when you take down your website and then put it back up altered, we feel obligated to pursue the story.

Don’t expect voters to blindly vote for you because you acknowledge that you lead a pagan sect and then yell freedom of religion.

Sorry, we want to know more. And so do the voters.

MSchenkler@QueensTribune.com

Michael Schenkler can be reached via this contact form.
Dan Halloran should put his original, unedited website back online.

 
 
Obama Snubs Paterson, Beams At Cuomo

Henry Stern
By By HENRY STERN

Governor Paterson’s victory in the Court of Appeals came just after his darkest hour, a weekend during which President Barack Obama, visiting New York, had publicly shown his affection for Andrew Cuomo, who is Paterson’s putative rival for the governorship in 2010.

Andrew’s father, Mario Cuomo, was governor from 1983 to 1994. Paterson’s father, Basil, was a State Senator from 1965 to 1970, and New York’s secretary of state from 1979 to 1982 (Governor Carey’s second term). Both candidates are the second generation in thoroughly political families, and have sought or held public office since they came of age. Neither has any private sector experience to speak of.

Iit appears likely that as support for Paterson fails to materialize among the interest groups that comprise the Democratic Party, he will accept another position and avoid a costly campaign which, in all likelihood, would end in his defeat.

If Cuomo were to take out Paterson in a contested primary, that would not enhance his position for the November election. Therefore it is important that the surgery of removing the first black governor be performed by others, preferably African Americans who have sufficient cover to avoid criticism.

If sufficiently inflamed, Paterson could inflict considerable damage on whoever challenges him, particularly if he is unhorsed. The record of his 18 months as governor, however, indicates that he has yielded repeatedly to the diktat of legislative leaders or other powerful figures. The fall special session that he has called to deal with the impending $3 billion budget gap in this year’s budget could be his last chance to stand up to the spenders. To resist, however, would inflame the spendees, whose unions and trade associations fund Democratic Party candidates.

Paterson may well be doomed. The question will be whether he leaves the scene as a man, standing up for a principle, or as a mouse, crushed by the spenders and unable to resist, even by words. The only way he could conceivably win is by running against the system he has always been part of. It worked for Mayor Wagner in 1961, but he had Alex Rose and David Garth to guide him. Paterson didn’t even have a dog, but now he has Dick Ravitch, whose skills are more in government than in a politics.

It will be interesting to see who Andrew Cuomo’s running mate will be. Will he plumb the pool of talent in the Senate or the Assembly?

We note that President Obama’s intrusion into New York politics was not based on any substantive legislative difference between the two.

Paterson’s comment that some of Obama’s opposition is racially based is an example of a politician getting in trouble only for telling the truth. Of course, the rednecks don’t like a man of race in what has always been the White House. On the other hand, millions of people may have voted for him partly or wholly because of his race, seeing his ascent as expiation for the crime of slavery.

The existential problem Paterson faces is that if he stands up to the legislative leaders and tries to reduce the budget with its $2 to $3 billion shortfall this year, he will offend almost every interest group, including public and private employees, and hospitals and other spending institutions.

In the face of impending 2010 state elections, the Democrats will in all likelihood try to run out the clock, deferring any serious action until 2011. They don’t want to raise taxes or reduce services, but there is no other way to come close to balancing the budget. They may resort again to off-budget borrowing (the Enron strategy), which is technically illegal. But, since the law is what the Court of Appeals says it is, there is hope that whatever maneuvers the legislative and executive branches undertake will not be struck down prematurely (before the election). The long term game plan: “Let Cuomo balance the budget.”

StarQuest@NYCivic.org

Not4Publication.com by Dom Nunziato
Michael Schenkler can be reached via this contact form.