First Amendment Rights
Dear Editor: A fundamental aspect of freedom of religion is freedom from religion. The Sitka Assembly is currently proposing to violate our legal and inalienable rights to freedom of religion.
Article I, section 4, of the Constitution of the State of Alaska:
Freedom of Religion. “No law shall be made respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.”
“The language of section 4 is taken almost verbatim from the religion clauses of the First Amendment to the United States Constitution.
Like its federal counterpart, section 4 prohibits any law “respecting” the establishment of religion, not simply laws that would establish a state religion (FREEDOM OF RELIGION IN ALASKA: INTERPRETING THE ALASKA CONSTITUTION by STEVEN KEITH GREEN.)
Article IX, section 6, of the Constitution of the State of Alaska provides:
No tax shall be levied, or appropriation of public money made, or public property transferred, nor shall the public credit be used, except for a public purpose.
A “donation” to the Russian Orthodox Church from the coffers of the City and Borough of Sitka is not for a public purpose. It is for a religious purpose, the renovation of a church building.
The definition of “property used for religious purposes” is found in Alaska’s Municipal Taxation Statute and includes church buildings and schools, ministerial residences, administrative offices, and parking lots relatively close thereto.
The justifications given by those Sitka Assembly members in favor of a donation to Russian Orthodox Church are all irrelevant because a “YES” vote is violation of the U.S. Constitution and the Constitution of the State of Alaska. Further, it is violation of the Oath of Office (an impeachable offense) made by each member of the Sitka Assembly to support and defend the Constitution of the United States and the Constitution of the State of Alaska.
Sitka, AK Home Rule Charter Section 17.04 Oath of Office:
Every officer of the municipality, before entering upon his/her duties, shall take the oath or affirmation required by Section 5 of Article XII, Constitution of the State of Alaska.
Alaska Constitution, Article XII Section 5. Oath of Office:
All public officers, before entering upon the duties of their offices, shall take and subscribe to the following oath or affirmation: “I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States and the Constitution of the State of Alaska, and that I will faithfully discharge my duties as . . . to the best of my ability.”
An ad hoc group of Sitkans is currently organizing to seek a legal remedy to this proposed violation of our Constitutional rights, if it becomes necessary.
Dr. Ronald E. Dick, Sitka
ANWR Referendum
Dear Editor: Now that it is evident to all that the intent – of Alaska’s folks down there on Capitol Hill over yonder there in SwampLand – is to pave the way for oil drilling into the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, the question now arises:
Is there a means, method, and mechanism by which the registered voters among The People of Alaska – by direct, free, and private referendum vote – could declare whether they are for or against drilling in the ANWR?
Do the People of Alaska get anything to say – or even get to say anything – at all, about all of this? Or, because it is “federal” land, are they only entitled to their two Senators’ and one Congressman’s say? The next question being: Sez Who?
If there were to be a referendum, how would it turn out? Would Alaskans vote for or against oil in the ANWR? How would You vote?
A second, obvious next question is: So what? So what if there was a referendum: What actual, real difference would it make? What if the overwhelming majority of Alaskans voted against ANWR oil? What difference would it really make? Or, as an alternative, what if only a very slim majority of Alaskans voted for it? What difference would THAT make? And/or vice versa?
A third obvious question is: How do all those who are too young to be registered voters get to have a say in all this? After all, they are the ones who are going to inherit, and have to sort all this all out.
Given that the “People” of Alaska had nothing to say about the “sale” of Their Land by Russia to the United States 150 years ago, a fourth and final question is: Ain’t it so that some questions are better left un-asked? Let alone un-answered?
Or not.
JG Moebus, Sitka
Fundraiser Thanks
Dear Editor: I would like to send out a huge thank you to everyone who supported my daughter, Wolf Star Duran, and Jaylynn Martinez in the Indian taco fundraiser we had this last weekend and the bake sale on Oct. 28. The outpour of support from the beautiful people of Sitka is just overwhelmingly heartwarming. A special thank you to Sitka Sentinel Shannon Haugland and James Poulson, Alaska Native Brotherhood Camp 1, Alaska Native Sisterhood Camp 4, Rachel Moreno (for her deliciously awesome fry bread and all her hard work), Ty (Rachel’s son), Harriet Beleal, Cayrn Coleman, Pat Alexander, Lakota Hardin, the Powells, Jacklyn Demmert DeBell, Dionne and Larry, Ben Miyasato and everyone who donated towards their trip to Australia 2018 Down Under Cross Country Team representing Alaska. Gunalch’eesh HoHou (thank you).
Jacqueline White
