Religion
Related: About this forumConstitution's "Supreme Being" Clause Targeted Again
by Zoë Gioja
June 14, 2012
In January, an atheist group will lobby the state Legislature to overturn an obscure clause in the Texas Constitution one that says candidates for public office must believe in a higher power. The group is following in the litigious footsteps of the late Madalyn Murray O'Hair, who 30 years ago challenged the same provision as an attempt to establish a state religion.
In Article 1, Section 4, the Texas Constitution states: No religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office, or public trust, in this State; nor shall any one be excluded from holding office on account of his religious sentiments, provided he acknowledge the existence of a Supreme Being.
In other words, the Constitution maintains freedom of religion, but appears to bar atheists from holding state office. During O'Hair's challenge, she wasn't a candidate for office, hadn't been denied the right to run and couldn't challenge on that ground. The federal courts gave her standing as a voter, but the provision remained in the state's foundational legal document.
And she and then-Attorney General Jim Mattox signed an agreement in federal court that contained this line:
The parties hereby agree that the last phrase, ... provided he acknowledge the existence of a Supreme Being. is void and of no further effect in that it is in violation of the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment of the United States Constitution.
http://www.texastribune.org/texas-lobbying/lobby-and-lobbyists/texas-atheists-lobby-texas-legislature/
DreamGypsy
(2,252 posts)The existence of the Supremes is well documented. I even have some of their vinyl.
Diana's vocal range was much higher than mine.
Seems like I satisfy the conditions of Article 1, Section 4. However I don't live in Texas so don't plan on running for office there.
cbayer
(146,218 posts)Very much agree that it needs to go.