Texas, 6 other states have bans on atheists holding office

[TexasTowelie]

ANNAPOLIS, Md. (AP) — Some freedom-from-religion advocates are pressing Maryland and six other states to remove provisions from their state constitutions that prohibit people who don't believe in God from holding public office.

The other states are Arkansas, Mississippi, North Carolina, South Carolina, Tennessee and Texas, according to the Openly Secular coalition, based in Columbus, Ohio. The New York Times reported on the group's campaign Dec. 6.

Such bans are unenforceable, according to a 1961 Supreme Court decision. The high court ruled unanimously in a Maryland case that states cannot have a "religious test" for public office.

The state provisions should therefore be removed, said Todd Stiefel, chairman of the Openly Secular coalition, based in Columbus, Ohio.

Read more: http://lubbockonline.com/filed-online/2014-12-18/texas-6-other-states-have-bans-atheists-holding-office#comment-358584

[PoliticAverse]

1. "but no religious test shall ever be required"

The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the Members of the several State Legislatures, and all executive and judicial Officers, both of the United States and of the several States, shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation, to support this Constitution; but no religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office or public trust under the United States.

[Heddi]

2. don't worry. A poster in the religion forum

who has his PhD in Google has assured us that no one has ever been denied holding office because of this so it's okay. The law is only bad if it affects you. It hasn't affected anyone, therefore it's not bad.

[AlbertCat]

3. no one has ever been denied holding office because of this

Oh good!

Then there should be no problem with removing it.... ASAP

[Heddi]

4. nononono. See, THAT is a waste of time

Anything that has to do with removing the church from the state is a WASTE OF TIME because WHAT'S NEXT, You GONNA TAX ALL THE NON PROFITS? That's GENOCIDE!11!!

[onager]

5. It only took 3 years of lawsuits in SC...

...for an atheist to finally hold the position of Notary Public:

http://www.positiveatheism.org/writ/silverman.htm

[Heddi]

7. what's three years in the space of eternity?

Oh, let me guess, someone should have knocked on his door the day he was born and just GIVEN him a notary public license or whatever. Oh, so he doesn't have to work for it like other people? He's just EXPECTING to get that license? And you know, I spent at LEAST 10 hours googling and I can't find any nonsense story to link to here, so obviously this isn't all there is to the story. Here, let me post a peice of irreverent youtubeism to deflect from the oooh look a shiny thing

[onager]

8. Well, missy, I spent ELEVEN hours Googling...

And found one court record saying the Com...atheist filed his lawsuit at 11:03 AM, but another story cited 11:05 AM.

INVALIDATED!

[Heddi]

9. fuckin' atheists

such liars.

[AlbertCat]

10. re: Pickle Surprise

I didn't know RuPaul's Drag Race came on in the '70's!

[An Atheist]

6. That just seems so backwards and wrong

I don't see how they're even still considered laws seeing as how unconstitutional that is. I mean, I would think that's unconstitutional....right??


It's like the laws that are still on the books (or were until recently) that banned interracial marriage. (or the stupid laws about breaking the law if you ride a horse barefoot on Sunday). If they're unenforceable, then why aren't they just not laws anymore? There shouldn't be a debate about this. It's discrimination, therefore it can't be enforced, therefore it's not a law anymore. Seems rather straight-forward.

The only reason I can see for keeping these "laws" on the books is for enforcement. So that makes me wonder how many people have been deterred from running for office or whatever because of the threat of breaking these laws.

They seem to be there for intimidation purposes.

[yortsed snacilbuper]

11. Pennsylvania

Article 1, section 4: “No person who acknowledges the being of a God and a future state of rewards and punishments shall, on account of his religious sentiments, be disqualified to hold any office or place of trust or profit under this Commonwealth.”

Note: Pennsylvania differs from the other states in that it says believers cannot be disqualified from holding office for his or her religious sentiments, but that is not extended to atheists.