HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Topics » Religion & Spirituality » Atheists & Agnostics (Group) » Texas, 6 other states hav...

Thu Dec 18, 2014, 07:34 PM

Texas, 6 other states have bans on atheists holding office

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

11 replies, 1538 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 11 replies Author Time Post
Reply Texas, 6 other states have bans on atheists holding office (Original post)
TexasTowelie Dec 2014 OP
PoliticAverse Dec 2014 #1
Heddi Dec 2014 #2
AlbertCat Dec 2014 #3
Heddi Dec 2014 #4
onager Dec 2014 #5
Heddi Dec 2014 #7
onager Dec 2014 #8
Heddi Dec 2014 #9
AlbertCat Dec 2014 #10
An Atheist Dec 2014 #6
yortsed snacilbuper Dec 2014 #11

Response to TexasTowelie (Original post)

Thu Dec 18, 2014, 07:59 PM

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.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TexasTowelie (Original post)

Thu Dec 18, 2014, 08:09 PM

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.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Heddi (Reply #2)

Thu Dec 18, 2014, 10:48 PM

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

 

Oh good!

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

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to AlbertCat (Reply #3)

Thu Dec 18, 2014, 11:07 PM

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!!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Heddi (Reply #2)

Thu Dec 18, 2014, 11:30 PM

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

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to onager (Reply #5)

Fri Dec 19, 2014, 12:01 AM

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

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Heddi (Reply #7)

Fri Dec 19, 2014, 12:21 AM

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!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to onager (Reply #8)

Fri Dec 19, 2014, 12:29 AM

9. fuckin' atheists

such liars.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Heddi (Reply #7)

Fri Dec 19, 2014, 02:26 AM

10. re: Pickle Surprise

 

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

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TexasTowelie (Original post)

Thu Dec 18, 2014, 11:34 PM

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.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TexasTowelie (Original post)

Sun Dec 28, 2014, 07:45 PM

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.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread