Privacy guaranteed - Your email is not shared with anyone.
Separate names with a comma.
If you consider yourself a beginner or an avid shooter, the Glock Talk community is your place to discuss self defense, concealed carry, reloading, target shooting, and all things Glock.
Discussion in 'Religious Issues' started by Vic777, Jun 10, 2012.
If the link is accurate, than it is clearly unacceptable under the First Amendment.
here are some links ....
[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WqSI0ike1Zc"]Atheists Banned From Public Office in 7 State Constitutions! - YouTube[/ame]
Wherever someone contests it, it fails the constitutional test. The state lawmakers in the remaining states just don't have the gumption to take it off the books and eventually someone will sue.
Just sayin, if its in the state constitution, its probably not unconstitutional....
BTW, has nothing to do with the First amendment. Its not establishing or preventing the exercise of any religion. Even if you decide atheism deserves the same protections as a religion, its still not prohibiting anyone from being an atheist, or "practicing" atheism.
Its an equal protection issue.
A state constitution could contain provisions that are unconstitutional as per the U.S. constitution, and the Supreme Court has actually already ruled that provisions such as these are in fact unconstitutional.
They're still on the books, but if anyone tried to enforce them, they'd have a tough row to hoe.
So, in essence you are saying it is a 14th Amendment violation, which of course, would provide a nice bridge to a First Amendment violation:
The 14th Amendment"
The parts of interest are italicized.
Actually it would be a violation of Article IV, Paragraph 3 of the US Constitution itself.
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.
There could be some argument whether or not state offices (other than legislatures) qualify as part of the "under the United States" group, but the 14th Amendment protections would seem to resolve that.
Every state has a handful of really dumb, or really outdated laws that just have never been removed. Personally, I see them as just really old laws that no one has bothered to remove from the books. If challenged I would see them being overturned pretty quickly.
there are atheists in public office in every state.
some just call themselves "christian" to get elected.
this is why liberals have to lie about their true beliefs to win elections.
atheism, socialism, marxism, communism, etc. have all proven to be losing platforms.
of course, all politicians are essentially liars, just to varying degrees.
The longer they stay in office the greater the liar they become.
The Constitution and the Bill of Rights disagrees with the practice of barring Atheists from office based on their religious beliefs. Just because I don't agree with your religious view point, doesn't mean I don't support your right to have it.
So, if it is an accurate statement that these states bar Atheists from office than it needs to be challeged in the Supreme Court, beause no one should be disinfranchized for their religious beliefs. The State has no business denying a person their individual liberties based on a religious view point.
Atheists don't have Religious Beliefs.
While I agree with you that Atheists often have to gloss over their lack of concern for religion in order to be elected, I disagree with your statement that likens atheism to socialism, Marxism, or communism. Those three are political belief systems that require an affirmative belief in their merits. Atheism is the lack of a belief system with regard to religion. An atheist may be aligned with any political party, and hold affirmative beliefs on a hundred other topics, but simply lack concern for, need for, or belief in a religion or religious construct. Atheism is not a losing platform because it isn't a platform. It is the lack of a platform. I do not affirm a disbelief in religion. I simply don't have a belief to affirm. The same way I don't have to affirm a disbelief in werewolves or Frankenstein's monster or Freddy Krueger. I simply don't possess a belief they are real so I don't think about it.
And btw, EVERYONE has to lie about something to get elected. You can't please everyone all the time (or even most of the people even once) without lies.
You, sir, are a scholar and a gentleman!
See? We don't disagree on everything!!!
Not according to the courts. Not according to an unemotional evaluation either.
But that's going to get us way off topic.
Yes, the USA is coocoo.
All you need as evidence is our love of Iced tea.
We make it hot to make the tea, then add sugar to make it sweet. Then we cool it down to make it cold, and add lemon to make it sour.
It's simple to see.
Must be a southern thing.
Up here we make sun tea.
Add sugar to taste.
I hate lemons.
Everyone that knows anything about iced tea, Knows that Yankees don't know how to do it, even the honest yankees will admit it.