Atheists are Discriminated Against in Seven State Constitutions

[luvtinayothers]

Wow.

Article (http://www.nebraskaatheists.org/article1.htm)

[Ladewig]

I think these instances need to be divided into the categories of illegal discrimination and poor phrasing.

Pennsylvania
"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."

I see this clause as saying religious people cannot be denied office just because they are religious. I see no harm to atheists here.

Maryland might fall into this category as well depending on how one interprets the phrasing. I believe one could make a very reasonable case for saying (1) everyone is protected from the state's trying to target people's religion and (2) {everything after the "wherefore"} the state cannot use people's religious persuasion to discriminate against people who are religious. While atheists are excluded from the last part, they are included in the first part.


On the other hand, states like N. Carolina are definitely targeting atheists for their lack of beliefs.

[Marvel Frozen]

Most of those clauses also discriminate againt Buddhists, Hindus, Satanists, etc ...

[The Don]

Article 36 of Maryland's Declaration of Rights

Does seem to discriminate agains polytheists - or if by God we are limiting it to a Christian god, non-Christians

Article 3 of Massachusetts' State Constitution

Only seems to cover internecine Christian squabbles - I don't have a problem with that

Article 6 Section 8 of North Carolina's State Constitution

Is highly discriminatory against non-Christians

Article 1 Section 4 of Pannsylvania's State Constitution

Does seem to discriminate agains polytheists - or if by God we are limiting it to a Christian god, non-Christians

Were PA and MA copying ?

Article 4 Section 2 of South Carolina's State Constitution

Is highly prejuducial against atheists, but really folks how likely is an atheist to be elected to office ?

Article 9 Section 2 of Tennessee's State Constitution

Is highly prejuducial against atheists - has this actually been used in practice ?

Article 1 Section 4 of Texas' State Constitution

Does seem to discriminate agains polytheists - or if by God we are limiting it to a Christian god, non-Christians



Much ado about nothing ?

Has anyone been barred by these rather outdated statutes ?

What's more concerning is that these days there isn't a hope in hell that an "out" atheist could be elected to public office. Maybe that's why the U.S. has such a problem with Islamic theocracies.

[ceo_esq]

Fortunately, the Federal Constitution nullifies the effect of any such provisions in state constitutions, to the extent that they could be relied on as a legal justification for a state to discriminate against anyone based on religious profession.

[Stimpson J. Cat]

Ladewig,

Pennsylvania
"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."
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I see this clause as saying religious people cannot be denied office just because they are religious. I see no harm to atheists here.

The problem is not that this clause mandates discrimination against atheists. The problem is that there is no clause which guarantees atheists the same rights that this clause guarantees to theists.

If these rights were guaranteed to everybody elsewhere in the Constitution, the clause would not be needed at all. Instead, by specifically excluding atheists from this clause, it is making it quite clear that atheists are not entitled to these rights.

The fact that it explicitly specifies that it only applies to people who not only believe in God, but also in some sort of divine justice, also clearly indicates that atheists do not have these rights. They could have simply said that "No person shall...", but they did not.

And of course, it is well known historically that the reason behind this clause was the belief that only somebody who believes in some sort of divine justice could be trusted with such rights. You can interpret the words differently, but legally what matters is the interpretation that was intended by those who wrote it.


Dr. Stupid

[hgc]

Originally posted by ceo_esq
Fortunately, the Federal Constitution nullifies the effect of any such provisions in state constitutions, to the extent that they could be relied on as a legal justification for a state to discriminate against anyone based on religious profession. Not according to former Judge Moore, lately of the Alabama Supreme Court.

[DarkPrimus]

Actually, Moore hadn't rread his states constitution very well, as it states that someone holding public office is not to let their religious beliefs interfere.

[Fun2BFree]

I was thinking of putting this in its own thread but it is relevant here. THe tack that God lovers like Bill O'Reilly are taking is that recognizing that there is a God is not religion...it is spirituality..the argument goes that just belief in God is not any one religion and therefore is not religion...further he claims that of course this is what the Founding Fathers wanted--a country that acknowledged the Creator but did not favor one religious sect over another...

My own take on this is quite different:
1) what the founders wanted and what is right may or may not be the same thing...the correctness or rightness of something is not made by appeals to authority but by logic and reason

2)Demanding an acknowledgement of God as a prerequisite for holding any government office is most definitely a violation of the Constitutions bar of religious tests which extends to all levels of the government--here I would appreciate some help --are there not legal precedents here from the Supreme Court? Can anyone cite case law here to refute O'Reilly's position?

2a) and is there some founding father literature wherein they talk about making sure the government is open to atheists and other heathens-in the Fewderalist papers or something? Anyone?