Video Flagged Dead

Maddow - Atheists Banned From Holding Office in 7 US States

7 US States' Constitutions apparently forbid the election and installation of atheists into office. Freedom of/from Religion, wtf?

This stuff keeps up, Ima start tagging this sort of thing with 'conspiracy.'
MilkmanDansays...

Rachel mentioned being worried about this going to court, and this councilman being tied up in litigation and distracted from the actual functions of his office. While I somewhat agree, and I typically despise frivolous litigation, I tend to think it would be fantastic if this actually goes to court.

I (miraculously) have enough faith in our legal system in the US to believe that the article in the S.C. constitution would be summarily slapped down by the supreme court. And that would set precedent for all of the other states mentioned, along with pushing some other "state vs. federal" issues into a sharper focus in general (gay marriage for example).

So while I would empathize with the councilman himself for being dragged along through the legal system, I think that he could potentially do a great service to the country by doing so and prompting a more logical and rational response to this issue.

Psychologicsays...

This is nothing to get upset over. It's just an antiquated provision from back in the 1800s. The precedent has already been set since similar language has been smacked down by the Supreme Court in at least one other state. It's probably just some old portion of the state constitution that no one ever bothered to have removed because it is practically unenforceable. Hopefully it will not require much time or money to dispose of this situation.

There are plenty of old laws on the books in many states that are laughable in today's world. Heck, I think oral sex is still technically illegal in NC.

Almanildosays...

I remember reading about this, and I am quite amazed. How does it take two hundred years to get rid of something unconstitutional from a constitution?

It's like the Norwegian blasphemy paragraph. We have a paragraph in our penal code that makes blasphemy an offense (yeah, Scandinavia can have bad laws too). Though it hasn't been used in ages, getting rid of it has turned out to be harder than we thought.

Psychologicsays...

> ^Almanildo:How does it take two hundred years to get rid of something unconstitutional from a constitution?



When something so obviously unconstitutional and seemingly unenforceable is on the books then people tend to see addressing it as a waste of time. I doubt someone could just go in and remove it.

Would you want to spend your time and money to file the lawsuit? There are plenty of other ones out there waiting to be trimmed from various constitutions.

Does anyone know of a way to remove such provisions without involving the courts or having a vote in the legislature?

gwiz665says...

>> ^Almanildo:
I remember reading about this, and I am quite amazed. How does it take two hundred years to get rid of something unconstitutional from a constitution?
It's like the Norwegian blasphemy paragraph. We have a paragraph in our penal code that makes blasphemy an offense (yeah, Scandinavia can have bad laws too). Though it hasn't been used in ages, getting rid of it has turned out to be harder than we thought.


We got a blasphemy law in Denmark too. It's bullshit!

morelenmirsays...

Whenever I come across news like this it leaves me feeling incredibly uneasy. It is essentially being said only those who believe in the Christian god are worthy to attain the highest and most honourable positions in society. Are atheists genuinely considered second-class citizens? Terrible.

ryanbennittsays...

Hey relax, have patience, nothing wrong with being a second class citizen, its just the natural order of things. Think back over the last two thousand years. Christians were second class citizens for a while and look what happened to them! Sure they had to go through the whole "feed them to the lions" era, but they got over that and reigned supreme. The same will happen to the atheism movement, I just hope the lions part is a metaphor for something else, I'm allergic to cats, especially the big ones with pointy teeth and sharp claws...

rebuildersays...

>> ^Almanildo:
I remember reading about this, and I am quite amazed. How does it take two hundred years to get rid of something unconstitutional from a constitution?


Imagine you're a North Carolina legislator. You know there's a clause in the constitution of your state that contradicts the US constitution's protections of freedom of religion. You also know pretty much nothing bad has come from having that clause in there for as long as anyone can remember. Do you take action, making it possible for your enemies to paint you as anti-religious, or do you just sit on it? Does the reward outweigh the risk?

I think this kind of evaluation sheds a lot of light on why politics works the way it does. Doing stuff is risky. As a politician, the stuff you do by definition affects people's lives. People don't like their lives being messed with. So, if you're going to do stuff, there had better be a big payoff. If there's virtually no payoff but even a small amount of risk, you're better of not doing stuff. Thus, representational democracy.

ShakaUVMsays...

It's not "Freedom from Religion", idiot. Atheists that think that way are essentially trying to repress other people's religions, which is just as bad as a religious test for office or similar shenanigans.

There's a lot of stupidity in America, and just as much of it comes from atheists than the other way around.

Send this Article to a Friend



Separate multiple emails with a comma (,); limit 5 recipients






Your email has been sent successfully!

Manage this Video in Your Playlists




notify when someone comments
X

This website uses cookies.

This website uses cookies to improve user experience. By using this website you consent to all cookies in accordance with our Privacy Policy.

I agree
  
Learn More