News:

Look, I haven't mentioned Zeus, Buddah, or some religion.

Main Menu

Aussie PM an Atheist?

Started by Nikky, June 29, 2010, 08:07:07 AM

Previous topic - Next topic

Thumpalumpacus

#15
Quote from: "Dretlin"Does your constitution overdrive State law? (Forgive me if I have not managed to get the terminology correct)
[apologies to Tank for the misattribution]

Quote from: "KDbeads"I think it would if the state constitutions were challenged in the supreme court.  We were just talking about that the other day....
I know here in TX it's a requirement for any elected office to believe in a supreme being/higher power.

The 14th amendment applies the Federal Constitution to the states.  Article Six forbids a religious test for office:

Quote... but no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States.

The Supreme Court in 1961's Torasco v Watkins explicitly upheld the ban on religious tests:

QuoteThe fact, however, that a person is not compelled to hold public office cannot possibly be an excuse for barring him [367 U.S. 488, 496]    from office by state-imposed criteria forbidden by the Constitution. This was settled by our holding in Wieman v. Updegraff, 344 U.S. 183 . We there pointed out that whether or not "an abstract right to public employment exists," Congress could not pass a law providing "`. . . that no federal employee shall attend Mass or take any active part in missionary work.'"

This Maryland religious test for public office unconstitutionally invades the appellant's freedom of belief and religion and therefore cannot be enforced against him.

The judgment of the Court of Appeals of Maryland is accordingly reversed and the cause is remanded for further proceedings not inconsistent with this opinion.

Reversed and remanded.

Therefore, any atheist wishing to hold office and denied for irreligion need only point this ruling out to the Attorney General of the state in question.
Illegitimi non carborundum.

pinkocommie

Quote from: "Thumpalumpacus"
Quote from: "Tank"Does your constitution overdrive State law? (Forgive me if I have not managed to get the terminology correct)

Quote from: "KDbeads"I think it would if the state constitutions were challenged in the supreme court.  We were just talking about that the other day....
I know here in TX it's a requirement for any elected office to believe in a supreme being/higher power.

The 14th amendment applies the Federal Constitution to the states.  Article Six forbids a religious test for office:

Quote... but no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States.

The Supreme Court in 1961's Torasco v Watkins explicitly upheld the ban on religious tests:

QuoteThe fact, however, that a person is not compelled to hold public office cannot possibly be an excuse for barring him [367 U.S. 488, 496]    from office by state-imposed criteria forbidden by the Constitution. This was settled by our holding in Wieman v. Updegraff, 344 U.S. 183 . We there pointed out that whether or not "an abstract right to public employment exists," Congress could not pass a law providing "`. . . that no federal employee shall attend Mass or take any active part in missionary work.'"

This Maryland religious test for public office unconstitutionally invades the appellant's freedom of belief and religion and therefore cannot be enforced against him.

The judgment of the Court of Appeals of Maryland is accordingly reversed and the cause is remanded for further proceedings not inconsistent with this opinion.

Reversed and remanded.

Therefore, any atheist wishing to hold office and denied for irreligion need only point this ruling out to the Attorney General of the state in question.

Yes but the laws still technically exist and are used in a very clever way.  In South Carolina, no one ever actually tries to utilize the law to ban someone from running because they know it's a bad law, they just start talking about how the law exists and if it may be applied if a candidate pops up who is suspiciously secular.  Because South Carolina is a very religious right kind of place, just mentioning the law in relation to a political candidate is enough to potentially kill his or her political career.  I saw this happen in Texas a few times as well, in less populated areas.  It's pretty sneaky, almost shockingly so.

Coincidentally for those outside the US, did you know that there are lots of crazy laws in places that are still technically laws but are just ignored?  Here is a link to the plethora of strange Texas laws for instance - though keep in mind that not all of these listed are still laws.  Once people started finding these, many states began removing the more ridiculous ones (It is illegal for a married woman to go fishing alone on Sundays, etc.) because they were...well, ridiculous.  =D

http://www.dumblaws.com/laws/united-states/texas
Ubi dubium ibi libertas: Where there is doubt, there is freedom.
http://alliedatheistalliance.blogspot.com/

Thumpalumpacus

Yeah, I'm not saying they're not extant.  And I agree that they exert a damping influence.

I just think that there has to be a first wave.  The big problem seems to be that political instincts govern against one being a groundbreaker, most of the time.
Illegitimi non carborundum.

pinkocommie

Quote from: "Thumpalumpacus"Yeah, I'm not saying they're not extant.  And I agree that they exert a damping influence.

I just think that there has to be a first wave.  The big problem seems to be that political instincts govern against one being a groundbreaker, most of the time.

You're totally right about that.  It boggles the mind that these laws do still exist, but I think a big part of the problem is it takes time and resources and unfortunately, there are too many issues and not enough groups with the capacity to deal with those issues yet, so things like antiquated laws take a backseat to more pressing matters.  That's one of the things I mention when people ask me why being vocal about atheism matters at all - why I feel it's necessary to speak up, even if it's just self identifying as an atheist.
Ubi dubium ibi libertas: Where there is doubt, there is freedom.
http://alliedatheistalliance.blogspot.com/

Tank

I suppose the US as a whole has a lot of odd laws as it's had a lot of parallel independent law makers. However the UK as thousands of odd laws that are hang overs from the long history of law making but not removing laws from the books. The laws simply don't get used anymore and it costs money and effort to remove them so they just hang around. Sometimes somebody will try to resurrect an old law to use it and a judge will rule it to be inappropriate based on later law and precedent so it becomes impotent and unusable but it remains on the books as it'll take work to remove it completely.
If religions were TV channels atheism is turning the TV off.
"Religion is a culture of faith; science is a culture of doubt." ― Richard P. Feynman
'It is said that your life flashes before your eyes just before you die. That is true, it's called Life.' - Terry Pratchett
Remember, your inability to grasp science is not a valid argument against it.