Awareness / Culture / Politics / Religion & Atheism

U.S. State Legislation Attempting to Prevent Atheists from Taking Public Office

This is legit, it is in current legislation as noted. Don’t think that this could ultimately prevent someone from taking public office but Jebus’s misguided politicians have been hard at work trying to bring Jebus and the state from separate bedrooms to permanent residency in a swanky sex hotel room in Tokyo! Obviously violating the constitution, bill of rights and all it stands for.

Not a good look!

1236730_351601094975008_174444161_n

Came across the info-graphic through social media channels and then researched its authenticity. I was very skeptical and then very surprised that I could validate it:

The constitutions of these seven US states ban atheists from holding public office:

Arkansas:

 
“No person who denies the being of a God shall hold any office in the civil departments of this State, nor be competent to testify as a witness in any Court.”

http://www.arkleg.state.ar.us/assembly/Summary/ArkansasConstitution1874.pdf

Maryland:

 
“That no religious test ought ever to be required as a qualification for any office of profit or trust in this State, other than a declaration of belief in the existence of God; nor shall the Legislature prescribe any other oath of office than the oath prescribed by this Constitution.”

http://msa.maryland.gov/msa/mdmanual/43const/html/00dec.html

Mississippi:

 
“No person who denies the existence of a Supreme Being shall hold any office in this state.”

http://www.sos.ms.gov/links/ed_pubs/pubs/Mississippi_Constitution.pdf

North Carolina:

 
“The following persons shall be disqualified for office: First, any person who shall deny the being of Almighty God.”

http://www.ncga.state.nc.us/legislation/constitution/ncconstitution.html

South Carolina:

 
“No person who denies the existence of a Supreme Being shall hold any office under this Constitution.”

http://www.scstatehouse.gov/scconstitution/a17.php

Tennessee:

 
“No person who denies the being of God, or a future state of rewards and punishments, shall hold any office in the civil department of this state.”

http://www.tn.gov/sos/bluebook/11-12/TS5_TNFoundingDocs.pdf

Texas:

 
“No religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office, or public trust, in this State; nor shall any one be excluded from holding office on account of his religious sentiments, provided he acknowledge the existence of a Supreme Being.”

http://www.statutes.legis.state.tx.us/Docs/CN/htm/CN.1.htm

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.”

http://sites.state.pa.us/PA_Constitution.html

Please advise if I am misinformed so that I can retract the post.

Hicks Bogan

7 thoughts on “U.S. State Legislation Attempting to Prevent Atheists from Taking Public Office

    • Came across the info-graphic through social media channels and then researched its authenticity. I was very skeptical and then very surprised that I could validate it:

      The constitutions of these seven US states ban atheists from holding public office:

      Arkansas:
      “No person who denies the being of a God shall hold any office in the civil departments of this State, nor be competent to testify as a witness in any Court.”

      http://www.arkleg.state.ar.us/assembly/Summary/ArkansasConstitution1874.pdf

      Maryland:
      “That no religious test ought ever to be required as a qualification for any office of profit or trust in this State, other than a declaration of belief in the existence of God; nor shall the Legislature prescribe any other oath of office than the oath prescribed by this Constitution.”

      http://msa.maryland.gov/msa/mdmanual/43const/html/00dec.html

      Mississippi:
      “No person who denies the existence of a Supreme Being shall hold any office in this state.”

      http://www.sos.ms.gov/links/ed_pubs/pubs/Mississippi_Constitution.pdf

      North Carolina:
      “The following persons shall be disqualified for office: First, any person who shall deny the being of Almighty God.”

      http://www.ncga.state.nc.us/legislation/constitution/ncconstitution.html

      South Carolina:
      “No person who denies the existence of a Supreme Being shall hold any office under this Constitution.”

      http://www.scstatehouse.gov/scconstitution/a17.php

      Tennessee:
      “No person who denies the being of God, or a future state of rewards and punishments, shall hold any office in the civil department of this state.”

      http://www.tn.gov/sos/bluebook/11-12/TS5_TNFoundingDocs.pdf

      Texas:
      “No religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office, or public trust, in this State; nor shall any one be excluded from holding office on account of his religious sentiments, provided he acknowledge the existence of a Supreme Being.”

      http://www.statutes.legis.state.tx.us/Docs/CN/htm/CN.1.htm

      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.”

      http://sites.state.pa.us/PA_Constitution.html

      Sorry I could not hyperlink the URL’s at the moment. Please advise me if I am misinformed so that I can retract the post.

      Thanks,

      Hicks Bogan

      • Could you elaborate on your question a little further please? These are state constitutions and their date of passing resolution into law does not bear relevance on the laws and provisions. Unless specific parts or articles of them are repealed or amended.

      • I gave a link in another reply. Right now, I’m trying to look up information about laws that have been declared unconstitutional but are somehow still on the books. It seems it’s not odd. I would have thought that they were automatically removed, but apparently it doesn’t work the way I thought.

      • I went to go get a link. The Maryland statute has specifically been ruled by the Supreme Court as unconstitutional.
        http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Torcaso_v._Watkins
        How one goes about getting these laws off the books is not something I understand, but it is not unusual for these things to remain. I wouldn’t mind seeing them go since I’ve had this conversation several times before. However, as long as it’s understood that these are unconstitutional, it’s a pretty low priority for me.

  1. I agree, In the second sentence of the post I stated that I didn’t think that they would ultimately be able to be enforced and concluded that they were, in fact, certainly unconstitutional. However, the fact that they have not been repealed or amendments made to remove them from official, current and enforceable constitutions is not a good look.

    The fact that you have been able to identify at least one supreme court case ruling that the provision in Maryland’s constitution is unconstitutional, yet remains unamended or repealed is very strange and relatively morbid.

    Definitely not a good look.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s