Religion has no place in government / W. Skordelis
Should an atheist be allowed to serve in public office? Some people in Asheville, North Carolina don’t believe that the councilman-elect, Cecil Bothwell, should be allowed to take his seat on the city council based entirely on the fact that he is an atheist.
Article 6, section 8 of North Carolina’s state Constitution says:
The following persons shall be disqualified for office: First, any person who shall deny the being of Almighty God.”
Bothwell’s political opponents are talking about the possibility of a lawsuit against the City of Asheville and the Board of Elections, should Bothwell be sworn into office.
There is one little problem for said God-fearing opponents, the First Amendment to the United States Constitution and the court precedents that have established the U.S. Constitution’s authority to trump state and local laws when conflicts occur.
First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution:
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
The very first sentence of the very first amendment to our constitution, the top of the list of what became known as the “Bill of Rights,” not only allows people to establish whatever form of religion they want and to be protected from any governmental “prohibiting the free exercise therof,” it also prohibits government from establishing any official religion. By not being permitted to form an “official religion,” likewise the government cannot place any religious requirements on a government post.
But there’s more, pesky, federalist constitutional meddling that’s bad news for Bothwell’s opponents, Article VI of the U.S. Constitution which says:
No religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States.”
There is nothing more fundamental than our right to free speech. And free speech is linked to the freedom of religion, for or against, because belief and practice of a religious doctrine are forms of personal expression which cannot be forced upon or denied by government. To challenge that fundamental right in court, based on the archaic wording of a state constitution, and how those words relate to the case of Councilman Cecil Bothwell would be frivolous. Just as government cannot deny a Jew, or a Muslim, or even a Catholic from serving office, we cannot deny the right of an atheist to serve elected office.
The more important question this case brings forward, is whether an atheist could ever and if elected, should ever be permitted to be President of the United States? Could such a thing occur? In the current state of politics where the entire conservative agenda is written by evangelicals, and they begat the Right-Wing media, and if any atheist candidate were to even remotely show signs of seriously competing for a nomination of a major party for the presidency, the Far Right would send out a swarm of locusts with leaflets and viral poison and pestilence to stamp out the evil pretender. It would be almost as impossible as electing an African-American.
Should an atheist like Cecil Bothwell be permitted to serve as president? The Bill of Rights says yes, and the king of laws always trumps the jokers who think otherwise.
.jpg)
Sources, Citizen-Times.com, Wkipedia
Comments
why not? they would allow a muslim to serve. i don't know of any athiest that would blow me away if given the opportunity.
I have no idea where "wire_paladin" is coming from with that comment.
The fact that this would even be a question in this day in age depresses me to no end. How can so many people be so narrow-minded and ugly? I don't, however, blame the people of Asheville...they're just following "the letter of the law", which is pretty clear, albeit stupid as hell. I blame this archaic and absurd law in their state constitution, which needs to be amended immediately.
Sounds like it's time to update some outdated and archaic laws to me. What century is this anyways? What happened to the separation of religion and government in this country? Nut job religious fundys trying to force their agenda on everyone and trying to influence government policy. The fact that this is even an issue just shows how bass ackwards Asheville is. Sad. Welcome to the 21st century NC.
Rob, do you believe the Ten Commandments are a document with which you can live by?
WWGBD :
Which ten commandments?
wire_paladin:
And which muslim you know who has been allowed to serve that will blow you away?
WWGBD asked:
"do you believe the Ten Commandments are a document with which you can live by?"
Hell no! Perhaps 6-9 and half of 5, but the rest are garbage.
I was sworn in without incident on Dec. 8, though it now appears fairly likely that a local lawyer will file a law suit to oust me.
My take is that the Ten Commandments are fine if they float your boat, but the Golden Rule covers (or leads to) everything that really matters.
When religion and government combine, the outcome is often horrendous. Bush's religious wars in the mid-east, sharia, stoning of rape victims, even King Henry VIII lopping of his wives heads. Billy Graham told GHW Bush that Saddam was "the AntiChrist itself" (according to Bush), and helped justify the first Gulf War. And of course, Blackwater and the Taliban are similarly headed up by dogmatic religionists.
I think he should be able to run. My only issue is when atheists divert their faith from a greater power (God) to the STATE. I call that the religion of the State. No specific Utopian belief necessary other than to believe in the STATE as the all supreme collectivization. uggg. collectivists..
Got something to say?
Examiner.com is looking for writers, photographers, and videographers to join the fastest growing group of local insiders. If you are interested in growing your online rep apply to be an Examiner today!