At the same time that many are promoting a ?Keep Christ in Christmas? message, one group is sending a similar but broader statement, although with almost opposite intentions. Religion of any kind has no place in government, says Openly Secular, the joint project of four organizations that call for non-discrimination of atheists and agnostics.
The constitutions of seven Southern states clearly say that any non-believing atheist cannot hold public office. Yes, the U.S. Constitution says otherwise, and the U.S. Supreme Court ruled such discrimination to be unconstitutional over 50 years ago, too. But it’s still there in Arkansas, Maryland and five other states.
And even though that SCOTUS decision made such terms of state constitutions illegal, that hasn’t exactly stopped those states from trying to enforce them, even as late as 1997 when a South Carolinian applying to be notary public was at first refused for being atheist. And with a recent growth of religion influencing politics in the U.S., who knows if this issue might not rear its ugly head again?
That’s why Openly Secular wants to improve public awareness of this issue during the holiday season. Todd Stiefel, chair of Openly Secular, recently told The New York Times:
?If it was on the books that Jews couldn’t hold public office, or that African-Americans or women couldn’t vote, that would be a no-brainer. You’d have politicians falling all over themselves to try to get it repealed. Even if it was still unenforceable, it would still be disgraceful and be removed. So why are we different??
After the 1961 SCOTUS decision in Torcaso vs. Watkins, no state could uphold any religious discrimination included in their constitutions. But seven states still have those terms:
- In 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.?
- In 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(.)?
- In Mississippi:
?No person who denies the existence of a Supreme Being shall hold any office in this state.?
- In North Carolina:
?The following persons shall be disqualified for office: First, any person who shall deny the being of Almighty God(.)?
- In South Carolina:
?No person who denies the existence of a Supreme Being shall hold any office under this Constitution.?
- In 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.?
- In 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.”
The (non-southern) Pennsylvania could also be included, pending on interpretation of a state constitution clause that declares protection of all office seekers despite any religious affiliation, so long as it includes belief in both a Heaven and Hell. According to the Keystone State’s Article 1, Section 4:
?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.?
So why won’t these states change their constitutions? Like Maryland’s Democratic majority whip Jamie B. Raskin told the New York Times:
?If a Mormon can run for president and Muslims can demand official school holidays, surely the secularists can ask the states for some basic constitutional manners.?
But religion could be having a recent growth in influence on politics, a recent Pew Research poll found. In a Sept. 2014 survey, Pew reports that up to 49 percent of the American public want faith to have more influence on U.S. politics, 54 percent believe churches should more frequently express political views, and 59 percent think Congresspersons should have strong religious beliefs, too. Fifty-three percent say they wouldn’t vote for an atheist candidate. And of a strongly hypocritical lean, Openly Secular notes, a majority says they would be more likely to support a politician who they knew to have extramarital affairs than support a secular candidate.
This trend, then, could suggest to politicians that the subjects of faith and secularity should be avoided at the moment, if only to protect their personal interests of holding office. But the recent survey results also make Openly Secular’s goals more prominent and timely, too:.
“We envision a world where there are no social costs for being secular, where families and communities remain whole when some members have moved away from religion or supernaturalism.”
Openly Secular is the joint effort of the Richard Dawkins Foundation, Secular Coalition for America, Secular Student Alliance, and the Stiefel Freethought Foundation. One of the organizations (Secular Coalition) unsuccessfully lobbied Texas? legislature to amend that term in its state constitution in 2012.
Let us know your thoughts at the Liberal America Facebook page. Sign up for our?free daily newsletter to receive more great stories like this one.
