View Poll Results: What do you think of the laws banning atheist from some offices?

Voters
109. You may not vote on this poll
  • Iím against it

    74 67.89%
  • it violates the constitution and should be removed

    70 64.22%
  • itís discrimination

    61 55.96%
  • itís bigotry

    47 43.12%
  • itís disgusting

    36 33.03%
  • I support this

    7 6.42%
  • it does NOT violate the constitution and should stand

    6 5.50%
  • itís NOT discrimination

    2 1.83%
  • itís NOT bigotry

    4 3.67%
  • itís righteousness

    6 5.50%
Multiple Choice Poll.
Page 17 of 36 FirstFirst ... 7151617181927 ... LastLast
Results 161 to 170 of 351

Thread: Appalling Discrimination against atheist?

  1. #161
    Guru
    pinqy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    Northern Virginia
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:07 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    4,377

    Re: Appalling Discrimination against atheist?

    Quote Originally Posted by sawyerloggingon View Post
    A very long decision to read right now but in the end it looks as though it was dismissed and the state was able to keep on keepin on.
    The decision cited Torasco v Watkins (1961), so the state requirement had already been ruled unconstitutional 37 years earlier. The reason those clauses are still in the state constitutions is that it's a pain in the ass to amend the constitution, and it's unnecessary to remove a clause that's not enforceable anyway.
    Therefore, since the world has still/Much good, but much less good than ill,
    And while the sun and moon endure/Luck's a chance, but trouble's sure,
    I'd face it as a wise man would,/And train for ill and not for good.

  2. #162
    Banned
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Where they have FOX on in bars and restaurants
    Last Seen
    09-14-14 @ 02:09 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    14,700

    Re: Appalling Discrimination against atheist?

    Quote Originally Posted by pinqy View Post
    The decision cited Torasco v Watkins (1961), so the state requirement had already been ruled unconstitutional 37 years earlier. The reason those clauses are still in the state constitutions is that it's a pain in the ass to amend the constitution, and it's unnecessary to remove a clause that's not enforceable anyway.
    Well then this whole thread has been a complete waste of time!

  3. #163
    Sage
    Dittohead not!'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    The Golden State
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 08:40 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    41,596

    Re: Appalling Discrimination against atheist?

    Quote Originally Posted by sawyerloggingon View Post
    Well then this whole thread has been a complete waste of time!
    Unlike many other threads in which we've managed to solve the world's problems.
    "Donald Trump is a phony, a fraud... [he's] playing the American public for suckers." Mitt Romney

  4. #164
    Guru
    pinqy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    Northern Virginia
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:07 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    4,377

    Re: Appalling Discrimination against atheist?

    Quote Originally Posted by sawyerloggingon View Post
    Well then this whole thread has been a complete waste of time!
    Pretty much. A similar stink was made when G. W. Bush was running for president the first time and it was revealed that a house he sold a few years earlier had a covenant in the deed forbidding sale to non-whites. The covenant hadn't been enforceable since 1947, Bush didn't know about it anyway, and even if he did, it would have been very difficult and expensive to change.

    But still...the clauses are still offensive.
    Therefore, since the world has still/Much good, but much less good than ill,
    And while the sun and moon endure/Luck's a chance, but trouble's sure,
    I'd face it as a wise man would,/And train for ill and not for good.

  5. #165
    Sage

    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Last Seen
    09-24-17 @ 04:38 AM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    29,261

    Re: Appalling Discrimination against atheist?

    Quote Originally Posted by pinqy View Post
    Pretty much. A similar stink was made when G. W. Bush was running for president the first time and it was revealed that a house he sold a few years earlier had a covenant in the deed forbidding sale to non-whites. The covenant hadn't been enforceable since 1947, Bush didn't know about it anyway, and even if he did, it would have been very difficult and expensive to change.

    But still...the clauses are still offensive.
    Was it the house in Highland Park?

  6. #166
    Guru
    pinqy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    Northern Virginia
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:07 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    4,377

    Re: Appalling Discrimination against atheist?

    Quote Originally Posted by winston53660 View Post
    Was it the house in Highland Park?
    Preston Hollow neighborhood..6029 Northwood Road, Dallas
    Therefore, since the world has still/Much good, but much less good than ill,
    And while the sun and moon endure/Luck's a chance, but trouble's sure,
    I'd face it as a wise man would,/And train for ill and not for good.

  7. #167
    Sage

    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Last Seen
    09-24-17 @ 04:38 AM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    29,261

    Re: Appalling Discrimination against atheist?

    Quote Originally Posted by pinqy View Post
    Preston Hollow neighborhood..6029 Northwood Road, Dallas
    HP has a lot of those covenants too. We are a little inbreed here.

  8. #168
    Dungeon Master
    Hooter Babe

    DiAnna's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Northern California
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    32,701
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: Appalling Discrimination against atheist?

    Quote Originally Posted by Removable Mind View Post
    Ditto...now that is funny. "Demonstrate a knowledge of what is in it? Because somebody is atheist...there's a likelihood they don't know what's in the Constitution?

    Surely you jest...
    What he meant is that swearing on the constitution and proving some actual knowledge of the constitution would be preferable to a bunch of elected officials who don't know squat about what the constitution says or what it means.

  9. #169
    Irremovable Intelligence
    Removable Mind's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Austin, Texas
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:09 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    23,565

    Re: Appalling Discrimination against atheist?

    Quote Originally Posted by Dittohead not! View Post
    No, no, no.. that's not what I meant at all.
    What I meant was that, instead of swearing in on the Bible, why not swear in political leaders on the Constitution?

    Atheists may not know the Bible, but that's OK. What we need are politicians who know what's in the Constitution and then support it.
    Ditto...sorry...it didn't sound like something you'd say. That's why I sounded a bit perplexed...and other poster wrote saying that I misunderstood your post. It happens every now and then.

    But I did say to Fletch...who replied about your post that that was actually a pretty good idea - foregoing your remark meant just for atheist. And you didn't mean it that way.

    My apologies...no disrespect intended...it was something I just didn't connect coming from you.

  10. #170
    Irremovable Intelligence
    Removable Mind's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Austin, Texas
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:09 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    23,565

    Re: Appalling Discrimination against atheist?

    Quote Originally Posted by DiAnna View Post
    What he meant is that swearing on the constitution and proving some actual knowledge of the constitution would be preferable to a bunch of elected officials who don't know squat about what the constitution says or what it means.
    Yeah, Di...I screwed up and misread his intended meaning. Fletch pointed out and I wrote Ditto an apology. His idea is a good one. I agree. We've got too many idiots in office who can't read and comprehend the phone book much less the Constitution.

    Thanks for bring it to my attention. I'm do make an error every now and then...well, not more than a few times a day.

Page 17 of 36 FirstFirst ... 7151617181927 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •