Appalling Discrimination against atheist?

JJB3333 said:

Indeed it does, but you have to realize that unless you publicly call them out on it, politicians have a nasty way of getting around certain parts of the law.

And to your part about slavery, segregation, and bans, it has and has almost brought us to war on multiple occasions. If you want it to start, march on washington with thousands of your supporters like MLK jr, or break the country in half and cause civil war like the south did. We're still waiting to see the big movement for same sex marriage.

IF you want change, then you have to get up and do something about it. No one cares what people say on a political forum. What they do care about is action. That is how everything had to be done to get us here now, and its not going to change any time soon until it happens again.

Click to expand...

:rofl

I'm afraid you misunderstand me. I am not advocating a million-man march on D.C. to demand "atheist rights". I don't have to. The constitution already guarantees that I have the same rights that you have. If you are implying that this country will go to war in order to prevent that from happening, I'm afraid that's really a bit melodramatic. Atheists are no different than anyone else, except that when we live a good, kind life its because we care about our fellow man, no matter what they personally believe, and because it's the right thing to do, not because we fear some kind of divine punishment if we don't fall to our knees in fear of the wrath of an invisible deity who demands complete allegiance lest one suffer eternal torture for such insolence.

If the "righteous faithful" decide to once again walk the streets in pitchfork-wielding mobs to lynch and burn those who do not believe exactly as they do, then we will probably get miffed enough to make a rather large and unpleasant scene on a national scale. Otherwise, the vast majority of us are too busy earning a living, loving our families and raising our children to be good citizens of the world to worry about such bigoted nonsense. If it comes to a significant legal challenge, I suspect SCOTUS, conservative majority and all, will support our right to exist with the same constitutional protections as everyone else. If not, then we will do as we have always done, live our lives doing the best that we can for our families, our communities and our country, just like the majority of Americans do regardless of their religious affiliations, or lack thereof.

As for Same Sex Marriage, it's here to stay, and about time. I suggest people simply get used to the idea, then go on with their lives as well.

AGENT J said:

sorry that doesnt answer the question
can states rights say no women are allowed to hold office? blacks? gays? and you think thats constitutional?

Click to expand...

Are we talking about religion, or ever possible subject under the sun?

davidtaylorjr said:

The federal government was never supposed to be able to trump the states, so yes, the states could say that and it be Constitutional.

Click to expand...

And that is why the system was flawed and you had a civil war.... states can not be trusted to do the right thing.

"An eighth state constitution discriminates against atheists by affording special protection to theists only.
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."[88]"

Unnecessary? Perhaps, but not special protection.

Good thing most of us are against it. One though voted for "righteousness."

DiAnna said:

So you're one of those people who insist that all atheists are exactly alike, but distance yourself from religious whackos who picket veteran funerals and burn Korans in the parking lot, right? Can we spell "hypocrite"? :lamo

Click to expand...

Atheist are exactly alike in that they do not believe in any higher power and I have not met one yet who does not seem bitter and angry about life.

shrubnose said:

It's not just me that says that they are wrong, the U.S. Constitution says that they are wrong.

BTW: That's what I voted in the poll.

Click to expand...

Where in the constitution does it say states can not ban atheist from running for office?

American said:

Are we talking about religion, or ever possible subject under the sun?

Click to expand...

for those that are severely confused, uneducated and or dishonest about this topic its not about religion, see thread title "ATHEIST". The discussion is about discrimination and equal, human and civil rights and its also about whats constitutional so they all apply, try to keep up.

your mistake, and no need to thank me for pointing that fact out

digsbe said:

I disagree with these state constitutions and laws, someone who is an atheist shouldn't have their philosophy barring them from a government office.

However, is atheism a religion and protected? The constitution guarantees religious freedom and atheism isn't a religion.

Click to expand...

If the constitution guarantees religious freedom, it guarantees freedom from religion. Otherwise, it would be contradictory to the nature of the guarantee itself. In other words, if the constitution allows you to deny the existence of the christian "god", it allows you to deny the existence of any and every god.

By law it appears that a state can deny people the ability to hold an office if they are a person who is not willing to accept that God exists.

Click to expand...

Only if you don't understand the concept of religious freedom.

It's a state's rights issue, but I think it's wrong.

Click to expand...

States don't have the right to create religious litmus tests.

I'm against it, but I also don't think such a practice violates the current US Constitution

Click to expand...

Torcaso v. Watkins - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Torcaso v. Watkins, 367 U.S. 488 (1961) was a United States Supreme Court case in which the court reaffirmed that the United States Constitution prohibits States and the Federal Government from requiring any kind of religious test for public office, in the specific case, as a notary public.

Click to expand...

Actually, it does.

I voted that it is discrimination, because atheism is just as much of a religion
as any of the others.
It takes just as much faith to believe in nothing, as to to believe in a Deity.
Atheism is the currently endorsed religion of the federal Government,
The endorsement of the religion of atheism over the other faiths, is what is unconstitutional.

sawyerloggingon said:

I think there are exceptions such as Washington state just legalizing pot.

Click to expand...

Yes, and Colorado as well, but is it really legal? Could I go to one of those states, buy up twenty acres, and start farming pot and selling it on the open market?

sawyerloggingon said:

Atheist are exactly alike in that they do not believe in any higher power and I have not met one yet who does not seem bitter and angry about life.

Click to expand...

Then you haven't met very many atheists.

AGENT J said:

Now I’m not an atheist myself and I know many atheists that do believe in religion just don’t think anybody has it right but discrimination is discrimination and it amazed me that these things below are actually in state constitutions. I just learned this in another thread.
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."[81]

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.”[82]

Mississippi:
"No person who denies the existence of a Supreme Being shall hold any office in this state."[83]

North Carolina:
"The following persons shall be disqualified for office: First, any person who shall deny the being of Almighty God."[84]

South Carolina:
"No person who denies the existence of a Supreme Being shall hold any office under this Constitution."[85]

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."[86]

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."[87]

An eighth state constitution discriminates against atheists by affording special protection to theists only.
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."[88]

Discrimination against atheists - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

That’s appalling to me and the purest form of bigotry and discrimination IMO. SO I’m curious where you stand.
I’d love to see someone try to enforce this so it can be defeated and destroyed like it should, wonder if there are any recent cases of it.

What do you think of the laws banning atheist from some offices?

I’m against it
it violates the constitution and should be removed
it’s discrimination
it’s bigotry
it’s disgusting
I support this
it does NOT violate the constitution and should stand
it’s NOT discrimination
it’s NOT bigotry
it’s righteousness

Click to expand...

Well that's pretty ****ing ridiculous. I didn't realize some states still did that. The Arkansas one was particularly troubling, because of ones lack of belief in any deity they are not considered a competent witness and cannot testify in court . Whaaaat the ****.

Although it makes me wonder why some atheists get caught up in all the stupid meaningless **** like not wanting religious images on public grounds when certain states don't let them hold public office or testify as a witness in court. The latter is actually something worth fighting for, the former...not so much.

longview said:

It takes just as much faith to believe in nothing, as to to believe in a Deity.

Click to expand...

I disagree there. I would think it is very much easier to NOT believe there is a pink unicorn in the moon rather than believing there is a pink unicorn in the moon.

TheNextEra said:

I disagree there. I would think it is very much easier to NOT believe there is a pink unicorn in the moon rather than believing there is a pink unicorn in the moon.

Click to expand...

I understand what you are saying, it has been my experience that the people who
are vocal about being atheist, are VERY passionate about their lack of beliefs,
One might almost say zealous.

longview said:

I understand what you are saying, it has been my experience that the people who
are vocal about being atheist, are VERY passionate about their lack of beliefs,
One might almost say zealous.

Click to expand...

Depends, I have seen both types. I have seen the atheist that goes along with their life, stays out of the way of others and is (for the most part) simply quiet about their views. I have also seen the militant atheist who is hell bent on forcing religion out of the public sight of society. Much like religious people, there are all types of atheists too.

The interesting part is most people that consider themeselves "Chrsitian" that I have met personally, more fall along the lines of agnostics than Christians. They believe there is a higher power, but not all believe in the bible nor do they necessarily believe Jesus is their savior. Religion is quite an interesting subject to have with people.

TheNextEra said:

Then you haven't met very many atheists.

Click to expand...

Obviously it's a generalization but I have family and even friends that are atheist and they are angry and bitter a lot of the time. One atheist friend brought me a 16 year old bottle of Scotch last time they came for dinner though so there is that.

Dittohead not! said:

Yes, and Colorado as well, but is it really legal? Could I go to one of those states, buy up twenty acres, and start farming pot and selling it on the open market?

Click to expand...

I am actually in Wash state now, it is where I am retiring. I looked into growing pot but there are lots of hoops to jump through and I gave up on the idea. You can not even grow a plant or two for personal use because this is a blue state after all and they want their pot tax revenue.

TheNextEra said:

Depends, I have seen both types. I have seen the atheist that goes along with their life, stays out of the way of others and is (for the most part) simply quiet about their views. I have also seen the militant atheist who is hell bent on forcing religion out of the public sight of society. Much like religious people, there are all types of atheists too.

The interesting part is most people that consider themeselves "Chrsitian" that I have met personally, more fall along the lines of agnostics than Christians. They believe there is a higher power, but not all believe in the bible nor do they necessarily believe Jesus is their savior. Religion is quite an interesting subject to have with people.

Click to expand...

I agree, most people are what is called piccadilly Christians, they only pick the parts they agree with.
I suspect this occurs in every faith.
For the topic of this thread, the only way for a Politician to be denied office for being an atheist,
is if they were outspoken about the issue.
Besides what would be wrong about an atheist lying about what they did not believe in?

longview said:

Besides what would be wrong about an atheist lying about what they did not believe in?

Click to expand...

I would guess the principle of the matter, same as if it were required for a religious person to lie about them being not religious. Why should anyone have to lie to get into office just because some archaic people think that you have to believe in a sky god to do public service?

Gotta love Constitutional wordplay. "No religious test should ever be required to hold public office except for this one." Just goes to show that the original framers aren't the enlightened geniuses we thought them to be, just flawed men who were products of their time.

TheNextEra said:

I would guess the principle of the matter, same as if it were required for a religious person to lie about them being not religious. Why should anyone have to lie to get into office just because some archaic people think that you have to believe in a sky god to do public service?

Click to expand...

But see this is getting to the heart of John Locke's comment about why atheist should not hold
public office, "they lack a moral compass."
There is no atheist principle against lying, all of our moral authority is derived from religion.
The religions authority represents the control group, without the control group,
there is nothing to measure against, therefore no absolute right or wrong.
I still think it would be wrong to discriminate against the person for their beliefs (or lack of),
but just think that atheism has many of the same attributes of the other religions,
and should be treated accordingly.

longview said:

But see this is getting to the heart of John Locke's comment about why atheist should not hold
public office, "they lack a moral compass."
There is no atheist principle against lying, all of our moral authority is derived from religion.
The religions authority represents the control group, without the control group,
there is nothing to measure against, therefore no absolute right or wrong.
I still think it would be wrong to discriminate against the person for their beliefs (or lack of),
but just think that atheism has many of the same attributes of the other religions,
and should be treated accordingly.

Click to expand...

No, it's not that an atheist has no moral compass it is that they don't have one that is locked into a sky god book. To say that an atheist has no morals is utterly ridiculous. Hell, there are so called "Christians" out there that have been caught in scandals from the GOP to the Dems and they are supposed to have "morals" right?

I'd rather elect an atheist now, than anyone in congress that thinks they are a "Christian" to be honest.

TheNextEra said:

Then you haven't met very many atheists.

Click to expand...

id have to agree the atheists i know i would describe the vast majority of them as free spirits and among the happiest people i know.

id also say at least 33% of them if not half describe themselves as atheist but they do think there is probably some higher power they just think nobody knows what it is and no religion has it right

Monserrat said:

1.) Well that's pretty ****ing ridiculous. I didn't realize some states still did that. The Arkansas one was particularly troubling, because of ones lack of belief in any deity they are not considered a competent witness and cannot testify in court . Whaaaat the ****.

2.) Although it makes me wonder why some atheists get caught up in all the stupid meaningless **** like not wanting religious images on public grounds when certain states don't let them hold public office or testify as a witness in court. The latter is actually something worth fighting for, the former...not so much.

Click to expand...

1.) i agree and calling it that is being nice

2.) extremist and idiots are going to exist in any group the problem is usually they have the loudest voices or get noticed the most and sadly we pay attention.