The state constitutions for these states disallow a person with no religious beliefs
from running for public office, and, in the case of Arkansas, from providing a testimony as a witness in a court case. Absolutely outrageous!
0 Kudo
Arkansas and Mississippi State Constitutions
| Author | Comment | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
 NewsTravels |
Arkansas and Mississippi State Constitutions |
Lead | ||
|
Posts: 38 01/31/08 00:33:18 |
|
|||
|
|
||||
|
AndysCatHouse |
#1 | |||
|
Posts: 147 01/31/08 19:45:54 |
How is this constitutional? This cannot hold up... Right?
|
|||
|
|
||||
|
agnohumanist |
Miss. & Arkansas | #2 | ||
|
Posts: 100 01/31/08 22:23:58 |
Wow! I can't believe no one has challenged those state laws! Surely they've been violated. Well, I suppose no candidate who lacks religious beliefs
has been bold enough to proclaim it publicly, given the prejudice against nontheists, especially in those states, but there have to have been nonbelievers who
have testified in court cases. Sounds like a great case to go all the way to the Supreme Court. Even with the rightward tilt on the current court, surely the
laws would be struck down...right? Tell me I'm right, please!
|
|||
|
|
||||
|
mightymjolnir |
#3 | |||
|
Posts: 132 02/01/08 09:54:13 |
Luckily, these laws usually fall when challenged. I am a little surprised that the "witness" portions have not been challenged yet. I am not at all
suprised at the difficulty in finding an electable atheist in Mississippi or Arkansas to challenge the constitution. The most viable option to challenge these
laws is to apply for the easily-attainable "office" of notary public.
For all of the stupid amendments proposed by the Indiana senate this year, we actually have a pretty solid church/state separation established in our state constitution. Even the notary oath reads, "so help me God (or under the pains and penalties of perjury)." Glad to know I can legally continue my notaryship. m |
|||
|
|
||||
|
agnohumanist |
#4 | |||
|
Posts: 100 02/01/08 18:49:27 |
Yeah, every once in a while our antiquarian state pleasantly surprises me. Mostly, though, I enjoy adapting Twain's joke (I think it was Twain) about
Cinncinati to Indiana: "When the world ends, I want to be in Indiana because it won't happen there until 20 years later."
What a mixed-up state. On one hand, we are one of a very few states where textbooks are not taxpayer-funded, placing a burden on many families and, in my opinion, denying people a free public education. (You should see parents' faces when they move here from another state to enroll their kids and are handed a huge book bill!) On the other hand, we have the 21st-century scholar program that provides free college tuition (Indiana colleges only) to students who sign up in 8th grade if their families qualify as low-income--and they don't have to be dirt-poor to qualify. It's a great program; I just wish we could apply it to even more people. It's very progressive for such a conservative state. I'm amazed that it passed the legislature. But that is exeption, rather than the rule. Anyway, I'm glad that you can continue your lucrative career as a notary without fear of persecution as a nontheist! |
|||
|
|
||||
|
mightymjolnir |
#5 | |||
|
Posts: 132 02/01/08 19:56:08 |
"When the world ends, I want to be in Indiana because it won't happen there until 20 years later."That may be the best Mark Twain quote ever. My new number one favorite at least. I agree on the 21st Century Scholars - I was actually in the first group of them, and while a freshman in college I spoke in front of the Indiana Commission on Higher Education in an effort to keep the program going. As a result, somewhere there's a picture of me shaking hands with Evan Bayh at the following State of the State address. Not sure how I didn't parlay that into greater success, especially considering I was pre-law at the time. But I digress... "My Man Mitch" may only tolerate having the scholarship in place, and never consider expanding it. It's too bad - it would really help fight the brain drain. m |
|||
|
|
||||
|
NewsTravels |
#6 | |||
|
Posts: 38 02/01/08 23:38:48 |
The Arkansas constitution was enacted in 1874, and the Mississippi constitution was enacted in 1890. That's a long time to have such a discriminatory
provision. As a matter of fact, the Arkansas Article 19 misc. provisions heading states "1. Atheists disqualified from holding office or testifying as
witness." Indiana actually has a respectable constitution with Article 1,
Sections 2-7 adhering to the Bill of Rights.
|
|||
|
|
||||
|
agnohumanist |
#7 | |||
|
Posts: 100 02/01/08 23:45:38 |
Mighty, that's cool that you benefited from the program and spoke to the Commission about it! Maybe some of my students and former students should thank
you for helping to keep the program alive. Yeah, I'm sure Mitch won't expand the program, but I haven't heard anything about cutting it. No news
is probably good news in this case.
|
|||
|
|
||||
|
agnohumanist |
#8 | |||
|
Posts: 100 02/01/08 23:56:41 |
Oops! Better give credit where credit is due. I wasn't sure Twain said that quote about Cincinnati, so I checked it out. It's actually attributed to Will Rogers, at least on ThinkExist Quotes and BrainyQuote. And it was 10 years, not 20--although I'm pretty sure I've heard the 20-year version somewhere. Probably one of those hard-to-pin-down quotes. |
|||
|
|
||||
|
mightymjolnir |
#9 | |||
|
Posts: 132 02/02/08 08:05:24 |
Will Rogers, Mark Twain, 10 years, 20 years - still love the quote.
The Arkansas constitution was enacted in 1874, and the Mississippi constitution was enacted in 1890. That's a long time to have such a discriminatory provision.That is a long time for such a discriminatory provision - a remarkably explicit one at that. Though I can't speak for the states with earlier-enacted constitutions, I do have a theory regarding Mississippi, Arkansas, and tragedy and religion in general. It seems that every time we exit a period of war or tragedy, it's followed by a period of increased religiosity. The more horrible the tragedy, the greater the religiosity. Example: the original use of the phrase "In God We Trust," on coinage, immediately followed the Civil War. Obviously nearly all casualties in the war were Americans, and this damaged our psyche to the point that people were scrambling for answers, justice, a supernatural overseer, etc. Now apply this to the south, which saw it's economy and way of life virtually destroyed, and it's not unreasonable to extend this increased religiosity for a few decades after the war ended. Though the south had already used the bible as justification for slavery, I believe that this increased sensitivity in particular also contributed to such bigoted language finding a home in the Mississippi and Arkansas constitutions. A few follow-up examples: after World War II, our increase religiosity combined with the Red Scare, placing "In God We Trust" on our paper money and as our national motto. I also believe the current trend was initiated by the horrors of 9/11, though it probably peeked sometime in 2004 or 2005, and the 2006 change election was (hopefully) a sign of the turning of the tides. I'll do some more research, though, and make sure I'm not completely full of crap. 
m |
|||
|
|
||||
|
agnohumanist |
#10 | |||
|
Posts: 100 02/02/08 10:11:53 |
M--You're not full of crap! Definitely a plausible theory, and an interesting one. I remember reading--a very long time ago--a passage by Bertrand Russel
in which he commented that people often display more religious belief after an event that, to his mind at least, actually argued against the existence of a
benevolent deity. I think it was Harris who pointed out that polls show a very high percentage of Katrina survivors said their belief was strengthened by that
horrific event! I know, I know, they want to thank someone for their "good luck"--but what are they thinking about those who perished?
|
|||
|
|
||||
|
NewsTravels |
#11 | |||
|
Posts: 38 02/02/08 20:42:55 |
agnohumanist wrote: Well, errr....they can always fall on the whole "God works in mysterious ways" bit. And by "mysterious," we actually mean maniacal. Those two terms are completely interchangeable, right? |
|||
|
|
||||
|
AndysCatHouse |
#12 | |||
|
Posts: 147 02/02/08 22:29:46 |
M and Agno, I think the disaster scenario is a big factor (one of many) in increased religiosity, too. 2007 was an incredible year for us atheists. I hope a
huge terrorism or natural disaster won't happen. The main reason of course is because no one wants bad things to happen to innocent people and the economy.
The other reason is it tends to silence skeptics. It seems nothing brings out the don't question authority card during a tragedy! Just look at what
happened to the Dixie Chicks and French Fries (aka Freedom Fries) when they questioned the War.
|
|||
|
|
||||
|
AndysCatHouse |
#13 | |||
|
Posts: 147 02/02/08 23:16:21 |
Indiana does seem to be doing ok on the teaching of reality in science class. (BTW: I didn't know parents had to pay for books here!) This was posted in
NCSE's newsletter from the Indiana Academy of Science: Resolution: Whereas science is defined as and limited to explanations based on natural, observable
and testable phenomena and, therefore, is explicitly distinguished from other types of explanations that depend on concepts relating to the supernatural (for
example," intelligent design", "creation science", and" informed debate" paradigms); and Whereas, learning and inquiry are
severely inhibited if teachers are placed in a position where they may feel pressured to alter their teaching of the fundamental concepts of science in
response to demands external to scientific disciplines; and, Whereas, evolution theory is fundamental to a thorough understanding of biological concepts as
reflected in the Indiana teaching standards, Therefore be it resolved that the Indiana Academy of Science, as a part of its commitment to educational
excellence in science instruction, opposes any restriction or imposition on the teaching of biological and cosmic evolution in the curricula of Indiana's
educational institutions. Explanation: Indiana scientists and educators recognize the critical importance of a strong grounding in the fundamental principles
of science for all of Indiana's youths. The extensive reasoning and consideration that has gone into the official position of the Indiana Academy of
Science on this issue (described in the resolution above) parallels that of all significant scientific and science education organizations across North
America. If you are interested in more details on the justification for this important and unanimous stance across these institutions, we strongly recommend
that you go to the WWW links provided below for the National Academy of Science, the American Association for the Advancement of Science, the National Science
Teachers Association and the National Center for Science Education. These organizations provide helpful background information on science, science education,
and the distinction between scientific and supernatural explanations of life. The fact that this information is typically highlighted on the front pages of
their web sites is an indication of the importance placed on this issue. The Indiana Academy of Science fully endorses the resolutions and policies of these
prominent institutions in order to promote instruction in science unencumbered by non-scientific explanations of life and the cosmos.
http://nationalacademies.org/evolution/#statements http://www.aaas.org/news/press_room/evolution/ http://pubs.nsta.org/galapagos/resources/page1.html
http://www.natcenscied.org/
Last Edited By: AndysCatHouse 02/02/08 23:20:46.
Edited 2 times.
|
|||
|
|
||||
|
mightymjolnir |
Free Inquiry Op-ed Weighs In | #14 | ||
|
Posts: 132 02/08/08 09:16:35 |
Once again, FI came through with a relevant article, this one by Nat Hentoff:
Christianizing America I just started a subscription to FI and Skeptical Inquirer, can't wait to read the stuff they don't post online. m |
|||
|
|
||||
|
76Rose |
#15 | |||
|
Posts: 35 02/10/08 18:50:41 |
Has anyone seen the trailers yet? One passed me at Maplecrest and St Joe Ctr. Something about weekday religious education.
I can think of few things more ridiculous than xian insecurity.
Guns don't kill people- Chuck Norris kills people.
|
|||
|
|
||||
|
SidewalkCynic |
God, Religion, and State Constitutions | #16 | ||
|
Posts: 2 02/21/08 15:15:10 |
mightymjolnir wrote:Texas and Tennessee, have similar provisions in their constitutions, and I am sure there are others; I am working on a survey. Almost all express some revernce to a deity in their preambles, I have only found a couple of exceptions. I was particularly surprised by the Indiana Preamble, as I am a former resident of Fort Wayne. PREAMBLE of INDIANA STATE CONSTITUTION What really got my attention was the phrase of "...right to choose our own form of government,..." I am certain that the federal constitution gaurantees that all States will form a republican form of government. What gets my attention about this discussion, is why are you worried about other States, when you have your own State to correct? Don't worry about the national agenda, concentrate on the local agenda. Prove that your ideas are correct, then maybe the rest of the nation will follow.
Last Edited By: SidewalkCynic 02/21/08 15:19:28.
Edited 1 time.
|
|||
|
|
||||
|
Skeptigator |
#17 | |||
|
Posts: 181 02/21/08 19:00:54 |
SidewalkCynic wrote: You could make the argument that the State of Indiana (as a benefit of joining the Union) is gauranteed to form a republican form of government. However, it
is not the Federal government that grants the People of the State of Indiana the right to form a government of any kind to begin with (for the same reasons the
First Amendment doesn't give me the right to free speech). Those who drafted the Indiana Constitution were thanking their GOD for giving the right to form
that government.
|
|||
|
|
||||
|
Skeptigator |
#18 | |||
|
Posts: 181 02/21/08 19:03:51 |
Interesting note about Mississippi, semi-related. They didn't ratify the 13th amendment to the Constitution (prohibiting slavery) until mid-1990's (not
1890s). I'm sure they meant to get to it but were too busy.
|
|||
|
|
||||
|
mightymjolnir |
#19 | |||
|
Posts: 132 02/22/08 16:25:21 |
Welcome to the board, SidewalkCynic.
Your criticism is well-taken, and deserves a response. I believe skeptigator covered the first part of the response - correcting a historical statement that, at this point, "neither picks my pocket nor breaks my leg," is not exactly a priority. Another point to consider is that we are not exactly a group of action yet. I don't think we've cleared 20 members at this point. Right now we're working on building an organization, so this post was more in the "open discussion" than "call to arms" category. Our affiliation with Center for Inquiry, Indiana, however, affords any one of us the opportunity and resources to take action as we see fit. That's where we're coming from - for clarity's sake, would you mind sharing where you're coming from? Not literally, of course - but are you an organizer or activist? Blogger? Whatever your standpoint, your contributions to this board are certainly welcome. Thanks for stopping by, m |
|||
|
|
||||
|
YoSoyJu |
#20 | |||
|
Posts: 39 02/23/08 01:04:08 |
This comes from PositiveAtheism:
According to a report in The State, the court's five justices unanimously agreed that the requirement violates the U.S. Constitution and upheld a lower court ruling in the case of a College of Charleton professor. The professor, Herb Silverman, is an atheist whose application for notary public was turned down because he had crossed out the part of an oath that read "so help me God." "The state Supreme Court didn't hesitate to find the religious test for public office to be a violation of religious freedom," Steven Bates, Executive Director of the ACLU of South Carolina, told the State. The ACLU had filed the original lawsuit in 1993 on behalf of Professor Silverman. The South Carolina high court agreed that forcing public officers to acknowledge the existence of a "supreme being" -- required by the state's constitution -- violated the U.S. Constitution's First Amendment that provides for religious liberty and separation of church and state. South Carolina was one of seven states that require belief in a higher power to hold public office, the State said. Arkansas, Maryland, Pennsylvania, North Carolina, Tennessee and Texas have similar clauses, the paper said, but they don't enforce them. I knew I had heard of a challenge before. It's 15 year old news, though.
Last Edited By: YoSoyJu 02/23/08 01:06:33.
Edited 1 time.
|
|||
|
|
||||
