Six states ban Athiests from holding public office

Texas, Arkansas, Mississippi, South Carolina, Tennessee, Maryland, and North Carolina  ban, in their state constitutions, atheists from holding office. This is directly at odds with the UNITED STATES of AMERICA constitution. This is at the very basic level of the seperation of church and state.

Here is Rachel Maddow explaining and exploring this issue as it has come up in North Carolina:

What do you think about this?


4 responses to this post.

  1. Posted by Mr. P on February 17, 2010 at 2:26 pm

    What do you mean? Oh wait did you mean the Son? Capital “S”? But seriously, what do you mean?


  2. Posted by Matt on February 17, 2010 at 2:21 pm

    lol… Stand a little less between me and the sun


  3. Posted by Aurelius on February 17, 2010 at 11:14 am

    i think one should believe in something higher than ones self. Something higher that connects us all giving us common interest. One with no deities is only serving their own righteousness, only believeing in themselves. There is also the other end of the spectrum where catholic, christians, muslims are also pressing their beilefe. Both are extreems one is of “me and them” the other is “us and them” when there is truely just US. An athiest is in my opinion and experience is the most seperate being from the human race. i dont buy chaos theory. Because one dosent believe in a god or struggles with the idea of god does not mean there is no god, because one does not believe in love does not mean there is no love. Because one thinks he is seperate or superior does not mean he is one or the other. i know about 15 Atheists all of whom need some humbling. I certainly would not want any one of them dictating whats best for me, whats best for me is not best for everyone. I would sooner have someone who believes in something making choices than someone who believes in themself…
    A noble man compares and estimates himself by an idea which is higher than himself; and a mean man, by one lower than himself. The one produces aspiration; the other ambition, which is the way in which a vulgar man aspires


    • Posted by Mr. P on February 17, 2010 at 12:17 pm

      Thanks for responding. How did you find my blog?

      In response to your thoughts:
      Most of the ten commandments are not laws and not believing in a ‘god’ doesn’t make someone immoral. It also does not mean that they only believe in themselves, an Atheist can be just as giving, humane, and moral as anyone else. I agree that the ‘us and them’ dichotomy needs to be broken down, though your opinions about Atheists do not seem to be working towards that.

      I feel as though an Atheist could be more in touch with the human race because that is what they believe in, they are not focusing their energies outside of humanity, and can, therefore, be aware of human nature in ways that others may not.

      Thinking one is superior indeed does not make one so, I do think that many who practice some kind of religion does see themselves as superior – this can be seen in your attitude of Atheists.

      I am curious about why your Atheist friends need humbling (I would love to hear their thoughts on your words).

      I am a bit confused by your words: “I certainly would not want any one of them dictating whats best for me, whats best for me is not best for everyone. I would sooner have someone who believes in something making choices than someone who believes in themself…” The first sentence seems to be saying that no one should be ‘dictating’ what’s best for you because everyone is different. But, you are more comfortable with someone who believes in something making choices for you. Is this regardless of what that belief is? Atheism is a belief, how about Scientology? or Islam? I bet you you would not be so comfortable living under Islamic law. The last part of that sentence I’ve addressed already in part, however you don’t want someone who believes in themselves making choices? Does that make sense, Maybe you mean believing in ONLY themselves, well again Atheism does not mean hedonism. Morality can come from within. I wonder though – does this mean that you think that without religion humankind would be evil? Do you know the histories of the major religions? They are rife with the blood of ‘non-believers’ and those who are different, the selfishness of the participants (mostly those in POWER), and persecution of the ‘them’ we have mentioned earlier. I should point out that I am not an Atheist, I do have beliefs, though they do not fit in with most mainstream religions. ALSO, one of my main problems with the actions of these states is the blurring of the separation of church and state. I would rather have someone who makes decisions based on logic and the evidence in hand rather than the fictional accounts of white men who died thousands of years ago.

      I’m assuming that last bit is a quote? Who said it? My thoughts are that people can (and have) aspire for/towards vulgar, evil things, and people can (and have) have very noble, good ambitions.


What do you think? Share it here!

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: