Where you aware

[YankeyMCC]

That you must swear belief in the xian religion in order to run for constitutional office in MA?

http://www.godlessgeeks.com/LINKS/StateConstitutions2.htm

and

http://www.mass.gov/legis/const.htm#cart090.htm

Am I mistaken or is there no amendment repealing this religious test for office?

Seems odd. Can someone better versed in MA law clarify or confirm?

[Poppyseedman]

1. Each individual state

would have to have an amendment to abolish it's religious clause in it's own Constitution.

It's called the ninth amendment to the federal Constitution. Anything not expressly written in the US Constitution defaults to the states and the individual as rights.

The US federal Constitution can overrule a states constitutional provision if it is found illegal or unlawful.

The states have a right to impose their own rules and regulations in who runs for office.

If you keep reading there is an amendment changing the Article VI so you don't have to profess being a Christian to run for office like the ones already elected would pass the test anyway.


Article VI. Instead of the oath of allegiance prescribed by the constitution, the following oath shall be taken and subscribed by every person chosen or appointed to any office, civil or military under the government of this commonwealth, before he shall enter on the duties of his office, to wit: "I, A. B., do solemnly swear, that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, and will support the constitution thereof. So help me God."

[YankeyMCC]

3. But you have to believe in god

Yes I understand the relationship between the US and State constituions. What I was unsure about is whether this provision of the state constitution had been declared by the courts unconstitutional which I would expect it would if put to the test.

[Poppyseedman]

5. Your question asked if we were aware that you had to be a

Christan to run for office. The answer is no you don't have to be.

You have to swear to God: "I, A. B., do solemnly swear, that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, and will support the constitution thereof. So help me God."

Nobody is going to ask you if you believe in a God you just swore by.

I never understand why atheist are so offended by the concept of god.

If you don't believe in god, why care?

I could care less if someone swore allegiance to their belly lint as long as they hold up the laws and constitution of the people they were elected to represent.

[YankeyMCC]

6. Why are theists so offended by questions about god

I modified my original question. It was pointed out that there was an amendment and I said ok but you still have to believe in god.

Do you question why black people are offended by the Confederate battle Flag on state flags?

Atheists are often offended by having god forced into their lives by government for many reasons. Just the fact of it being forced is one, then there's the centuries of persecution and the continued ostracizing. Bush the 1st even said he didn't think atheists really qualified as citizens and should not have equal rights. The recently deceased pope said atheists were damned. We have plenty of reason to be offended when god is forced into our lives.

In this case, for me, it isn't so much a matter of offense it is a matter of personal freedom and government staying out of the god business. If I'm going to give a solemn oath I want to give a solemn oath. It is a much more important aspect of my values that I be honest than the question of the existence of god. So if I'm being made to swear to what I think is a fictional character how can that be an honest solemn oath?

On edit: Just because it is easy sometimes for atheists to stay in the closet doesn't mean we should be forced to do so.

[Poppyseedman]

7. Apples and oranges

To use the race and homosexual card to justify being offended is pretty offensive.

Name one, just one right you are denied based on your atheist belief as opposed to the real inequality blacks suffered under ?

Just who exactly is forcing you to stay into the closet?

Who is forcing you to believe in god ? If you don't like what you are seeing, hearing, don't pay attention or turn the channel

Would you be just as offended if technology is being forced upon you, as it is, if you were anti-technology ?

I'm offended by soft porn billboards, does it mean my being offended supersedes the rights of the general public to advertise?

[YankeyMCC]

8. You're analogies are apples and oranges

If an atheist wants to run for gov of MA they have to either LIE - be forced to do something against their values - or accept god again something against their values and in fact against the law of the US Constitution.

The existence of soft core porn doesn't force anything on you. You have a choice in the matter someone running for gov in MA does not have a choice unless you consider being forced to lie or pretend a choice. You're talking about the "free market" and I'm talking about government and my right to participate without discrimination on equal basis with all other citizens as opposed to a private market.

It is very similar to the case of homosexuals being forced in the closet. Yes the situations are different but to refuse someone to make analogies is rather narrow minded.

When atheists have been put to death or tortured to "convert" for not believing in god they are no less dead or hurt than a homosexual who experienced the same thing.

The confederate battle flag is offensive to black people for good reason. Having god forced on them for atheists is just as offensive to them even if the history is different. It takes nothing away from the injustice of what was done to homosexuals or blacks to make analogies of this sort. It in fact should give us all power as it is a common cause in which we can stand shoulder to shoulder fighting injustice not just for ourselves but for everyone - to borrow an idea from Dr King.

And you don't address any of the points I made in my post. Government should not be in the god business. The oath violates my religious freedom. And regardless of what you think of the aptness of the analogy with homosexuals why should atheists be forced to hide as this oath forces and as society in general forces? And if you don't think society forces atheists to hide try walking around with a "Godless American" T-Shirt someday see how you're treated.

OR think about how your family and friends would react if you told them you were an atheist.

If you don't understand - ok that in itself is understandable it isn't easy to put yourself in another person's shoes. I can't ever fully understand what it is like to be a black person for example. But at least try and understand what you can and be accepting. Even though I can not understand what it is like to be black because I'm not, I can still understand that they face injustice in today's society and be as understanding and supportive as is possible. I can ask questions about it without being dismissive or angry in the spirit of trying to understand and not in the spirit of being judgmental.

[James T. Kirk]

2. It says "God". I don't think it necessarily means Christ in this section.

There are lots of denominations that believe in God, but not necessarily in Christ.

Also, it says Quakers get out of the oath. Hmm. Who'da thunk it?

The part about the university is overtly Christian, however.

[YankeyMCC]

4. But there are lots of people that don't believe in either

[TaleWgnDg]

9. I refuse to get into a "debate" with laypeople about law . . .

.
I refuse to get into a "debate" with laypeople about law. It's fruitless. With that being said, I will state the following:

1.) The Massachusetts constitution was authored by John Adams and ratified by the ppl of Massachusetts BEFORE the federal constitution existed. As such, the original Massachusetts constitution contains some, shall we say, antiquated terms. When its terms are picked over out of context, the full meaning of its entire contents is lost.

2.) Regardless, the later federal constitution is the superior law of the land, all across America -- all the several states and territories:

"The (U.S.) Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the Members of the several State Legislatures, and all executive and judicial Officers, both of the United States and of the several States, shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation, to support this Constitution; but no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States." (italicized emphasis added by TaleWgnDg)

U.S. Constitution, Article IV, Clause 3, in pertinent part

3.) The U.S. Supreme Court (SCOTUS) has interpreted this federal constitutional clause as reaching the states. Thus, any state constitution or state law or state regulation or state executive order or any color of law u/ any state in the nation that conflicts with federal constitution (SCOTUS opinions), fails. This is true whether a state has amended or not its state constitution to comply with the federal constitution. Again, the state con or action fails, period.

Therefore, the entire premise is bogus, from start to finish, that anyone in any state of the nation is mandated to take a "religious test" in order to achieve a public office of whatever bent . . . is BOGUS!

Furthermore, no one is mandated to say "oath" because "oath" has been interpreted to have a religious base in violation of the 1st amendment and Article IV, Clause 3. To say "affirm" in place of "oath" is within your federal constitutional rights.

One last item: for anyone to allege anti-godliness of another merely for asserting his/her constitutional rights is waaaaaaay the hell off-base in constitutional law, and, may I add, is being erroneously instructed by whom -- the extreme religion-into-law radical rightwingers? Nothing more need be said.





.