Some people in Asheville, North Carolina are up in arms about a man just elected to the city council. No he is not corrupt or an adulterer. Those are virtually qualifications in today’s politics. The problem is not what Cecil Bothwell is but what he is not: God-fearing. Opponents are opposing his election on the basis of a provision of the North Carolina Constitution that bars atheists from public office. One is the former head of the NAACP. It is clearly unconstitutional and would make for a wonderful (and educational) challenge for North Carolina.
H.K. Edgerton, a former Asheville NAACP president, does not appear disturbed about discriminating against people on the basis of faith as opposed to race: “I’m not saying that Cecil Bothwell is not a good man, but if he’s an atheist, he’s not eligible to serve in public office, according to the state constitution.”
Article 6, section 8 of the state constitution says: “The following persons shall be disqualified for office: First, any person who shall deny the being of Almighty God.”
We have previously seen candidates opposed for their belief in creationism (here) or their lack of belief in God (here). I am not sure why atheists are viewed as inherently disqualified. At least with an atheist, you know that he is not hoping for something better later. This is it. Indeed, Mr. Bothwell should have run on the slogan: “Vote for Me: This is All I Got.” If you do not believe in an afterlife, you really want to make this heaven on Earth. It is the same reason it may be an advantage to have pilots who are atheists: they have nothing to look forward to if they crash, here.
Article VI of the U.S. Constitution says: “no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States.” The Supreme Court clearly ruled that such requirements are unconstitutional in Torcaso v. Watkins, 367 U.S. 488 (1961).
Bothwell acknowledges that he is an atheist on his MySpace page, though he wrote in an online post last week that he prefers the term “post-theist.” At the moment, many are trying to keep him a pre-council member.
For the full story, click here.
This would be a fascinating SCOTUS case. If one can be barred from political office for being an atheist, than logically one might be barred for lack of regular church attendance, or for not believing that Jesus is the Son of God. I would say that it would be slam dunk unconstitutional all the way to SCOTUS, but in this Country, in these times, with 30 years of peculiar judicial appointments, you never can tell.
Yes, Mike S., everything you say is true but have you considered that he has a demon? Perhaps he worships Satan on his off hours? Given the many fine actions of our politicians who do believe in God, why would you want a non-believer in office? I think he should convert or be banished. He just looks evil to me.
Well Edgerton, that’s all fine and dandy.
Except for the Supremacy Clause. And the First Amendment. And you, YOU Edgerton, have just lost your right to complain about discrimination in any form. You can’t have your cake and eat it to, Jesus Nazi. Oppression and discrimination is oppression and discrimination whether it comes from a whip or a little black book, sport. Or do you support a racial limitation on holding office too, hypocrite?
Mr. Bothwell won’t be going anywhere soon absent SCOTUS letting Scalia write a lone opinion . . . and he’s a Cheney co-conspirator.
This dog won’t hunt by the plain language of the U.S. Constitution.
And if it does get supported by some insane chance? I’ll see you all at the Revolution. If someone wants to dictate my religion (or any other Constitutional or basic human right for that matter), I ultimately have no compunction about destroying them and their supporters. I don’t give a damn if you’re “from the Government” or not. YOU WORK FOR WE THE PEOPLE, even if you don’t think so. Your right to believe ENDS at forcing your beliefs on me or others. You want to use coercion? I have no issue using force if required. Being a pacifist does not mean being a doormat for you Jesus Nazis. It means refraining from violence until there is no other option. You theocrats won’t be happy until someone is bleeding. It’s your nature. You’re from the division set, the God is Ego set, the destroyer set. Jesus was about inclusion, you are not, ergo, you are not about Jesus. You bunch of zealots keep pushing your luck. Just don’t be surprised when people don’t rollover like you’ve all been trained to do by Pastor Polyester.
I hope you all cry like children when your State Constitution is found unconstitutional.
it’s not just about athiests. What about Buddhists? Hindus? NC has growing Asian populations, so these are non-trivial. Asheville is a new age-y place, so there would be all kinds of non-Christian creeds.
“He just looks evil to me.”
Jill,
How right you are. He should go down. We need more religious people with the looks of Joe Lieberman, or the booty of Sarah Palin, to lead us all to the promised land.
Does the NC Constitution specify who “Almighty God” is?
Mike S.–
I believe according to some of the Fundamentalist groups who are big “supporters” of Israel that “Droopy Dog” Joe Lieberman would have to convert to Christianity before the Rapture–or he ain’t going to be beamed up to the “heavenly” promised land.
Prof Turley, thank you for covering this topic and to Blind Faithiness for mentioning it earlier under another topic.
As a former baptized Southern Baptist—and presently going on 40+ years as an atheist—I agree with Mike Spindell ,and doubtless others, that this would be a perfect Supreme Court case.
I trust that the High Priestess God—Oh! Wait!—no woman could exhibit such despicable handiwork of which a man-gawd is capable—ergo, god *must* be an anthropomorphic man with hisn’ patriarchal biases of submission a’gin all natural women.
Professor Turley already pointed out the SCOTUS holding in Torcaso v. Watkins, 367 U.S. 488 (1961).
“We repeat and again reaffirm that neither a State nor the Federal Government can constitutionally force a person ‘to profess a belief or disbelief in any religion.’”
http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/cgi-bin/getcase.pl?court=US&vol=367&invol=488
Us NALs need more. The no religious test clause is fine for federal positions. How does it get incorporated to the state level? Via the due process clause of the 14th amendment? Or via the privileges or immunities clause?
I Factor,
Thanks for the link; however, if the lower courts–district and appellate–do not rule in favor of the atheist, what is the legal recourse other than the Supreme Court?
OK, I should have read Torcaso v. Watkins. Nevermind.
Hey Nal,
Should not that be We NALS,i.e., We need need more v. Us need more?
Or has my nonstandard ‘nglish corrupted you too?
I am beginning to believe that both sanity and insanity are communicable diseases, and that we all have both in us, struggling at times to dominate.
http://blogdredd.blogspot.com/2009/12/some-dementia-is-contagious.html
FFLEO:
Oui.
Well thanks a lot Nal. I had to Google what Oui meant! Other than Latin, I sure would prefer that uppity people did not use ferrin’ vocabularies in this ‘sheer conservative Republican Republic of ourn’.
And, by just giving me just one answer to a 2-part question, I am unsure which question you answered and with which you agreed.
Googling certainly ruins the (supposed) cleverness of my response.
I often use colloquialisms when I want to “get down” with the common folk.
Oweeeeeeeeeeeeeeee!
I don’t suppose that this is the first Sct Justice that has been an atheist more by actions than words. Rehnquist comes to mind.
FFLEO,
The SCOTUS holding in Torcaso is controlling. I don’t expect any court to uphold the ban on atheists. (even the lowest)
As a child, I attended a Catholic school. My parents were devout Catholics. I was taught that atheists were the most despicable people on earth. I guess that part of “free will” was not expected to be so free.
“I would say that it would be slam dunk unconstitutional all the way to SCOTUS, but in this Country, in these times, with 30 years of peculiar judicial appointments, you never can tell.”
I wish I could say that I think you’re wrong, Mike… but I can’t. This country is REALLY starting to scare me.
The IT Factor,
As a nonlawyer, I was just wondering about examples of precedents for cases, such as Torcaso, where the Supreme Court had to reaffirm an earlier SC’s decision—albeit controlling.
The smartest kids I knew growing up in Colorado attended Catholic parochial school. When they entered high school with us heathens, they were so far advanced in math and science–as well as discipline–that they were admired and envied.
FF LEO–
Can’t say that I got the same advanced background in math and science at my parochial school. I probably could have passed an AP course in discipline with flying colors on the first day of high school though. And I sure could repeat verbatim answers to questions from my Baltimore Cathechism.
Nal,
Would you like a saucer of milk to go with your response to FFLEO?
Elaine,
Are you white milk, or are you —- the dreaded spotted milk bottle?
Jill–
Black milk bottles are the ultimate in sinfulness.
I’m a white milk bottle–or spotted milk bottle–or black milk bottle depending on your perspective of what constitutes the following: 1) being in a state of grace, 2) a venial sin, 3) a mortal sin.
Actually, I’ve been in a state of agnostic euphoria for many years now.
Agnostic Euphoria?
Isn’t that the new scent by Elizabeth Taylor.
BIL–
You’ve given me an idea for a line of Pagan Perfumes: Heavenly Heathen, Amorous Atheist, Scent of Sinner, Odor of Odin, Vestige of Venus, Whiff of Wiccan. Oh, the possibilities!
Elaine:
Isnt Heavenly Heathen an oxymoron?
Arent you neglecting Joy de Juno?
“Odor of Odin”
________________________________
Well, that sounds better than the bottle of ‘Old Spice’ and Fitch’s hair tonic that I am still using since the mid-1950s.
My grandpappy used to have to hide his colorful Fitch’s bottles when his alcoholic friend came a’vistin’ or the old boy would drink them dry. The stuff had like a 10% alcohol content and the colors ranged from emerald green to a beautiful blue but the durn stuff had lanolin in it, which caint be too good for your innards.
Byron–
Oxymoronic depending on the definition of “heavenly” you have in mind. According to The American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language, the first defintion listed for heavenly is “Sublime; delightful; enchanting.”
Don’t you suppose a heathen can be enchanting–just like someone who’s got religion?
I like Joy de Juno. And how about A Zap of Zeus?
************
FF LEO–
One of my grandpappies used to hide little nip bottles of whiskey in different places around his house.
BTW, I hope yer grammaw kept that alcoholic friend away from the bottle of vanilla too!
Very nice work to Elaine, FFLEO and Byron!
roflol
I knew I liked you people for a reason.
And I may have to print up some “Odor of Odin” t-shirts.
Personally of the lot I’d probably prefer sent of sinner (depending on the sin).
These all seem sort of Eurocentric, how about Essence of Isis, Bouquet D’Quetzalcoatl?
Gyges–
Bouquet of Buddha. I’m into alliteration in the naming of my perfumes. Essence of Isis is a keeper!
Elaine,
You have to think of this as a song instead of a series of isolated notes. Without tension there can be no resolution.
Gyges–
Do you mean that the names of the different scents in my line of Pagan Perfumes should be listed in such a way that when they are read aloud in succession the reader feels a verbal crescendo mounting in his/her voice rising to a sonorous climax–followed by an anticlimatic dip in glottal thrust?
I do like the idea of high-resolution perfumes.
“I am beginning to believe that both sanity and insanity are communicable diseases, and that we all have both in us, struggling at times to dominate.”
Dredd,
I agree with your statement above and with your linked article. I think hisotically this could also be shwon. The German people were not any worse humans than the cultures around them and yet they could be infected with NAZI mania and become literally insane for a time, following insane leaders. The historical examples are too many to raise here.
“This country is REALLY starting to scare me.”
Flipkid,
Me too and while I’ve always been something of an optomist about the world, I find darker thoughts creeping in.
“I believe according to some of the Fundamentalist groups who are big “supporters” of Israel that “Droopy Dog” Joe Lieberman would have to convert to Christianity before the Rapture–or he ain’t going to be beamed up to the “heavenly” promised land.”
Elaine,
Ignorant Joe and the other ignorant Jewish Fundamentalists that cozy up to Christian Fundamentalists ignore the real beliefs of of “Revelations.” They do so in the hope of creating alliances that will assist Israel, but fail to see that their direction goes the opposite way.
BTW I’m more an Essence of Erato type of guy.
Mike–
Essence of Erato, the Muse of lyric poetry, goes to the top of the my list!
Elaine,
You’ve got it backwards, the tension has to come before the climax. Thus the single non-alliterative name, you place it before the one with the greatest harmony to make the highlight that harmony.
Gyges–
Thank you for the clarification.
Mr. Turley writes:
“If you do not believe in an afterlife, you really want to make this heaven on Earth. It is the same reason it may be an advantage to have pilots who are atheists: they have nothing to look forward to if they crash, here.”
That is the “eat, drink, and be merry for tomorrow we die” theory written about in the Bible.
It has never worked, anywhere on earth, including non-biblical lands, or even atheist lands.
This is because, and I think history proves it, humans are inherently evil whether they do their evil deeds because or not because of “god”.
Karl Marx, if I recall, didn’t believe in a god. He worked real hard at making life a better place, perhaps even a heaven on earth.
And in the meantime, his wife and children lived in dire poverty. This was, I believe, somewhat self imposed because Marx was obsessed with how to make life fairer but couldn’t make a living at it. Four of his seven children died because of the hardships caused in large part because of a man out to make the world a better place since there was nothing beyond this life.
Tootie,
Your logic is distressed to say the least. The truth is that some people are predominantly good, some are predominantly bad and most are inbetween. Bad can usually be defined as those who would hurt others for their own gain, be it psychological, power based of money based. There is enough historical evidence to show that purveyors of religion have been every bit as bad as purveyors against religion.
“That is the “eat, drink, and be merry for tomorrow we die” theory written about in the Bible.”
This is not logically responsive to your quote from JT which obviously meant that those not believing in an afterlife might be more careful about avoiding death. This has nothing to do with the “eat,drink..etc.”
formulation since that is about fatalism.” As to the inherent evil of human beings, one first has to define what is evil. To me anyone who does not believe in treating others, as they themselves would want to be treated, are people on the path towards being evil. However, that doesn’t make them inherently evil, only self centered.
To me few people are really evil and that is not because I morally equivocate, but because of my lifelong interest in how people think and live, I’ve only seen a few instances of real evil. Among those who I distrust the most in their judgments of others are those who have such a pessimistic outlook on who humans are.
Mike,
But if all men are inherently evil, then our own short comings are just human nature and excusable.
That’s why family values politicians can cheat on their wife with a clear conscious.
Gyges,
Those who are so eager to ascribe evil willy-nilly, don’t get the sense of what you say. They’re too busy pointing fingers.
Mike:
My outlook on who humans are comes from the overwhelming evidence writ large throughout history that the human race is wicked beyond belief. Last century was particularly awful and atheism had a lot to do with it.
Yes, I’m guilty, I have profiled the entire human race. It helps me survive.
I profile lions too and so, wisely, I keep away from them. This is not pessimism, it is sensibility.
Among those in the world I distrust are those who claim to be optimists but pessimistically make nasty snap judgments about people they just instantly met through a few typed words in the comment section of an internet blog.
Tootie:
“My outlook on who humans are comes from the overwhelming evidence writ large throughout history that the human race is wicked beyond belief.”
************
I wonder who illuminated,tried,reproved,and punished those responsible for historical atrocities? Chimpanzees? How did the lions handle their crimes among themselves? If for every evil, there is a justice are not these “vile” humans worthy of some credit? If it’s any consolation, your view is decidedly Christian!
mespo:
A broken clock is right twice a day.
Thank you, I am a Christian.
The most beautiful thing in nature is a virtuous man (since there are so few of them).
I appreciate them all.
“Last century was particularly awful and atheism had a lot to do with it.”
Tootie,
If you knew anything about history you would understand that most Centuries have been particularly awful. That is the history of humanity. It is not about evil though for the most part, that is where your personal prejudices cloud your viewpoint. Humanity is evolving apes. We are somewhat different from most animals in that we are self aware and aware of our own mortality. A shark is not inherantly evil as a flesh eater and yet constantly kills to live. Where the simian branches have evolved the option of meat vs. vegetable it is less clear cut and humanity has come to the point where there is general acknowledgement that murdering others of our species is unnecessary and can be counterproductive. This has represented at least a million years of evolving, with our understanding of the world making breakthroughs in perhaps the past 250,000 years.
Now to an extent, religion has played a positive role in this and there is wisdom to be found in various religious philosophies. However, these philosophies, no matter how enlightened the original teacher, have also been re-interpreted into justifications for killing other people. There were no doubt horrendous wars and genocide in the 20th Century, but the 19th was hardly better. The Civil War killed over 500,000 people who were citizens of the same country. Slavery was genocide, without question and so was our dealing with Native Americans. That was just our country alone. The historical record shows the rest of humanity no better.
Your claim that atheism had a lot to do with the troubles of the 20th Century and your reference to Marx. no doubt indicates communism as a pernicious cause of evil in the 20th century and no doubt it played a major role with Stalin killing as many as Hitler. I’m not a fan of Marxism as an economic philosophy and unlike many I have known and debated real life Marxists. However, the NAZI’s were not atheists and were supported by the bulk of Christians in their country. They were responsible for WW II and not Stalin. WW I was begun by Christians, as was the slaughters in Africa. THe Muslims and Hindu’s also had problemmatic 20th Century History and many criticize Israeli behavior. Neither Atheism, nor religion represents inherent evil or bad behavior. Both can be used to good or bad purposes. The bad behavior in the world is the product of individuals and groups who fanatically believe their own version of the truth should prevail.
However, as bad as history has been it has truly shown a marked upward trend in human living. Given that we humans are at the brain stem merely omnivorous predators of the highly successful variety, there is little doubt that we have had a violent history. This for the most part is not evil, it is the nature of a percentage of our population acting on their less evolved impulses. People who generally try to define things as evil, are those with a philosophical, or religious axe to grind and so have their judgment clouded by their own pre-suppositions.
“Among those in the world I distrust are those who claim to be optimists but pessimistically make nasty snap judgments about people they just instantly met through a few typed words in the comment section of an internet blog.”
Since I assume this to be a riposte aimed at me let me say that there are clues in your meager output that I think indicate where you’re coming from, though you try to play your cards close to the vest.
1.”That is the “eat, drink, and be merry for tomorrow we die” theory written about in the Bible.”
2. “This is because, and I think history proves it, humans are inherently evil whether they do their evil deeds because or not because of “god”.”
3. “the human race is wicked beyond belief”
Your word choice and characterizations are such that much meaning can be gleaned from the.
Of course, Tootie you share the ideals of some of my fellow towns people(Asheville, NC), where this story is unfolding.
I’m always amused by religious judgement and self-righteousness.
Its as clear as “the overwhelming evidence writ large throughout history” that you believe yourself to be ‘right’ beyond doubt in all things but how do you know for sure?
Its fun to say things like “Last century was particularly awful and atheism had a lot to do with it.” with ZERO evidence to back up such a claim, I guess. Unfortunately, for your way of thought control though, its not true.
Please, Tootie, prove to us that supernatural beings are real and that YOUR particular brand of the supernatural is ruling the universe, first, then we’ll talk.
Tootsie,
If man is inherently evil, why has the course of human history (in general) been a progression away from violence and towards pacifism, from slavery and serfdom to freedom for all?
“Pray to Play: North Carolina Voters Seek to Seek To Block Swearing in” man this site has the worst typos of any I’ve seen.
Mike Kilpatrick,
You are welcome to leave any time; please do.
Milk K.
Don’t let the keynoard kept use hear. k
or don’t let the wind sweep your ass between you ears again. It makes it difficult for one to hear. Ever read Faulkner, Steinbeck? Did not think so.
Cecil Bothwell’s story was covered on Maddow last night. Here’s a link
Also, a link to Mr Bothwell’s blog which has a statement explaining his position.