Bizarre, Politics, Religion, Society

Pray to Play: North Carolina Voters Seek to Seek To Block Swearing in of New Bar Council Member Under State Constitutional Ban of Atheists in Public Office

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.

56 thoughts on “Pray to Play: North Carolina Voters Seek to Seek To Block Swearing in of New Bar Council Member Under State Constitutional Ban of Atheists in Public Office”

  1. 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.

  2. 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.

  4. Googling certainly ruins the (supposed) cleverness of my response.

    I often use colloquialisms when I want to “get down” with the common folk.

  5. 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.

  8. 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?

  10. 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?

  11. 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?

  13. 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.

  14. 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.

  16. “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.

  17. 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.

  18. 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.

  19. 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.

  20. 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.

Comments are closed.