quote:

ORIGINAL: Real0ne

Hey dumb shit I didnt say this: Oxford Professor of Mathematics John Lennox holds that atheism is an inferior world view to that of theism

see it has credits included, I am not john lennox

quote:

ORIGINAL: Nnanji

quote:

ORIGINAL: MrRodgers

quote:

ORIGINAL: Nnanji

quote:

ORIGINAL: WhoreMods

quote:

ORIGINAL: Real0ne
That said seems the gubmint has a controlling interest in promoting enforcing their atheist religion

The government that's been fawning and grovelling to the moral minority since Reagan handed the republican party over to the religious right in 1980?
The government that, at a state level, bans atheists from standing for elected political positions in several areas of your country?
The government that has never once been headed by a president who didn't claim to be a christian?
Yeah, if there's a government that's obviously a tool of the atheist conspiracy to promote secular humanism, it's the American one...

Yea, it was Obama...what a minute, you've gone back even further. Not being consistent are you?

Much more consistent than believers who have 3 choices of what they themselves claim IS the only way to salvation.

You need to once again, create an atheist conspiracy that clearly in no way exists.

No WM points out how the poisoning religious society poisons govt.

You want to be elected...better be a christian. In many states, one is required to claim a belief in god, to be on the ballot.

If you are a christian and you absolutely should be in a religiously 'free' country, then vote for [whoever] brings 'christian values' whatever they are...to govt. (how's that worked out for the voters ?)

Govt. therefore is in no way involved in any advancement in secular humanism.

Shall I get my tin foil hat or are you going to provide links to a few states that require you to believe in God to be on a ballot?

quote:

ORIGINAL: Nnanji

quote:

ORIGINAL: WhoreMods

quote:

ORIGINAL: Nnanji

quote:

ORIGINAL: WhoreMods

quote:

ORIGINAL: Nnanji

quote:

ORIGINAL: WhoreMods

quote:

ORIGINAL: Nnanji

quote:

ORIGINAL: MrRodgers

quote:

ORIGINAL: Nnanji

quote:

ORIGINAL: WhoreMods

quote:

ORIGINAL: Real0ne
That said seems the gubmint has a controlling interest in promoting enforcing their atheist religion

The government that's been fawning and grovelling to the moral minority since Reagan handed the republican party over to the religious right in 1980?
The government that, at a state level, bans atheists from standing for elected political positions in several areas of your country?
The government that has never once been headed by a president who didn't claim to be a christian?
Yeah, if there's a government that's obviously a tool of the atheist conspiracy to promote secular humanism, it's the American one...

Yea, it was Obama...what a minute, you've gone back even further. Not being consistent are you?

Much more consistent than believers who have 3 choices of what they themselves claim IS the only way to salvation.

You need to once again, create an atheist conspiracy that clearly in no way exists.

No WM points out how the poisoning religious society poisons govt.

You want to be elected...better be a christian. In many states, one is required to claim a belief in god, to be on the ballot.

If you are a christian and you absolutely should be in a religiously 'free' country, then vote for [whoever] brings 'christian values' whatever they are...to govt. (how's that worked out for the voters ?)

Govt. therefore is in no way involved in any advancement in secular humanism.

Shall I get my tin foil hat or are you going to provide links to a few states that require you to believe in God to be on a ballot?

There's seven.

Supreme Court unanimously declared it unconstitutional over fifty years ago. Where's my tin foil hat?



https://www.nytimes.com/2014/12/07/us/in-seven-states-atheists-push-to-end-largely-forgotten-ban-.html

quote:

ANNAPOLIS, Md. — A bookkeeper named Roy Torcaso, who happened to be an atheist, refused to declare that he believed in God in order to serve as a notary public in Maryland. His case went all the way to the Supreme Court, and in 1961 the court ruled unanimously for Mr. Torcaso, saying states could not have a “religious test” for public office.
But 53 years later, Maryland and six other states still have articles in their constitutions saying people who do not believe in God are not eligible to hold public office. Maryland’s Constitution still says belief in God is a requirement even for jurors and witnesses.

Now a coalition of nonbelievers says it is time to get rid of the atheist bans because they are discriminatory, offensive and unconstitutional. The bans are unenforceable dead letters, legal experts say, and state and local governments have rarely invoked them in recent years. But for some secular Americans, who are increasingly visible and organized, removing the bans is not only a just cause, but a test of their growing movement’s political clout.

Yet you want to make it sound like it's happening now.

When they repeal the laws, you can claim it's no longer an issue.

I can say it's not an issue since the SPOTUS published the decision. If you're so butthurt you can't, then you have issues. I will say, though, that's pretty pretentious of you to think you can or cannot determine what I can and cannot claim. Especially given the silly claims you make.

If we're dismissing silly claims: explain how the fact that this legislation is still part of the legal codes of seven states and has not been repealed despite a supreme court challenge half a century ago supports conspiracy boy's claim that the united states government is a tool of the liberal humanist conspiracy.

It wasn't a Supreme Court challenge, it was a Supreme Court decision. If you'd read the NYT article I posted, you'd answer your own question without looking silly.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Nnanji

quote:

ORIGINAL: WhoreMods

quote:

ORIGINAL: Nnanji

quote:

ORIGINAL: MrRodgers

quote:

ORIGINAL: Nnanji

quote:

ORIGINAL: WhoreMods

quote:

ORIGINAL: Real0ne
That said seems the gubmint has a controlling interest in promoting enforcing their atheist religion

The government that's been fawning and grovelling to the moral minority since Reagan handed the republican party over to the religious right in 1980?
The government that, at a state level, bans atheists from standing for elected political positions in several areas of your country?
The government that has never once been headed by a president who didn't claim to be a christian?
Yeah, if there's a government that's obviously a tool of the atheist conspiracy to promote secular humanism, it's the American one...

Yea, it was Obama...what a minute, you've gone back even further. Not being consistent are you?

Much more consistent than believers who have 3 choices of what they themselves claim IS the only way to salvation.

You need to once again, create an atheist conspiracy that clearly in no way exists.

No WM points out how the poisoning religious society poisons govt.

You want to be elected...better be a christian. In many states, one is required to claim a belief in god, to be on the ballot.

If you are a christian and you absolutely should be in a religiously 'free' country, then vote for [whoever] brings 'christian values' whatever they are...to govt. (how's that worked out for the voters ?)

Govt. therefore is in no way involved in any advancement in secular humanism.

Shall I get my tin foil hat or are you going to provide links to a few states that require you to believe in God to be on a ballot?

There's seven.

Supreme Court unanimously declared it unconstitutional over fifty years ago. Where's my tin foil hat?



https://www.nytimes.com/2014/12/07/us/in-seven-states-atheists-push-to-end-largely-forgotten-ban-.html

quote:

ANNAPOLIS, Md. — A bookkeeper named Roy Torcaso, who happened to be an atheist, refused to declare that he believed in God in order to serve as a notary public in Maryland. His case went all the way to the Supreme Court, and in 1961 the court ruled unanimously for Mr. Torcaso, saying states could not have a “religious test” for public office.
But 53 years later, Maryland and six other states still have articles in their constitutions saying people who do not believe in God are not eligible to hold public office. Maryland’s Constitution still says belief in God is a requirement even for jurors and witnesses.

Now a coalition of nonbelievers says it is time to get rid of the atheist bans because they are discriminatory, offensive and unconstitutional. The bans are unenforceable dead letters, legal experts say, and state and local governments have rarely invoked them in recent years. But for some secular Americans, who are increasingly visible and organized, removing the bans is not only a just cause, but a test of their growing movement’s political clout.

Yet you want to make it sound like it's happening now.

quote:

ORIGINAL: WhoreMods

quote:

ORIGINAL: Nnanji

quote:

ORIGINAL: MrRodgers

quote:

ORIGINAL: Nnanji

quote:

ORIGINAL: WhoreMods

quote:

ORIGINAL: Real0ne
That said seems the gubmint has a controlling interest in promoting enforcing their atheist religion

The government that's been fawning and grovelling to the moral minority since Reagan handed the republican party over to the religious right in 1980?
The government that, at a state level, bans atheists from standing for elected political positions in several areas of your country?
The government that has never once been headed by a president who didn't claim to be a christian?
Yeah, if there's a government that's obviously a tool of the atheist conspiracy to promote secular humanism, it's the American one...

Yea, it was Obama...what a minute, you've gone back even further. Not being consistent are you?

Much more consistent than believers who have 3 choices of what they themselves claim IS the only way to salvation.

You need to once again, create an atheist conspiracy that clearly in no way exists.

No WM points out how the poisoning religious society poisons govt.

You want to be elected...better be a christian. In many states, one is required to claim a belief in god, to be on the ballot.

If you are a christian and you absolutely should be in a religiously 'free' country, then vote for [whoever] brings 'christian values' whatever they are...to govt. (how's that worked out for the voters ?)

Govt. therefore is in no way involved in any advancement in secular humanism.

So which of you two is the sock? WM couldn't answer because WM knows exactly what I was saying and why.

Can't you get medication for paranoia these days?
(BTW: nobody knows exactly what you're saying because you talk so much ridiculous and mindless shite while posting on here that the signal gets drowned out by the noise most of the time.)

quote:

ORIGINAL: MrRodgers

quote:

ORIGINAL: Nnanji

quote:

ORIGINAL: WhoreMods

quote:

ORIGINAL: Nnanji

quote:

ORIGINAL: MrRodgers

quote:

ORIGINAL: Nnanji

quote:

ORIGINAL: WhoreMods

quote:

ORIGINAL: Real0ne
That said seems the gubmint has a controlling interest in promoting enforcing their atheist religion

The government that's been fawning and grovelling to the moral minority since Reagan handed the republican party over to the religious right in 1980?
The government that, at a state level, bans atheists from standing for elected political positions in several areas of your country?
The government that has never once been headed by a president who didn't claim to be a christian?
Yeah, if there's a government that's obviously a tool of the atheist conspiracy to promote secular humanism, it's the American one...

Yea, it was Obama...what a minute, you've gone back even further. Not being consistent are you?

Much more consistent than believers who have 3 choices of what they themselves claim IS the only way to salvation.

You need to once again, create an atheist conspiracy that clearly in no way exists.

No WM points out how the poisoning religious society poisons govt.

You want to be elected...better be a christian. In many states, one is required to claim a belief in god, to be on the ballot.

If you are a christian and you absolutely should be in a religiously 'free' country, then vote for [whoever] brings 'christian values' whatever they are...to govt. (how's that worked out for the voters ?)

Govt. therefore is in no way involved in any advancement in secular humanism.

Shall I get my tin foil hat or are you going to provide links to a few states that require you to believe in God to be on a ballot?

There's seven.

Supreme Court unanimously declared it unconstitutional over fifty years ago. Where's my tin foil hat?



https://www.nytimes.com/2014/12/07/us/in-seven-states-atheists-push-to-end-largely-forgotten-ban-.html

quote:

ANNAPOLIS, Md. — A bookkeeper named Roy Torcaso, who happened to be an atheist, refused to declare that he believed in God in order to serve as a notary public in Maryland. His case went all the way to the Supreme Court, and in 1961 the court ruled unanimously for Mr. Torcaso, saying states could not have a “religious test” for public office.
But 53 years later, Maryland and six other states still have articles in their constitutions saying people who do not believe in God are not eligible to hold public office. Maryland’s Constitution still says belief in God is a requirement even for jurors and witnesses.

Now a coalition of nonbelievers says it is time to get rid of the atheist bans because they are discriminatory, offensive and unconstitutional. The bans are unenforceable dead letters, legal experts say, and state and local governments have rarely invoked them in recent years. But for some secular Americans, who are increasingly visible and organized, removing the bans is not only a just cause, but a test of their growing movement’s political clout.

Yet you want to make it sound like it's happening now.

That such a codification still exists anywhere in law is an abomination. seems states can remove laws covering other forms of bigotry and prejudice but just can't seem to reconcile the same...for these laws. 1992 still had to go to court, so......?

Why are they still on the books ? I say because religion poisons everything.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Nnanji

quote:

ORIGINAL: MrRodgers

quote:

ORIGINAL: Nnanji

quote:

ORIGINAL: WhoreMods

quote:

ORIGINAL: Nnanji

quote:

ORIGINAL: MrRodgers

quote:

ORIGINAL: Nnanji

quote:

ORIGINAL: WhoreMods

quote:

ORIGINAL: Real0ne
That said seems the gubmint has a controlling interest in promoting enforcing their atheist religion

The government that's been fawning and grovelling to the moral minority since Reagan handed the republican party over to the religious right in 1980?
The government that, at a state level, bans atheists from standing for elected political positions in several areas of your country?
The government that has never once been headed by a president who didn't claim to be a christian?
Yeah, if there's a government that's obviously a tool of the atheist conspiracy to promote secular humanism, it's the American one...

Yea, it was Obama...what a minute, you've gone back even further. Not being consistent are you?

Much more consistent than believers who have 3 choices of what they themselves claim IS the only way to salvation.

You need to once again, create an atheist conspiracy that clearly in no way exists.

No WM points out how the poisoning religious society poisons govt.

You want to be elected...better be a christian. In many states, one is required to claim a belief in god, to be on the ballot.

If you are a christian and you absolutely should be in a religiously 'free' country, then vote for [whoever] brings 'christian values' whatever they are...to govt. (how's that worked out for the voters ?)

Govt. therefore is in no way involved in any advancement in secular humanism.

Shall I get my tin foil hat or are you going to provide links to a few states that require you to believe in God to be on a ballot?

There's seven.

Supreme Court unanimously declared it unconstitutional over fifty years ago. Where's my tin foil hat?



https://www.nytimes.com/2014/12/07/us/in-seven-states-atheists-push-to-end-largely-forgotten-ban-.html

quote:

ANNAPOLIS, Md. — A bookkeeper named Roy Torcaso, who happened to be an atheist, refused to declare that he believed in God in order to serve as a notary public in Maryland. His case went all the way to the Supreme Court, and in 1961 the court ruled unanimously for Mr. Torcaso, saying states could not have a “religious test” for public office.
But 53 years later, Maryland and six other states still have articles in their constitutions saying people who do not believe in God are not eligible to hold public office. Maryland’s Constitution still says belief in God is a requirement even for jurors and witnesses.

Now a coalition of nonbelievers says it is time to get rid of the atheist bans because they are discriminatory, offensive and unconstitutional. The bans are unenforceable dead letters, legal experts say, and state and local governments have rarely invoked them in recent years. But for some secular Americans, who are increasingly visible and organized, removing the bans is not only a just cause, but a test of their growing movement’s political clout.

Yet you want to make it sound like it's happening now.

That such a codification still exists anywhere in law is an abomination. seems states can remove laws covering other forms of bigotry and prejudice but just can't seem to reconcile the same...for these laws. 1992 still had to go to court, so......?

Why are they still on the books ? I say because religion poisons everything.

Why yes. It's a conspiracy of every elected official and government lawyer. Oh...I see the light now.

Have you ever read the government code for the State of California? It's full of laws that have been unconstitutional for years. Why I had an environmental issue a few years ago. Some smart ass low level state environmental inspector came and told me that I was going to have to spend millions changing a thing and be fined thousands of dollars. I called his boss and asked him if he wanted me to comply with an obsolete California Government Code section and violate current EPA regulations doing so. The boss just shrugged and said, "ya it's an old regulation that's out of date and hasn't been changed." It stopped there because the boss was a reasonable person.

I guess I could have gotten all conspiracy about it...but I didn't because I'm a normal person and understood.

quote:

ORIGINAL: MrRodgers

quote:

ORIGINAL: Nnanji

quote:

ORIGINAL: MrRodgers

quote:

ORIGINAL: Nnanji

quote:

ORIGINAL: WhoreMods

quote:

ORIGINAL: Nnanji

quote:

ORIGINAL: MrRodgers

quote:

ORIGINAL: Nnanji

quote:

ORIGINAL: WhoreMods

quote:

ORIGINAL: Real0ne
That said seems the gubmint has a controlling interest in promoting enforcing their atheist religion

The government that's been fawning and grovelling to the moral minority since Reagan handed the republican party over to the religious right in 1980?
The government that, at a state level, bans atheists from standing for elected political positions in several areas of your country?
The government that has never once been headed by a president who didn't claim to be a christian?
Yeah, if there's a government that's obviously a tool of the atheist conspiracy to promote secular humanism, it's the American one...

Yea, it was Obama...what a minute, you've gone back even further. Not being consistent are you?

Much more consistent than believers who have 3 choices of what they themselves claim IS the only way to salvation.

You need to once again, create an atheist conspiracy that clearly in no way exists.

No WM points out how the poisoning religious society poisons govt.

You want to be elected...better be a christian. In many states, one is required to claim a belief in god, to be on the ballot.

If you are a christian and you absolutely should be in a religiously 'free' country, then vote for [whoever] brings 'christian values' whatever they are...to govt. (how's that worked out for the voters ?)

Govt. therefore is in no way involved in any advancement in secular humanism.

Shall I get my tin foil hat or are you going to provide links to a few states that require you to believe in God to be on a ballot?

There's seven.

Supreme Court unanimously declared it unconstitutional over fifty years ago. Where's my tin foil hat?



https://www.nytimes.com/2014/12/07/us/in-seven-states-atheists-push-to-end-largely-forgotten-ban-.html

quote:

ANNAPOLIS, Md. — A bookkeeper named Roy Torcaso, who happened to be an atheist, refused to declare that he believed in God in order to serve as a notary public in Maryland. His case went all the way to the Supreme Court, and in 1961 the court ruled unanimously for Mr. Torcaso, saying states could not have a “religious test” for public office.
But 53 years later, Maryland and six other states still have articles in their constitutions saying people who do not believe in God are not eligible to hold public office. Maryland’s Constitution still says belief in God is a requirement even for jurors and witnesses.

Now a coalition of nonbelievers says it is time to get rid of the atheist bans because they are discriminatory, offensive and unconstitutional. The bans are unenforceable dead letters, legal experts say, and state and local governments have rarely invoked them in recent years. But for some secular Americans, who are increasingly visible and organized, removing the bans is not only a just cause, but a test of their growing movement’s political clout.

Yet you want to make it sound like it's happening now.

That such a codification still exists anywhere in law is an abomination. seems states can remove laws covering other forms of bigotry and prejudice but just can't seem to reconcile the same...for these laws. 1992 still had to go to court, so......?

Why are they still on the books ? I say because religion poisons everything.

Why yes. It's a conspiracy of every elected official and government lawyer. Oh...I see the light now.

Have you ever read the government code for the State of California? It's full of laws that have been unconstitutional for years. Why I had an environmental issue a few years ago. Some smart ass low level state environmental inspector came and told me that I was going to have to spend millions changing a thing and be fined thousands of dollars. I called his boss and asked him if he wanted me to comply with an obsolete California Government Code section and violate current EPA regulations doing so. The boss just shrugged and said, "ya it's an old regulation that's out of date and hasn't been changed." It stopped there because the boss was a reasonable person.

I guess I could have gotten all conspiracy about it...but I didn't because I'm a normal person and understood.

The mere fact that such laws even existed at anytime, the fact that it had to go to the US SC, the fact that a 1992 case still had to be reversed in the So. Carolina (why am I not surprised ?) supreme court, the fact that these laws are still on the books just shows once again, how...religion poisons everything.

A faith in the belief in an imaginary god wrought to us by the written word in the form of stone age fairy tales and as given to and interpreted by illiterate, ancient heathens...is no basis for any law, ever.

quote:

ORIGINAL: MrRodgers

quote:

ORIGINAL: Real0ne

take a pic of one for snotty :)

Take a pic of god.

quote:

ORIGINAL: WhoreMods

quote:

ORIGINAL: Nnanji

quote:

ORIGINAL: WhoreMods

quote:

ORIGINAL: Nnanji

quote:

ORIGINAL: WhoreMods

quote:

ORIGINAL: Nnanji

quote:

ORIGINAL: WhoreMods

quote:

ORIGINAL: Nnanji

quote:

ORIGINAL: MrRodgers

quote:

ORIGINAL: Nnanji

quote:

ORIGINAL: WhoreMods

quote:

ORIGINAL: Real0ne
That said seems the gubmint has a controlling interest in promoting enforcing their atheist religion

The government that's been fawning and grovelling to the moral minority since Reagan handed the republican party over to the religious right in 1980?
The government that, at a state level, bans atheists from standing for elected political positions in several areas of your country?
The government that has never once been headed by a president who didn't claim to be a christian?
Yeah, if there's a government that's obviously a tool of the atheist conspiracy to promote secular humanism, it's the American one...

Yea, it was Obama...what a minute, you've gone back even further. Not being consistent are you?

Much more consistent than believers who have 3 choices of what they themselves claim IS the only way to salvation.

You need to once again, create an atheist conspiracy that clearly in no way exists.

No WM points out how the poisoning religious society poisons govt.

You want to be elected...better be a christian. In many states, one is required to claim a belief in god, to be on the ballot.

If you are a christian and you absolutely should be in a religiously 'free' country, then vote for [whoever] brings 'christian values' whatever they are...to govt. (how's that worked out for the voters ?)

Govt. therefore is in no way involved in any advancement in secular humanism.

Shall I get my tin foil hat or are you going to provide links to a few states that require you to believe in God to be on a ballot?

There's seven.

Supreme Court unanimously declared it unconstitutional over fifty years ago. Where's my tin foil hat?



https://www.nytimes.com/2014/12/07/us/in-seven-states-atheists-push-to-end-largely-forgotten-ban-.html

quote:

ANNAPOLIS, Md. — A bookkeeper named Roy Torcaso, who happened to be an atheist, refused to declare that he believed in God in order to serve as a notary public in Maryland. His case went all the way to the Supreme Court, and in 1961 the court ruled unanimously for Mr. Torcaso, saying states could not have a “religious test” for public office.
But 53 years later, Maryland and six other states still have articles in their constitutions saying people who do not believe in God are not eligible to hold public office. Maryland’s Constitution still says belief in God is a requirement even for jurors and witnesses.

Now a coalition of nonbelievers says it is time to get rid of the atheist bans because they are discriminatory, offensive and unconstitutional. The bans are unenforceable dead letters, legal experts say, and state and local governments have rarely invoked them in recent years. But for some secular Americans, who are increasingly visible and organized, removing the bans is not only a just cause, but a test of their growing movement’s political clout.

Yet you want to make it sound like it's happening now.

When they repeal the laws, you can claim it's no longer an issue.

I can say it's not an issue since the SPOTUS published the decision. If you're so butthurt you can't, then you have issues. I will say, though, that's pretty pretentious of you to think you can or cannot determine what I can and cannot claim. Especially given the silly claims you make.

If we're dismissing silly claims: explain how the fact that this legislation is still part of the legal codes of seven states and has not been repealed despite a supreme court challenge half a century ago supports conspiracy boy's claim that the united states government is a tool of the liberal humanist conspiracy.

It wasn't a Supreme Court challenge, it was a Supreme Court decision. If you'd read the NYT article I posted, you'd answer your own question without looking silly.

You have nothing then, as always. What a surprise.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Nnanji

quote:

ORIGINAL: WhoreMods

quote:

ORIGINAL: Nnanji

quote:

ORIGINAL: WhoreMods

quote:

ORIGINAL: Nnanji

quote:

ORIGINAL: WhoreMods

quote:

ORIGINAL: Nnanji

quote:

ORIGINAL: WhoreMods

quote:

ORIGINAL: Nnanji

quote:

ORIGINAL: MrRodgers

quote:

ORIGINAL: Nnanji

quote:

ORIGINAL: WhoreMods

quote:

ORIGINAL: Real0ne
That said seems the gubmint has a controlling interest in promoting enforcing their atheist religion

The government that's been fawning and grovelling to the moral minority since Reagan handed the republican party over to the religious right in 1980?
The government that, at a state level, bans atheists from standing for elected political positions in several areas of your country?
The government that has never once been headed by a president who didn't claim to be a christian?
Yeah, if there's a government that's obviously a tool of the atheist conspiracy to promote secular humanism, it's the American one...

Yea, it was Obama...what a minute, you've gone back even further. Not being consistent are you?

Much more consistent than believers who have 3 choices of what they themselves claim IS the only way to salvation.

You need to once again, create an atheist conspiracy that clearly in no way exists.

No WM points out how the poisoning religious society poisons govt.

You want to be elected...better be a christian. In many states, one is required to claim a belief in god, to be on the ballot.

If you are a christian and you absolutely should be in a religiously 'free' country, then vote for [whoever] brings 'christian values' whatever they are...to govt. (how's that worked out for the voters ?)

Govt. therefore is in no way involved in any advancement in secular humanism.

Shall I get my tin foil hat or are you going to provide links to a few states that require you to believe in God to be on a ballot?

There's seven.

Supreme Court unanimously declared it unconstitutional over fifty years ago. Where's my tin foil hat?



https://www.nytimes.com/2014/12/07/us/in-seven-states-atheists-push-to-end-largely-forgotten-ban-.html

quote:

ANNAPOLIS, Md. — A bookkeeper named Roy Torcaso, who happened to be an atheist, refused to declare that he believed in God in order to serve as a notary public in Maryland. His case went all the way to the Supreme Court, and in 1961 the court ruled unanimously for Mr. Torcaso, saying states could not have a “religious test” for public office.
But 53 years later, Maryland and six other states still have articles in their constitutions saying people who do not believe in God are not eligible to hold public office. Maryland’s Constitution still says belief in God is a requirement even for jurors and witnesses.

Now a coalition of nonbelievers says it is time to get rid of the atheist bans because they are discriminatory, offensive and unconstitutional. The bans are unenforceable dead letters, legal experts say, and state and local governments have rarely invoked them in recent years. But for some secular Americans, who are increasingly visible and organized, removing the bans is not only a just cause, but a test of their growing movement’s political clout.

Yet you want to make it sound like it's happening now.

When they repeal the laws, you can claim it's no longer an issue.

I can say it's not an issue since the SPOTUS published the decision. If you're so butthurt you can't, then you have issues. I will say, though, that's pretty pretentious of you to think you can or cannot determine what I can and cannot claim. Especially given the silly claims you make.

If we're dismissing silly claims: explain how the fact that this legislation is still part of the legal codes of seven states and has not been repealed despite a supreme court challenge half a century ago supports conspiracy boy's claim that the united states government is a tool of the liberal humanist conspiracy.

It wasn't a Supreme Court challenge, it was a Supreme Court decision. If you'd read the NYT article I posted, you'd answer your own question without looking silly.

You have nothing then, as always. What a surprise.

What I have is the NYTs. What you have is the inability to go read what I posted and the emotional inability to have a discussion instead of your little troll tit for tat arguments. Since I'm not emotionally unstable, I'll stop here and let you take this wherever you need to feel safe and secure.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Real0ne

you mean he hasnt found something he can label a conspiracy theory yet? Thats how he usually tries to dodge bullets.

quote:

ORIGINAL: MrRodgers

That such a codification still exists anywhere in law is an abomination. seems states can remove laws covering other forms of bigotry and prejudice but just can't seem to reconcile the same...for these laws. 1992 still had to go to court, so......?

Why are they still on the books ? I say because religion [ESTABLISHED AS LAW] poisons everything.

quote:

ORIGINAL: WhoreMods

quote:

ORIGINAL: Real0ne

you mean he hasnt found something he can label a conspiracy theory yet? Thats how he usually tries to dodge bullets.

You found those missing 475,000 dead civilians from Dresden yet?
You're having trouble with the whole "atheist mythology" thing, so maybe you can do a bit better with that one. You've had six months to think about it now, after all.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Nnanji

Why yes. It's a conspiracy of every elected official and government lawyer. Oh...I see the light now.

Have you ever read the government code for the State of California? It's full of laws that have been unconstitutional for years. Why I had an environmental issue a few years ago. Some smart ass low level state environmental inspector came and told me that I was going to have to spend millions changing a thing and be fined thousands of dollars. I called his boss and asked him if he wanted me to comply with an obsolete California Government Code section and violate current EPA regulations doing so. The boss just shrugged and said, "ya it's an old regulation that's out of date and hasn't been changed." It stopped there because the boss was a reasonable person.

I guess I could have gotten all conspiracy about it...but I didn't because I'm a normal person and understood.