Can you imagine the utter shitstorm of outcry there would be if anyone suggested a Christian but be able to hold office because of their faith?
"Christopher B. Shank, the Republican minority whip in the Maryland Senate, said that while he believed in pluralism, “I think what they want is an affirmation that the people of the state of Maryland don’t care about the Christian faith, and that is a little offensive.”
What the hell…?
This is typical conservative Christian mentality for you: Ask the government to stop treating atheists like shit and it’s automatically anti-Christian.
If it’s not obvious, this has nothing to do with Christians. They can run for office. They do run for office. All we’re asking for is the opportunity to have that opportunity."
Very sad.
+Paul Spoerry I was with you up until "This is typical conservative Christian mentality for you:". There is nothing "typical" about the Christianity of politicians who wear their Christian faith as calling card on their campaign. It might be typical of Right-Wing Christians, but I would not put that on all Christians or on all people of faith. I believe in a supernatural deity and if you want to send me a link to a petition to repeal the laws in these 7 states I will sign it and I will brag on social media that I signed it.
this doing is the way of the Lamb of God- but as stupid atheism- lol
(false pretences)
I guess one of the benefits of being an atheist – I can lie about it and not go to Hell 🙂
Why betray,
in the name of the lord?⛪
How would they know your beliefs unless you announce them? Unless that's what's required to run (and even then there is no need to be truthful). This is like in Italy in the 1920s & 30s, you had to produce the fascist party membership card to get a job (they called it the meal ticket). This is more than a little unsettling. ¬_¬
+Adreana Langston I posted via my mobile and there are missing quotation marks. I didn't say that. Everything past the first sentence is from the linked article. I'll fix that so it shows I was just quoting the article. I think you are correct in that it would be mostly far Right Wing Christians who would be most represented by the above. And there are links to the coalitions who are looking to change this in the linked article.
+Peter Serven That sentence made absolutely zero sense.
+Bill Holder But you shouldn't have to lie.
+kitty alexander Again, why bother commenting if you're just going to post something nonsensical?
+West Kagle Politicians are often asked about their religious beliefs. It's prohibited by the Constitution for it to be a "test" but that doesn't mean they won't be asked and in these states if they tell the truth there are laws (even if unenforceable) on the books stating they cannot run for office. I think the point is that you shouldn't have to lie about not having a belief system, just like how you shouldn't have to lie about having one.
Here's where the whole 'flying spaghetti monster' joke comes in handy. You can say you do have a religion, it's just not the one they want to hear. Maybe tell them you are a member of the porcelain order, and you pray to it's god every Sunday morning (especially if it was an exceptionally festive Saturday night service).
BTW….how old are these laws? I got the impression that these were recent additions (which would lend credence to the outrage tone of the video) However if these are laws from like before the civil war and just managed to stay on the books, and this guy went looking for them, dug them up and then became outraged…………….dude, go get a life. If they are one of those 'left-over' laws from a bygone era, I'll say that no one even realizes they are there so they are a non issue. Seriously, WTF…….there are plenty of things to get bent about. This is not one.
Unless they are new laws, than I apologize for the outburst, and am equally angry about it.
as a Christian. And as an American, i have a big problem with this. You/they have the same Constitutional Rights that Christians, Catholics, Muslims or Buddhist have. Restricting rights to only people you agree with isn't a true freedom of speech or freedom of religion
+West Kagle I'm an ordained minister with the Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster (true! also a non-denominational minister… I've married friends before!).
I don't know if they are old or new additions, I do know that in the article they reference people being denied positions in 1992, 1997, and 2009 and that there is a group attempting to get the laws taken off the books to prevent that happening in the future.
+M Neidlinger "Restricting rights to only people you agree with isn't a true freedom of speech or freedom of religion", well said… very well said.
+Paul Spoerry
I, myself am a bishop in the church of the porcelain order (although I don't prey to the god so much now that I have gotten out of my 20s and 30s). 😉
Whether or not the laws are old becomes irrelevant once someone uses said obsolete laws to political advantage in the present. Then it become just as bad as if it were a newly minted law. Unbelievable. ¬_¬