My thanks to Tom Glennon, for this astute observation:
As a Constitutionalist, I would point out Article VI, which states:
"The 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."
Perhaps we have trashed the founding document so far that now the interpretation is 'no religious belief will be allowed in order to qualify for any office or public trust under the United States'.
Deeply impressed by this reminder, I started looking around the innernut for more on this matter of a (or no) "religious test." When I came across a transcription of the North Carolina debate on ratification of the Constitution -- in 1788 -- I was struck by the following passage, attributed to one Mr. Henry Abbot:
".... The exclusion of religious tests is by many thought dangerous and impolitic. They suppose that if there be no religious test required, pagans, deists, and Mahometans might obtain offices among us, and that the senators and representatives might all be pagans. Every person employed by the general and state governments is to take an oath to support the former. Some are desirous to know how and by whom they are to swear, since no religious tests are required--whether they are to swear by Jupiter, Juno, Minerva, Proserpine, or Pluto. We ought to be suspicious of our liberties. We have felt the effects of oppressive measures, and know the happy consequences of being jealous of our rights. I would be glad some gentleman would endeavor to obviate these objections, in order to satisfy the religious part of the society. Could I be convinced that the objections were well founded, I would then declare my opinion against the Constitution."
How fascinating it is to remember that our "Law of the Land" was once in its infancy.
As it turns out, Abbot represented Camden County at this Hillsborough Convention, wherein the Constitution as then proposed was rejected, for want of "written assurance of certain individual liberties" (i.e., a "bill of rights"). A year later, a second convention was held, this time in Fayetteville. Abbot was again a delegate and voted with the majority to ratify.
The Dictionary of North Carolina Biography notes that Abbot
is generally recognized as author of the nineteenth article of the [North Carolina] state constitution, which made formal acknowledgement that "all men have natural and inalienable rights to worship almighty God according to the dictates of their own conscience."
And we all say... Ameyn.
Posted by: Mannie Sherberg | Thursday, 23 February 2012 at 03:13 PM