A college psychology professor's observations about public policy, mental health, sexual identity, and religious issues
Readers in Minnesota’s state House district 33B (Saint Paul), your representative, Cindy Pugh, is plugging the theocratic Institute on the Constitution.
Among other assignments, Pugh sits on the Higher Education and Finance committee. The IOTC course is riddled with errors and so it is disappointing to see it get a high profile endorsement.
Does this title represent a sinister new proposal by the godless left to keep Christian ministers from political office?
Hardly. Rather, this is a section from the 1817 Constitution of the State of Mississippi. Apparently, the framers of that Constitution believed that the care of souls could be distracted by the care of the government. After posting Jake MacAulay’s article on the issue of belief in God as a requirement to hold office, I checked out the original Mississippi Constitution. Section 6 contains the words quoted by MacAulay. However, the very next section forbids Christian ministers from seeking public office.
Section 6. No person who denies the being of God, or of a future state of rewards and punishments, shall hold any office in the civil department of this State.
Section 7. Ministers of the Gospel being by their profession, dedicated to God, and the care of souls, ought not to be diverted from the great duties of their functions. Therefore, no minister of the Gospel, or priest of any denomination whatever, shall be eligible to the office of Governor, Lieutenant-Governor, or to a seat in either branch of the General Assembly.
Jake MacAulay lauded Mississippi for including belief in God as a requirement for public service. Will he also laud Section 7 which disallowed ministers from public office? Which of these planks is the so-called “American view” of law and government?
The framers of the federal Constitution were wise to specifically prohibit religious tests. The American view is reflected in their work. The Institute on the Constitution is an organization dedicated to misinforming the public and cannot be trusted.
Institute on the Constitution Director of Operations Jake MacAulay today argued against the Constitution on Matt Barber’s Barbwire website.
MacAulay noted that seven states still have requirements that office holders in those states believe in a god.
There are seven states including Maryland with language in their constitutions that prohibits people who do not believe in God from holding public office.
And now, according to a recent New York Times article by Laurie Goodstein, a coalition of nonbelievers including atheists, agnostics, humanists and freethinkers, led and primarily funded by atheist Todd Stiefel, says it is time to get rid of these atheist bans because they are discriminatory, offensive and unconstitutional.Besides Maryland, the other six states with language in their constitutions that prohibit people who do not believe in God from holding public office are Arkansas, Mississippi, North Carolina, South Carolina, Tennessee and Texas.
Such bans were declared unconstitutional by Torcaso v. Watkins in 1961.
Torcaso v. Watkins
No. 373
Argued April 24, 1961
Decided June 19, 1961
367 U.S. 488
APPEAL FOM THE COURT OF APPEALS OF MARYLAND
Syllabus
Appellant was appointed by the Governor of Maryland to the office of Notary Public, but he was denied a commission because he would not declare his belief in God, as required by the Maryland Constitution. Claiming that this requirement violated his rights under the First and Fourteenth Amendments, he sued in a state court to compel issuance of his commission, but relief was denied. The State Court of Appeals affirmed, holding that the state constitutional provision is self-executing, without need for implementing legislation, and requires declaration of a belief in God as a qualification for office. Held: This Maryland test for public office cannot be enforced against appellant, because it unconstitutionally invades his freedom of belief and religion guaranteed by the First Amendment and protected by the Fourteenth Amendment from infringement by the States. Pp. 367 U. S. 489-496.
A South Carolina case addressed that state’s religious test by specifically referring to Article VI of the Constitution:
Silverman v. Campbell, 326 S.C. 208, 486 S.E.2d 1 (1997): In this case, the South Carolina Supreme Court held Article VI, section 2 (“No person who denies the existence of the Supreme Being shall hold any office under this Constitution) and Article XVII, section 4 (“No person who denies the existence of a Supreme Being shall hold any office under this Constitution) of the South Carolina Constitution violated the First Amendment and the Religious Test of the United States Constitution by barring persons who denied the existence of a “Supreme Being” from holding office. At that time, only two states, North Carolina and South Carolina, required a religious test for public office. Full Case Materials
It is clear the framers did not intend for religion to be a test because the Constitution forbids such tests. From Article VI, paragraph three of the Constitution:
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.
In light of the Constitution’s clear statement here, consider this absurd statement from MacAulay:
So this constitutional requirement that an office holder must believe in God is a logical and consistent protection against those who might drive our constitutional republic in a bad direction.
This isn’t about discrimination or bigotry. It’s about ensuring that those holding office in America are committed to the true, lawful, American philosophy of government.
Apparently, the Constitution got it wrong, according to the Institute on the Constitution’s Director of Operations. In his argument in favor of a religious test, he seems oblivious to the fact that the Constitution forbids such a test. In essence, MacAulay argues that the federal Constitution is wrong and does not represent the “true, lawful, American philosophy of government.”
This and other clear problems are why no school child should be confused and misled by the IOTC’s teaching on the Constitution via their inaccurately named American Clubs. That Matt Barber, who works at the Liberty University law school, posted this mess is another reason why no student should attend Liberty University’s School of Law.
The Institute on the Constitution, founded by former League of the South board member Michael Peroutka, bills itself as an educational outreach of Peroutka’s law firm. I have contended for over a year that the IOTC is a theocratic enterprise which does not educate but rather misleads followers about the Constitution.
Today I note an illustration of how the IOTC subtly misinforms followers. On their Facebook page, the IOTC attributes to George Washington the following spurious quote:
It is impossible to rightly govern a nation without God and the Bible
According to the IOTC Facebook page, this post has been shared 66 times. That is a lot of ignorance going around.
According to Mt. Vernon website, there is no evidence that Washington ever said this. The exact quote has never been located in Washington’s works. A similar quote was first included, without citation, in an book published long after Washington’s death. There is no evidence he ever said this.
This is not the first fake Washington quote used by the IOTC to advance their agenda.
The IOTC course on the Constitution is riddled with errors and cannot be trusted as a source on the subject. In addition, the IOTC has posted material on the organization’s website defending racial and religious discrimination. Peroutka believes the wrong side won the Civil War.
The IOTC is making a strong push to establish what they call “American Clubs” in public schools. In my view, these clubs are dangerous and should be resisted by parents. It is beyond disgusting that the Liberty Counsel, affiliated with Liberty University, defends the American Clubs in school districts who attempt to resist them.
As noted earlier today, former League of the South board member and founder of the theocratic Institute on the Constitution, Michael Peroutka, won the District 5 County Council race in Anne Arundel County MD.
His friend Michael Hill, president of the League of the South, offered his congratulations to Peroutka on the League’s Facebook page.
