North Carolina councilman may face lawsuit over his atheism

[Siddhartha]

RALEIGH, N.C. — Asheville City Councilman Cecil Bothwell believes in ending the death penalty, conserving water and reforming government — but he doesn’t believe in God. His political opponents say that’s a sin that makes him unworthy of serving in office, and they’ve got the North Carolina Constitution on their side.

Bothwell’s detractors are threatening to take the city to court for swearing him in, even though the state’s antiquated requirement that officeholders believe in God is unenforceable because it violates the U.S. Consititution.

“The question of whether or not God exists is not particularly interesting to me and it’s certainly not relevant to public office,” the recently elected 59-year-old said.

Bothwell ran this fall on a platform that also included limiting the height of downtown buildings and saving trees in the city’s core, views that appealed to voters in the liberal-leaning community at the foot of the Appalachian Mountains. When Bothwell was sworn into office on Monday, he used an alternative oath that doesn’t require officials to swear on a Bible or reference “Almighty God.”

That has riled conservative activists, who cite a little-noticed quirk in North Carolina’s Constitution that disqualifies officeholders “who shall deny the being of Almighty God.” The provision was included when the document was drafted in 1868 and wasn’t revised when North Carolina amended its constitution in 1971. One foe, H.K. Edgerton, is threatening to file a lawsuit in state court against the city to challenge Bothwell’s appointment.
…
In 1961, the U.S. Supreme Court reaffirmed that federal law prohibits states from requiring any kind of religious test to serve in office when it ruled in favor of a Maryland atheist seeking appointment as a notary public.

But the federal protections don’t necessarily spare atheist public officials from spending years defending themselves in court. Avowed atheist Herb Silverman won an eight-year court battle in 1997 when South Carolina’s highest court granted him the right to be appointed as a notary despite the state’s law.

Bothwell said a legal challenge to his appointment would be “fun,” but believes his opponents’ efforts have more to do with politics than religious beliefs.

 

[chessmane4e5]

I just find it ironic that the shoe is on the other foot for once. How many times have I been told that my opinion is not constitutional because it was also a religious belief? For example, gay marriage or teaching abstinence in schools.

I think that both sides are ridiculous. For government, what matters is what the person is going to do in their elected office.

 

[ralphinal]

Let me start by saying Whoop!! Alabama is not one of the states involved.

Now, seriously, this is junk. It is against the federal law. There is no reason to exclude him because of his faith, or lack there of. Further, it reeks of sore loser on the part of the people challenging it.

 

[rev_kevin]

We have seperation of church and state so with this in place his religious preferrence is a mute item. He is not running for head priest or head pastor so his lack of belief has nothing to do with his running for office. The law is on his side.