Show of HandsShow of Hands

VirtualCongress May 22nd, 2017 8:45pm

johonmilla (D-NC) proposes Politician Religious Liberty Act

0 Liked

Comments: Add Comment

Liberty 4,032,064
05/23/17 3:33 am

Nay. This is none of the federal government's concern and it shouldn't be extorting states for political lobbying either.

johonmilla Monroe, nc
05/23/17 6:11 am

Article VI section 3 makes it the federal governments concern.

Liberty 4,032,064
05/23/17 6:52 am

No, it doesn't. Try reading it.

TomLaney1 Jesus is Lord
05/22/17 10:16 pm

Fine, KEEP your federal funding and we'll keep our laws here in the Sovereign Republic of Texas.
This silly law goes directly against the principles of our Founders.

Reply
chance Sirnotappearinginthisfilm
05/22/17 2:17 pm

Nope, this is a state issue, the fed government has no business dictating to states in this manner.

Reply
johonmilla Monroe, nc
05/22/17 2:38 pm

It does, the constitution gives Supremacy to federal government in the Fifth article of the Constitution. Since freedom of religion is an amendment and this extends to that, federal government can dictate.

mudkip17 United States of Texas
05/22/17 3:31 pm

Article VI section 3 of the constitution :but no religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office or public trust under the United States.

chance Sirnotappearinginthisfilm
05/22/17 4:24 pm

Freedom of religion does not apply in this case. The states are not creating a religion, nor are they preventing anyone from practicing it.

chance Sirnotappearinginthisfilm
05/22/17 4:28 pm

Sorry mud, I didn't see your reply before posting. I looked up that article and that seems pretty straightforward. I reverse my objection.

Senate101 San Diego
05/22/17 2:13 pm

Yea. Obviously it's probably not being enforced, but it's still a good idea.

CollinN
05/22/17 2:13 pm

voting yea

Reply
gluxford1 Arizona
05/22/17 1:57 pm

Nay. This is a state's rights issue.

Reply
johonmilla Monroe, nc
05/22/17 2:39 pm

First amendment and the supremacy article makes this a federal issue

iceberg124
05/22/17 3:10 pm

Establishment clause makes your argument invalid

johonmilla Monroe, nc
05/22/17 3:18 pm

Nope, considering it's that clause that I'm using as my support (I said first amendment clearly). It prohibits government from establishing or preferring a religion. These states clearly prefer religion over non-religion and thus goes again the clause itself.

iceberg124
05/22/17 3:30 pm

Atheism in itself is a religion. It's one thing if these people don't talk about religion on the campaign trail, it's another if they refer to themselves as atheists

EthanF9877
05/22/17 1:52 pm

Yea. The First Amendment protects people of faith and atheists alike.

Reply
EthanF9877
05/22/17 1:54 pm

However, I do have an issue with section 3. I don't know if it makes sense to unilaterally cut funds because of lawmakers.

skinner Jersey City
05/22/17 1:51 pm

Nay, the Supreme Court has already invalidated these religious tests and it is not appropriate for Congress to apply these sanctions to sovereign states

Reply
iceberg124
05/22/17 1:48 pm

Nay, this is series federal overreach

Reply
mudkip17 United States of Texas
05/22/17 3:25 pm

How is an enforcement of the constitution a federal overreach? Article VI section 3

RagingMystic covfefe
05/22/17 1:47 pm

My only concern is the use of federal funds as a punishment

VirtualCongress Speaker NDAmerican
05/22/17 1:46 pm

I. All states must remove from their constitution bans preventing atheists or non-Christians from running in state or federal government positions.
II. These states include Arkansas, Maryland, Mississippi, North Carolina, South Carolina, Tennessee, and Texas.
III. Failure to remove these sections of their constitutions will result in a cut in federal funding for those states.

VirtualCongress Speaker NDAmerican
05/22/17 1:47 pm

Summary: "The following persons shall be disqualified for office: Any person who shall deny the being of Almighty God." This is an excerpt from the NC constitution, my home state. I urge congressman to remove any infringement on religious liberties and prevent disgusting laws such as this from occurring.