What part of ‘no law respecting an establishment of religion’...

[Adsos Letter]

What part of ‘no law respecting an establishment of religion’ does North Carolina not understand?

Source:
The Washington Post
On Faith
"Guest Voices"
By Barry W. Lynn,
Published: April 4

Imagine driving from Northern Virginia to the Outer Banks in North Carolina, and as you hit the state line, you see a large highway sign that reads: “Welcome To North Carolina: A Christian State,” complete with an iconic image of Jesus on a cross.

This incredible scenario could become a reality if misguided lawmakers in Raleigh succeed in passing a bill that says the state and all of its subsidiary groups (including public schools) are free to make any laws they choose regarding religion. That’s right; they could even declare an official faith.

House Joint Resolution 494, known was the “Rowan County Defense of Religion Act,” makes the claim that “each state is sovereign and may independently determine how the state may make laws respecting an establishment of religion.”

The measure was filed on April 1, but it’s no April Fools’ joke. Instead, it’s a brash statement straight out of the antebellum era, and it would permit state and local governments to ignore portions of the First Amendment with which they do not agree. It assumes that the U.S. Constitution applies only to the actions of the federal government.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/on-faith/what-part-of-no-law-respecting-an-establishment-of-religion-does-north-carolina-not-understand/2013/04/04/90c33440-9d1a-11e2-9a79-eb5280c81c63_story.html

I realize posting this here is preaching to the choir, and that the resolution has been torpedoed. Just wanted to include AU's argument on the matter.

EDIT: added link...

[cleanhippie]

1. This type of action is emboldened by the apathetic attitude of many liberal believers

who see these people as a crackpot minority who managed to get into political offices. Until THEY start being outraged at such nonsense as non-believers are, we will all continue to be subjected to other people's absurd ideologies.

[Goblinmonger]

2. Yup. Absolutely

There can be as much talk as they want about "we are on the same side" but it frustrating as shit that we are the ones most loudly calling bullshit on this type of thing. And then called "militant" because of it.

[TreasonousBastard]

4. Fighting this isn't "militant"-- it's just the right thing to do. And even...

the religious should be fighting right by your side because most of them are in the "wrong" church. Or, worse, the unmentionable synagogues, mosques, and other temples.

[Adsos Letter]

9. Indeed.

Even the SDA church, a pretty conservative denomination, has a department dedicated to religious liberty and Church/State separation, and for pretty much the reasons you mention (although issues of Church/State separation also figure very predominantly in their eschatology).

I wish the majority of the various Baptist denominations would recall their origins, and come out strongly on the side of Church/State separation.

[Jim__]

5. "... we are the ones most loudly calling bullshit on this type of thing."

From the OP:

Source:
The Washington Post
On Faith
"Guest Voices"
By Barry W. Lynn,
Published: April 4

About Barry Lynn:

Barry W. Lynn, Esq. has been the Executive Director of Americans United for Separation of Church and State since 1992. He is an ordained minister in the United Church of Christ, and a prominent leader of the American religious left.

[cbayer]

6. He's great. The United Church of Christ and other denominations have been strong advocates

of separation issues, but don't get the kind of press the fundamentalists get.

[trotsky]

12. What's hilarious is that religious DUers have mocked AU in the past...

as being a "militant atheist" group trying to eradicate religion from the public square.

I've always had fun pointing out who's in charge of AU.

[Adsos Letter]

13. Excellent post. I should have pointed that out.

Thanks for making that point. I agree with Cleanhippie to the degree that everyone, non-religious and religious, should hold common cause on this.

[Adsos Letter]

3. I agree with you. This should be an issue for everyone, liberal and conservative.

Anyone who wants to preserve freedom of conscience for themselves and others ought to be paying very close attention to these matters.

[struggle4progress]

7. Proposal to allow official North Carolina state religion dead in legislature

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1014444990

[Adsos Letter]

11. Yes, I mentioned that the resolution had been torpedoed.

Thanks for providing the link to the full story on that.

I wanted to provide AU's take on this because I tend to find Barry Lynn's arguments especially persuasive.

[brooklynite]

8. Probably the part where the 1st Amendment says "Congress shall not..."

Their argument, subject I'm sure to legal challenge, is that the 1st Amendment specifically does not apply to the States.

[Adsos Letter]

10. Yes, the ongoing argument over Incorporation. n/t

[okasha]

14. Declaring the state sovereign

and abjuring the Constitution is de facto secession. Perhaps the Speaker who killed the proposal recalls that it didn't work out very well the last time they tried it.