Christmas and New Year are National holidays in Syria, Jordan, Tunisia, Morocco, Lebanon, Palestinian authority and the former Iraqi government. Syria, Jordan, Tunisia, Morocco, Lebanon, Palestinian authority, Kuwait, Qatar, Bahrain, UAE, Egypt offer their Christian citizens Chiristian holidays.
ok, but please don't waste too much of your time on my account trying to show how " ..all executive and judicial officers, both of the United States and of the several states " - does not include state offices -
That wouldn't take any time at all. That clause refers only to the requirement to take an oath of allegiance to the Constitution, not to any religious test for office.
This is actually an interesting subject. It turns out there is a Supreme Court decision on requiring a religious test for state officials. Interestingly, the Court based its decision on the 14th Amendment incorporation of the First Amendment to the states, not on Article VI's prohibition of religious tests for officeholders. ****************************** from wikipedia: Background In the early 1960s, the Governor of Maryland appointed Roy Torcaso as a notary public. At the time, the Maryland Constitution required "a declaration of belief in the existence of God" (Maryland Declaration of Rights, Article 37) in order for a person to hold "any office of profit or trust in this State" (ibid.). Torcaso, an atheist, refused to make such a statement, and his appointment was consequentially revoked. Torcaso, believing his constitutional rights to freedom of religious expression had been infringed, filed suit in a Maryland Circuit Court, only to be rebuffed; the Circuit Court rejected his claim, and the Maryland Court of Appeals held that the requirement for a declaration of belief in God as a qualification for office was self-executing. The Court of Appeals justified its decision: The petitioner is not compelled to believe or disbelieve, under threat of punishment or other compulsion. True, unless he makes the declaration of belief, he cannot hold public office in Maryland, but he is not compelled to hold office. Torcaso took the matter to the United States Supreme Court, where it was heard on April 24, 1961. [edit] The Court's decision The Court unanimously found that Maryland's requirement for a person holding public office to state a belief in God violated the First and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution. The Court had previously established in Everson v. Board of Education (1947): The 'establishment of religion' clause of the First Amendment means at least this: Neither a state nor the Federal Government can set up a church. Neither can pass laws which aid one religion, aid all religions, or prefer one religion over another. Neither can force nor influence a person to go to or to remain away from church against his will or force him to profess a belief or disbelief in any religion. Writing for the Court, Justice Hugo Black recalled Everson v. Board of Education, and explicitly linked Torcaso v. Watkins to its conclusions: There is, and can be, no dispute about the purpose or effect of the Maryland Declaration of Rights requirement before us - it sets up a religious test which was designed to and, if valid, does bar every person who refuses to declare a belief in God from holding a public "office of profit or trust" in Maryland. ... We repeat and again reaffirm that neither a State nor the Federal Government can constitutionally force a person "to profess a belief or disbelief in any religion." Neither can constitutionally pass laws or impose requirements which aid all religions as against non-believers, and neither can aid those religions based on a belief in the existence of God as against those religions founded on different beliefs. Rebuffing the judgment of the Maryland Court of Appeals, Justice Black added: The fact, however, that a person is not compelled to hold public office cannot possibly be an excuse for barring him from office by state-imposed criteria forbidden by the Constitution. The Court did not base its holding on the no religious test clause of Article VI. In Footnote 1 of the opinion Justice Black wrote: Appellant also claimed that the State's test oath requirement violates the provision of Art. VI of the Federal Constitution that "no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States." Because we are reversing the judgment on other grounds, we find it unnecessary to consider appellant's contention that this provision applies to state as well as federal offices. The question of whether the no religious test clause binds the states remains unresolved. Given the Court's First Amendment holding, that issue is largely academic.
Christmas and New Year are National holidays in Syria, Jordan, Tunisia, Morocco, Lebanon, Palestinian authority and the former Iraqi government. Syria, Jordan, Tunisia, Morocco, Lebanon, Palestinian authority, Kuwait, Qatar, Bahrain, UAE, Egypt offer their Christian citizens Chiristian holidays.
White Christians strongly supported slavery and forced Christianity down the throats of natives, and then after slavery was abolished, strongly support segregation/Jim Crow. Their prejudices were built right on the Word of God. Freedoms came IN SPITE OF, not BECAUSE OF, white Christians.
Is the fact they celebrate new Year's supposed to prove something? It is hardly a religious holiday...
To answer your question, the Christmas part speaks for itself. As for observing New Year's, it recognizes the Gregorian ("Christian") calendar, as well as their Hijra ("Islamic") calendar.
The Constitution , the single most important legal documant, is the grounding for The Law of the United States - the supreme law of the land. I feel sure you are aware state courts are bound by the supreme law. State offices too. No amount of fundemntalist Christian idealogue is going to alter that fact. Exactly how do you <s>twist</s> explain "... no religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office or public trust..." is referring only to the requirement to take an oath!? Right, so now we have 3 examples of where religious test is found Unconstitutional . Article VI, First and Fourteenth Amendments. Ok then, now what? You shot your own argument dead.
In conclusion I am correct and STU and the rest of the haters were wrong again. As late as the 1960s states still required people to affirm their belief in God to hold public office. Case closed.