You haven’t convinced me constitutionally. Let me repeat: [N]o religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States.
Let me repeat: Article VI of the Constitution is geared toward the govt & toward candidates & potential candidates
Not toward voters.
Otherwise, you would HAVE to vote for a Satanist (to prove you weren't voting against him because of his religion!)
ALL: What has our conservative cause come to when you have supposed "conservatives" insistently and repeatedly claim that a voter CANNOT consider (for example)...
...the jihadist leanings or express jihadist convictions of a Muslim POTUS candidate...???
...or even the openly Satanic views of any given future POTUS candidate????
Why, Ge0ffREY COULD have 100% evidence that the Dems in 2016 were running the "anti-Christ" ... and Ge0ffrey, were he in ANY way consistent & not hypocritical, would pull out his extreme misinterpretation of Article VI of the Constitution & proceed to lecture FReepers that sorry, they as voters, supposedly could not take the "anti-Christ" religious beliefs of the "anti-Christ" into consideration in their voting.
[Shaking my head over such lack of basic discernment...(No wonder the Republicans are in such disarray & dire straights)]
Btw, Ge0ffrey, I counted at least three Sunday threads focusing on this subject: Easter threads shooting @ Obama's religious comments & alleged ties (see post #24 for EXACT links to these threads)
So, Ge0ffrey, where were you on any of these threads with your Article VI advisements? It's not too late, ya know...you could venture into ALL of these threads & proceed to lecture & scold posters that Article VI of the Constitution precludes them from taking Obama's religious comments & alleged ties into consideration as they vote in 2012.
What a strange coincidence. I've seen Article VI posters probably 20 times in the past five years of FREEP posting...but what a coincidence that they ALWAYS show up on Romney threads and NEVER show up on Obama's religion threads...for example, the countless Rev. Jeremiah Wright threads...ones that were, btw, being revived on FR last week...[see the Hatch link in the above link]
It's not too late, Ge0ffrey...
...show us that you're not some two-faced hypocrite & head into those 4 threads I linked on post #24 of the above-linked thread...
...remind all those FREEPERS commenting about Obama's Easter bumbles & alleged "Muslim" ties that they CANNOT take Obama's religious life into consideration when they vote...per Ge0ffrey's "interpretation" of Article VI of the Constitution.
Colofornian is right. Article VI is a limitation on the fed, not on you and I. All it means is that a person of any religion or no religion cannot be blocked by the fed from running for federal office. That means that whether a person believes in the God of Israel or in the tooth fairy or in no god at all, the federal government cannot deny that person a place on the ballot.
However, I venture to guess that if you knew a candidate was on the ballot who seriously believed in the tooth fairy, you might give the other, more, um, traditional candidates a closer look. And you would have a constitutional right to do so. Election law under our Constitution liberates both the candidate and the voter to express their views freely under the First Amendment, whether those views are religious or otherwise. Your advocacy of Article VI as a limitation on what the *voter* may consider is a perfect inversion of that principle, and an argument against those costly liberties, paid for in blood, and enshrined for us in the First Amendment of our Constituion. Your argument has no basis in fact or law, and is not to be taken seriously. We will vote with eyes wide open, but thank you for your concern.