"No religious test"

[Individualist]

Here's Article VI, paragraph 3 of the United States Constitution:

The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the Members of the several State Legislatures, and all executive and judicial Officers, both of the United States and of the several States, shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation, to support this Constitution; but no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States.

Does the prohibition on requiring religious tests "as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States" apply to state governments. I know a few states (I'm thinking Pennsylvania, Kentucky, and the Carolinas; but I'm not sure) have laws requiring a public officeholder to believe in God, despite a U.S. Supreme Court ruling that those laws are unconstitutional. When the Constitution says "United States," is it ever referring to state governments?

Consider this statement in the Constitution:

Judgment in Cases of Impeachment shall not extend further than to removal from Office, and disqualification to hold and enjoy any Office of honor, Trust or Profit under the United States: but the Party convicted shall nevertheless be liable and subject to Indictment, Trial, Judgment and Punishment, according to Law.

Can the U.S. Senate impeach members of state legislatures? On the other hand, there's this:

No Senator or Representative shall, during the Time for which he was elected, be appointed to any civil Office under the Authority of the United States, which shall have been created, or the Emoluments whereof shall have been encreased during such time; and no Person holding any Office under the United States, shall be a Member of either House during his Continuance in Office.

If "Unites States" only ever refers to the general/federal government, is it therefore permissable for state officeholders to also hold federal office?

More Constitution:

The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;

Here, the term obviously doesn't refer to any government at all, but to the federal government's jurisdiction. Wouldn't the state governments be in, even if not under, the federal government's jurisdiction?

No Title of Nobility shall be granted by the United States ... No State shall ... grant any Title of Nobility.

Here, "United States" obviously only refers to the federal government, unless the Constitution is being extremely redundant.

But enough analyzing the use of the term "United States." Do you think the term is used consistently here? Would a strict construction of the text permit state laws requiring belief in God?

Would you say that a requirement to believe in God is a "religious test"? What about a requirement to believe the Nicene Creed or the Westminster Confession? Does "religious," as used in the Constitution, only refer to church membership? Where should we draw the line between what's religious and what's not?

[Rainbow Brite]

Would you say that a requirement to believe in God is a "religious test"?

Not really according to the following interpretations:

• US Public Law 102-14 deems failure to observe Noahide will "threaten the fabric of civilized society." presumably the same as terrorism.
  
• Noahide is not a religion but "ethical values and principles which are the basis of civilized society." In other words Torah and Noahide are not religions, but God-given Laws: Unlike Torah-true Noahidism and Judaism that were given by G-d, there are man-made religions in the modern world that have a great many recognized branches and sub-branches. In addition, one must admit that each individual has his/her own personal interpretations of his own religion, which influence exactly what he/she believes and practices. The compatibility of this with the strict letter of the Noahide Commandment that forbids idolatry must be considered objectively on a case-by-case basis. -AskNoah
  
• Noahide.org II. No blasphemy 1 "To acknowledge the existence of G-d." Positive Mitzvah 1 Exodus 20:2 "I am the L-rd, your G-d"

[Nicholas]

Yes. Requiring belief in God (or gods) is a religious test. It's impossible to interpret it any other way.

[Individualist]

Not really according to the following interpretations:

• US Public Law 102-14 deems failure to observe Noahide will "threaten the fabric of civilized society." presumably the same as terrorism.
  
• Noahide is not a religion but "ethical values and principles which are the basis of civilized society." In other words Torah and Noahide are not religions, but God-given Laws: Unlike Torah-true Noahidism and Judaism that were given by G-d, there are man-made religions in the modern world that have a great many recognized branches and sub-branches. In addition, one must admit that each individual has his/her own personal interpretations of his own religion, which influence exactly what he/she believes and practices. The compatibility of this with the strict letter of the Noahide Commandment that forbids idolatry must be considered objectively on a case-by-case basis. -AskNoah
  
• Noahide.org II. No blasphemy 1 "To acknowledge the existence of G-d." Positive Mitzvah 1 Exodus 20:2 "I am the L-rd, your G-d"

The resolution for a "National Education Day" you cited doesn't require anyone to do anything, any more than a resolution for a "National Day of Prayer." Even if it did, the resolution wouldn't help us interpret what's in the actual Constitution. I don't see the relevance of the other items, either.

Yes. Requiring belief in God (or gods) is a religious test. It's impossible to interpret it any other way.

Well, I agree, but I'm looking for the reasons, for and against.

[Rainbow Brite]

The resolution for a "National Education Day" you cited doesn't require anyone to do anything, any more than a resolution for a "National Day of Prayer." Even if it did, the resolution wouldn't help us interpret what's in the actual Constitution. I don't see the relevance of the other items, either.

It's Public Law acknowledging that not observing Noahide threatens society, that Noahide is not considered a religion but a set of God-given moral codes, and that atheism is against Noahide.

It is what it is. If it was technically considered a religion, it would be calling for the establishment of a national religion by Congress, which would violate the First Amendment.

President Barack Obama wrote in his proclamation on Education & Sharing Day 2009:

"Few have better understood or more successfully promoted these ideas than Rabbi Menachem Mendel Schneerson, the Lubavitcher Rebbe, who emphasized the importance of education and good character. Through the establishment of educational and social service institutions across the country and the world, Rabbi Schneerson sought to empower young people and inspire individuals of all ages. On this day, we raise his call anew."

If you are looking for how belief in God isn't considered a religion, and for how requiring it isn't a religious test, there is one reason that's not just opinion.

[Individualist]

It's Public Law acknowledging that not observing Noahide threatens society, that Noahide is not considered a religion but a set of God-given moral codes, and that atheism is against Noahide.

It is what it is. If it was technically considered a religion, it would be calling for the establishment of a national religion by Congress, which would violate the First Amendment.

President Barack Obama wrote in his proclamation on Education & Sharing Day 2009:

"Few have better understood or more successfully promoted these ideas than Rabbi Menachem Mendel Schneerson, the Lubavitcher Rebbe, who emphasized the importance of education and good character. Through the establishment of educational and social service institutions across the country and the world, Rabbi Schneerson sought to empower young people and inspire individuals of all ages. On this day, we raise his call anew."

If you are looking for how belief in God isn't considered a religion, and for how requiring it isn't a religious test, there is one reason that's not just opinion.

Where does Congress say that Noahide isn't religion? They weren't establishing anything by this resolution. And again, Congress didn't write the Constitution, so their opinion is irrelevant. So is Obama's, even though the quote you gave doesn't say anything religious.

[Rainbow Brite]

Where does Congress say that Noahide isn't religion? They weren't establishing anything by this resolution. And again, Congress didn't write the Constitution, so their opinion is irrelevant. So is Obama's, even though the quote you gave doesn't say anything religious.

Government expresses intent through the bill, and subsequent annual Presidential proclamations of it thereafter, to deem said Jewish interpretation of Noahide as well as Judaism to be authoritative, which state, Torah and Noahide are not religions or religious, but are moral codes to be upheld by all respective members of society, else society is threatened with peril.

In other words, loopholes exist to get around calling it a religious test or respecting of a religion.

[Individualist]

Government expresses intent through the bill, and subsequent annual Presidential proclamations of it thereafter, to deem said Jewish interpretation of Noahide as well as Judaism to be authoritative, which state, Torah and Noahide are not religions or religious, but are moral codes to be upheld by all respective members of society, else society is threatened with peril.

In other words, loopholes exist to get around calling it a religious test or respecting of a religion.

Congress can't create a loophole in the Constitution. The Constitution is what created Congress. The only thing that could create a loophole would be the understanding of the word religious at the time the Constitution was ratified.

[Rainbow Brite]

The only thing that could create a loophole would be the understanding of the word religious...

That's really all I said.

[Da Blonde]

Yes.