1. Atheists do not experience major prejudice and discrimination in the United States.
2. Although atheists may experience some measure of prejudice and discrimination, it is not as extreme or openly codified into our government and culture, as it was against blacks, and therefore we have no right to call their fight a “civil rights movement” (a mostly emotional argument made by many African Americans, especially those who experienced the civil rights movement first hand).

The first argument, which this first of two posts is concerned with, has no truth whatsoever.  It is simply an attempt to whitewash the entire issue.  There have, throughout American history, and are still today many examples of discrimination, and most certainly bigotry against atheists.  Although it is not my purpose in this post to give a ton of examples (that’s this entire blog’s mission, isn’t it?), only one is needed to show that claim is patently false – that there is, in fact discrimination against the nonreligious codified into government.  Many states still technically require a religious test for public office, which is blatantly unconstitutional.  They don’t require any specific religious beliefs, only that one asserts a belief in some supernatural deity.  This clearly singles out only the nonreligious, barring them from state public office¹.  These states are:

• Arkansas²

“No person who denies the being of a God shall hold any office in the civil departments of this State, nor be competent to testify as a witness in any Court.”
Constitution Of The State Of Arkansas Of 1874 (Article XIX, Section 1. Atheists disqualified from holding office or testifying as witness)

• Maryland³

“That as it is the duty of every man to worship God in such manner as he thinks most acceptable to Him, all persons are equally entitled to protection in their religious liberty; wherefore, no person ought by any law to be molested in his person or estate, on account of his religious persuasion, or profession, or for his religious practice, unless, under the color of religion, he shall disturb the good order, peace or safety of the State, or shall infringe the laws of morality, or injure others in their natural, civil or religious rights; nor ought any person to be compelled to frequent, or maintain, or contribute, unless on contract, to maintain, any place of worship, or any ministry; nor shall any person, otherwise competent, be deemed incompetent as a witness, or juror, on account of his religious belief; provided, he believes in the existence of God, and that under His dispensation such person will be held morally accountable for his acts, and be rewarded or punished therefor either in this world or in the world to come.

Nothing shall prohibit or require the making reference to belief in, reliance upon, or invoking the aid of God or a Supreme Being in any governmental or public document, proceeding, activity, ceremony, school, institution, or place.

Nothing in this article shall constitute an establishment of religion (amended by Chapter 558, Acts of 1970, ratified Nov. 3, 1970).”
Declaration of Rights, Maryland Constitution (Article XXXVI) [emphasis added]

“That no religious test ought ever to be required as a qualification for any office of profit or trust in this State, other than a declaration of belief in the existence of God; nor shall the Legislature prescribe any other oath of office than the oath prescribed by this Constitution.”
Declaration of Rights, Maryland Constitution (Article XXXVII) [emphasis added]

• North Carolina⁴

“The following persons shall be disqualified for office:

First, any person who shall deny the being of Almighty God.

Second, with respect to any office that is filled by election by the people, any person who is not qualified to vote in an election for that office.

Third, any person who has been adjudged guilty of treason or any other felony against this State or the United States, or any person who has been adjudged guilty of a felony in another state that also would be a felony if it had been committed in this State, or any person who has been adjudged guilty of corruption or malpractice in any office, or any person who has been removed by impeachment from any office, and who has not been restored to the rights of citizenship in the manner prescribed by law.”
The Constitution of North Carolina (Article VI, Section 8. Disqualifications for office.) [emphasis added]

• Pennsylvania⁵

“No person who acknowledges the being of a God and a future state of rewards and punishments shall, on account of his religious sentiments, be disqualified to hold any office or place of trust or profit under this Commonwealth.”
Declaration of Rights, Constitution of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania (Article I, Section 4. Religion)

[Ed. This isn't clear.  Is it implying that only those who acknowledge God are protected from disqualification due to their beliefs, therefore atheists are not?]

• South Carolina⁶
  

“No person shall be eligible to the office of Governor who denies the existence of the Supreme Being; and who on the date of such election has not attained the age of thirty years; and who shall not have been a citizen of the United States and a citizen and resident of this State for five years next preceding the day of election. No person while Governor shall hold any office or other commission (except in the militia) under the authority of this State, or of any other power. (1972 (57) 3171; 1973 (58) 48.)”
South Carolina Constitution (Article IV, Section 2. Qualifications of Governor.) [emphasis added]

• Texas⁷
  

“No religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office, or public trust, in this State; nor shall any one be excluded from holding office on account of his religious sentiments, provided he acknowledge the existence of a Supreme Being.”
Bill of Rights, Texas Constitution (Article I, Section 4)  [emphasis added]

Although only one example would have been needed to invalidate the first criticism, I have shown that atheists are subject to institutionalized discrimination in many states.  In these six states, the nonreligious are denied a right that the religious are given.  Specifically, no atheist, agnostic, etc. may hold either any public office, or, such as in the case of South Carolina, a specific public office.  This is one of the most important facets of representative democracy, which in these states the nonreligious cannot participate.

I don’t claim this list to be exhaustive.  It’s simply what I have found in my research.  Do you know of more?  Am I mistaken and has one of these changed to include those of all faiths and no faith?  Let me know: sdreport [at] bunda.org

In my next post, I will respond to the second criticism (that atheists have no right to call their fight a “civil rights movement”).

Edit: I think it is important to point out that the U.S. Constitution trumps these discriminatory parts of state constitutions, and the U.S. Supreme Court has affirmed this (Torcaso v. Watkins)⁸.  The point is that these provisions still exist in these constitutions, something no one felt was important enough to remove.  Furthermore, I wouldn’t put it past some ideologues to at least try to enforce it, even though precedent suggests the Supreme Court would most definitely overturn these provisions if challenged.  Presumably, these have not been challenged because the bigotry that exists, or at the least the fact that polls suggest atheists are the least trusted citizens, has not allowed openly atheist politicians to run.

References:

Excerpts:

“I think atheists, as well as agnostics or folks of other religious convictions other than Christianity for that matter, are disliked because so many ‘Christians’ in the south equate patriotism with belief in God,” said Tripp York, a professor of religious studies at Elon. “There is much confusion in the minds of many North American Christians as to the God they claim to worship and the tribal god established by the civil religion inherent within this nation-state. To deny belief in this god is synonymous, for many, as a form of anti-patriotism.

[sic]

“Not only are atheists the least trusted minority in America, but gays have been trying to be liberated for almost 30 years,” said William. “They have had a long time to acclimate the populace towards homosexuals and the majority of the populace is now willing to treat them as people. The fact that we are talking about true gay marriage in the mainstream rather than how AIDS and vigilantes will kill all of the gays on the news shows this. That’s why I do indeed think that it is harder to come out Atheist rather than gay in the South.”

“Ten or twenty years ago, if you came out gay, your students would see you differently and you’d be afraid the administration would see you differently and there’d be a different acceptance of you on campus, and I’m seeing a real parallel with this,” said an Elon professor who asked to remain anonymous for this article. “Since the topic of my sabbatical research (atheists in the South) became public, people have come to me out of the woodwork saying ‘I’m glad you’re working on that because I’ve always felt uncomfortable here.’”

Click the link.  Read the rest of the article.  This is the kind of insightful writing we need out of our new crop of young journalists.