New Rule: Any Politician Who Tries to Interject Religion into Government Should be Removed from Office Immediately

paul-ryan-churchI’ve absolutely had it with these politicians who constantly try to inject their religion into politics and policy.  Not only that, they run on the premise that our government should be based on biblical principles.

Oh, by the way, it’s 100 percent unconstitutional for laws to be based on religion.  But you don’t have to believe me, just read our First Amendment:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion…

Our Constitution couldn’t be much more direct on this subject.

Yet, despite this indisputable fact, we still constantly see politicians (specifically Republican politicians) running on the premise that they’ll govern based on religious principles.

In other words, we have politicians blatantly admitting that they plan to violate our Constitution.

And I know, I can already hear some people saying, “Oh, what about Obama’s violations of the Constitution?”  I’m not talking about actions that are subjective.  All politicians support policies that sometimes skirt the line of being Constitutional.  Obama critics just like to act as if everything he does is unconstitutional.  Which is completely ridiculous.

I’m talking about the fact that our Constitution clearly states that laws cannot be based on religion, yet we have politicians willfully trying to base laws on religion.

Hell, I still don’t quite get how every law we have in this country based on religion isn’t immediately deemed unconstitutional.  Why do we have to “challenge” these laws to get them overturned?  They shouldn’t exist in the first place!

But what I think we should do (though I know it would never happen) is make a rule that says any politician who tries to justify any law or legislation because of their religious beliefs should immediately be removed from office.

Think about how much simpler politics would be.

Hell, think how much simpler life would be if people just kept their religious views to themselves.  Much of the conflict we see around the world is based on this desire by some to force their religion on others.

This doesn’t mean people couldn’t freely exercise their religion as much as they want.  By all means, spend 7 days a week at church for all I care.  Just don’t try to force others to follow the same religious views that you do.  If someone happens to ask you about it, then by all means discuss it with that one person.  Otherwise, keep your views to yourself.

Yes, it’s that simple.

I’m just sick and tired of seeing politicians stand in front of crowds, blatantly admitting that they plan to govern via “biblical principles” when basing legislation on religion is 100 percent unconstitutional.  I don’t understand how that could be considered Constitutional.

Because, to me, the moment a politician willfully tries to interject their religion into public policy, they’re violating our First Amendment.

So I say, let’s set a rule that says any politician who willfully tries to base laws on religious beliefs is to be immediately removed from office.

Hit me up on Twitter and let me know what you think.

Allen Clifton

Allen Clifton is a native Texan who now lives in the Austin area. He has a degree in Political Science from Sam Houston State University. Allen is a co-founder of Forward Progressives and creator of the popular Right Off A Cliff column and Facebook page. Be sure to follow Allen on Twitter and Facebook, and subscribe to his channel on YouTube as well.


Facebook comments

  • Ed Fagan

    Religion is throughout history, and today still, by Far THE single biggest reason for MASS MURDER in the number of MILLIONS and MILLIONS of children, women and men, and rapes.

    • meatwad_SSuppet

      “Religion has caused for more harm and misery to more humans in all of history than any other single idea.” M.M.O’Hair

      • Misha Langley

        Quite agree.

  • 2Smart2bGOP

    The quickest, surest way to lose our Constitutional right to freedom of religion is to interject it into our government.

    • DB

      Love the image!

  • Sue Roediger

    Imagine the outcry if someone of any religion other than Christianity were to say they were going to govern according to their faith.

    • Tracy DuChien Jr.

      They would immediately scream theocracy or sharia law! Yet Americans oppose of voting for an atheist that lacks a religion and would avoid this issue all together.

    • pam95650

      Could you even imagine if Keith Ellison prayed on his rug seven times a day?

      • Misha Langley

        Just want to clarify that Muslims are supposed to pray 5 times a day, not 7 (although I don’t suppose a couple of extra prayers would be considered a bad thing…)

    • Bonta-kun

      Dude, they think Obama is a Muslim already, doesn’t matter what you tell them.

    • utopia27


      • Sue Roediger

        ???? really ???? I said person not country !

      • utopia27

        Just saying – Christian theocracies and Muslim theocracies are not the only models we have to look to. A quick review of political debate inside Israel shows a range of approaches/attitudes in an explicitly religiously focused/motivated state.

      • Sue Roediger

        The are having trouble with their extremists…. ultra conservative and Hasidic elements…..who want the civil laws to reflect their tenets.

  • Laura Hurt

    This is something I really can’t fathom: how can laws exist that are in violation of the law? It should be automatically be stricken of the books: sorry, this law can’t exist. I don’t know why that is not happening. And I very much agree that every politician trying to make a law based on religion should be banned from politics.

    • Eg Kbbs

      Under the current system, legislature passes a bill which becomes law when the president signs it. Judicial review only happens when challenged. Constitution doesn’t allow a non-involved person to challenge a law – you have to have someone who the law negatively effects and then they have to start at the lower courts and work their way up,

      Unfortunately, those legislators that should know better (and very like DO know better) continue to pass laws which have absolutely no chance of passing judicial review. I’m jaded enough to believe that often a flurry of patently unconstitutional laws are passed with the idea that they will be the law for a while and may stay on the books for years before a group expends the time, energy and massive expense of challenging those laws. (That is, we’ll have a decade of profiting from flaunting the law till we’re shut down).

      • Laura Hurt

        I understand the mechanics. I DON’T understand why the mechanics work like that…

  • Steve Temke

    Article VI of the Constitution says that there will be no religious test required for public office yet politicians insidiously violate the spirit of this rule constantly. They’ll (and they’re usually Republicans) trumpet their own piety and godliness while implying that their opponent is a godless heathen. Louie Gohmert, E.W. Jackson, Rick Santorum and Mike Huckabee come to mind. The whole “Obama is a Muslim” meme is put forth to imply that he can’t be a good American because he’s not a good Christian.

    Personally, I’d prefer it if any politician who can’t get through a stump speech or a media interview without mentioning his God, his faith or his church should be barred from office. If he can’t keep from talking about it in every other sentence, then obviously he can’t keep it our of his governance.

    • JoJo35

      You, as well as the author of this article, claim that people should just shut up about their religion yet your reserve the right to spout out against it. You can’t have it both ways. If you want to talk freely against religion, then you have to accept when people talk freely for it.

      • Terry Major-Holliday

        It’s one thing to have the right to speak about one’s religion, and quite another to impose one’s religion on others via laws.

      • digitlburn

        JoJo, Ecclesiasties 3 states, “There is a time for everything, and a season for every activity under the heavens.”

        Obviously, someone’s personal website (the original author’s) that discusses politics EVERY DAY would be the time and season to talk about this political subject, and the Bible is the Word of God. So, why aren’t you following the Word of God?

        Teh stoopid herts!

      • hermanprovi

        Which “God” did you have in mind? We are a SECULAR Nation, governed by a Constitution NOT THE BIBLE! If that is not what you like, move to a Country where the ‘Bible” is the governance!

      • Justtryingtounderstand49

        No ! We only spout off about religion in our government ! if you keep it out of our laws we wouldn’t NEED to talk about it !~so shut up about your stupid religion and we wouldn’t have to put it down !

      • hermanprovi

        When something is evil, it is a human duty to rail against it, not to indulge in it!

      • RT Kraken

        “When something is evil, it is a human duty to rail against it, not to indulge in it!”

        That’s precisely why we don’t want religion to be any part of our laws!

      • James Dorian Gaynes

        No, what he’s speaking out against is CAMPAINING or GOVERNING based on your faith. He said right in the OP that you can talk about it all you want, outside of those two contexts.

        Do us all a favor and take a reading comprehension class. Please?

      • GL

        Actually, JoJo, allow me to break down what the author was saying in simple, easy to understand, short words.
        If you want to be religious, that’s cool.
        If you want to talk about your religion, that’s cool.
        If you want to make laws based on your religion, you are a prick.

      • Dave Morales

        The problem is not about talking about religion, the problem is governing thru religion.

      • traveler19491

        Ah, JoJo, JoJo, there you go, drawing unwarranted, unjustifiable, and unsupportable conclusions from an article that very CLEARLY stated that people should be able to say whatever they like, to whomever they like, about religion…just that it has no place in politics or government, per our Constitution. I assume that you are familiar with the Constitution (although given the level of misinformation and just plain ignorance rife within the Republican and Tea Parties, that may not actually be a safe assumption)? What the article said, again, very clearly, is that religion has no place in our government, and particularly in the law making process, seeing as it is forbidden per the First Amendment. No one says you can’t talk about your religion. Just don’t go trying to insert it into the law…doesn’t work. Now then, JoJo, take a step back from the edge, put down the sharp objects, and inhale deeply. Good. Now, go find your Prozac…and you might wanna pop two.

    • Michael W Hall

      i’d go even one step further and say that any candidate that uses their religion to gain the Presidency or a seat in congress during their elections should lose their candidacy immediately. It is a clear violation of the 1st amendment, it’s time “we the people” start beating our own politicians over the head with our own bill of rights.

  • Eg Kbbs

    Yes, religion has often been used as the rationale for some of the biggest atrocities in history. However, it has also been the driving force between some of our best moments also.

    The founding fathers obviously saw the problem of an organized state religion (such as Church of England dealing with various anabaptist groups). But like most things, there is a balance. For example, incorporating the moral elements common to many denominations and religions – such as concern for the poor – while not establishing a particular religion.

    • Eg Kbbs

      I’d add that the current politics seems to be the establishment of a religion but somehow with total neglect of the moral elements which are basic to that religion.

      • PostingID2014

        Yes yes yes, Eg!

      • JoJo35

        And Obama fits that description. You know it hasn’t been that long ago that is was ok to be religious. Religion has been hijacked so many times by people who want to use it for evil. It’s just like everything else, that people who are against, it want to put it into a catagory and rip it to pieces. And that is why this country is so divided today. NOBODY is tolerant of anything. It’s either you think exactly like me or you are the enemy. Unbelievable.

      • Patrick T. Hendrick

        What are you saying? Obama did it?

    • Phil Graves

      exactly, if someone was brought up in a religion that emphasizes fair treatment of the poor and needy and equality for all then of course they’re going to bring that religion based thinking into their politics. So what is the negative of someone saying there morals about helping the helpless and so on comes from a religious background vs a non-religious background?

      • Laura Hurt

        It’s not about morals like helping the poor (in contrast, it is ANYTHING but that, since the most religious right is also for taking away a lot of money that is now helping the poor). It’s about laws that are not based on what’s right or wrong as objectively as can be, but what’s right and wrong according to the bible. And THAT is wrong. Because -I- don’t want to live my life according to biblical rules, because -I- don’t believe in them. Yet a lot of the new laws are based on biblical laws and are therefore limiting my life in a way that is unconstitutional.

      • JoJo35

        What a bunch of bull. Did you read what you just wrote? “Because I don’t like it.” Our country consist of a few more people than you! You actually want what the religious people want and that is “what you want”.

      • Laura Hurt

        uh what? I did not say “because I don’t like it”. I said I don’t believe in the bible and I don’t think I should be made to live according to that. Did you read what I wrote??? The rest of what you wrote made no sense either, I don’t even understand what you mean by your last sentences. Then, you say our country consists of a few more people than just me. Well, our country exists of more than religious people too, the laws should not be such that they benefit only the religious and should not be such that the non-religious have to live according to the religious laws.

    • RT Kraken

      “Yes, religion has often been used as the rationale for some of the biggest atrocities in history. However, it has also been the driving force between some of our best moments also.”

      Name three…

  • rossbro

    Fire them all, let’s start over.

  • sherry06053


  • Dave McCormick

    Seriously, you might want to read “The Armageddon Factor” by Marci McDonald. It’s about this very issue, mostly about what’s happening in Canada, but those of you in the USA will be able to relate.

  • shacker2762

    I just wish that progressives make the same passionate argument FOR the 2nd Amendment that clearly states the Right to keep and bear arms shall NOT be infringed. When you have cities like New York charging upwards of $400 for a license for something that’s supposed to be a right, you’d think progressives would be quoting the Constitution against such things but all you get is silence. How sad.

    • klynb

      That’s part of the “well-regulated militia” portion of the 2nd Amendment.

      • Charles Vincent

        Well regulated means how they are to be trained and organized.

    • BilbySA

      You have the ‘right’ to remain silent, too, but does that mean you expect the lawyer to be free? Come on, be reasonable.

      • shacker2762

        Seriously? “You have a right to an attorney. If you cannot afford one, one will be provided to you at no cost”.
        Forgot that part?

      • Tammy Kolii

        WTH…I think Shacker now wants guns freely handed out to everyone who cannot afford one. Want a gun? Pass a background Check. Want an assault rifle? go [email protected]#ck yourself.

    • Bradlisky

      I support the 2nd, and am a gun owner. However, I do not support assault rifles, 100-round magazines, sales of guns without background checks and no owner liability. Nor do I support all of the anti-government rhetoric and ‘2nd amendment remedies’ many on the right cry for, or all this revolution talk. Lastly, anyone that argues their guns are for protection from the Government can’t be taken seriously.

  • Spencer Ward

    Recently, I stated to a coworker who was a Republican I felt we shouldn’t have any policy based on religious principles and those who do should be removed from office. His response was, “If we restrict making religiously based legislation, why not make it illegal to hold office if you have a mustache? It’s the same thing!” I’m still confused….

  • Zophorianz

    Your interpretation of the constitution is so simplistic it is laughable. It is like someone in this day and age insisting that God literally created the world in 7 24 hour days. It maybe popular in some (narrow minded and wishful thinking) circles, but it ignores a lot of facts and information.

  • Cat Marcuri

    I’ll tell you how it could be clearer. We need to amend that part of the constitution to state that religion has NO business in government, and that religion is BANNED from having anything to do with the running of the government, to include making laws. It needs to say so, IN SO MANY WORDS, for these jackasses to get the message.

    • Laura Hurt

      It already DOES say so, they prefer to ignore that, THAT’s the problem.

      • Charles Vincent

        Actually it says;
        “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances”

        Which means there can be no state religion i.e. The sate cannot sponsor an official state religion like the Church of England. The state has to treat all religions equally i.e. If it allow the Ten Commandments to be place on public property it must allow other religions to place similar edifices.

      • CCoA

        Mr. Vincent. Thank you. This entire article and readers contents are solely based on a wrong interpretation of the first amendment. Good to see someone that is educated on the Constitution.

  • Otis Wikman

    It has always struck me as odd that the party that extols “christian” values are hell bent to break all the “christian” teachings in the book they swear by.

    • buricco

      They preach Christianity, they practice Objectivism, little knowing or caring that Objectivism is more or less the same thing as Laveyan Satanism 😛

      • RT Kraken

        They “worship” Jesus but they “follow” Moses. Everything is Leviticus with them (but only the parts that inconvenience someone else) and to hell with anything Christ ever (allegedly) said himself.

      • buricco

        Moses is easier for their primitive brains to comprehend.

  • Adam R Wallace

    If that rule were in place, the GOP would cease to exist. Let’s make it happen!

  • Stephen Sottile

    The first response should be to tax all church’s, no reason they should receive any tax exemptions..that is the ultimate violation of the establishment clause.

    • buricco

      At least SOMEONE else said that!

  • Tamaracboy

    NOT just removed from office, BUT: Tried for treason !
    After all each and every one of them took the Federal Oath of Office, swearing to uphold and defend the Constitution !

    • Ben Weston

      Ya… You know, when screaming that they need to obey the Constitution, it would help your argument to have actually READ the Constitution.

      Treason is spelled out VERY clearly in the Constitution. This doesn’t come close to qualifying.

      • Tamaracboy

        I have read every word of the Constitution
        I also have access to a DICTIONARY !
        One would think that IF you are capable of getting on line you were also capable of reading.

        Better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to speak out and remove all doubt. – Abraham Lincoln

        Oh well, open your mouth on the internet and expose your ignorance for all to see:

      • Ben Weston

        US Constitution, Article 3, sub-section 3

        Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying war
        against them, or in adhering to their enemies, giving them aid and
        comfort. No person shall be convicted of treason unless on the testimony
        of two witnesses to the same overt act, or on confession in open court.

        So, no. Injecting and forcing your religious belief into law and onto others would be a violation of their oath of office, and should be grounds for removal. It is NOT treason.

        “Oh well, open your mouth on the internet and expose your ignorance for all to see:”

        Thank you for proving your own point.

      • hermanprovi

        Unless, you are right! Right Abe! You were not silent, and and you are not considered a fool!

    • Turtle Turtle

      I think you have to give away war secrets to be tried for treason in the US.

      • Tamaracboy

        One would think that IF you are capable of getting on line you were also capable of reading a dictionary.

        “Better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to speak out and remove all doubt.” – Abraham Lincoln

        Oh well, open your mouth on the internet and expose your ignorance for all to see:

  • Bradlisky

    It is worse. There are Dominionists in our government (Ted Cruz, etc.) who actively WANT our gov to fail so they can institute Biblical Law. He and his dad, and their religion, say it all the time. There is no secret.

    HOW can these people hold office??

    • DavidD

      The solution is not to remove office holders who can’t or won’t support secular law.Banning anything surrenders all contol over an issue or substance and will play into their persecution fantasies they constantly push.
      Education on the rule of secular law and how the wall of seperation protects both the state and religion.
      The churches in Europe are empty because previous generations were forced to participate in a theocratic state.
      When that state lost credibility it took that religion down with it.
      Many sincere Christians are upset to see their sincere private beliefs being peddled like dishwater soap for political and financial gain gain.
      This directly contradicts what Jesus himself said about faith.
      Perhaps the best tactic is to join with them and allow them to take back their practice of faith to their communities by observing the actual practice of it layed out by the Bible not Wall Street or their local Chamber of Commerce.
      Rember the only time Jesus really got pissed was when he drove the bankers out of the Temple with a whip.

  • Don spencer

    How do we or why would we create laws that do not reflect our values? Some values serve us well both within religious teaching and in the secular world.
    Because a religion advocates such a value is it wise to reject it? How many within the secular world cling to their dogma as tenaciously as do the most fanatic of the religious? “Sacred” is not limited to the formal religion. Addiction to cherished ideas is a malady that infects us throughout the spectrum of intellectual endeavors. So, you of the “Progressive” persuasion should not get too cocky. Excess certitude is the real villain..

  • Al Briones

    Fully, wholeheartedly and without question.

  • Erin Weldon

    For some who follows the teachings of Ayn Rand, an avowed atheist, Paul Ryan is so hypocritical. He says he bases his economic beliefs on the teachings of Ayn Rand, who, before she died, depended on social security benefits to live.

    • Turtle Turtle

      8 out of the 10 States that receive the most food stamps per capita are red states.

  • LindaRealism

    Definitely agree!

  • Brian Justis

    Science takes man to the moon, religion flies men into buildings.

    • Keith Babberney

      . . . After science invents planes for them.

    • RT Kraken

      Science takes man to the moon, religion takes man to the internet…
      where he flings poo…
      like a poo flinging money…
      a poo flinging monkey that he is totally unrelated to because evolution is of the Debil.

  • hermanprovi

    Religion is one of the worlds OLDEST businesses! Faith, is a different matter! Religion is the bane of humanity! People all around the world, having been brainwashed into believing that if you don’t believe in one deity or another, you will go to hell or if you kill and die for a religion you will have “ladies” waiting for you in the after world, or only a “few” [Mormans] will be allowed in, etc, etc, not only follow like lemmings, but pour money into the coffers of these huge Corporations! Preachers have to look good and live well in order to “serve the Lord”! If need be, let us get an Amendment that prevents all politicians from even mentioning their Faith! the Rule must also [ because of recent rulings], include all justices from making rulings based on their faiths!

  • John Ktejik

    nah, you’re wrong. The constitution only says no laws shall be related to religion. Doesn’t mean you cannot have religious principles or explain things in religious terms. Two different things.

  • Richard Vasquez

    Bashing religions has become a popular trend and is growing each decade. A skillful politician is called to speak on that which is good for our world and that which is not. In addition it is his job to take a part in legislation which will help achieve good things and correct that which is bad. There are many politicians who do a good job and many who do not… just as there is in every profession. Many times we vote for who we think is the lesser of two evils… But we forget that what most of what we hear about the politicians is the bad because we get our news from media who is looking for high ratings. Bad news is just more interesting to most Americans. Controversial gets ratings. In the same way… People of Faith get bashed because of the bad that some do in the name of religion. And those who have an axe to grind on the subject of religion focus on the abusers of religion to paint religion as a bad thing for humanity. They never mention all the good that comes into the community from people of Faith. While we must uphold the important principal of separation of Church and State… we must not attempt to silence those politicians whose sense of purpose comes in part from their religious beliefs. We must expect that what we think about and speak about in time will bring about the betterment that we hope for. History has proven that this is so in America. Christians are constantly criticized profusely because they are not perfect… that they are hypocirites… but if their criticizers would take the time to look into what Christians actually believe they would find that they actually do not even come close to believing they are perfect… which is exactly why they rely on their Faith. Faith that helps them forgive others precisely because they require Forgiveness themselves. Separation of church and state… by all means… but don’t you even try to silence someone to cease speaking on what they believe. We have enough Fascism in this country already without embracing more of it.

    • Keith Babberney

      Charity and good works are not solely the purview of religious people. Nor is forgiveness. Nor is religion necessary for any of these.

      If your religion drives you to support a law, that’s fine; it’s as good a reason as any. But, when you want to apply your new rule to the rest of us, you need some kind of justification other than “the bible says.” You won’t find any of us arguing that murder should be okay because we don’t believe in god. We can all agree certain things are wrong. Just keep your religion where it belongs and bring your best secular arguments to the floor when it’s time to vote, and everything will be fine.

  • Joseph White

    I agree, provisionally. You could also add that any politician that tries to abridge free speech, freedom of press, tries to pass laws that abridge assembly, the ownership of weapons, illegal spying by the NSA, CIA, FBI, etc. should also be removed.

  • WilliamPatrickPond

    It’s past time we had our first atheist president. Far too many people equate religion with good when in fact it’s hidden some of the biggest scoundrels in history. Didn’t the newly convicted McDonnell pretend to have the highest religious ethics in the land? And look what he really was, just a thief and liar- who would have guessed?
    Every politician must have the appearance of being a pious beacon of righteousness and we know they’re not, and most of them are lying anyway.
    Religion is the cloak under which far too many miscreants hide, and its time we unveiled them.

  • Kim Serrahn

    they do and say those things to get the votes and the money.

  • ram1020

    Does this imply we should remove the apologists of Islam from office?

  • Joe Huelsman

    I can’t understand this so called “Freedom of Choice” and “All are Welcome” that some Christians try to say they cherish as there teachings tell them. There actions tell a completely different scenario. Since Child hood and my understanding of God and Jesus also being an alter boy for my Catholic church and not ever had a problem with the clergy or sisters.
    As I’ve grown and experienced life and have been educated I am now 51. I enjoyed my years in the church as a youth and felt what I was taught about Jesus and God gave me a good foundation to my spiritual beliefs. As I got older I began seeing religion and churches were just not fowling Jesus’s example. I believe god’s will was to send Jesus to live with us to tech us how to live with each other. That is what is lost on religions. Yet, Our Democratic style of government is exactly what Jesus was showing. Living in the den of thief’s and chasing the money changers out of his father’s house, pointing out hypocrisy Etc… I have been shown by the actions of the Christian right, it’s not about freedom of choice or inclusiveness. They say you have been given free will. Your only choice is to follow gods will. So with that there is no choice. Those who do not fallow God are not included and now all are not welcome. Our government, the way it was designed. Allows different minded people, different cultures, different beliefs to coexist. Its not perfect but it can get there. It is the separation of Church and State that works. That is the main key stone to our way of life in this county. That is what gives us “Freedom of Choice” and “All are truly Welcome”. I do not wont to be ruled or governed by religion, ether if it is my chosen religion or not. I totally agree with this article. “Get Religion out of my Politics get my Politics out of my Religion.” Also money is not speech, corporations are not people, Christianity is not a government, Opinion is not Fact.

  • hermanprovi