A couple of days ago, I posted about a runoff race for the Austin City Council in Texas. Normally, it’d be off my radar, but candidate Laura Pressley had posted a graphic on her website explaining the differences between her and her opponent Gregorio Casar. She implied that his atheism was a problem:
Except he’s not an atheist. He’s a self-described Catholic.
More importantly, why would it make a difference even if he were an atheist?
Pressley never apologized for making that unnecessary distinction. Instead, she told the Austin American-Statesman his atheism disqualified him from hold public office:
Pressley pointed to a section of the Texas Constitution’s Bill of Rights that says there are no religious qualifications for holding public office, provided that the official “acknowledge the existence of a Supreme Being.”
You would think someone running for public office would know that such a provision is completely unenforceable.
In response to all this, Casar took the high road, proving once again that he’s the more mature candidate for the city:
“I don’t feel like having a debate with Laura about either of our religious beliefs,” Casar said. “It’s not a relevant part of the discussion about what qualifies someone to be a City Council member.”
(Thanks to Brian for the link)