HCR 28 - AS INTRODUCED
2000 SESSION
HOUSE CONCURRENT RESOLUTION 28
A RESOLUTION requesting the New Hampshire supreme court to rule on whether part first, article 6 and part second, article 83 of the New Hampshire constitution are in conflict.
SPONSORS: Rep. Bruno, Hills 4; Sen. Roberge, Dist 9
This house concurrent resolution requests the New Hampshire supreme court to rule on whether part first, article 6 and part second, article 83 of the New Hampshire constitution are in conflict with each other, and specifically whether part second, article 83 is in conflict with and in breach of part first, article 6.
00-2331
04/09
STATE OF NEW HAMPSHIRE
In the Year of Our Lord Two Thousand
A RESOLUTION requesting the New Hampshire supreme court to rule on whether part first, article 6 and part second, article 83 of the New Hampshire constitution are in conflict.
Whereas the United States Supreme Court in a footnote to Torcaso v. Watkins, 367 U.S. 488 (1961), commented that "Among religions in this country which do not teach what would generally be considered a belief in the existence of God are Buddhism, Taoism, Ethical Culture, Secular Humanism and others," and
Whereas the absence of religious education in the public schools of this state creates a void, the effect of which is tantamount to teaching secular humanism in the public schools, and
Whereas under part second, article 83 of the New Hampshire constitution as interpreted by the Claremont II rulings, public school pupils in this state have a constitutional right to a public education and the state has a constitutional duty to provide and fund such education, and
Whereas since the public schools are deemed to be teaching secular humanism, and as such are religious schools, the constitutional mandate requiring the state to fund public education is a direct breach of part first, article 6 of the New Hampshire constitution which provides, in pertinent part, that "...[N]o person shall ever be compelled to pay towards the support of the schools of any sect or denomination," and
Whereas the general court believes that as a result of the foregoing, there may be a fundamental conflict between the provisions of part first, article 6 and part second, article 83 of the New Hampshire constitution; now, therefore, be it
Resolved by the House of Representatives, the Senate concurring:
That the New Hampshire supreme court render a ruling as to whether or not part first, article 6 and part second, article 83 of the New Hampshire constitution are fundamentally in conflict.