Constitutional issues should block Bible bill

A veto of legislation that proposes to designate the Holy Bible as the “Official State Book” of Tennessee could easily be overridden, but Gov. Bill Haslam would be sending the right message: Not everyone in the state is united in fear and distrust of religious minorities.

There is no doubt that this would be a difficult veto for Haslam, who rarely uses his limited veto power. The emotional and spiritual ties a majority of Tennesseans have with the Bible are strong.

But the governor, the state attorney general and a fair number of legislators understand the harm that can come from giving the Bible the status of an official state document. That would be an unconstitutional gesture that would reduce to non-Christians to the status of second-class citizens.

The state Senate voted 19-8 in favor of the legislation Monday night, ignoring a state attorney general’s opinion declaring that it violates both the Tennessee and U.S. constitutions. The House approved the bill 55-38 last year. A gubernatorial veto, which could be overridden by simple majority votes in both houses of the General Assembly, would nevertheless reinforce the argument that many Tennesseans understand the government’s obligation to avoid granting official status to any set of religious beliefs.

It’s clear, too, that even those in favor of the measure understand the constitutional concerns. Why else would they seek to justify the Bible’s adoption as an official state document — and try to evade constitutional scrutiny — with a lengthy preamble to the legislation that depicts the Bible as a historical work of cultural and economic importance to Tennessee rather than primarily a religious one? Or to justify passage with the rationale that Bibles are printed in Tennessee?

Cultural and economic progress in Tennessee would simply be impeded by any legislation that religious minorities would interpret — correctly in some cases — as exclusionary. Passage would undoubtedly trigger a lawsuit that would be costly to defend against and that the state would undoubtedly lose.

It may be that sponsors of this legislation have no intention of offending Jews, Buddhists, Muslims, atheists or any other minority group. They may be operating from very deeply held personal experiences, such as those held by the bill’s sponsor, Sen. Steve Southerland, R-Morristown, who cites the Bible’s role in many Tennessee families, recording a history of births, marriages and deaths that predates anything the state has on file.

But the framers of the Constitution had very good reasons for barring the government from the establishment of an official state religion, including protecting the rights of those who don’t conform to majority beliefs.

The state is doing a good job of avoiding prickly arguments over religion so far. There is no reason to start one now.