APA Classifies Belief in God As Mental Illness

[MTL]

Won't that be directly unconstitutional?

There is what is called the "strict scrutiny test", in which the Courts may determine whether the government can infringe on an otherwise-protected right, and the Lemon test, by which they measure the necessity versus the effect, such as in cases where a religious practice like polygamy is part of the religion yet the government wishes to ban it. Sorry for the copypasta, but these are concepts that everyone should understand, but that it is really important for atheists to understand:

It must be justified by a compelling governmental interest. While the Courts have never brightly defined how to determine if an interest is compelling, the concept generally refers to something necessary or crucial, as opposed to something merely preferred. Examples include national security, preserving the lives of multiple individuals, and not violating explicit constitutional protections. The law or policy must be narrowly tailored to achieve that goal or interest. If the government action encompasses too much (overbroad) or fails to address essential aspects of the compelling interest, then the rule is not considered narrowly tailored. The law or policy must be the least restrictive means for achieving that interest. That is, there cannot be a less restrictive way to effectively achieve the compelling government interest. The test will be met even if there is another method that is equally the least restrictive. Some legal scholars consider this "least restrictive means" requirement part of being narrowly tailored, though the Court generally evaluates it separately.

The Court's decision in the case established the "Lemon test" (named after the lead plaintiff Alton Lemon) which details the requirements for legislation concerning religion. It is threefold:

1. The statute must not result in an "excessive government entanglement" with religious affairs. (also known as the Entanglement Prong)
   
   1. Factors.
      
      1. Character and purpose of institution benefited.
         
      2. Nature of aid the state provides.
         
      3. Resulting relationship between government and religious authority.
         
2. The statute must not advance nor inhibit religious practice (also known as the Effect Prong)
   
3. The statute must have a secular legislative purpose. (also known as the Purpose Prong)
   

You're very well-informed.  I wasn't aware of this, and yet it makes obvious sense that it exists.

I'm glad you posted this.  Thank You.