Incorporation Doctrine w/ Quebec

Assume the following:
- Quebec joins the ARW and becomes a state
- The US Constitution (with Bill of Rights) is effectively identical to its historical form
- Quebec establishes Catholicism as their state church
- The idea of incorporation of the Bill of Rights proceeds, more or less, as it did historically (late 19th-early 20th century)

I’m trying to stay as broad as possible with this, as we coild get bogged down in the weeds pretty quickly (how does an alt-ACW go, and what impact does that have on the 14th amendement?), which I don’t want to do.

Ultimately, with a prominent state having their own established church, how might incorporation play out?
 
Why do I think they would be oppressed by Anglo-Protestants like everyone else?

I can’t say why you think that, but I have seen similar stereotypes expressed regarding the generation of the founding fathers, in direct contrast to their stated intentions with Quebec, and the laws they crafted as an independent people.
 
Connecticut had a state church up until 1818, requiring all residents to pay taxes to and attend the Congregationalist church unless they had written documentation that they were a member of some other church. With Quebec establishing Catholicism, they might scare the other states into agreeing, much more clearly and at an earlier date, to prohibit state governments establishing a state church.
 
Connecticut had a state church up until 1818, requiring all residents to pay taxes to and attend the Congregationalist church unless they had written documentation that they were a member of some other church. With Quebec establishing Catholicism, they might scare the other states into agreeing, much more clearly and at an earlier date, to prohibit state governments establishing a state church.

Why would anyone care what Quebec did, and why would this "scare" anyone?
 
Top