Atheist files suit to remove "In God we trust" from money....

[skace]

Originally posted by: broon
Please look at a dollar or coin. It says "IN GOD WE TRUST". Would you suggest it say "IN a god WE TRUST"? Your G vs g argument doesn't apply since it's in all caps to begin with.

It would HAVE to be "IN A GOD WE TRUST" for it to be taken as a noun and not a specific name.

 

[Kipper]

Originally posted by: skace

Originally posted by: Kipper
You've nearly got it, but you're missing the mark. It is impossible to be entirely agnostic, as it is impossible to be entirely objective. You lean toward one side or the other, although you maintain that it is impossible to know...so agnosticism does NOT encompass people who profess belief in a deity, as this requires faith of one sort or another - 'proof' in a manner of speaking, that such a being exists. I think for actual agnostics it would be fair to classify two types atheist-agnostics and religious-agnostics, the names being self-explanatory depending on which way you lean.

Well, the biggest mistake of my definition was using the term "God" in defining Agnostic. Because while Agnostics believe in a god, they do not necessarily believe in "God". Agnostics believe in a god of any shape or form, from anything from a god of their refrigerator to a god being an alien in space.

If you are not sure if god exists or not, you are pretty much athiest but just scared to refer to yourself as such.

From Answers.com, for the definition of AGNOSTIC:

"One who believes that it is impossible to know whether there is a God."

Your suggestion that agnostics believe in a god of any sort: "...while Agnostics believe in a god..." directly contradicts this statement.

 

[broon]

Originally posted by: skace

Originally posted by: broon
Please look at a dollar or coin. It says "IN GOD WE TRUST". Would you suggest it say "IN a god WE TRUST"? Your G vs g argument doesn't apply since it's in all caps to begin with.

It would HAVE to be "IN A GOD WE TRUST" for it to be taken as a noun and not a specific name.

Majority rules in a republic. The majority of religions recognize the same God.

 

[Fenixgoon]

and what about the Declaration of Independence having a capital C for the word "Creator"? No one has a beef with that yet?

 

[skace]

Originally posted by: scrawnypaleguy
The Constitution does not mention the "separation of church and state", it merely states that there is no national religion. Read the Constitution. The whole idea of the separation of church and state comes from a series of letters written by Thomas Jefferson.

I understand the plight of the atheist and/or other religions, because it does seem unfair that one "God" is mentioned on money and others aren't, but it's not hurting anything so let it go already.

By putting "IN GOD WE TRUST" on currency you are embracing a national religion through subversive tactics. You may not get shot in the streets for not practicing it but there is obviously a widely accepted norm being demonstrated by money.

The question then becomes, why would a nation feel the need to acknowledge a specific religion via currency? Only one reason, to make sure it is widely accepted and acknowledged. To keep it circulated just like money is. There is nothing more widely circulated through the nation than currency.

If you were to sit down and have a group meeting one what phrases to put in a coin, would "IN GOD WE TRUST" be your first choice? Only if you were religious and only if that phrase encompassed your religion.

 

[Kipper]

Originally posted by: compuwiz1
Michael Newdow is an attention whore, and a a moron. It's just some words on money for christ sakes! Why waste time and money over it? :thumbsdown:

"Heil Hitler" is also just "some" words. So are the ten commandments - they are just "some words," right? Why bother Words are the way we convey feeling, expression, opinion, and thought. They have power, and therefore are significant.

I'm sorry you don't see it that way.

 

[broon]

Originally posted by: skace
By putting "IN GOD WE TRUST" on currency you are embracing a national religion through subversive tactics. You may not get shot in the streets for not practicing it but there is obviously a widely accepted norm being demonstrated by money.

The question then becomes, why would a nation feel the need to acknowledge a specific religion via currency? Only one reason, to make sure it is widely accepted and acknowledged. To keep it circulated just like money is. There is nothing more widely circulated through the nation than currency.

If you were to sit down and have a group meeting one what phrases to put in a coin, would "IN GOD WE TRUST" be your first choice? Only if you were religious and only if that phrase encompassed your religion.

For many that GOD is the dollar itself. It's fitting.

 

[skace]

Originally posted by: broon
Majority rules in a republic. The majority of religions recognize the same God.

When your view point is destroyed, you fall on your safety line. Well then it must make you uncomfortable that times are changing.

 

[broon]

Originally posted by: skace

Originally posted by: broon
Majority rules in a republic. The majority of religions recognize the same God.

When your view point is destroyed, you fall on your safety line. Well then it must make you uncomfortable that times are changing.

Times aren't changing. My point of view isn't destroyed. I'm very comfortable thank you.

 

[Kipper]

Originally posted by: Fenixgoon
and what about the Declaration of Independence having a capital C for the word "Creator"? No one has a beef with that yet?

The Declaration of Independence is not the textual basis for every single American law. It is a historical document, nothing more.

 

[Dedpuhl]

Originally posted by: Fenixgoon
and what about the Declaration of Independence having a capital C for the word "Creator"? No one has a beef with that yet?

The Declaration of Independence was written before the Constitution and is not a legal document.

 

[SagaLore]

Originally posted by: Jzero
How about:
"In Gods Some Of Us Trust"

That's even better. I like! :beer:

Or "In Gods Some of Us Trust Occasionally".

Let's just replace it with a more continutional motto, like:

Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness

That's neither religion nor anti-religious, since most religions are based on the premise anyway. For Christians, it would probably be best to remove God off something that represents greed anyway.

 

[skace]

Originally posted by: Kipper
From Answers.com, for the definition of AGNOSTIC:

"One who believes that it is impossible to know whether there is a God."

Your suggestion that agnostics believe in a god of any sort: "...while Agnostics believe in a god..." directly contradicts this statement.

I stand corrected and it seems I've largely had my deffinition of agnostics confused due to common practices of those I've known. Wikipedia had some good information.

Interestingly enough, Wikipedia had this to say:

Agnosticism has suffered more than most expressions of philosophical position from terminological vagaries. Data collection services [1], [2] often display the common use of the term, distinct from atheism in its lack of disputing the existence of deities.

I guess I'm guilty.

 

[nakedfrog]

Originally posted by: Fenixgoon

Originally posted by: nakedfrog

Originally posted by: HeroOfPellinor
I don't think anybody has converted to Christianity because they saw the phrase "In God We Trust" on a dollar bill.

I do believe you've missed the point. Having the phrase on there excludes people, whereas not having it doesn't exclude or include anyone. Yes, it's a small trifling matter, which is why in my initial post I said I'd like to see it gone, but wouldn't make a fuss over it.

even if you do remove it from future coins and bills, there's still the currency in circulation. please don't tell me you're going to take everyone's money and burn it because "god" is on there:disgust:
by having "god" on the bill/coin, the government isn't FORCING you to worship any particular way. how is it excluding people to begin with? people can't use US currency if they believe in Allah or Yahweh (or have no belief), but not a higher being excplicitly called God? gimme a break.

Currency is eventually returned to the mint to be destroyed. And thanks for completely missing a point I've stated twice thus far, but will now restate: I'd like to see it gone, but wouldn't make a fuss over it.
I also missed the part where I said having it on there forces anyone to do anything, or that non-christians can't use the currency as a result. Care to point it out to me?

 

[broon]

Originally posted by: SagaLore

Originally posted by: Jzero
How about:
"In Gods Some Of Us Trust"

That's even better. I like! :beer:

Or "In Gods Some of Us Trust Occasionally".

Let's just replace it with a more continutional motto, like:

Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness

That's neither religion nor anti-religious, since most religions are based on the premise anyway. For Christians, it would probably be best to remove God off something that represents greed anyway.

But really shouldn't it be Life, Liberty For Those That Believe Like Me, and the Guarantee of Happiness?

 

[Cerpin Taxt]

edit: nvm. I see that what I had said was actually redundant.

 

[scrawnypaleguy]

Originally posted by: skace

Originally posted by: scrawnypaleguy
The Constitution does not mention the "separation of church and state", it merely states that there is no national religion. Read the Constitution. The whole idea of the separation of church and state comes from a series of letters written by Thomas Jefferson.

I understand the plight of the atheist and/or other religions, because it does seem unfair that one "God" is mentioned on money and others aren't, but it's not hurting anything so let it go already.

By putting "IN GOD WE TRUST" on currency you are embracing a national religion through subversive tactics. You may not get shot in the streets for not practicing it but there is obviously a widely accepted norm being demonstrated by money.

The question then becomes, why would a nation feel the need to acknowledge a specific religion via currency? Only one reason, to make sure it is widely accepted and acknowledged. To keep it circulated just like money is. There is nothing more widely circulated through the nation than currency.

If you were to sit down and have a group meeting one what phrases to put in a coin, would "IN GOD WE TRUST" be your first choice? Only if you were religious and only if that phrase encompassed your religion.

Ok, sorry, I wasn't very clear before. What I meant to say was "yes, it is stupid that we have 'In God we trust' on our money, and I'm not crazy about it either, but I still don't see a reason to make a huge deal out of it."

Newdow is a douche.

 

[Fenixgoon]

Originally posted by: Dedpuhl

Originally posted by: Fenixgoon
and what about the Declaration of Independence having a capital C for the word "Creator"? No one has a beef with that yet?

The Declaration of Independence was written before the Constitution and is not a legal document.

it may not be the foundation for our government, no.

it's just the foundation of this country's very existence, and the constitution too.

 

[EyeMWing]

IN GODS OR LACK THEREOF WE TRUST

 

[Kipper]

Originally posted by: Fenixgoon

Originally posted by: Dedpuhl

Originally posted by: Fenixgoon
and what about the Declaration of Independence having a capital C for the word "Creator"? No one has a beef with that yet?

The Declaration of Independence was written before the Constitution and is not a legal document.

it may not be the foundation for our government, no.

it's just the foundation of this country's very existence, and the constitution too.

That still doesn't give it legal power. It is a statement of ideology, nothing more.

 

[Jzero]

Originally posted by: Fenixgoon
by having "god" on the bill/coin, the government isn't FORCING you to worship any particular way. how is it excluding people to begin with? people can't use US currency if they believe in Allah or Yahweh (or have no belief), but not a higher being excplicitly called God? gimme a break.

Amendment I says:
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.

Yet...
US Code Title 31 Section 5112 says:
United States coins shall have the inscription ?In God We Trust?.

Section 5114 says: United States currency has the inscription ?In God We Trust? in a place the Secretary decides is appropriate.

While this is not flat-out declaring a national religion, it wanders into a gray area where the government has made an official endorsement of some religion, whether or not it is explicitly specified.

IMO, it's close enough to the border and unimportant enough in the grand scheme of things that there is no reason to have it on the money. If you read just how it came to be, it becomes all the more absurd.

 

[skace]

Originally posted by: Fenixgoon
it may not be the foundation for our government, no.

it's just the foundation of this country's very existence, and the constitution too.

My standpoint has always been, if I were going to rewrite this stuff tomorrow, there are certain things I wouldn't do. Such as the C in Creator. As an open minded individual, I'd try to write it as nuetral as possible, similar to what most lawyers attempt to do when writing legal documents. But I am not going to go burn down any buildings because someone isn't rewriting everything tomorrow. I realize it takes money and man power to change these things and changing them really doesn't mean much. But, like I said in my first post, it is sad that something like money is being changed recently (all the new quarters, the new knickel, the new 20s, etc) and yet no one thought to evolve beyond our old style of thinking on them. That depresses me somewhat. I just stop and I think, I'm sure people realize that by now we are a larger melting pot then we've ever been before, maybe we should encompass everyone for once, maybe "United we stand Divided we fall" is much more powerful than "IN GOD WE TRUST".

 

[HumblePie]

HAHA, you guys amuse me.

First off, sorry Mosh but I have to say this, the line doesn't add anything to history. IF you want history go read a textbook. Reading that line on a coin or bill doesn't do anything for history at all.


Second, to the people saying "most" religions have only one god. LOLOLOLOLOLOL


You can't be serious right? Christinaity has MULTIPLE gods and religious icons. There is THE GOD and there is Jesus. Look 2 gods! Technically, Mary is ALSO a female god or goddess and any good theologian will tell you that as well. Why? You can't give birth to a god or a son of god and remain a mere mortal. For such religious zealots out there and very few have any understanding or actually read their own text. They take what's spoonfed to them at a Sunday Ceremony as dogma. Blah. Read, learn, interpret, take a class, ask a real theologian who isn't interested in "preaching" but learning how their religion and the religions of others all fit together in this world. You might learn a thing or two.

For the record. Most religions have MUTLIPLE gods. The capitalization of the word god to God on the currency is singling out a few sects of religions from others. Only a few actually use the name God as a name, hence needing that capitaization. The rest of the religions do not do this. Basically, Jewish, Mormon and Christianity uses God. Everyone else has another name for their god(s). Oh, and muslims use Alah.


That being said, the guy that is fighting this is a loon to a certain degree, but being a loon doesn't mean he's not wrong in this case. Hell, a broken clock is right twice a day. Why does a person have to be of perfect and impeccable character to fight against the wrongs of the world? Actually, does such a person exist? I doubt it so who cares what his views are on OTHER TOPICS. This is the one under dicussion and the microscope. Does he make a valid case? Yes. Should those words be removed? Yes. End of discussion.

 

[Kipper]

Originally posted by: HumblePie
HAHA, you guys amuse me.

First off, sorry Mosh but I have to say this, the line doesn't add anything to history. IF you want history go read a textbook. Reading that line on a coin or bill doesn't do anything for history at all.


Second, to the people saying "most" religions have only one god. LOLOLOLOLOLOL


You can't be serious right? Christinaity has MULTIPLE gods and religious icons. There is THE GOD and there is Jesus. Look 2 gods! Technically, Mary is ALSO a female god or goddess and any good theologian will tell you that as well. Why? You can't give birth to a god or a son of god and remain a mere mortal. For such religious zealots out there and very few have any understanding or actually read their own text. They take what's spoonfed to them at a Sunday Ceremony as dogma. Blah. Read, learn, interpret, take a class, ask a real theologian who isn't interested in "preaching" but learning how their religion and the religions of others all fit together in this world. You might learn a thing or two.

For the record. Most religions have MUTLIPLE gods. The capitalization of the word god to God on the currency is singling out a few sects of religions from others. Only a few actually use the name God as a name, hence needing that capitaization. The rest of the religions do not do this. Basically, Jewish, Mormon and Christianity uses God. Everyone else has another name for their god(s). Oh, and muslims use Alah.


That being said, the guy that is fighting this is a loon to a certain degree, but being a loon doesn't mean he's not wrong in this case. Hell, a broken clock is right twice a day. Why does a person have to be of perfect and impeccable character to fight against the wrongs of the world? Actually, does such a person exist? I doubt it so who cares what his views are on OTHER TOPICS. This is the one under dicussion and the microscope. Does he make a valid case? Yes. Should those words be removed? Yes. End of discussion.

A quick comment on your statements about Christianity - although I'm not religious in any sense of the word and know very little about Christianity, if you knew anything about this religion you'd understand that there is only one "God" - and Christ is the same thing, and so is the Holy Spirit - they are all one and the same yet distinct: the doctrine of the Holy Trinity. I don't quite understand it myself, but that somehow circumvents the problem of multiple gods.

Moreover, with respect to Mary I would say she falls into somewhat the same camp as the Catholic saints, who are prayed to just like "God" but are not deities in their own right...so you still have one deity, with some other spiritual figures, if you want to call them that, loosely, on the side.

Maybe I'm hitting off the mark entirely and this is all semantics.

 

[Cerpin Taxt]

Originally posted by: EyeMWing
IN GODS OR LACK THEREOF WE TRUST

Not to be overly pedantic, but that still wouldn't describe me and a whole host of atheists that I know. That is to say, we don't "trust" in a lack of gods.