At the moment maybe but it would be interesting to see the reaction from the populace if there was a serious proposal to remove the motto from the currency

The DEM/Libs controlled The House of Reps 2007-2011 and House, Senate, Prez 2009-2011.

Since The DEM/Libs seemed So Upset at this recent Re-Vote/Affirmation of In God We Trust, they had ample time to Get Rid Of It during their Years of Control.

Why didn't they? Heck, it only took 35 minutes for The Repugs to do. Certainly more Pressing and Weighty Matters were not The Reason.

The Reason is The Godless DEM/Libs are Not That GodLess. Not when it comes to Getting Votes. And if they took the Motto Away, they would certainly Suffer Loss of Votes and Their Jobs. Hypocrisy Much? Yep.

These groups worry me and I'm 15,000 miles away.

Aw Shucks TA, they not be that bad. What Me Worry 'bout Them? Not a bit.

'Cause I Trust God Will Look After Me.

I gots The Greenies In Me Pocket for The Very Purpose

In Dull I Trust

---

May we All have a METAMORPHOSIS. REASON. GOoD JUDGEMENT and LOVE and ORDER!!!!!

I note this entire paragraph is nothing more than a reductio ad-absurdum and not indicative of my stance or views at all

It was basically to make the point "where do you stop?" and that no matter what is done the authorities can never make everyone happy because someone will always find something to complain about. If you change things to make one person or group of people happy, the action will always upset someone else.

Yeah, I got your point, and as the Latin phrase suggests, it's absurd. Sure, you can't make all the people happy, but as a government representative of all people in the nation, they should not be making a motto that is supportive of any religious view.

Also, you would be hard pressed to find even 100,000,000 "other" people who care enough to write their congressmen in support of this...

At the moment maybe but it would be interesting to see the reaction from the populace if there was a serious proposal to remove the motto from the currency

Yeah, it would be interesting because as I said earlier, I know many religious people that feel the same way, that religion and politics should not be mixed. Even so, slavery was considered OK by the majority at one point in time, and it took a lot of fighting to right that wrong.

I note your entire argument is an attempt make this all about me, to make my argument seem as "small" as possible. I think your decision to make this your stance against me seems to say more about your personal issues with me (or are purposefully making it as personal as you can) than it does about my stance or my views.

Why in the name of fortune would I have personal issues with you ? Apart from our debates in this forum on a very narrow range of subjects I know nothing about about you (and visa versa) if somehow we were to pass in the street, neither would know. It isn't about "you" it's about one or two of your opinions. If you look back through the old threads you will even find matters that we have agreed on.

So you don't have personal issues with me, and yet you only know my views by what you read here and you assert rather insistently that I am intolerant of religion because I want a separation of church and state. Yeah, makes sense.

If I were living in the US at the minute and had your concerns about the separation of church and state, I would be more worried about the mid-west bible belt that forces candidates to jump through hoops to prove their "christianess" in order to have a hope of getting elected. It's these pressure groups that are the real problem, the motto on the currency is just a storm in a teacup by comparison. These groups worry me and I'm 15,000 miles away.

That's another discussion entirely.

The reason I wrote as I did was because, whenever someone starts banging on about their rights, the constitution and how they are "offended" by something, it usually means that some of my rights are going to be taken away in order to appease them. It looked like you were singing from the same hymn book, so you got the same reaction.

Again, you are using the term "offended" when I am not, nor have I said such a thing in this entire thread. I think you may be lumping me in with whatever other camps you've disagreed with in the past and extrapolating that I am of the same mindset. I repeat, there is supposed to be a separation of church and state and the national motto violates that premise.

What right is it of yours that I am taking away to have In God We Trust as the national motto or on the national currency? I see nowhere that states in our constitution that you have a right to keep it in our government. I do, however, see an Establishment clause that directly supports my case.

One of the reasons for this is you used some pretty strong statements yourself such as

All those in support of religion and in favor of In God We Trust are showing their intolerance toward anyone that isn't Christian,

I don't think so, a true christian would be tolerant, it's the "love one another" thing.

Then we're in agreement. In God We Trust should be removed as the national motto and the currency and not a single Christian would have a problem with it because they are required to love one another.

There's something about that "true Christian" statement though... I was a Catholic for 25 years and I experienced it first hand. Yeah, I don't want their brand of love one another.

I interpret the "In God We Trust" on currency to simply be nothing more than the majority forcing their will on the minority.

In this case we have a tyranny of the majority forcing their will upon everyone else.

How is the "forcing" done? Are non christians rounded up and sent to church at gunpoint, made to wear distinctive marks on their clothing or threatened with burning at the stake ?

<sigh> It's so hard to argue with someone that uses absurdity as their primary weapon in an argument. It shows they're not even trying to have a discussion or trying to understand.

The forcing is done via using stunts like this to use the rule of law to enforce their belief in God in the sovereignty of the nation.

That is not a democracy where all people and their beliefs are equal.

I suspect you are right there but not for the reasons you think

I suspect I am more right than you can imagine and for exactly the reasons I think. I've been on both sides of the debate on this one.

you are alienating every single non-Christian belief system and non-believers alike

So, apart from those at the more sensitive end, how many non christians feel "alienated" by the motto ? I suspect not many.

That's a strange conclusion to come to. You "suspect" not many, which shows your unwillingness to see what I am trying to show you, and then you label it as just "those at the sensitive end". Sorry, I didn't mean to offend your sensitivities by bringing the topic up.

Whether you like it or not your own opinions are colouring your writing and it shows. You are not just making a point on legal and constitutional grounds

You're trying to paint a black and white situation where none really exists, you infer that if a person favours one thing they automatically have to be against something else,

Well yeah, I hope my opinions are coloring my writing. That's why I brought the topic up. However, it would seem that my coloring is not showing up properly to the colorblind who choose to see my opinions as whatever they wish to interpret them as.

And I think your color-blindness is showing in your far-fetched interpretations of my writing in that I never claimed that if you favor one thing you are automatically against something else. Might I have had the courtesy of explaining to you whatever it is you misinterpreted, maybe that could have been understood better, though I somehow suspect you would continue to interpret my writing however it is that fits your views of me best (which would be why I suggested that you seem to be making this personal).

the reality is that depending on the individual there are many shades of grey in between. AFAIK there is no "official" state religion in the US and most citizens are very tolerant of non-christians

I agree that there are many shades of gray, and no, there is no "official" state religion in the US, but that doesn't make it OK to mix belief in a deity with a national motto or currency. I do have to largely disagree as someone who nearly has to hide in my own life that I am a non-believer because the few times I have argued in favor of my beliefs I am always met with the same immediate stereotypes, misunderstandings, and mischaracterizations. To which I am slowly fighting to have my voice in this nation too, only to be labeled "intolerant", the very injustice I am fighting against. Believers simply want people like me to "shut up", "go away", and to simply "deal with it" that they and their beliefs are mixed with the same government sworn to separate church and state, and somehow lately it's "intolerant" to fight for a more agnostic speech in our government.

The more people like you argue the way you have here, the more I am encouraged to speak up and make waves, not because I'm "sensitive" or "intolerant", but because it's my nation too, and I have every right to want my voice to be heard too. So if the US Constitution says there's supposed to be a separation of church and state, and I see political posturing or reverse psychology tactics such as your own, then you're damned right I have a strong backing to my views and my opinions, and you better believe I'm going to speak up.

(except for Islam but we both know why that is the case, nut cases from one political ideology vs nut cases from another, with both using religion as a justification [and I'm aware I left an opening for you there:) ])

No further comment.

At the moment maybe but it would be interesting to see the reaction from the populace if there was a serious proposal to remove the motto from the currency

The DEM/Libs controlled The House of Reps 2007-2011 and House, Senate, Prez 2009-2011.

Since The DEM/Libs seemed So Upset at this recent Re-Vote/Affirmation of In God We Trust, they had ample time to Get Rid Of It during their Years of Control.

Why didn't they? Heck, it only took 35 minutes for The Repugs to do. Certainly more Pressing and Weighty Matters were not The Reason.

That's what this always is to you Dull. If you perceive anyone as slamming the GOP, you immediately start in on the Dems/Libs (quite obvious who you dislike more). I agree, the Dems/Libs had every chance to change it and they didn't, which is one of many reasons why I don't consider myself part of their party.

The Reason is The Godless DEM/Libs are Not That GodLess. Not when it comes to Getting Votes. And if they took the Motto Away, they would certainly Suffer Loss of Votes and Their Jobs. Hypocrisy Much? Yep.

Fully agreed, which is why we need more people to speak up so they won't be afraid to lose their votes.

which is why we need more people to speak up

Nope.

As long as I have shelter, comfort, enough Gruel and Drink(mostly milk/coke zero) and relative safety(this is The Wacko US)I ain't gunna Speak Up.

And I have shelter, comfort, enough Gruel/Drink and relative safety(well, I do hear bullets flying around occasionally).

To me, In God We Trust is so infinitesimally a non-issue.

I paid for Some Gruel and Drink yesterday with a 20 Dollar Bill. I had to wait in line as usual. And during this wait I looked at the Bill in my hand. All I noticed was a Big Head with Wavy Hair and a Big Number 20.

If my eyes saw In God We Trust, my Mind did not register it. And so it is. No Frakking Biggie. Means Nothing to me and Most Everyone Else.

Oh, by the way, what is with The Pagan Pyramid and Frakking Big Eye?(I know The Story), but hey, Pagan Much? Offensive Much? Who Frakking Cares? Not me.

If Dirt Were Dollars We Wouldn't Worry Anymore.

Dull, so Frakking Dull

---

May we All have a METAMORPHOSIS. REASON. GOoD JUDGEMENT and LOVE and ORDER!!!!!

K, great. Got it. You don't care and Dems/Libs suck. Your opinion has been duly noted. Thanks for your input. Good to see you can speak up and invoke the silent majority in this.

No one has pointed out yet that the United States, strictly speaking, is not a Democracy. It is a democratic republic. When a law gets passed, say banning prostitution, whether I agree with the law or not I am obliged to obey that law or risk paying the consequences. We all can't just go out and do what we want as that would be anarchy.

Another example would be laws banning the sale of alcoholic beverages on Sunday. Whether or not you are a Christian who believes in such bans you must either obey the law or pay the penalty if caught.

Some laws are passed that are not necessarily supported by the majority. Unfortunately most of those that we elect to represent us at the state and federal level don't feel obligated to follow the wishes of those who voted him or her into office.

---

Bob DeWoody

My motto: Never do today what you can put off until tomorrow as it may not be required. This no longer applies in light of current events.

Excellent points Bob. All the more reason why we need to keep those jokers in DC under a leash, otherwise we end up with rulings like this one.

No one has pointed out yet that the United States, strictly speaking, is not a Democracy. It is a democratic republic. When a law gets passed, say banning prostitution, whether I agree with the law or not I am obliged to obey that law or risk paying the consequences. We all can't just go out and do what we want as that would be anarchy.

Another example would be laws banning the sale of alcoholic beverages on Sunday. Whether or not you are a Christian who believes in such bans you must either obey the law or pay the penalty if caught.

Some laws are passed that are not necessarily supported by the majority. Unfortunately most of those that we elect to represent us at the state and federal level don't feel obligated to follow the wishes of those who voted him or her into office.

Is the same in my country, does not matter you religion, believes or any other thing, you have to obey the law, and some I must say from a human point of view are quite idiotic. Why Hypermarkets can not open on sunday? because Portugal is a catholic country and as per the bible God rested on the sevent day or it's to protct mom's and pap's litle business?

This is endless question, and polticians are joker's the bad thing about them is that they joke with other's poeple's lives.

It is quite obvious the Republicans in congress are doing anything they can OTHER than something constructive. Re-affirming a left over "motto" made official in the heat of Mcarthyism that was never under any threat instead of
proposing or trying to work on any of the bills given to them(many of which they
had given lip service to previously) that might actually make a difference to the American people is a travesty.

Send congress to work in Afghanistan until they are ready to get back to work.

---

Janice

It is quite obvious the Republicans in congress are doing anything they can OTHER than something constructive.

Keeping The DEM/Libs from doing any More Damage to The US Economy is Very Constructive Work. And they are doing more than a Yeoman's Job.

0.000001%Dull

---

May we All have a METAMORPHOSIS. REASON. GOoD JUDGEMENT and LOVE and ORDER!!!!!

again nonsense. we've had 10 years of "Job" creating tax cuts to the wealthy. When should we expect those jobs to start opening up. I bet the 9+% that are unemployed would love to know as well.

here the thing, being obtuse and wrong are not a means to an end. they are just the end. Enough supply side economics. Truman rejected out of hand and he was a High School Graduate. How is it that a grad school graduate in Business and History could miss such an obvious fact.
Eliminating taxes on the wealthy without stipulations that their new found money will be put towards jobs creation is pointless. 10 years later we are mopre broke than ever and we still have morons in Congress railing that the tax cuts create jobs. Show me any evidence that supply side economics isn't just a money grab and class warfare and I'll show you that its all a lie.

---

In a rich man's house there is no place to spit but his face.
Diogenes Of Sinope