While I, personally, would never send someone to MSNBC.com, I received an email today where MSNBC.com has a Live Vote currently that asked the following question:
"
from newsvine.com where you can comment about the Live Vote
Link
So what do you think? Should it be removed or is this argument stupid as some on the newsvine.com site say?
I figured one visit to this particular artticle of the site would not hurt much and instead could yield some interesting results. I recommend you try it just to see what people have voted so far.
Then I recommend you check out a link at the bottom
Depends on the administraion.
No, not really. If you say that, then all sorts of things could be considered a religion.
You're misinformed, secularism is "the assertion that governmental practices or institutions should exist separately from religion and/or religious beliefs." Government, not society.
Ahuh, right, what are they supposibly doing at the Tea parties?
Sorry, but I call bullshit.
"America's culture war: Hash and rehash, no thinking required."
I remembered it saying prophet, not messiah,but i could be recalling this incorrectly,reading the source is the best way of learning, but reading it does not gaurentee remembering every snipped correctly, I will look it up again.
Yes what an individual who claims to follow holy book X beleives is not an indication what all people who follow that holy book beleive, as that individual might be mistaken on WHAT his holy book says.
Unless a person explicitly states that he cares not for holy books and beleives whats in his heart.
Here's my thoughts:
1. It's not the age, it's the principle.
2. Depends, it's a rather tricky thing to decipher. Mind what? The in god we trust? It wasn't the founding fathers that put it there.
3. I'm not offended, per se. I'm annoyed because people are saying something that's total BS.It goes against our principles, which, as an American, pisses me off.
4. It implies endorsement.
5. I don't, my many atheist friends don't.Other atheists or buddhists, or taoists, etc. do not.
lula posts
Could you provide a direct quote? Because I keep reading that Thomson (not Thompson) was the principle designer of the great seal, not the entire design.~Alderic
Yes, it's Thomson...and sorry, I can't supply a direct quote....my notes are from "Symbols of a Nation" and I can't tell if that was a book or an article.
Anyway, it seems we are saying the same thing...his sketches of an American eagle and Barton's that arranged the stripes on the shield led to the design that was finally adopted by congress.
It's a grassroots movement of Democrats, Republicans and Independents all across the country peacefully protesting about out of control government spending putting that burden on our children and our children's children, rising taxes, more government control over private enterprise and less individual liberty.
Secularism is a religion of a sort
No, atheism is.
And I would be opposed to a slogan "There is no god." just as much and for the same reason I am opposed to a slogn "In some god we trust." on American bank notes.
Why the heck does any of this have to be mentioned on bank notes? It's _money_.
Because the American culture is one that believes in God. God is mentioned in the Declaration of Independence as well as our money. We as a nation believe in God, the founders believed in God, and they felt that submission to God is what is best. Look at it this way, if there is no god then who is being hurt? If there is a God that is all powerful do you really want to piss him off?
Because the American culture is one that believes in God.
It's _money_, not the National Opera Company.
Look at it this way, if there is no god then who is being hurt? If there is a God that is all powerful do you really want to piss him off?
Principle is principle. You either value the constitution or you don't.
And my personal opinion is that G-d is probably more pissed off because His name is mentioned on money than he would be if it weren't.
you probably don't know this Leauki but I'm pretty sure that Christ spoke more about money and stewardship than any other topic.
Almost anything we have (or had) in place regarding God or scripture or just sayings here and there are based on biblical scripture. Not the Quran or any other religious writings but the Holy Bible. Alot of what was written in many of our documents was based on scripture including the Declaration and Constitution. Every state in the Union has a statement of Faith to it from the get go and still on the books because it was founded upon these principles.
At one time (too lazy to go back) I blogged on the State's Mottos all very very God centered. Every single one of them.
Agreed, that's what the principle of it is; however, after talking with a friend of mine who is actively involved in the Tea parties, and has been -- mind you -- for years. (Libertarians have been doing these for six or so years, so it's not a new thing). He is telling me that they're being manipulated for various purposes; political, monetary, racist, etc.
My point in asking that of Paladin is to try to understand what his assumptions are. It seems to me, that he was making the claim that Secularists are trying to do something to them.
You know, I think this argument is going to give me a freaking ulcer. So, I'm going to explain this clearly so that even a kindergartener who has repeated the grade can understand it, and then I'm going to take up smoking...
Just kidding, a little humor...
1. American culture, by your logic, would believe in YWH, Buddha, etc. as well. American culture, is more than just Christianity, it is Buddhistm, Taoism, Confucism, etc. It is also: Japan, China, Russia, etc. It is every person that comes into this country and contributes to it. So, bluntly, you are flat out full of shit. American culture is not as you say, not in the context you put it in at least.
2. The Declaration of Independence is not a legally binding document; it was - frankly - a declartion of principles and grievances toward King George. It has no, so far as I know, not a legal document as to set a precedent on.
3. Even then; however, the Declaration of Independence states God once, and only once. The context however, is this:
"When, in the course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bonds which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the laws of nature and of nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation." Laws of nature, and nature's God; that sounds Deist, not Theist. Hmm, no real precedent there.
4. Uh, nope. Certain individuals may believe in God, but I do not believe in it and nor do I appreciate people telling me that I supposibly do, when I do not. Sorry, but my freedom of religion (or no religion), is paramount to me. You don't like Obama saying we're not a Christian nation? Then by the very princple of your dislike, you should not make the claim that we as a nation believe in God. The nation, the United States, is a pluralistic society, it's time you folks get that. We're not all one thing, we're a plethora of differences.
5.
Part One:
The founders may or may not have found in God; however, with a few exceptions 1) Being part of a church does not necessarily mean that they are religious. 2) It's hard in some cases to decipher some of the founding father's religious beliefs.
However, that being said, the founding fathers obviously had the intentions of setting of a secular government, otherwise they would have set up some sort of theocracy instead. There was submission to God only on a personal level. They did not, as their predecessors from England had experienced, persecuter, subject, or force (any) religoin on the people of the colonies.
They understood the diversity.
Part Two:
That being said, when it comes to the motto and the pledge of allegiance: Sorry, but the pledge of allegiance was written in 1892 by Francis Bellamy (a Christian, and a socialist oddly enough). 1892? that's well over one hundred years since the Constitution convention and Declaration.
However, even with that revalation (no pun intended), the words "under God," were not added until about 59 years later, by the effosts of the Knights of Columbus (a religious fraternity btw) and others. It seems to me that this was pushed through without much notice to the people. I would think, that in the best interests of the people, such a thing should be made well known.
Part Three:
The motto, IGWT, was brought about due to the increase of religious upheaval, during the Civil War. Psychologically, and sociologically the upheavel is understandable because of the time and era. However, the time is passed and there is no need what-so-ever for it. The government, by saying that, has essentially said "Yup, we favor this religion." There is no excuse for that, it violates the First Amendment plain and simple.
6.
Uh, sorry, but that was a stupid comment. A lot of people have been hurt. You don't see Atheists proudly being themselves do you now? Do you remember when - i believe it was Bush - stated tht he did not consider Atheists to be Americans? Hello, a president should not say that.
How about people who were killed by Christian gunmen, abortion bombers, etc. How about the religious violence in all parts of the world in the name of God?
Free will and the right to choose; just as you have had the right to choose your God, we, non-religious individuals have the right to not choose a God, or those who are of a different religion.
I second that; we need to change it back to E Pluribus Unum, "Out of many, one." Now that is a motto that is befitting of what America is, and has gone through.
As of today, you would be wrong; Seven states (currently) have mottos with reference to God.
Source
Every state/territory/etc. motto:
[63]
1. Naturally because people believed in God, it was the predominant religion. Our Government, however, is a different story.
2. Ahuh, sorry but I disagree; The US Constitution was influenced by enlightenment principles, reason, etc. Not God. It is humorous to note though, that if they were - then a wife couldn't divorce, etc.
3. Prove the statment of faith.
*Sigh* Always want proof....but when I supply it, you guys go onto something else....here ya go! I was talking about every single state preamble but I know, I used the term "motto" instead. My bad. Pick your State's Preamble. Still think our country wasn't founded on Christian principles? The whole enlightened thing? It's a lie.
Alabama 1901 , Preamble . We the people of the Stateof Alabama, invoking the favor and guidance ofAlmighty God, do ordain and establish the followingConstitution. Alaska 1956, Preamble . We, the people of Alaska,grateful to God and to those who founded our nationand pioneered this great land. Arizona 1911, Preamble . We, the people of the Stateof Arizona, grateful to Almighty God for ourliberties, do ordain this Constitution... Arkansas 1874, Preamble . We, the people of the Stateof Arkansas, grateful to Almighty God for theprivilege of choosing our own form of government... California 1879, Preamble . We, the People of theState of California, grateful to Almighty God for ourfreedom. Colorado 1876, Preamble . We, the people of Colorado,with profound reverence for the Supreme Ruler ofUniverse. Connecticut 1818, Preamble. The People of Connecticut,acknowledging with gratitude the good Providence ofGod in permitting them to enjoy. Delaware 1897, Preamble . Through Divine Goodness allmen have, by nature, the rights of worshipping andserving their Creator according to the dictates oftheir consciences. Florida 1885, Preamble . We, the people of the Stateof Florida, grateful to Almighty God for ourconstitutional liberty, establish this Constitution...Georgia 1777, Preamble . We, the people of Georgia,relying upon protection and guidance of Almighty God,do ordain and establish this Constitution... Hawaii 1959, Preamble . We , the people of Hawaii,Grateful for Divine Guidance ... Establish thisConstitution. Idaho 1889, Preamble . We, the people of the State ofIdaho, grateful to Almighty God for our freedom, tosecure its blessings. Illinois 1870, Preamble . We, the people of the Stateof Illinois, grateful to Almighty God for the civil l,political and religious liberty which He hath so longpermitted us to enjoy and looking to Him for ablessing on our endeavors. Indiana 1851, Preamble . We, the People of the Stateof Indiana, grateful to Almighty God for the freeexercise of the right to choose our form ofgovernment. Iowa 1857, Preamble We, the People of the State ofIowa, grateful to the Supreme Being for the blessingshitherto enjoyed, and feeling our dependence on Himfor a continuation of these blessings establish thisConstitution. Kansas 1859, Preamble . We, the people of Kansas,grateful to Almighty God for our civil and religiousprivileges establish this Constitution. Kentucky 1891, Preamble. We, the people of theCommonwealth are grateful to Almighty God for thecivil, political and religious liberties... Louisiana 1921, Preamble . We, the people of the Stateof Louisiana, grateful to Almighty God for the civil,political and religious liberties we enjoy. Maine 1820, Preamble</ FONT> . We the People of Maineacknowledging with grateful hearts the goodness of theSovereign Ruler of the Universe in affording us anopportunity ... And imploring His aid and direction. Maryland 1776, Preamble We, the people of the state ofMaryland, grateful to Almighty God for our civil andreligious liberty... Massachusetts 1780, Preamble . We...the people ofMassachusetts, acknowledging with grateful hearts, thegoodness of the Great Legislator of the Universe .. Inthe course of His Providence, an opportunity anddevoutly imploring His direction .. Michigan 1908, Preamble le. We, the people of theState of Michigan, grateful to Almighty God for theblessings of freedom establish this Constitution. Minnesota, 1857, Preamble . We, the people of theState of Minnesota, grateful to God for our civil andreligious liberty, and desiring to perpetuate itsblessings: Mississippi 1890, Preamble . We, the people ofMississippi in convention assembled, grateful to Almighty God, and invoking His blessing on our work. Missouri 1845, Preamble . We, the people of Missouri,with profound reverence for the Supreme Ruler of theUniverse, and grateful for His goodness .. Establishthis Constitution . Montana 1889, Preamble. We, the people of Montana,grateful to Almighty God for the blessings of liberty establish this Constitution ... Nebraska 1875, Preamble . We, the people, grateful toAlmighty God for our freedom .. Establish thisConstitution. Nevada 1864, Preamble . We the people of the State ofNevada, grateful to Almighty God for our freedomestablish this Constitution New Hampshire 1792, Part I. Art. I. Sec. V . Everyindividual has a natural and unalienable right toworship God according to the dictates of his ownconscience. New Jersey 1844, Preamble. We, the people of the Stateof New Jersey, grateful to Almighty God for civil andreligious liberty which He hath so long permitted usto enjoy, and looking to Him for a blessing on ourendeavors. New Mexico 1911, Preamble . We, the People of NewMexico, grateful to Almighty God for the blessings ofliberty New York 1846, Preamble . We, the people of the Stateof New York, grateful to Almighty God for our freedom,in order to secure its blessings. North Carolina 1868, Preamble . We the people of theState of North Carolina, grateful to Almighty God, theSovereign Ruler of Nations, for our civil, political,and religious liberties, and acknowledging ourdependence upon Him for the continuance of those North Dakota 1889, Preamble . We , the people of NorthDakota, grateful to Almighty God for the blessings ofcivil and religious liberty, do ordain... Ohio 1852, Preamble . We the people of the state ofOhio, grateful to Almighty God for our freedom, tosecure its blessings and to promote our common Oklahoma 1907, Preamble . Invoking the guidance ofAlmighty God, in order to secure and perpetuate theblessings of liberty ... establish this . Oregon 1857, Bill of Rights, Article I. Section 2. Allmen shall be secure in the Natural right, to worshipAlmighty God according to the dictates of theirconsciences.. Pennsylvania 1776, Preamble We, the people ofPennsylvania, grateful to Almighty God for theblessings of civil and religious liberty, and humblyinvoking His guidance Rhode Island 1842, Preamble. We the People of theState of Rhode Island grateful to Almighty God for thecivil and religious liberty which He hath so longpermitted us to enjoy, and looking to Him for ablessing South Carolina, 1778, Preamble . We, the people of heState of South Carolina grateful to God for ourliberties, do ordain and establish this Constitution. South Dakota 1889, Preamble . We, the people of SouthDakota, grateful to Almighty God for our civil andreligious libertiesTennessee 1796, Art. XI.III. That all men have anatural and indefeasible right to worship Almighty Godaccording to the dictates of their conscience... Texas 1845, Preamble . We the People of the Republicof Texas, acknowledging, with gratitude, the grace andbeneficence of God. Utah 1896, Preamble . Grateful to Almighty God forlife and liberty, we establish this Constitution. Vermont 1777, Preamble. Whereas all government oughtto enable the individuals who compose it to enjoytheir natural rights, and other blessings which theAuthor of Existence has bestowed on man . Virginia 1776, Bill of Rights, XVI Religion, or theDuty which we owe our Creator can be directed only byReason and that it is the mutual duty of all topractice Christian Forbearance, Love and Charitytowards each other Washington 1889, Preamble . We the People of the Stateof Washington, grateful to the Supreme Ruler of theUniverse for our liberties, do ordain thisConstitution West Virginia 1872, Preamble . Since through DivineProvidence we enjoy the blessings of civil, politicaland religious liberty, we, the people of West Virginiareaffirm our faith in and constant reliance upon God.. Wisconsin 1848, Preamble . We, the people ofWisconsin, grateful to Almighty God for our freedom,domestic tranquility Wyoming 1890, Preamble . We, the people of the Stateof Wyoming, grateful to God for our civil, political,and religious liberties .. establish thisConstitution."Those people who will not be governed by God will beruled by tyrants." - William Penn
It is not against the constitution in any way so your statement is invalid.
Well, if you knew a little bit about God you would learn that his name has not been used at all. His name is only used a few times in the bible, all in the old testement. God forbid his name be used which is why the generic title god is used rather than his name.
It is against the constitution because the constitution prohibits government endorsement of any religion.
Well, if you knew a little bit about God you would learn that his name has not been used at all. His name is only used a few times in the bible, all in the old testement.
The word with an upper case "G" is a name, hence the upper case G.
As for G-d in the bible, I am sure I know a whole lot more about that than you do.
His name in Hebrew is immaterial here. Plus it doesn't appear "only a few times", but several thousand times.
The word is יהוה
And if you can tell me what's so special about those three letters יהו in Hebrew, we can discuss how "little" I know about G-d in the "Old Testament".
(Ironically, just yesterday on the train from Tel Aviv a Christian or Messianic Jew gave me a Christian Bible in Hebrew when he left the train at Hof HaKarmel. It contains the Tanakh and the "Bris Hadasha". Nice guy. We didn't speak a word during the entire journey, he was very unobtrusive in his mission.)
God forbid his name be used which is why the generic title god is used rather than his name.
There is no such prohibition. It would be rather ridiculous if there were as many common Hebrew names contain the name of G-d and are used all the time. I think you are confusing a Biblical commandment with a rabbinical decision. When the temple still stood His name was pronounced all the time by the priests.
*Sigh* Always want proof....but when I supply it, you guys go onto something else...
You now remind me of Artysim who always believes that pointing out that others agree with him constitutes proof that he is right.
Notice two things:
1. Your examples are about state governments, not the federal government. Individual US states can probably be as Christian (or Hindu) as they want to be. It's the FEDERAL constitution that prohibits the FEDERAL government to endorse a religion, not individual state constitutions and individual state governments.
2. Proof for the occurence of something illegal does not prove its legality. That means that if something is against the constitution (for example an endorsement of a religion), it is illegal even if people break the law and do it anyway.
"Those people who will not be governed by God will be ruled by tyrants." - William Penn
William Penn was a smart man.
I am sure he realised that those tyrants will most likely pretend to govern in the name of G-d.
The constitution prohibits an endorsement of religion precisely because endorsement of religion by the government can easily lead to tyranny in the name of (a) god.
But do tell me that you believe that Saudi-Arabia and Iran are closer to G-d because they don't have such a clause in their constitution but instead allow government to endorse (and force on people) a religion.
This is the mistake most people that do not believe in or understand religion make a lot. I pointed it out gently I will try a little stronger this time.
God is a generic title not the name of any one god or religion. For years the secularists have been trying to equate God with Christianity in order to have it removed from government. In God we trust is the nation submitting or acknowledging that there is a god and we as a nation trust in that God. Your god may be money, or a tree or the god of water or what have you. The nation is allowing for you to choose and submit to your beliefs without showing favor to any one religion or belief system. You trust in your god while I trust in my god but we all trust in God. God is not Christian or Muslim, or Hebrew, it is the title for the most high God of the Christians, Hebrew’s and Muslim’s. if you wish to worship the great pumpkin then that is your God. If you don’t believe in God then Chance is your god.
The argument for removing the word god from our currency is that it shows the governments favor of Christians and Jew’s but that was not the intent of the framers and founders of our nation. It was used to eliminate prayer in schools because it favored Christians. Funny how these same secularists don’t mind getting Christmas off as a paid Holiday. That is holy day. So when you (rhetorical you) are on Holiday and you wish to berate those mean stupid believers in a god you don’t know, remember that it is supposed to be a holy day, a day in which you are supposed to be thinking and reflecting on your religious beliefs not partying.
God is a generic title not the name of any one god or religion.
You are wrong.
The word is written with an upper-case "G" because it's a name, and it does refer to the god of Christianity (and Judaism and possibly Islam and technically Zoroastrianism, if you will). The word you are talking about is "god", with a lower-case "g" and used in English as any word with an article, as in "In a god we trust". But "In God we trust" uses the word "God" as a name and refers to the Christian god.
And even if "God" and "a god" were really the same (and they are not), the motto "In a god we trust" would still promote certain religions (monotheistic such) over others (atheisism and polytheism), but the constitutional way is to promote neither of those.
So instead of those:
"In God we trust."
"In a god we trust." (Which is not the same as "In God we trust.")
"In no god we trust."
"In many gods we trust."
The constitution demands that the federal government makes none of those statements.
And I myself trust in "God" but wouldn't want to read "in many gods we trust" or "in no god we trust" in bank notes. I also find it offensive that my god is mentioned on money, which I consider a necessary tool not exactly representing the symbolism of a god who protests his children.
Simple, God, the personage said his name is not to be used. When you speak to Doctor Harris, you will call him Doctor because that is his title, it is capitalized because it is his title, just like the Master of a ship or ships captain is the title of the person in charge of the ship. They are job descriptions not actual names. If you have an MBA at the end of your name your name is not MBA but a rank you have earned. It is still proper to call you Master or Mister depending on where you are from.
The name of god is only mentioned a few times in the Bible and Torah, in most places it is just God said or the most high God said. That is because of the restriction of using the lord god’s name in vain. His name should be used only when communicating with him. If someone asks what you are mumbling about, you tell them you’re talking to God leave me alone. Every instance in the Torah or Bible where God tells someone to do something God tells that person this is the name you use. The God of Abraham sent me. The God of David told me to do X. I have never found in either book where God told someone to do anything in his name. Jesus said to go forth and preach in his name not the name of God. John the Baptist was to baptize in the name of the one who is to come.
You must have a different text than I. In the masoretic text the name appers really quite often. I just checked and selected Joshua quite randomly and found the name twice in the first sentence.
When you speak to Doctor Harris, you will call him Doctor because that is his title, it is capitalized because it is his title, just like the Master of a ship or ships captain is the title of the person in charge of the ship.
And you would say "In Doctor we trust" when referring to Doctor Harris that way? Somehow I don't find that convincing.
The name of god is only mentioned a few times in the Bible and Torah, in most places it is just God said or the most high God said.
The Tanakh (Hebrew Bible) uses several terms to refer to G-d, but I don't see that the YHWH version is particularly rare. What makes you think it is used only a few times? The translations you refer to are generic, used at different times for different versions of the Hebrew.
But that is besides the point. Did you find out what's special about the three letters in the name? If you find out, you will understand why the idea that saying the word is "forbidden" by Biblical commandment is quite funny indeed.
There are many great features available to you once you register, including:
Sign in or Create Account