I NEED YOUR HELP!!!!

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Pirate Bard on March 28, 2010 at 10:05pm

If no one cares about it, then ask him if he'd mind if it were changed to "In Allah We Trust" or the vastly superior, "In FSM We Trust."

It's annoying, and IMO violates the separation of church and state just as much as the phrase "under god" does in the Pledge of Allegiance. So yeah. It is kind of a big deal. It's yet another wedge the Christian Reich uses to "prove" that we're a "Christian Nation" (which we're not).

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Jennifer Nicole on March 29, 2010 at 1:15pm

I would run for a seat in office if I could push forth a bill to change it to "In FSM We Trust." XD

I love giving history lessons on this topic to people. When I explain why they were added in the 50s, their only response is along the lines of asking for sources of my information.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Pirate Bard on March 29, 2010 at 2:24pm

If you had that as your platform, I'd be likely to vote for you!

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Objection on March 28, 2010 at 10:13pm

There are organizations dedicated to removing god from the bill. There were court cases about it. Check them out.
It is for these reasons that his remark is nonsense to the ears of Anyone who knows sh*t about this matter.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by feralboy12 on March 28, 2010 at 10:27pm

I'll be one of those hundred.
I don't know if it's a big deal, exactly, but it's a fairly blatant contradiction of the first amendment. The Supreme Court says that "God" has lost its religious meaning through rote repetition, and that adopting the motto "In God We Trust" does not establish a state church, but I would answer that only Christians address their supreme being as "God," and that the motto legitimizes one-god religious beliefs and de-legitimizes multi-god and no-god beliefs.
It was first used on coins during the Civil War, became the national motto in 1956 and was used on paper money in 1957, during the early, frightening days of the Cold War with the godless commies. Basically, it's one of those retarded things that happened when everybody was freaking out, like the Patriot Act.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Johnsky on March 28, 2010 at 10:42pm

I make a point to wipe "god" from the bills and put "cash" on them.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Howard S. Dunn on March 28, 2010 at 11:40pm

I like to say it was a simple typo - should have said "In gold we trust."

No one cares - ask all the Christians who would get pissed if we took it off! This is ironic, however, considering the fact that Jesus spoke of a kingdom not of this Earth and that we should give to Caesar what is Caesar's specifically in reference to his image on the money. After all, money being at the root of all evil, I can't understand why Christians want the anonymous currency that, more and more is relegated to a expenditures such as porn, drugs, prostitutes, etc. taking the name of their god in vain with every bill circulated. Most legit expenditures nowadays (traceable = no shame) are made with debit or credit cards.

Having it printed on our money violates the First Amendment (in spirit at the very least) and probably two of the Ten Commandments - in regard to 'graven images' and 'taking the Lord's name in vain.'

Considering that the only way they can (and do) justify the Constitutional question is by claiming that belief in some form of god or another is not a religious question, per se, then they admit to being willing to violate yet a third commandment by admitting the possible existence of any god; thus having strange gods before their god.

Believe it or not, by the time I put it this way to most Christians (they haven't thought it through) they find it tough to disagree.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Agatka Radwańska on March 29, 2010 at 2:06pm

It is a disgrace. It is in no way beneficial to anyone but rather harmful, if anything. It's been on your currency for only 50-something years, yet it might take as long as that to take this phrase off.
Hmm... it's good to live in UK*. I have few £10 notes with Charles Darwin on them in my wallet!

*for many, many reasons apart from this!

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by mojo5501 on March 29, 2010 at 9:26pm

Hey, how can an American get her hands on one of those Darwin bills? I would carry it proudly in my wallet so it can directly contradict the "IN GOD WE TRUST" dollar bills sitting in there. ( I suppose if I can get Euros from the bank, I can get other currencies as well. )

I would support the removal of IN GOD WE TRUST and also the removal of UNDER GOD in the Pledge of Allegiance. It was only added in 1954 and not part of the original pledge.

Anyway, back to the point, I think money should be secular. No religious icons needed.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by mojo5501 on March 30, 2010 at 6:13pm

Yes it is frightening...the change in the pledge happened during the McCarthy era....a large part of our population was concerned with "godless communists" taking over. A very paranoid time in our history. (I think we've entered another paranoid period lately, too. IE: Teabaggers). Eisenhower supported the change and this was definitely part of a political strategy on his part.

Even if the majority of our U.S. population is religiously affiliated, our money should remain secular and our pledges as citizens should remain "neutral". Francis Bellamy was a Baptist AND a socialist...and, like you said, he would not have supported the additional phrase "under God".

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Pirate Bard on March 29, 2010 at 2:28pm

This is ironic, however, considering the fact that Jesus spoke of a kingdom not of this Earth and that we should give to Caesar what is Caesar's specifically in reference to his image on the money.

Now we know the real reason! So that way the mega-churches can use that very scripture to convince the sheeple that all of their money "belongs to gawd!" (BTW, Many of them who regularly tithe already are convinced of this idea, so it must be working!) No wonder they don't want to get rid of it!!

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Austin on March 29, 2010 at 4:10pm

well thank you guys for the positive feedback already! I really hope I get over 100!

• ▶ Reply

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• 2
• Next ›
• Page