Yeah, I had some problems with JU as well; those damn dirty apes! LOL

Your point is valid, but even if the majority of America is, there is the government's job of protecting the minority from majority tyrrany.I personally do not want to have someone tell me I have to

Agreed, no sort of change is; we're a very complacent society.

How so?

~Alderic

I vote to keep the words "In God we trust" on our currency.

But really, who is surprised that this question popped up on MSNBC given that during Holy Week, it was all abuzz over Obama's statement to the Turkish press that "we do not consider ourselves a Christian nation".  And just prior to this Newsweek ran an article entitled,  "The End of Christian America" .

I don't know who the "we" is that Obama was referring to....I personally found it quite offensive.  And so didn't Rabbi Yehuda Levin, the Special Emissary to Israel for The Union of Orthodox Rabbis of the U.S. and Canada and The Rabbinical Alliance of America,

"With the greatest respect for the office of the presidency, many of us are both frightened and befuddled by this combo of bowing to the waist to the king of Saudi Arabia, and then declaring that this is not a Christian nation,"

Give me your cash.

Hell no, I need to keep what I have! Capitalist!

~Alderic

It spends the same with or without the words.

BTW it was taken off the twenty dollar gold piece in 1907 and half of 1908. The people wanted it back, and got their way, it was restored in 1908. If just for historical continuity alone, it should remain.

ALDERIC POSTS: 10

It is pretty much saying that we as a nation, and/or as a government trust in God. That's just not true, and that, in my opinion, is too damn close to favoring a specific religion.

I agree.."In God we trust" means we are placing our government, our nation and it's people under His care. A very, very good thing in my view. In God we trust means that we recognize this land, this flag, and our government as a gift from God to be used for His purposes. It means we didn't become the land of the free and home of the brave by blind faith or a happy set of circumstances, rather, it was a wise and loving God hovering over us from the very hour of our nation's  conception. It means that Christopher Columbus, under direction of the Holy Spirit, diecovered this land, and took a cross in his own hands, planted it in the soil fell upon his knees, and took possession of this land for God. It means that our Founding Fathers established this land upon "the laws of nature and the laws of nature's God" (Bill of Rights).

The Founding Fathers warned that our Constitution was good only so long as the Lord is our God. The second verse of the National Anthem so proudly sung reads, "Blessed with victory and peace my this heaven rescued land praise the Power that hath made a preserved ua a nation. Then conquer we must, when our cause it is just, and this be our motto, "In God be our Trust". And the Star Spangled Banner, in triumpth shall wave, o're the land of the free and the home of the brave."

So, it was true from the time of America's founding through the 1960s when the sexual and cultural war began...from then on, secular and atheistic humanists have led a campaign to eliminate the Christian religion, ethos, and morality from government and the public square.  

Following the radicals of the French Revolution who were the first to demand that religion be removed from the state, they started undermining America's religious foundation by having prayer removed from school in 1963 by judiciary fiat.

*sniff* *sniff*

I smell Christian persecution complex...

~Zoo

You know what I find offensive? Pictures of Marilyn Manson, naked fat people, people doing things in public they should be doing in the privacy of their bedroom, people who speak bad about my mom. But you know what? I have no pictures of Marilyn Manson anywhere in my house, I avoid naked fat people at all cost (never know when you stumble upon such things online), I avoid being anywhere where this kind of behavior outside the bedroom is common and I avoid people who's ignorance would make them regret talking about my momma.

You wanna avoid this modo that offends you so much? You can always use credit cards, bank cards, checks, direct deposit or let someone else handle your money and avoid this offensive piece of paper or metal that on one side offends you but on the other you can't live without. I bet that all these people who find this modo offensive would put their hands in fire, would eat horse intestins, would pick up dog poop with their bare hands and would live with Osama Bin Laden in a cave for 2 months if it meant getting millions of these offensive pieces of paper or metal tax free.

You don't believe in God? Fine, that never stopped you from using the money to by 50" plasma TVs', PS3, iPhones, 2009 Dodge Chargers or Ford Mustangs, laptops and shot guns though.

Please, don't make that mistake too. "Allah" is the arabic word for "The God" (Al = the, llah = god), a.k.a. the Abrahamic God. Which means it IS the same god than the Jews', Christians', Muslims', Bahais', Samaritans', Druzes' and Rastafarians'.

Technically, if you are christian, you DO believe in Allah. But you say "God" because of your language. If you were french, you'd say "Dieu". Just because you call it differently doesn't mean it isn't the same entity.

No, I think we should use government force to discriminate against Jedis.

True. Arabic-speaking Jews and Christians also use the word(s) "allah" and Aramaic-speaking Jews and Christians call Him "eloah" (which is cognate to the "ilah" part of the Arabic and it's spelt with the same consonants).

If you need more gods or more words for other gods, I recommend "Ba3al" ("lord", "husband", the god of Carthage) and Melqart (from "Melk-Qart" = "king of the city", the god of Tyr).

I read yesterday that the root of the word "druid" exists in the English word "truth". It makes sense as Celtic-Italic /d/ corresponds to West-Germanic /t/ (dingua <> tongue, ducere <> tow).

But I do prefer the Semitic pantheon over this Latin and Celtic stuff.

Let's print this on dollar notes for a while:

"In Baal Hammon we trust!"

Baal Hammon was the city god of Carthage and having the US government endorse his power and recommend him to the American people is certainly just as constitutional as endorsing El or any of the other Semitic gods.

Personally, I am a follower of El, the traditional creator god, but I am fascinated by Phoenician history and their gods.

So let's ignore those secular anarchists and preserve some good old-fasionahed western values. After 60 years of El, I propose we have a year or two of Baal Hammon and then cycle through the Hindu gods for a few decades.

I don't see how anybody could oppose this government endorsement of religious values, unless someone wants to claim that the US government should pick one god over another for some reason.

Hum..

"In Mua'dib we trust"?

That's a winner!!!

no it's not's the same at all.  The Jews and Christians do worship the same Jehovah (YHWH) God but the Bahai's and the Muslims and the rest do not.  I've studied at length with a neighbor the diff between her god of her Bahai' faith and Jesus (God in the flesh)  and they were not the same at all.   We had to part company after a year of discussion and I still have all her correspondence.  Her god sounded nothing like the Christian God. 

no the Christian does not believe in the Arab god Allah.  Jehovah God and Allah are NOT the same.  Jehovah God was manifested in the flesh in the person of Jesus Christ (Christ comes from the Gk Christos) and Allah and Jesus are not one and the same. 

Christ was the Messiah (annointed). The word Messiah in Hebrew means oil.  Christos was God's holy annointed; filled without measure (like holy oil) with God's spirit.  When a prophet or King in the OT was annonted with holy oil like David it was  that he was "messiahed" meaning annointed by God.  Christ was annointed by God.  Allah was not and is not God to the Christians. 

I agree with #2 but not #1. 

The problem is  most young people today have not been taught correct U.S. History......and are voting with thoughts of revisionist history running thru their heads as taught by the government schools. 

Our first Chief Justice of the United States appointed by George Washington was John Jay.  He said on Feb 28, 1797 in a letter: 

"Providence has given to our people the choice of their rulers. And it is the duty as well as the privilege and interest of a Christian nation to select and prefer Christians for their rulers."

Wow!  Not only did our very first Justice say we were a Christian nation but that we are to prefer Christians as rulers.  We don't have that today and look at the mess we are in.  Coincidence?  I think not.  Why do you think over the last so many years it's been imperative that these men in office go to church (like Obama) even when it's clear they are NOT Christians?  Because of history.   

Now Obama just recently said (and its all over the news) to the Turks that we are NOT a Christian nation.  While I agree with that now, how did we get here?  That's not what Jay or any of our founders thought of our nation.  They all wrote about our Nation as one under God.  We were once upon a time a Christian nation and it's very very evident by our Founding Father's writings.  And as a Christian, I believe that's why we have been so blessed and are now losing that blessing. 

George Washington in his farewell address said this:

"Whatever may be conceded to the influence of refined education on minds of peculiar structure, reason and experience both forbid us to expect that national morality can prevail in exclusion of religious principle."

Now, is it any wonder we have so much corruption from the White House on down?  How's morality working for us these days?

Consider this and test it for yourself. 

Go and get a picture (a classic) of the Signers of the Declaration.  There were 56 signers.  Point out how many you can recognize.  My guess?  Two. Yep two out of 56....maybe three or four if you're really bright.  The two?   Ben Franklin and Thomas Jefferson.  You know why?  Because you've been conditioned (government schools) to only recognize those two who are the "least" religous of our founding fathers.  Coincidence?  I don't think so.  Take the picture and ask your friends how many they can identify.  If you're open minded enough.  I dare you. 

Do you think they (or you) could identify Minister John Witherspoon?  How about Dr. Benjamin Rush who founded the First Bible Society?  How about Francis Hopkinson who was a Choir Leader and produced the first American Hymn book in 1767?  How about Thomas McKeen who was a legal expert and Govenor of Delaware and PA?  He was also the Chief Justice of PA.  Ever hear of him?   He wrote the first legal commentary on the Constitution of the U.S. and his decisions we can still read today. 

He wrote a case against a John Roberts for treason.  When he gave the verdict and sentenced this man to death he said:  "You have very few days left.  You need to make peace with your maker." 

So what is this?  An atheist giving an altar call in court? 

How about Roger Sherman, Abraham Baldwin or John Dickerson?  Ever hear of them?  They were major theologians, minsters of the gosepl and were also signers. 

Did you know the American Bible Society was started by two Atheistic Founding Fathers?......NOT!  Did you know that our founders started what we now know is Sunday School and the American Sunday School Union?  Did you kow that Frances Scott Key was President of this Uniton for 40 years? 

Did you know that the American Tract Society (bible tracts) were started by our founding fathers.  We still benefit from these today but most don't know where they came from.

Did you know in our Records of Congress that in 1774 our first Congress opened in prayer?  It was so significant and so serious (why do you think our Country has been so blessed?)  that a painting was done to recapture this moment.  Did you know this prayer lasted three hours? 

I didn't know atheists prayed that long. 

No, what we've been seeing (and its moving rapidly) is the secularization of our nation.  I know exactly where we are heading and have been preaching this for years way before it was even on the radar.  We are heading for a one world government and a one world religion. 

We will still have our Baptists, Mormons, Methodists, Muslims, Jews, etc....all under one head or authority.   The government. The ones  who will be in trouble will be the Jews and the biblical Christians who will not submit to the government authorities when it comes to morality and biblical principles.   That's why there is such a clash between the Christians and the whole homosexual issue right now.  The churches will eventuallyl not be able to discriminate or discipline and will have to adhere to government authorities instead of biblical authority if they wish to remain open.  Most likely what will happen first is their tax exempt status will be taken away.   The tax laws are already being set up to go in that direction as we speak.  But then it's going to get worse and while the churches above ground will be filled with "so-called" Christains, the genuine bible believers will go underground.  They will have no choice.  It's either obey God or man. 

And that's exactly why our country was founded in the first place.

We have gone almost full circle and I'm sure our founding fathers if they could see what we've done would not be happy. 

I'm not Christian, but I think the saying should stay.  Last I checked, the US was supposed to be a Democracy (it's supposed to be...it may not be anymore, but that's a different discussion).  With a Democracy, majority rules.  Christians are the majority when it comes to religion in the US.

You have to compare the Jewish concept of "god" with the Islamic and Bahai concepts of "god", not the Christian concept of "god" with the Islamic and Bahai concepts of "god".

It doesn't surprise me that the god of the Bahai faith is not the same as a "God in the flesh" because the Bahai view of god is like the Jewish and islamic view of G-d and there cannot be a corporeal form or image of G-d in those faiths.

The concept of G-d is exactly the same in Judaism and Islam and very similar in the Bahai faith. Christianity's concept of the god is different.

Neither Islam nor Judaism use any pictures to represent G-d or believe that G-d ever takes or took or will take corporeal form. The Bahais are ultimately an Islamic sect (they add a couple of prophets).

If you find that your god is the same as a Bahai's, you have seen what I have seen. The Jesus thing really is a big difference between Christianity on the one side and all the other Abrahamic faiths on the other. And if you find more differences like that, you only show your Christianity is different from Judaism and Islam, not how Islam or the Bahai faith are different from Christianity and Judaism when it comes to the concept of G-d.

Allah is not "the Arab god", Allah is the emphatic state* of the Arab word "ilah" which is cognate to Hebrew "eloah", it translates to "the god" (as opposed to "a god"). When Muhammed believed that only the god of the Jews was real he naturally referred to that god as "the god".

*Semitic nouns decline for case (3), number (3), gender (2), and state (3). The three states are absolute ("a thing"), emphatic ("the thing"), and construct ("thing of").

True.

Cyrus was annointed by G-d. I don't know if Jesus was.

No thanks.

1. Oddly enough, I believe the judges that made the first supreme court case ruling on prayer  were all of Christian/Judaic faith. I'm assuming they weren't following the word or way of God, correct? It's the same with the other ruling when it comes to faiths (in the justices faiths)

2. I don't see it as eliminating the Christian faith, seriously. Just as you don't want Atheism or secularism pushed down your throat, neither do they. Surely you understand that desire?

It's comments like these that scare me. (Figuratively/metaphorically) God help us if we get someone in office in the future with as much zeal, we're all doomed. In a way, it feels like it could end up being the Christian "antichrist" so to speak. Making everyone pretty much live in a Christian nation.

I agree.

That's all well and good KFC, but just because they were of a faith, doesn't mean that they didn't want a nation that was secular. If you look at their (founding fathers), they've asserted time and time again the need for a secular American government, because they were aware enough to know that the nation was not comprised of just Christians. There were Jews, and I believe a small bunch of Muslims.

Remember the saying - Actions speak louder than words? - or - You can judge a man/people by his/their actions? To me, while they may have been of a faith (Deist in fact, from my own personal interpretations.), their actions were that of a people that were wise enough, and intelligent enough to know what the future may have held. They, through their actions, chose to establish a secular government. Period. End of story.

:le sigh:

One persons so called revisionist history is another's factual history; I hate politics.

The US may well be a Democracy, but being a Democracy does not mean that the majority rules by tyrrany. There are checks and balances in place, and in a Democracy there is expected to be responsible governing, which would entail minority (party, opinion, et al.) rights. Just because there's a majority doesn't mean that the majority is the only opinion that counts, this is after all, a representative democracy - everyone's opinion is supposed to count.

~Alderic

Didn't you guys have laws that were meant to prevent exactly that from happening?

I would not want currency to display the sentence "There is no G-d" and I can understand why those who believe in no god or others gods don't care about reading "In G-d we trust" on bank notes.

If the US were an atheist state, I would understand the first sentence and accept it.

If the US were a Christian state, I would understand the second sentence and accept it.

But the US is supposed to be a state that promotes no particular religion, not atheism, not Christianity, not Judaism, and not Islam.

(I think the US government should only be used to fight Jedis.)

Said the ancient Jedis of the west: "May the horse be with you."

[quote]

You mentioned to KFC that because it says "freedom of religion" it would logically mean "from religion" as well.

Why not put that into actual writing?  You overestimate American citizans as a whole.  In terms of society, people believe what they read, see, hear, and don't try to add logic to it, so perhaps that would add a little clarity to this whole mess.

While this is true, a lack of religion promotes atheism, does it not?  At least, that is how the religious will see it.

A lack of a (national) religion doesn't necessarily promote atheism. I would think it promotes the freedom to search and choose what fits you best. Of course they would; no offense KFC, but that's their mentality - any negative opinion of Christianity, any sort of desire to not have it in the government - is atheist's work, etc.

That's what I was thinking she meant, but figured I should ask instead of assuming. I really try not to look like an arse, but I have my moments.

My bottom line with the whole Religion v. Secularism is this:

I'm annoyed by certain Christian's* assertion of persecution. They seem to think that they don't deserve to have any negative action or opinion against them. How do you think we atheists/agnostics feel when we get lambasted to high heaven? (No pun intended) I'm really tired of the stares and smirks I get when I try to be open and honest about my lack of faith.

I have nothing against Christianity or all religious practitioners, I just have something against some of those who practice it and espectially the smug prententiousness that some practice it with; they seem the think that they should get special treatment. Excuse me? Uh, not going there.

Religion should not have a holy place (no pun intended) in our society. Those people seem to forget that this nation has more than just Theists or Deists, and the tolerance they profess is scarce in action. Loving Christian? Tolerant Christian? Give me a break; are you really loving of the Atheists (or homosexuals, or pagans, or...) that you push back and bog down because you think what they are is immoral? Who are you to assign your faith's morals to others? Are you tolerant of other people? Very little in my experience. Sorry, but you don't own morals.

Likewise, don't tell me that our founders wanted to make us a Christian nation when clearly their words, along with their subsequent actions prove otherwise. That's just wrong, and that's a lie in my book, along with factual misrepresentation. (I get worked up to no end with people misrepresenting facts.)

Am I bitter? No, not really. Am I angry? Yes, very much so, because I am sick and tired of seeing good, nay, great people - honest, compassionate, charismatic, loving people -who happen to be atheist, agnostic, homosexual, or just plain different - get treated essentially like less of a human.

It's wrong, just plain wrong.

Yes, practice your faith - believe in your God. That's all well and good, but take the friggin' tree out of your eye before you go about castigating and suppressing others.

That's my issue. Again, please note my disclaimers and emphasis. I've this problem with some, not all religious folks. Also, if you could forgive me a bit - I'm extremely passionate about this, so I come across a tad extreme. Really, I'm a mellow guy.

If only we all could pull our heads out of our personal black hole - things may...may just start getting clearer. I consitantly hope for clarity, wisdom and intelligence. I believe those are the key to solving this problem.

* I use the label Christian in a vague, in general sense because of the majority in the US and since we're talking about the US; It can be applied to any faith really.