In God we trust... no longer?

[Gilrandir]

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2016/01/14...rom-money.html
From the political correctness perspective, it should be removed. Opinions?

[Greyblades]

Once upon a time I would be celebrating at the thought. Now I dont really care, what the americans want to put on their money is their buisness.

So basically:

[Fragony]

I don't like people who make a point out of being an atheist, seems like needlesly being an ass to me. Usually the same people who look up quotes from the bible to excuse the quirks of islam, they do respect that. but but but

[lars573]

Once upon a time I would be celebrating at the thought. Now I dont really care, what the americans want to put on their money is their buisness.

So basically:

What you did there, I sees it. Even if you don't.

[Sarmatian]

I'd be in favour of it if I were an American, but I wouldn't care enough to actually do something about it.

[Husar]

I don't like people who make a point out of being an atheist, seems like needlesly being an ass to me.

This.

[Viking]

I don't like people who make a point out of being an atheist, seems like needlesly being an ass to me.

Alternatively, religious people are "needlessly being asses" by "making a point out of being religious" by printing religious slogans on banknotes.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

What you did there, I sees it. Even if you don't.

Levels upon levels of irony.

Irrc this has been floated several times and it seems there's no real desire to change it.

[Husar]

Alternatively, religious people are "needlessly being asses" by "making a point out of being religious" by printing religious slogans on banknotes.

"In God We Trust" is the official motto of the United States. It was adopted as the nation's motto in 1956 as an alternative or replacement to the unofficial motto of E pluribus unum, which was adopted when the Great Seal of the United States was created and adopted in 1782.[1][2] Many people have expressed objections to its use, and have sought to have the religious reference removed from the currency, claiming that it violates the First Amendment.[3]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/In_God_we_trust

Maybe it was a historical development that was wanted and established as part of a democratic process?
I think what Fragony meant though is that you can not be in favor of it being there without being an ass about it like the guy(s) in the source of the OP. Why be all melodramatic about being a 'victim' and having to carry it in your pocket? For atheist it sounds pretty superstitious, as if a christian ghost possessed the bills and could potentially harm their atheism. The guy doesn't even want to spell the word 'god' for some strange reasons, how much more pathetic could he be? If a Christian said the pyramid on it is a demonic symbol and that he doesn't want to wear a demonic symvbol in his pocket, would you also support him? Because these people sound like the "atheist" version of just that. Just read this part for reference:

One plaintiff says his Atheism is "substantially burdened because he is forced to bear on his person a religious statement that causes him to sense his government legitimizing, promoting and reinforcing negative and injurious attitudes not only against Atheists in general, but against him personally."

With this kind of reasoning I might as well claim the guy is possessed by the devil because he does not dare write God's name.

[Fragony]

Alternatively, religious people are "needlessly being asses" by "making a point out of being religious" by printing religious slogans on banknotes.

Been on it for ages, does it matter. You can pay with a card if you want to have priinciples about it. I really dislike that the Netherlands is monarchy but should I care about images on coins. Religious people rightfully call it militant-atheism imho, just like there are feminists who will make a point out of everything, gay-right activists who identify themselves as gay while nobody cares. I basicly dislike all activism. The guy who wants to have it removed is just a bully.Friend of mine goes to church every sunday, we never talk about it, we have an unspoken agreement not to.

[Brenus]

Funny enough, I had this kind of conversation with a friend recently, about old symbols and why to keep them...
Some old symbols represent nowadays oppression. Like it or don't, the Arian Sun Wheel better know a Nazi Cross (reversed) is an old symbol, however, no country will put it as flag, or on coins, or banknotes. That is for the "old symbols" arguments.

So, it looks like the "In God We Trust" is even not old at all!!! 1956 being 3 years before I born, I think it is quite young in fact...

Now, they keep it or not, really not my problem as such. Except of course when it is included in a global system, where you swear oaths on the Bible (?) in Court, you pray at schools, etc. Believe me, all France would burst in laugh if a French President would finish a speech with "God bless France". Because the question would be: which one?

So, the solution would be to have alternative banknotes, like "insert your deity/ies names" banknotes and of course atheist ones. Cost a bit, but...

[Husar]

Yeah, but then remove the pyramid, too!

http://www.jesus-is-savior.com/Evils...our_dollar.htm

This is the Great Seal of the United States of America. It was designed by the Freemasons and contains a mass of symbolism that the profane (non masons) are not to understand. This article will once and for all prove that the Seal is a Masonic design. Have you ever asked the question “Why is there a Pyramid on our $1 note?” The religion of Freemasonry and some of it's mysteries have descended from ancient Babylon whose mysteries descended from ancient Egypt. The Great Pyramid has of old been a fascination of Freemasons. It is a pagan temple of Satan worship. Aleister Crowley, Freemason and chief Satanist of the 20th Century performed a satanic ritual in the Kings Chamber. The Masonic founded and controlled cults of the Jehovah's Witnesses and Mormons have also adored the Great Pyramid.

But why are elite occultists in the Illuminati pushing this garbage on the public? Why are they saturating society with occult symbols? What is their agenda? Luciferians love to place occult symbols in plain sight, mocking the ignorance of the common person. The answer why they are doing this is found in a book authored by occultist Alice Bailey, titled “The Externalisation Of The Hierarchy,” in which she teaches that now is the time to promote the ancient mystery religion and symbols to the masses, to prepare them to receive the soon appearing Antichrist.

See, why would you want one kind of religious symbolism removed that supposedly offends you but leave another that other people do not want in their pockets?
Just make it a white peace of paper/cloth with a number on it.

[Fragony]

So, the solution would be to have alternative banknotes, like "insert your deity/ies names" banknotes and of course atheist ones. Cost a bit, but...

Government prints the banknotes, got any faith in them? I am not religious but this is just silly. #1 rule of the old ways, never hurt anything that doesn't harm you.

and no not into that either, but I like the thought

[rajpoot]

Alternatively, religious people are "needlessly being asses" by "making a point out of being religious" by printing religious slogans on banknotes.

Or the ones crying on about can find something more constructive to do with their time.
Honestly I thought people with this degree of inanity were limited to the religious extremist groups.
Kind of like the guy who tried to sue Ram for being cruel to Sita.

[Viking]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/In_God_we_trust

Maybe it was a historical development that was wanted and established as part of a democratic process?
I think what Fragony meant though is that you can not be in favor of it being there without being an ass about it like the guy(s) in the source of the OP. Why be all melodramatic about being a 'victim' and having to carry it in your pocket? For atheist it sounds pretty superstitious, as if a christian ghost possessed the bills and could potentially harm their atheism. The guy doesn't even want to spell the word 'god' for some strange reasons, how much more pathetic could he be? If a Christian said the pyramid on it is a demonic symbol and that he doesn't want to wear a demonic symvbol in his pocket, would you also support him? Because these people sound like the "atheist" version of just that. Just read this part for reference:



With this kind of reasoning I might as well claim the guy is possessed by the devil because he does not dare write God's name.

If you don't like the guy and/or the way he's going about this, you should address that to him, not me.

Been on it for ages, does it matter.

Does it matter if it's gone.

Religious people rightfully call it militant-atheism imho, just like there are feminists who will make a point out of everything, gay-right activists who identify themselves as gay while nobody cares. I basicly dislike all activism. The guy who wants to have it removed is just a bully.Friend of mine goes to church every sunday, we never talk about it, we have an unspoken agreement not to.

You can dislike people as much as you want, but it does not affect whether or not a specific cause they fight for is "right".

[Fragony]

What does it matter if it's gone, wrong question imho, why does it need to be gone? Why ask me. I am not relgious but I don't take offence either if someone is. Live and let live, just never impose. Some stupid quote on a bill doesn't qualify, making a ruckus out of it does though.

[Viking]

Why does it need to be there in the first place, and how is this not the act of imposing? If US coins did NOT have this slogan today, and Ted Cruz wanted to put it there tomorrow, would you say "fine, it doesn't matter"? Is it OK to put a religious slogan on coins, but not to remove it?

One would also think that a "live and let live" policy would allow other people to think it matters. Why does it matter to you that it matters to others? Why don't you leave the topic be?

[Gilrandir]

What does it matter if it's gone, wrong question imho, why does it need to be gone? Why ask me. I am not relgious but I don't take offence either if someone is.

Some things which were once quite OK today are offensive. In Huckleberry Finn the blacks are never called otherwise but niggers. What should be done with it?

[Fragony]

Some things which were once quite OK today are offensive. In Huckleberry Finn the blacks are never called otherwise but niggers. What should be done with it?

Nothing, that is what they were called at the time.

[Husar]

If you don't like the guy and/or the way he's going about this, you should address that to him, not me.

If you don't want me to reply to your comments, you should write them into your diary, not here.

[Greyblades]

If you don't want me to reply to your comments, you should write them into your diary, not here.

I'm fairly sure he's complaining that you aren't replying to his comments.

[Husar]

I'm fairly sure he's complaining that you aren't replying to his comments.

I did reply to his comment by saying it was a different time when this was decided and then I expanded a bit on why I (and possibly Fragony) think the guy is being an ass about it. How is that not related to Viking's attempt to blame the other side? I haven't seen anyone here explain how a sentence on a banknote is dangerous to someone's atheism or why an atheist would need to feel bad about carrying such a sentence in his pocket? I can see how you think it is needless but these people are suing on the basis that it is somehow harmful to them or some such nonsense.

[Fragony]

Make that definitaly

[Papewaio]

I did reply to his comment by saying it was a different time when this was decided and then I expanded a bit on why I (and possibly Fragony) think the guy is being an ass about it. How is that not related to Viking's attempt to blame the other side? I haven't seen anyone here explain how a sentence on a banknote is dangerous to someone's atheism or why an atheist would need to feel bad about carrying such a sentence in his pocket? I can see how you think it is needless but these people are suing on the basis that it is somehow harmful to them or some such nonsense.

Separation of Religion (any) and State.

Because it is on the dollar it is also being put up in other government areas.

Problem is that it is endorsing a religion and isn't inclusive of others ie to include Hinduism would be in God(s) We Trust. Maybe for Thor it would be Hammer Time. Jedism May the Force be With You. Islam Allah Akabar...

So the God We Trust is used as a thin end of a wedge to place other statements that are pro one religion over the rest. So not only a breach of separation of religion and state, it's the proto environment for a state religion with all its wonders and issues.

Wonderful if you belong to the group that is now held as above the rest, chilling to those outside that group. So not inclusive, secular or eglatarian.

[Viking]

I did reply to his comment by saying it was a different time when this was decided and then I expanded a bit on why I (and possibly Fragony) think the guy is being an ass about it. How is that not related to Viking's attempt to blame the other side? I haven't seen anyone here explain how a sentence on a banknote is dangerous to someone's atheism or why an atheist would need to feel bad about carrying such a sentence in his pocket? I can see how you think it is needless but these people are suing on the basis that it is somehow harmful to them or some such nonsense.

I was showing how easy it is to turn the argument on its head. The random guy does not factor into anything.

[Husar]

Separation of Religion (any) and State.

Because it is on the dollar it is also being put up in other government areas.

Problem is that it is endorsing a religion and isn't inclusive of others ie to include Hinduism would be in God(s) We Trust. Maybe for Thor it would be Hammer Time. Jedism May the Force be With You. Islam Allah Akabar...

So the God We Trust is used as a thin end of a wedge to place other statements that are pro one religion over the rest. So not only a breach of separation of religion and state, it's the proto environment for a state religion with all its wonders and issues.

Wonderful if you belong to the group that is now held as above the rest, chilling to those outside that group. So not inclusive, secular or eglatarian.

I see what you mean by a breach of secularism but less so the wedge issue. The other thing is that a majority religion of a country's people will always influence the state a bit, see religious holidays. You also don't forbid people to prefer a certain candidate for the presidency or any other public office because of her or his religious values. Of course electing such a person means their religious values will influence what they do while in office. On the other hand it's also not forbidden to prefer a candidate due to their opposition of religion. Strictly enforced secularism seems almost impossible in a democracy.

I do see the issue with people voting for candidates who'd basically turn the country into a quasi-theocracy, but as it currently is in the US I don't see how a religious sentence on a banknote is threatening someone's atheism. To remove it on the grounds that the state should not endorse or promote any religion as you say seems more reasonable than "the sentence in my pocket that is just empty words for me is threatening my conviction that it's just empty words!".

Again, my beef is more with the reasons given in the source than with whether or not it should be removed. The people suing here just seem about as fanatic as the ones who oppose them the most I'd imagine.

I was showing how easy it is to turn the argument on its head. The random guy does not factor into anything.

So your statement wasn't related to Fragony's then because his statement was directly related to that random guy?
Okay, nevermind.

[Fragony]

Separation of Religion (any) and State.

Because it is on the dollar it is also being put up in other government areas.

Problem is that it is endorsing a religion and isn't inclusive of others ie to include Hinduism would be in God(s) We Trust. Maybe for Thor it would be Hammer Time. Jedism May the Force be With You. Islam Allah Akabar...

So the God We Trust is used as a thin end of a wedge to place other statements that are pro one religion over the rest. So not only a breach of separation of religion and state, it's the proto environment for a state religion with all its wonders and issues.

Wonderful if you belong to the group that is now held as above the rest, chilling to those outside that group. So not inclusive, secular or eglatarian.

But what is the problem really. It's paper money you can pay with it. Why look for controversity when it isn't needed. Self-proclaimed atheists should just be honest about themself and just admit that they like to bully christians. I am not religious and I got nothing to prove, do as you like and think what you want.

[Viking]

But what is the problem really. It's paper money you can pay with it. Why look for controversity when it isn't needed. Self-proclaimed atheists should just be honest about themself and just admit that they like to bully christians. I am not religious and I got nothing to prove, do as you like and think what you want.

Issues have already been presented, you just refuse to acknowledge them as such.

[Fragony]

Issues have already been presented, you just refuse to acknowledge them as such.

True that, I don't see the necesity. It's called disagreement.

[HopAlongBunny]

If the phrase is truly meaningless, why grant it the power to annoy you?