'Under God', 'In God We Trust' .. AGAIN!

Before the Ninth Circuit..

It's brought by the Genius Moron, Newdow, again! Remember last time... he said 'Under God' in the pledge 'offended his daughter'? Except it actually didnt offend HER and he wasnt her legal guardian.

Since it's the 'Ninth Circus', I'm guessing he probably boned up on the stuff he forgot since passing the bar and his case will win in that panel. Which means it goes to the Supreme Court.

Now.. I doubt it's going to be dealt with on the basis of common sense.

Which WOULD be that 'under God' should be removed from the pledge as it was incorporated in a time {fifties} of somewhat justified hysteria and has always seemed.. even to me, as a kid.. to be a little bit of a 'reach'.

I want to believe 'One Nation'.. I dont want atheists to think we arent if they have to say or omit 'under God'.

However..'In God We Trust' is a motto. You can take it or leave it, you dont have to beleive that in order to spend the currency and it really bears no more meaning than the pyramid and the eye.
{Warning.. DONT start on that loony Masonic crap!}

It's on the currency as a custom and gains cred because it's been there for a long time..period.

 

RE:

God help us.
If Newdumb doesn't want his cash, I'll be more than happy to take it off his hands. Otherwise I can put a nice 666 on his forehead...
MK

 

RE:

don't get me started on this!

 

Having not been religious most all my life, I recall being especially uncomfortable with that part.

The money never bothered me... although "in the Fed we trust" is also suitable. I'm hoping God will strike down a Fed Chairman... thus earning the motto's placement.

Whats kooky about Masons? They aren't aliens, the actually exist with overt influence on history... no conspiracy theories there...

 

As a Christian i believe it should stay. I don't force God on anyone, after all it's all about free will. This country was founded by Christians, and efen the one who dodn't believe said the good book should be kept. Bottom line, if you don't want to believe then don't, but why is that we always have to conform to a small minorty.

 

I think 'Fog is right. As something of an agnostic, aggressive atheism annoys me about as much as aggressive proselytizing.

 

I understand what you are saying, but I was a christian when 'Under God' was put into the pledge and I felt hinky about it at the time. I still do, though I believe you probably wouldnt call me a good christian...
Remember that the pledge became custom LONG before 'under God' was installed.
It was a political statement at the time. Though the wiki on it doesnt address that, I certainly WAS reading Time Magazine and listening to the arguments for and against at the time.

And it only serves to irritate.

And it lends credence to those who want to remove HISTORICAL christian references and symbols... even from city crests.

 

OHHH MY GOD! This is scarey, i actually agree with you fog. In my short time here i don't think i have ever seen eye to eye with you. I guess theres always a first for everything. GOD BLESS fog.

 

Maybe it takes THREE OR FOUR readings???

But be careful.. you wouldnt want to be accused of 'regurgitating'* my views. Or Don's. But wait... how could THAT be?

Because Don is wrong.. it was not really put into there to 'legislate religion' into anything. It was put in there specifically as a sop of differentiation against 'Godless Commies'. Yeah... it made the Knights of Columbus and mainstream protestant churches {at THAT time} happy, but make no mistake it was a political move. No matter what the wiki leads you to believe. Remember it was WRITTEN by a minister, and he didnt think it was necessary. .

* Dan Bartlett. Talk about misunderinterpreting.. wotta putz! No wonder we've had the worst communications from any administration in ANY of our memories.

 

Not so fast, Buddy!

Let's unscrew the lid on the little bottle and pull out the litmus strip.

Are we discussing politics or religion, here? I aint afraid of religion.. I'm afraid of those who use it {or abuse it} politically, just as you seem to be.
But...
It forced no one to actually PRACTICE, attend to, or recognize any religion at all.
It DID set a political tone and atmosphere.

Fernando: to explain.. I simply apply a variant of the old Southern Baptist view, here.
. . .. . . . .. . . .
By the way Don.... I saw a good reference to Ike and Truman yesterday.

End of terms: Ike was very popular, Truman very unpopular.

Accomplishments of each, retrospectively? heh...

 

I read a book recently called "The Secret Founding of America". It was about the settlers of this country including the Puritans, Quakers, Virginia Free Mason's etc. It went into hostoriv detail about the mentions of God in the Constitution and the freedom of religion. The founding fathers were largely deists. They believed in God but, not the Christian image of God. They felt they were above most American citizens and they did not need to follow and organized religion but it was good for the less educated because it kept them in line. The language of God also keptthe Quakers and Puritans happy.

 

sigh.....

They read but they DONT read. Puh...LEEZE!

So, chirobob, they were Unitarians.. or what?

There have been loony conspiracy books written about 'Mystical Orders' since long before the printing press made it easy! Written by the 'Papists', while at the same time they had their OWN 'Mystical Orders'

How to explain it? EASY... some people never grow up, and especially people with power have responsibilities. So what better than to have a 'Secret Society' where they get to act like idiots with silly ass rites. Away from those who might laugh at them.

Like in the old kid movies, you know:

"Sekrit Klub! No Gurlz aloud!"

. . . . .. ... . . . . . . . . ..

Well, you dont have to wait long... or chaplains from city police departments.

This is freakin' INSANITY!