Congress mandates use of "In God We Trust"

"Honus" . wrote in message
news:J0N3i.1116$hw.209@trndny08...

"Jim Higgins" wrote in message
...

Psalm 14:1

I -love- that verse. For everyone unfamiliar with the verse, it's the one
that claims that the fool hath said in his heart that there is no god.
It's
also the one that says those people are corrupt, do abominable works, and
never do good.

Here, let me look it up to be sure I have it right...ah, yes...here we go:

Psalm 14

"The fool hath said in his heart, There is no God. They are corrupt, they
have done abominable works, there is none that doeth good."


It's a sobering thought...I'm an actual, living and undeniable refutation
of
Biblical literalism.



I'm living proof that the bible is wrong as I once helped an old lady across
the road.

If I never post again you will know that I have been struck by lightning.

A few years ago my modem was destroyed by a strike so it will never happen
twice will it, hold on a minute, what was that bright fla

Religion is a good-or-evil, black-or-white,Jesus or Satan,
if-you-aren't-with -us-you-are-with-the-terrorists mentality. It does not
mesh well with democracy, which at best is a series of compromises.

"Paul Causey" wrote in message
hlink.net...
Religion is a good-or-evil, black-or-white,Jesus or Satan,
if-you-aren't-with -us-you-are-with-the-terrorists mentality. It does not
mesh well with democracy, which at best is a series of compromises.

I'm not quite ready to concur with your first statement, but your second
statement is spot on!

James

On May 18, 1:31 pm, "Aram H. Haroutunian" wrote:

"Countless" and "One" are not nearly alike enough for me.


Very incisive!

K

"Mr. Jaggers" lugburzman[at]yahoo[dot]com wrote in message
...

"Anka" wrote in message
ups.com...
On May 18, 7:23?am, Bill Dunkenfield
wrote:
1908 : Congress mandates use of "In God We Trust"

In a move that seemingly flew in the face of America's founding belief
in the separation of church and state, Congress passed legislation on
this day in 1908 that made the maxim "In God We Trust" an obligatory
element of certain coins. The motto dates back to the early 1860s, when
the Civil War stirred religious feelings throughout the nation.
America's heightened piety manifested itself in many places, including
the treasury department, which received countless letters requesting
that the nation's coins pay some form of tribute to God. Concerned
citizens and religious leaders found a fast friend in Treasury
Secretary
Salmon P. Chase, who readily agreed that the "trust of our people in
God
should be declared on our national coins." James Pollock, director of
the U.S. Mint at Philadelphia, was charged with devising a suitable
motto. After some key revisions from Chase, Pollock decided upon the
now-familiar "In God We Trust."

http://www.history.com/tdih.do?actio...tegory&id=5869

JAM


"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion,
or prohibiting the free exercise thereof . . . ."

No state religion was established. So what's your beef?

I have no beef, but can only summarize what is observable. First, "In God
We Trust" is a false statement, as it does not apply to all 300 million
U.S.
citizens.

80% of Americans claim to be Christians.

Second, many do not wish the government to speak for them or
represent them with regard to personal, private faith.

I dont think youve run a pole that shows this to be plausible, have you?

Finally, there are
multiple interpretations and definitions of Deity, even among those who do
believe in one, that one worldview is no more important than another, true
even if a particular one might be held by a majority. Under these
circumstances, the default value must therefore be zero.

No, in our country the majority is always the default value. If congress
chooses to have a minister open their meetings with a prayer, this still
doesnt constitute establishment of a religion by reason of fact that no one
is forced to participate in the prayer, and no one is forced to be a member
of any particular faith.

You are correct in
saying that IGWT does not establish a state religion, but for the reasons
I
have enumerated, it is my opinion that it should not appear on our
currency.

James

And which reasons of the ones of yours above are valid?
B

"Reid Goldsborough" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 18 May 2007 14:54:36 -0500, "Mr. Jaggers"
lugburzman[at]yahoo[dot]com wrote:

I have no beef, but can only summarize what is observable. First, "In
God
We Trust" is a false statement, as it does not apply to all 300 million
U.S.
citizens. Second, many do not wish the government to speak for them or
represent them with regard to personal, private faith. Finally, there
are
multiple interpretations and definitions of Deity, even among those who
do
believe in one, that one worldview is no more important than another,
true
even if a particular one might be held by a majority. Under these
circumstances, the default value must therefore be zero. You are correct
in
saying that IGWT does not establish a state religion, but for the reasons
I
have enumerated, it is my opinion that it should not appear on our
currency.

Bingo. And well said. I'm also weary of those who don't get it. But I
understand it. Religion has nothing to do with reason or intelligence.

It appears that you are the one that doesnt get it. Faith is not blind, as
you might believe.

It has to with faith, with believing despite evidence or lack of it.

Or the evidence that IS there, and lack of evidence to NOT believe...

In general, the more fundamental the faith, the less important reason
becomes.

Again, the more fundamental, the more reason and evidence is there. Its
liberal wishy washy ness of secular historic revisionists that want to show
that reason or intelligence has nothing to do with faith.

"In God We Trust" on coins in no different from prayer in
schools, at attempt to foist the religiosity of one group on the
whole.


Again, this in no way compels anyone to have faith in anything. Its an
expression of the majority of people in our country who do believe in God.
That all.

The Supreme Court over the years has interpreted the First
Amendment to mean more than the literal words, instead to mean that
national affairs and religious affairs should be separate.

Thats the first mistake they made, because the way it is worded in the
Constitution never says that religion has to be seperated out of government.
It specifically says that our government shall not sanction (force upon
anyone) a particular religion. In God We Trust, prayer in school (which is
still allowed, just not for Christians), do not constitute forcing ANYONE to
participate in ANY prayer or religious activity.

The
arguments for "In God We Trust" are just blatant rationalizations of
one of the most important founding doctrines of this country, this
separation of church and state, of religious affairs from national
affairs. "In God We Trust" on coins is hypocrisy.

I might agree, in that the 80 percent of those in our country that claim to
belive in God dont bother to behave as if they do.
B

"Reid Goldsborough" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 18 May 2007 21:05:19 -0400, "Bruce Remick"
wrote:

I agree. There are things that can truly hurt people which are certainly
worth getting huffy over. To me, personal indignance over this IGWT
issue--
either side-- ranks way way down on the list of things that need to be
addressed, unless one simply enjoys pontificating for exercise or extra
credit.

Much of it has to do with how important an institution you regard
coinage. If it's just bits of metal used to make and spend change,
then sure, what verbiage your country puts on it is of little
consequence. But if you understand that a country's, any country's,
coinage is a statement it's sending out about itself, to its own
citizens as well as the rest of the world, then the verbiage and
imagery mean a lot. If you're a coin collector, I can't see how you
wouldn't be in the latter group, how you would regard it as
unimportant.

"In God We Trust" is on coinage because of political pandering and
inertia. It's a violation of the First Amendment, a violation of the
doctrine of the separation of church and state, an unconstitutional
commingling of national and religious affairs.

Again, this neither forces forces anyone to BELIEVE in a particular god, not
to participate in ANY religious activity. The constitution never says that
government and religion need to be seperate. You hypocrites all to often
leave off the second part of that sentence.

It's a motto you'd
expect to see on the coinage of an Islamic theocracy, not a Western
democracy.

No, its something that people who believe God is the benefactor of all would
gratefully put on their coins to acknowledge that benevolance. Look around
at this world. Its not getting better, its getting worse, and its not
because of Christians. Its because those that would eradicate it make laws
that make people less and less accountable for their actions, make violators
to be victims, and allow perversion to reign supreme. Our founding fathers
would be totally ashamed of what our country has degenerated into.
B

"Sibirskmoneta" wrote in message
...

"Reid Goldsborough" wrote in message
It's interesting that among the first U.S. coins, the sentiment
exactly opposite of "In God We Trust" was included as a motto. The
1792 half disme includes, "Liberty: Parent of Science and Industry" or
more precisely, "Liberty Parent of Science & Indus." Our Founding
Fathers, as many people do today, recognized well that religion has an
inimical history of opposing science, opposing the knowledge of
reality that science has brought forth and the insights into human
character and the workings of the world. This is not to say that all
religious people though history have supporting the executions of
"heretics" whose discoveries about nature and the universe have
contradicted the teachings of religious leaders.

--

Religion has a unique position in that it by itself is the root cause of
more human suffering and conflict than any other factor in human
existence,
much more so than hunger, war, disease etc.

Its amazing that you would really believe such a crock. Athiesm has kille
more people than any and all religious wars that ever were.

Think about what the cause of
more conflict and persecution of others is, more often than not it is
religion.

Its the lack of religion that brings about persecution. Look at China, and
North Korea, and VietNam, and Stalinist Russia. You really need to get a
clue.

Microcosm of it all is Iraq, where you have different type of
Muslims slaughtering each other for Allah.

They dont. That is also a crock. They slaughter each other because of
hatred instilled in them from their parents. If their parents didnt do
that, they wouldnt be killing each other, they would continue to kill all
others that dont convert to Islam.

Then Northern Ireland, where Christians slaughter each other, until
recently, but probably again soon in the name of you guessed it -
religion.

No, that was clearly in the name of political power. It was an excuse.


If religion were strictly a personal matter and a practice for the self
instead of having to be heaped on everybody around one, then the world
would
be a better place.

LOL.
B

"Reid Goldsborough" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 19 May 2007 15:13:01 -0400, "Sibirskmoneta"
wrote:

Religion has a unique position in that it by itself is the root cause of
more human suffering and conflict than any other factor in human
existence,

This is harsh. But I agree with it. Religion has done much good. But
it has done far more evil, caused far more suffering and death, than
any other institution ever invented by humankind. It's not religion in
itself that does this. It's how it's used by people, or abused.

Much has to do with dogmatism (fixed ideas not easily amendable to
change), irrationality (faith despite evidence), and intolerance
(distrust or hatred toward those who don't believe as you do) that
religion inspires. All these qualities in people can exist independent
of religion. But because of religion's nature, its basis on a power
not perceptible to the senses, these qualities coalesce more around
religion than any other human institution.

It's not "Money is the source of all evil." It's not "Religion is the
source of all evil." It's "Religion is the source of much evil."

No its MAN that is the sorce of evil. Religion in itself, for the most
part, other than the teaching of the Quran, tend to promote peace and
goodwill. MEN are the ones that misuse their religion, except in those that
follow the Quran.

On the other hand, there many good religious people out there, people
whose lives are based on doing good, just as there are beneficent ways
of interpreting deity.

Just exactly how good are these good people?
Better check your heart.
B

America is a Christian Nation and as such we acknowlege God as the ultimate
moral authority. It is only right to have in God we trust on our coins and
curency. Getting rid of God goes a long way in taking our liberties away
so that govenment can dole out what freedoms it think the people are
fortunate to earn. Right Frank? Reed? Brickhead?? You'd like to take God
away, he's the only One who stands in your way of declaring Homosexuality
normal.