Freethought & Rationalism Archive

butswana · 02-28-2002, 08:04 AM

<a href="http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,46721,00.html" target="_blank">http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,46721,00.html</a>

Atleast it got shot down here.
I'm deciding how to best fuck with my General Assembly Reps.

DougI · 02-28-2002, 08:22 AM

I pondered the idea of getting a lot of posterboard and printing up the historical document The Treaty of Tripoli. Of course I'd section out the, "America was in no sense founded on the Christian religion."

It's historical therefore the school must post it if it posts a document from the 1950s.

critical thinking made ez · 03-01-2002, 07:03 AM

Quote:

"If putting these mottos in the schools can help build patriotism, it has served its purpose."

Michigan state Rep. Stephen Ehardt, a Republican. "It is secular. It's not a religious statement and it's something we should be proud of

The motto was first placed on coins by the U.S. Treasury in 1864, during the Civil War. In 1955, Congress passed a bill to have the motto placed on paper currency, and it first appeared on bills two years later. Congress passed a resolution in 1956 declaring "In God We Trust" the national motto.

So Rep. Ehardt, you think belief in God is not secular… Maybe God, angels, and heaven are really a 3rd political party and not to be worshiped.

It seems Americans don’t think we can win wars or get through times of adversity without grasping for the God Card. So during those times we print it on everything we can get our hands on.

That is so pathetic, the religious are just a bunch of fighten old women (and men)hiding under their beds praying for help.

If God is our Ace-in-the-Hole, and I for one hope we never have to use it, because it will mean we have lost.

Kevin Dorner · 03-02-2002, 11:04 AM

If "In God We Trust" is a secular motto and therefore fit for use in schools...

... then a teacher closing a class with "See you next class, and remember: God does not exist." is also a non-religious statement.

No specific religion was mentioned, just like no specific religion is mentioned in IGWT. It is "ceremonial non-deism."

It also has a historical component in Jefferson's statement "Question with boldness even the very existence of God; because, if there be one, he must more approve of the homage of reason than that of a blind-folded fear." As this is a historical document, being written by a Founding Father of the U.S., I wonder if schoolchildren will be forced to memorze that, as the bills that will force them to memorize historical documents asserting god-belief do. Throw in a little Thomas Paine for good measure. History can work in both directions.

Berenger Sauniere · 03-02-2002, 09:05 PM

This religious bull is an act of desperation and our government is scared sh*tless. It's just a way to worship Uncle Sam. Uncle Sam is America's Christ.

Oregon Slim · 03-02-2002, 10:17 PM

That's a good idea. I could go along with posting IGWT everywhere, as long as they add the full explanation "... whether She exists or not!"

03-03-2002, 01:21 PM

Michigan state Rep. Stephen Ehardt, a Republican. "It is secular. It's not a religious statement and it's something we should be proud of

Come on, how can he keep a straight face when he says things like that, I mean, really. He's just spitting on the establishment clause as clearly as that judge that called homosexuality 'an abomination'. Truly, I only live in this country because of the university system, and my lack of funds. Otherwise, I'd be right off to... well, I'm willing to take suggestions. Whatever happened to this country.

----------
Gabriel Syme

"You want to abolish government?"
"To abolish God!"

Koiyotnik · 03-03-2002, 04:21 PM

Ah, I hadn't realised that this topic was already being covered in here.

Sorry about my repeat post, folks.

Agnostichero · 03-04-2002, 07:23 PM

"With things that are facing us today, like terrorism, I think we need a pulling-together of this country,"

What a bunch of garbage. Can we really "pull together" the multitude of cultures that make up this country by shoving majority religious beliefs down their throats?

Hopefully, the disingenuousness of these "motto" advocates will finally be revealed.

Dissenting in the Supreme Court case Lynch v. Donnelly(1983), Justice Brennan suggested that "such practices as the designation of our national motto, or the references to God contained in the Pledge of Allegiance can best be understood [as] a form of 'ceremonial desism,' protected from Establishment Clause scrutiny chiefly because they have lost through rote repetition any significant religious content."

I think the error of Justice Brennan's observation may finally come to light. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to realize that the motto advocates want to plaster "In God We Trust" everywhere precisely because of its "significant religious content," notwithstanding their assertions to the contrary.

[ March 04, 2002: Message edited by: Agnostichero ]</p>

Agnostichero · 03-04-2002, 07:35 PM

By the way, Oregon Slim, I think you might enjoy the following 10th Circuit case:

<a href="http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?navby=search&case=/data2/circs/10th/964087v2.html" target="_blank">Snyder v. Murray City Corp.</a>

A Utah citizen sued after not being allowed to recite an "alternative" prayer at a city council meeting.

I recommend you skip most of the opinion and scroll down to the text of the proposed prayer, which is printed in its entirety in footnote 3 of the dissenting opinion. Funny stuff.

[ March 04, 2002: Message edited by: Agnostichero ]

[ March 04, 2002: Message edited by: Agnostichero ]

[ March 04, 2002: Message edited by: Agnostichero ]</p>

02-28-2002, 08:04 AM	#1
butswana Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2001 Location: Indianapolis, IN Posts: 1,804	God Goes Back to Schools in Form of National Motto <a href="http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,46721,00.html" target="_blank">http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,46721,00.html</a> Atleast it got shot down here. I'm deciding how to best fuck with my General Assembly Reps.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

02-28-2002, 08:22 AM	#2
DougI Senior Member Join Date: Jun 2000 Location: Wichita, KS, USA Posts: 932	I pondered the idea of getting a lot of posterboard and printing up the historical document The Treaty of Tripoli. Of course I'd section out the, "America was in no sense founded on the Christian religion." It's historical therefore the school must post it if it posts a document from the 1950s.

03-02-2002, 11:04 AM	#4
Kevin Dorner Senior Member Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada Posts: 762	If "In God We Trust" is a secular motto and therefore fit for use in schools... ... then a teacher closing a class with "See you next class, and remember: God does not exist." is also a non-religious statement. No specific religion was mentioned, just like no specific religion is mentioned in IGWT. It is "ceremonial non-deism." It also has a historical component in Jefferson's statement "Question with boldness even the very existence of God; because, if there be one, he must more approve of the homage of reason than that of a blind-folded fear." As this is a historical document, being written by a Founding Father of the U.S., I wonder if schoolchildren will be forced to memorze that, as the bills that will force them to memorize historical documents asserting god-belief do. Throw in a little Thomas Paine for good measure. History can work in both directions.

03-02-2002, 09:05 PM	#5
Berenger Sauniere Regular Member Join Date: Oct 2001 Location: et in Arcadia ego... Posts: 406	This religious bull is an act of desperation and our government is scared sh*tless. It's just a way to worship Uncle Sam. Uncle Sam is America's Christ.

03-02-2002, 10:17 PM	#6
Oregon Slim Regular Member Join Date: Jan 2001 Location: Portland, OR Posts: 283	That's a good idea. I could go along with posting IGWT everywhere, as long as they add the full explanation "... whether She exists or not!"

03-03-2002, 01:21 PM	#7
Gabriel Syme Guest Posts: n/a	Michigan state Rep. Stephen Ehardt, a Republican. "It is secular. It's not a religious statement and it's something we should be proud of Come on, how can he keep a straight face when he says things like that, I mean, really. He's just spitting on the establishment clause as clearly as that judge that called homosexuality 'an abomination'. Truly, I only live in this country because of the university system, and my lack of funds. Otherwise, I'd be right off to... well, I'm willing to take suggestions. Whatever happened to this country. ---------- Gabriel Syme "You want to abolish government?" "To abolish God!"

03-03-2002, 04:21 PM	#8
Koiyotnik Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: St Catharines, ON, Canada Posts: 1,920	Ah, I hadn't realised that this topic was already being covered in here. Sorry about my repeat post, folks.

03-04-2002, 07:23 PM	#9
Agnostichero Junior Member Join Date: Feb 2002 Location: Texas Posts: 18	"With things that are facing us today, like terrorism, I think we need a pulling-together of this country," What a bunch of garbage. Can we really "pull together" the multitude of cultures that make up this country by shoving majority religious beliefs down their throats? Hopefully, the disingenuousness of these "motto" advocates will finally be revealed. Dissenting in the Supreme Court case Lynch v. Donnelly(1983), Justice Brennan suggested that "such practices as the designation of our national motto, or the references to God contained in the Pledge of Allegiance can best be understood [as] a form of 'ceremonial desism,' protected from Establishment Clause scrutiny chiefly because they have lost through rote repetition any significant religious content." I think the error of Justice Brennan's observation may finally come to light. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to realize that the motto advocates want to plaster "In God We Trust" everywhere precisely because of its "significant religious content," notwithstanding their assertions to the contrary. [ March 04, 2002: Message edited by: Agnostichero ]</p>

03-04-2002, 07:35 PM	#10
Agnostichero Junior Member Join Date: Feb 2002 Location: Texas Posts: 18	By the way, Oregon Slim, I think you might enjoy the following 10th Circuit case: <a href="http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?navby=search&case=/data2/circs/10th/964087v2.html" target="_blank">Snyder v. Murray City Corp.</a> A Utah citizen sued after not being allowed to recite an "alternative" prayer at a city council meeting. I recommend you skip most of the opinion and scroll down to the text of the proposed prayer, which is printed in its entirety in footnote 3 of the dissenting opinion. Funny stuff. [ March 04, 2002: Message edited by: Agnostichero ] [ March 04, 2002: Message edited by: Agnostichero ] [ March 04, 2002: Message edited by: Agnostichero ]</p>

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.