Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Mad Lion · 06-26-2002, 12:39 PM

FUCK FUCK FUCK.

Just saw the white house reaction... this is not a good thing. This is going to lead to even more religious idiocy. Simple-minded cretins. I can't believe people still believe in such ridiculous tripe as superstitious mythology. *sigh*

BibleBelted · 06-26-2002, 12:40 PM

Quote:

hezekiah jones:
So Bush joins Jerry Falwell ("nutty") and Bob Barr ("idiotic") with his in-depth and trenchant legal analysis.

Not to mention Charlie Daniels

Lone Wolf · 06-26-2002, 12:41 PM

Rut Ro...

The Senate is trying to put a resolution on the floor immediately to stomp the ruling out ASAP. (Cspan2).

crazyfingers · 06-26-2002, 12:41 PM

I'd like to suggest that those of us who post on xians boards might want to get on over there and defend this ruling.

06-26-2002, 12:43 PM

Im worried. The case was against her being forced to say the pledge. If appealed, would the higher court have to directly deal with the constitutionality of the pledge itself because of the previous ruling, or can they skip it, totally destroy the ruling and just say it was unconstitutional to make her recite it in the first place? Heres hoping the higher courts aren't too conservative.

Mecha_Dude · 06-26-2002, 12:45 PM

Oh boy, all of the sudden,It looks lke the fundies are so angry that we aren't scared of their hell, so they decide to make this country hell for atheists, agnostics, and, all non christians in general...

may I say it this way:

fuck fuck fuck fu *gets shot by the thought ploice*

Anunnaki · 06-26-2002, 12:45 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by BibleBelted:
<strong>

Not to mention Charlie Daniels

</strong>

Lets try to forget about Charlie Daniels. I think the worst thing about all this is that now I`ve seen Charlie on TV TWICE this week and I`ll probably see him again very soon.

I`ve gone through most of my 32 years without ever seeing his repugnant snout and now I can`t seem to get away from him.

Bad Religion · 06-26-2002, 12:46 PM

I just checked out the treasury web site on the "In God We Trust":

<a href="http://www.treas.gov/education/fact-sheets/currency/in-god-we-trust.html" target="_blank">http://www.treas.gov/education/fact-sheets/currency/in-god-we-trust.html</a>

and surprisingly, it does not support the idea of the motto going on in 1954 like I thought. Does anyone have any other ideas on this?

Toto · 06-26-2002, 12:47 PM

The local paper is the <a href="http://www.sacbee.com/" target="_blank">Sacramento Bee</a>

<a href="http://www.sacbee.com/content/news/story/3353068p-4379244c.html" target="_blank">Their story</a>:

Quote:

...
Newdow, an emergency room physician with a law degree acting as his own attorney, recently lost a bid in federal court in Sacramento to halt President Bush's faith references.

Newdow, 49, built his lawsuit against Bush around a prayer delivered at the 2000 inauguration by the Rev. Franklin Graham, son of evangelist Billy Graham, that was based on Christian beliefs and referenced "the Lord Jesus Christ."

Newdow complained that permitting any prayer at a presidential inauguration violated the First Amendment's establishment clause.

And, he said, Graham's references to Christian figures and concepts "further excluded theistic non-Christians" and "showed a preference for a particular religious belief." The prayer made him feel like an "outsider," he added.

. . .
Assistant U.S. Attorney Kristin Sudhoff Door argued that courts lack authority to meddle in the internal affairs of other government branches.

She cited an 1866 U.S. Supreme Court opinion that neither the legislative nor executive branches can be restrained by the judicial branch.
. . .

And there's a forum where you can read comments like this:

Quote:

Mr. Newdow or Cowdoo, or whatever Godless name you are called; What is the next step - to stop the saying of the Pledge of Allegiance at any and all government functions, i.e. Congress, etc., under the b.s. guise of separation of church and state? Shall we then recall and re-issue all our currency to eliminate the words "In God We Trust"? Where is it all to end? When you and the rest of the lunatic fringe have deleted all reference to God everywhere in a country that was founded upon a belief in God.

Toto · 06-26-2002, 12:55 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by questionit:
<strong>I just checked out the treasury web site on the "In God We Trust":

<a href="http://www.treas.gov/education/fact-sheets/currency/in-god-we-trust.html" target="_blank">http://www.treas.gov/education/fact-sheets/currency/in-god-we-trust.html</a>

and surprisingly, it does not support the idea of the motto going on in 1954 like I thought. Does anyone have any other ideas on this?</strong>

The motto was on the coinage in the 19th century, but the official motto of the United States was "E Pluribus Unum" until 1956. That is still on the Great Seal.

Quote:

On July 30, 1956 a law was passed stating that "the national motto of the United States is hereby declared to be 'In God we trust'." (70 Stat. 732. 36 U.S. Code 186). The House Judiciary Committee recognized that the phrase E Pluribus Unum had also received wide usage in the United States, and the joint resolution did not repeal or prohibit its use as a national motto. In 1963 the Department of State took the following position: "'In God we trust'" is the motto of the United States. It seems to the Department, nevertheless, that there is ample basis both in history and I law for calling 'E Pluribus Unum' a motto of the United States." The Congress has used both.

From <a href="http://www.usscouts.org/flag/sealmotto.html" target="_blank">the Boy Scouts</a>.

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

06-26-2002, 12:39 PM	#121
Mad Lion Regular Member Join Date: Aug 2001 Location: Cookeville, Tennessee, U.S.A. Posts: 306	FUCK FUCK FUCK. Just saw the white house reaction... this is not a good thing. This is going to lead to even more religious idiocy. Simple-minded cretins. I can't believe people still believe in such ridiculous tripe as superstitious mythology. sigh

06-26-2002, 12:41 PM	#123
Lone Wolf Regular Member Join Date: Jun 2001 Location: Chicago, IL Posts: 383	Rut Ro... The Senate is trying to put a resolution on the floor immediately to stomp the ruling out ASAP. (Cspan2).

06-26-2002, 12:41 PM	#124
crazyfingers Contributor Join Date: Mar 2001 Location: Massachusetts, USA Posts: 13,699	I'd like to suggest that those of us who post on xians boards might want to get on over there and defend this ruling.

06-26-2002, 12:43 PM	#125
himynameisPwn Guest Posts: n/a	Im worried. The case was against her being forced to say the pledge. If appealed, would the higher court have to directly deal with the constitutionality of the pledge itself because of the previous ruling, or can they skip it, totally destroy the ruling and just say it was unconstitutional to make her recite it in the first place? Heres hoping the higher courts aren't too conservative.

06-26-2002, 12:45 PM	#126
Mecha_Dude Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: Everywhere... I'm Watching you... Posts: 1,019	Oh boy, all of the sudden,It looks lke the fundies are so angry that we aren't scared of their hell, so they decide to make this country hell for atheists, agnostics, and, all non christians in general... may I say it this way: fuck fuck fuck fu gets shot by the thought ploice

06-26-2002, 12:46 PM	#128
Bad Religion Regular Member Join Date: Mar 2001 Location: memphis, tn. usa Posts: 127	I just checked out the treasury web site on the "In God We Trust": <a href="http://www.treas.gov/education/fact-sheets/currency/in-god-we-trust.html" target="_blank">http://www.treas.gov/education/fact-sheets/currency/in-god-we-trust.html</a> and surprisingly, it does not support the idea of the motto going on in 1954 like I thought. Does anyone have any other ideas on this?

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.