FRDB Archives

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.


Go Back   FRDB Archives > Archives > IIDB ARCHIVE: 200X-2003, PD 2007 > IIDB Philosophical Forums (PRIOR TO JUN-2003)
Welcome, Peter Kirby.
You last visited: Today at 05:55 AM

 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 07-11-2003, 12:04 AM   #21
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Stevens Point, WI
Posts: 538
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by DMB
Question about American culture: What is a Sharpie? I realise it's some sort of writing instrument, but what sort?
Linky:

Sharpie.
JonathanChance is offline  
Old 07-11-2003, 05:32 AM   #22
DMB
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Thanks for the info. I had sort of thought it might be a propelling pencil.
Quote:
Originally posted by Godless Dave
In England you probably have another name for it, like biro or ironmonger.
I'm not aware of one. "Biro" is a brandname used for any sort of ballpoint, but as far as I am aware we tend to talk about "felt tips", "fibre tips" or "permanent markers".

Sorry for the red herring, everyone, but I was curious. Keep up the good work with the currency!
 
Old 07-11-2003, 07:43 AM   #23
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: ahhh, I've moved since then....
Posts: 1,729
Default

I've past a couple of $5 bills in the St. Louis area. I also use a 'sharpie". I also use a Expo Dry Eraser Marker with a wide felt tip.

Later,
ElectEngr
ElectEngr is offline  
Old 07-11-2003, 07:52 AM   #24
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Minneapolis, MN
Posts: 746
Default Never received one

I've never received a bill with the "In God We Trust" marked out, but I've been marking my money every chance I get.
niggle is offline  
Old 07-11-2003, 11:23 AM   #25
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Chicago 'burbs
Posts: 1,242
Default Re: Never received one

Quote:
Originally posted by niggle
I've never received a bill with the "In God We Trust" marked out, but I've been marking my money every chance I get.
The $5 was my first. Seems like we'd see more of them, since a lot of us are marking up these bills!
Ennazus is offline  
Old 07-11-2003, 02:33 PM   #26
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Northern Virginia, USA
Posts: 1,112
Default Re: Re: Never received one

Quote:
Originally posted by Suzanne**Atheist
The $5 was my first. Seems like we'd see more of them, since a lot of us are marking up these bills!
While I definately mark out the IGWT on all of my bills, I actually don't have cash all that often. It has gotten so must more convenient just to pay for everything with my check card. I imagine that is at least one reason why we may not see the modified bills all that often. Another reason being the small percentage overall that are marked.
Jewel is offline  
Old 07-11-2003, 09:08 PM   #27
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: no longer at IIDB
Posts: 1,644
Default

I sharpie out IGWT off my money whenever I have a chance to. I prefer to use thick black lines that completely obscure the lettering that's covered up. The rubber stamp of E Pluribus Unum is a good idea... unfortunately, I'm a very poor college student. Maybe when I'm not so horribly broke.
NonHomogenized is offline  
Old 07-12-2003, 07:11 AM   #28
Regular Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Toronto, Canada
Posts: 197
Default "In God We Trust" is not a religious phrase

“The Foundation lawsuit was dismissed by a 10th-circuit federal judge on the grounds that "In God We Trust" is not a religious phrase.”

http://www.scbn.com/america/ingodwetrust.html

Wow!

I can’t argue with this judge. There is no hope. This judge lost it. Completely. If he/she ever had it.

A psychiatrist would say about this judge:”My kind of guy”. (Meaning:”This guy must be my patient”)

Remember what Arnold Schwarzenegger’s character said in “Twins”? He said:” You have no respect for logic. I have no respect for people who have no respect for logic.” After this he destroys the guy. I wish he would do the same to this judge. Sweet dreams…

But seriously, this judge should be locked in mental institution. He/she is not guilty of his/her ruling by the reason on insanity.
Tony is offline  
Old 07-12-2003, 10:01 AM   #29
Contributor
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Los Angeles area
Posts: 40,549
Default

Don't be too hard on that judge. His opinion was not logical but was politically astute in its own twisted way.

The judge probably figured that he would be lynched if he struck down IGWT. But there was no way he could take the motto seriously and hold that it was legal under the First Amendment. So he fell back on the "ceremonial Deism" defense, that the phrase is essentially meaningless.

Quote:
The motto's primary effect is not to advance religion; instead, it is a form of "ceremonial deism" which through historical usage and ubiquity cannot be reasonably understood to convey government approval of religious belief. Allegheny, 492 U.S. at 625 (O'Connor, J., concurring); Lynch, 465 U.S. at 693 (O'Connor, J., concurring); id. at 716 (Brennan, J., dissenting). . . .

. . . we find that a reasonable observer, aware of the purpose, context, and history of the phrase "In God we trust," would not consider its use or its reproduction on U.S. currency to be an endorsement of religion.
Translation: please don't hurt me, you can keep your motto, at least we're not burning heretics at the stake.
Toto is offline  
Old 07-15-2003, 11:55 PM   #30
Banned
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Posts: 7,834
Default

It's funny, I picked up on the exact same parts of the ruling as Toto.

Quote:
The motto's primary effect is not to advance religion; instead, it is a form of "ceremonial deism" which through historical usage and ubiquity cannot be reasonably understood to convey government approval of religious belief.
But does this mean that the government doesn't approve of non-religious belief? Sems like they left a bit of an opening there. Any lawyers know if that's worth a good nitpick to carry on the fight?

And this..
Quote:
The reasonable observer, much like the reasonable person of tort law, is the embodiment of a collective standard and is thus "deemed aware of the history and context of the community and forum in which the religious display appears."

Id. at 2455 (O'Connor, J., concurring).
...just cracks me up!! Has anyone seen the level of historical 'perspective' in this country lately? If the 'collective standard' had any kind of clue, the motto would have never been put there in the first place! :banghead:

This is a little confusing though:
Quote:
We need not engage in such empirical investigation because "we do not ask whether there is any person who could find an endorsement of religion, whether some people may be offended by the display, or whether some reasonable person might think [the State] endorses religion." [snip]
"[T]he endorsement inquiry is not about the perceptions of particular individuals or saving isolated non-adherents from the discomfort of viewing symbols of faith to which they do not subscribe."
After making that inquiry, we find that a reasonable observer, are of the purpose, context, and history of the phrase "In God we trust," would not consider its use or its reproduction on U.S. currency to be an endorsement of religion.
It just doesn't make sense! This is the whole reason the lawsuit was brought about!

[rant]As an atheist, it actually doesn't bother me all that much in the 'general no specific deity' sense. It's the majority of the religiously affiliated folks who do see it as en endorsment of thier particular brand of religion to say that's it's ok to impose thier backwards, out dated, mythologically retarded sense of right and wrong on me!!
If it were just a case of a few atheists who felt bad, I would agree, but it is used by the 'other side' to such a large extent that the motto must go!! [/rant]

I don't see how a judge could not see this, but from my observation, most of them are politicians first, and judges second....

-Lane
Worldtraveller is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 04:38 PM.

Top

This custom BB emulates vBulletin® Version 3.8.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.