which brings me back to "write your representative"
if you feel this strongly, and spent half the time poster here about it as you did writing to someone who mattered, you'd have a minute chance of actually doing something about it.
how do you know we (i) don't? i belong to <a href="http://www.eff.org/"; target="_blank">EFF</a> and <a href="http://www.pirg.org/"; target="_blank">P.I.R.G.</a> and between the two of those my representatives here from me plenty. what am i s'posed to do copy you?
<strong>I didn't know we had a national motto, which is why I put the question mark. Thanks for the info.
Fricking stupid and certainly unConstitutional as a legal document if you ask me.</strong><hr></blockquote>
How possibly can such a thing be unconstitutional.
How does a motto represent an attempt to establish a religion? Acknowledge a common belief of many religions, yup. Inclusive of all people, of coarse not and doesn't need to be.
The first amendment only covers establishment, nothing more. Though many have tried.
How possibly can such a thing be unconstitutional.
How does a motto represent an attempt to establish a religion? Acknowledge a common belief of many religions, yup. Inclusive of all people, of coarse not and doesn't need to be.
The first amendment only covers establishment, nothing more. Though many have tried.</strong><hr></blockquote>
This motto establishes that this is a country that believes in god. It, as a whole, does not.
This motto establishes that this is a country that believes in god. It, as a whole, does not.</strong><hr></blockquote>
I fail to see how a motto creates anything.
Now for those foolish enough to use the most liberal of definitions(i.e. to recognize or accept) for the word Establish than you don't understand the context of the First Amendment.
For that interpretation of the word makes the statement of the First Amendment self contradictory, which I doubt was the intent.
I fail to see how a motto creates anything.</strong><hr></blockquote>
What is the purpose of a motto?
mot·to (m?t'?)
n., pl. -toes or -tos.
1. A brief statement used to express a principle, goal, or ideal. See synonyms at saying.
2. A sentence, phrase, or word of appropriate character inscribed on or attached to an object.
3. A maxim adopted as a guide to one's conduct
Our national motto is important. Let's take the first definition, for example. Is "In God We Trust" a principle goal or ideal of the United States? Should it be? No. Because it only serves to divide, not unite.
Fine, how about the second definition? Should "In God We Trust" be what this nation is known for or should it be "E Pluribus Unum?" I think From Many, One better represents what this country is supposed to be all about.
Finally, let's look at the third definition. Is "In God We Trust" something that We, as a nation, should look to to guide our conduct? Again, no, because that phrase is a divisive phrase. What really should guide our conduct is "From Many, One." That is what our nation is supposed to be all about.
1. God a. A being conceived as the perfect, omnipotent, omniscient originator and ruler of the universe, the principal object of faith and worship in monotheistic religions. b. The force, effect, or a manifestation or aspect of this being. 2. A being of supernatural powers or attributes, believed in and worshiped by a people, especially a male deity thought to control some part of nature or reality. 3. An image of a supernatural being; an idol. 4. One that is worshiped, idealized, or followed: Money was their god. 5. A very handsome man. 6. A powerful ruler or despot.
<strong>How possibly can such a thing be unconstitutional.
How does a motto represent an attempt to establish a religion? Acknowledge a common belief of many religions, yup. Inclusive of all people, of coarse not and doesn't need to be.
The first amendment only covers establishment, nothing more. Though many have tried.</strong><hr></blockquote>
The definition of a motto:
1 : a sentence, phrase, or word inscribed on something as appropriate to or indicative of its character or use
2 : a short expression of a guiding principle
To have a legal document stating that the guiding principle of the nation is trust in a religious being is, in fact, an establishment of religion. Violation of the establishment clause.
Just like a law putting "under God" into the Pledge of Allegiance, a sworn oath legally backed by the government in which the speaker subjugates himself to a religious icon. Violation of the establishment clause.
Religious people can still have their god(s). Don't worry your pretty heads, though, because neither of those will ever get truly thrown out, far too many Americans attach their faith to such things to allow it to go away.
not only does every relegion have a different take on god (including a lack of belief or even concept of god); every member of every relegion has a slightly different view of god. In no place in any official american motto, declaration, or legal document is god defined, or references the definition given in any relegion.
Is it reasonable to assume that reference to god is in reference to that which is greator than us? even if only a metaphore for ideals? I absolutely believe in separation of relegion and state - though in this circumstance I fail to see how the government has affiliation with any particular relegion or concept of god. And I for one can say that Webster's dictionary does not contain my definition of god, so a reference to its definition is meaningless. god need not be in reference to a creator - or anything judeo-christian-muslim.
Want the word god removed from the vernacular of our society - good luck. Want it removed from anything legally american - then the best course of action, as mentioned, is to write your senators. Personally, I don't feel as though the US is pushing ANY form of religion or concept of what god is on anyone.
Well since none of you accually are reading what I have written... I see no reason in answering your points.
Establishment in the context of the First Amendment does in no way limit the Government from acknowledging or promoting religious concepts. Oh and one or two legislators are not enough to have a new Amendment added, sorry.
And if we follow your logic through, I believe that humanism is a form of religion and should not be promoted either. How then would we have any laws <img src="confused.gif" border="0">
<strong>Well since none of you accually are reading what I have written... I see no reason in answering your points.
Establishment in the context of the First Amendment does in no way limit the Government from acknowledging or promoting religious concepts. Oh and one or two legislators are not enough to have a new Amendment added, sorry.
And if we follow your logic through, I believe that humanism is a form of religion and should not be promoted either. How then would we have any laws </strong><hr></blockquote>
How about a little common sense, eh? IT'S OUR FREAKING MOTTO. It's supposed to be the one thing that describes us ALL as A PEOPLE. In God We Trust DOES NOT DO THAT. It DIVIDES. It DOES NOT UNITE. Why is that so f**king hard to understand?
All religious discussion aside, good luck getting all 200-some-odd million people in the U.S. to ALL agree on one thing.
There's probably a lot of people who hate the idea of E Pluribus Unum. "I don't want that latin sh*t as our motto! I'd rather have 'Beer. Drink more.'"
Any elected official or person in a position of authority will tell you, you'll never please everyone. You have to do what's best for the most people possible in your decisions.
When Dubya says "God bless America," that's the best thing to say for 86% of Americans. It just sucks you atheists are in the minority. <img src="graemlins/hmmm.gif" border="0" alt="[Hmmm]" />
<strong>All religious discussion aside, good luck getting all 200-some-odd million people in the U.S. to ALL agree on one thing.
There's probably a lot of people who hate the idea of E Pluribus Unum. "I don't want that latin sh*t as our motto! I'd rather have 'Beer. Drink more.'"
Any elected official or person in a position of authority will tell you, you'll never please everyone. You have to do what's best for the most people possible in your decisions.
When Dubya says "God bless America," that's the best thing to say for 86% of Americans. It just sucks you atheists are in the minority. <img src="graemlins/hmmm.gif" border="0" alt="[Hmmm]" /> </strong><hr></blockquote>
I'm not an Atheist. Anyway, I am saying this is what should be. I am realistic and know that most of our citizens are ignorant and our idiot politicians will only pander to them. It is unlikely it will change. However, I still have a right to bitch about it and I am right.
Thanks for your wonderful contribution. I see you cannot articulate your thoughts. I guess that's why smileys exist--people like you can still express your feelings without having to grapple with the tough alphabet.
Comments
if you feel this strongly, and spent half the time poster here about it as you did writing to someone who mattered, you'd have a minute chance of actually doing something about it.
<strong>I didn't know we had a national motto, which is why I put the question mark. Thanks for the info.
Fricking stupid and certainly unConstitutional as a legal document if you ask me.</strong><hr></blockquote>
How possibly can such a thing be unconstitutional.
How does a motto represent an attempt to establish a religion? Acknowledge a common belief of many religions, yup. Inclusive of all people, of coarse not and doesn't need to be.
The first amendment only covers establishment, nothing more. Though many have tried.
<strong>
How possibly can such a thing be unconstitutional.
How does a motto represent an attempt to establish a religion? Acknowledge a common belief of many religions, yup. Inclusive of all people, of coarse not and doesn't need to be.
The first amendment only covers establishment, nothing more. Though many have tried.</strong><hr></blockquote>
This motto establishes that this is a country that believes in god. It, as a whole, does not.
<strong>
This motto establishes that this is a country that believes in god. It, as a whole, does not.</strong><hr></blockquote>
I fail to see how a motto creates anything.
Now for those foolish enough to use the most liberal of definitions(i.e. to recognize or accept) for the word Establish than you don't understand the context of the First Amendment.
For that interpretation of the word makes the statement of the First Amendment self contradictory, which I doubt was the intent.
<strong>
I fail to see how a motto creates anything.</strong><hr></blockquote>
What is the purpose of a motto?
mot·to (m?t'?)
n., pl. -toes or -tos.
1. A brief statement used to express a principle, goal, or ideal. See synonyms at saying.
2. A sentence, phrase, or word of appropriate character inscribed on or attached to an object.
3. A maxim adopted as a guide to one's conduct
Our national motto is important. Let's take the first definition, for example. Is "In God We Trust" a principle goal or ideal of the United States? Should it be? No. Because it only serves to divide, not unite.
Fine, how about the second definition? Should "In God We Trust" be what this nation is known for or should it be "E Pluribus Unum?" I think From Many, One better represents what this country is supposed to be all about.
Finally, let's look at the third definition. Is "In God We Trust" something that We, as a nation, should look to to guide our conduct? Again, no, because that phrase is a divisive phrase. What really should guide our conduct is "From Many, One." That is what our nation is supposed to be all about.
The motto is indeed important.
NOUN:
1. God a. A being conceived as the perfect, omnipotent, omniscient originator and ruler of the universe, the principal object of faith and worship in monotheistic religions. b. The force, effect, or a manifestation or aspect of this being. 2. A being of supernatural powers or attributes, believed in and worshiped by a people, especially a male deity thought to control some part of nature or reality. 3. An image of a supernatural being; an idol. 4. One that is worshiped, idealized, or followed: Money was their god. 5. A very handsome man. 6. A powerful ruler or despot.
anything else?
<strong>How possibly can such a thing be unconstitutional.
How does a motto represent an attempt to establish a religion? Acknowledge a common belief of many religions, yup. Inclusive of all people, of coarse not and doesn't need to be.
The first amendment only covers establishment, nothing more. Though many have tried.</strong><hr></blockquote>
The definition of a motto:
1 : a sentence, phrase, or word inscribed on something as appropriate to or indicative of its character or use
2 : a short expression of a guiding principle
To have a legal document stating that the guiding principle of the nation is trust in a religious being is, in fact, an establishment of religion. Violation of the establishment clause.
Just like a law putting "under God" into the Pledge of Allegiance, a sworn oath legally backed by the government in which the speaker subjugates himself to a religious icon. Violation of the establishment clause.
Religious people can still have their god(s). Don't worry your pretty heads, though, because neither of those will ever get truly thrown out, far too many Americans attach their faith to such things to allow it to go away.
Is it reasonable to assume that reference to god is in reference to that which is greator than us? even if only a metaphore for ideals? I absolutely believe in separation of relegion and state - though in this circumstance I fail to see how the government has affiliation with any particular relegion or concept of god. And I for one can say that Webster's dictionary does not contain my definition of god, so a reference to its definition is meaningless. god need not be in reference to a creator - or anything judeo-christian-muslim.
Want the word god removed from the vernacular of our society - good luck. Want it removed from anything legally american - then the best course of action, as mentioned, is to write your senators. Personally, I don't feel as though the US is pushing ANY form of religion or concept of what god is on anyone.
Establishment in the context of the First Amendment does in no way limit the Government from acknowledging or promoting religious concepts. Oh and one or two legislators are not enough to have a new Amendment added, sorry.
And if we follow your logic through, I believe that humanism is a form of religion and should not be promoted either. How then would we have any laws <img src="confused.gif" border="0">
<strong>Well since none of you accually are reading what I have written... I see no reason in answering your points.
Establishment in the context of the First Amendment does in no way limit the Government from acknowledging or promoting religious concepts. Oh and one or two legislators are not enough to have a new Amendment added, sorry.
And if we follow your logic through, I believe that humanism is a form of religion and should not be promoted either. How then would we have any laws
How about a little common sense, eh? IT'S OUR FREAKING MOTTO. It's supposed to be the one thing that describes us ALL as A PEOPLE. In God We Trust DOES NOT DO THAT. It DIVIDES. It DOES NOT UNITE. Why is that so f**king hard to understand?
E PLURIBUS UNUM.
FROM MANY, ONE.
hmm, maybe it just means that if you don't believe in God, you're not a person.
gotta look at these things from all sides you know.
<img src="graemlins/lol.gif" border="0" alt="[Laughing]" />
<strong>
hmm, maybe it just means that if you don't believe in God, you're not a person.
gotta look at these things from all sides you know.
<img src="graemlins/lol.gif" border="0" alt="[Laughing]" /> </strong><hr></blockquote>
I'm sure many of the people that support the current motto feel that way about me.
There's probably a lot of people who hate the idea of E Pluribus Unum. "I don't want that latin sh*t as our motto! I'd rather have 'Beer. Drink more.'"
Any elected official or person in a position of authority will tell you, you'll never please everyone. You have to do what's best for the most people possible in your decisions.
When Dubya says "God bless America," that's the best thing to say for 86% of Americans. It just sucks you atheists are in the minority. <img src="graemlins/hmmm.gif" border="0" alt="[Hmmm]" />
<strong>All religious discussion aside, good luck getting all 200-some-odd million people in the U.S. to ALL agree on one thing.
There's probably a lot of people who hate the idea of E Pluribus Unum. "I don't want that latin sh*t as our motto! I'd rather have 'Beer. Drink more.'"
Any elected official or person in a position of authority will tell you, you'll never please everyone. You have to do what's best for the most people possible in your decisions.
When Dubya says "God bless America," that's the best thing to say for 86% of Americans. It just sucks you atheists are in the minority. <img src="graemlins/hmmm.gif" border="0" alt="[Hmmm]" /> </strong><hr></blockquote>
I'm not an Atheist. Anyway, I am saying this is what should be. I am realistic and know that most of our citizens are ignorant and our idiot politicians will only pander to them. It is unlikely it will change. However, I still have a right to bitch about it and I am right.
<strong>
Thanks for your wonderful contribution. I see you cannot articulate your thoughts. I guess that's why smileys exist--people like you can still express your feelings without having to grapple with the tough alphabet.