While not being an avid church goer...I still believe in something higher .It makes you wonder sometimes what to call it....some people have different names for their God..........It's a symbolic word that most of us share .......
Other than certain date and value issues, I think there should not be any "requirements" for all coins. It limits the design opportunities (that must be approved by the Secretary of the Treasury) available. I would rather have Liberty as a design than the word on each coin, but that is just MHO.
There is no need for any motto to be mandated.
Retired United States Mint guy, now working on an Everyman Type Set.
<< <i>I agree to both but does the phrase fit the current nation? >>
Last poll I seen said that currently about 85% of the people of this nation believe in GOD or at least a creator of one type or another so ya I feel it fits. Just my opinion.
<< <i>No, but it was in the First Amendment to the Constituion as the Establishment Clause. It is a biggie. How would you feel if they changed it to say "One nation under Allah"? >>
Why do people always assume the word "God" MUST be the Christian God? And in the same vein, why do people always assume prayer MUST be to the Christian God?
<< <i>Why do people always assume the word "God" MUST be the Christian God? And in the same vein, why do people always assume prayer MUST be to the Christian God? >>
Hmmm... because the country's population is massively Christian? This certainly excludes all the polytheist religions, doesn't it?
"The greatest productive force is human selfishness." Robert A. Heinlein
<< <i>I don't think that's what it meant. And "separation of church and state" is not in our constitution. >>
No, but it was in the First Amendment to the Constituion as the Establishment Clause. It is a biggie. How would you feel if they changed it to say "One nation under Allah"? >>
Where does the First Amendment require an absolute elimination of any mention of God in any public place? The First Amendment says, literally, that the government may not make any law respecting an establishment of religion. For the first 175 years of this country, that was understood by the courts to mean literally what it says - that the government may not establish a religion -- i.e., no state-sponsored religion is allowed.
The "wall of separation between Church and State" is not written into our Constitution. It's a modern Supreme Court interpretation of the First Amendment, based partially on a single letter Thomas Jefferson wrote, that disregards the longstanding interpretation and the interpretation of many other founding fathers. It's not the only interpretation, and many scholars argue that it's not even the correct interpretation.
"Men who had never shown any ability to make or increase fortunes for themselves abounded in brilliant plans for creating and increasing wealth for the country at large." Fiat Money Inflation in France, Andrew Dickson White (1912)
How exactly does a legal written by Thomas Jefferson mean anything when it comes to deciding what the Constitution says? Is that legal a legal document of any kind?
This is just an attempt by the minority to try and rule over the majority period.....
Collection under construction: VG Barber Quarters & Halves
<< <i>Hmmm... because the country's population is massively Christian? This certainly excludes all the polytheist religions, doesn't it? >>
This country, although having a majority of those that do believe in a god do believe in the Christian God, have many people that believe in many different gods.
I like the way you think. Although not a christian I am very religious. Liberty is so much more important than a generic "god". We need Liberty now more than ever as we side into theocracy.
Always took candy from strangers Didn't wanna get me no trade Never want to be like papa Working for the boss every night and day --"Happy", by the Rolling Stones (1972)
I've written at length on this topic in other threads, so this time I'll just let our presidents speak for me.
"America should have a foundation free from the influence of clergy." --George Washington
"The Doctrine of the divinity of Jesus is made a convenient cover for absurdity." --John Adams
"History I believe furnishes no example of a priest-ridden people maintaining a free civil government." --Thomas Jefferson
"Fruits of Christianity: pride and indolence in the clergy; ignorance and servility in laity; in both, superstition, bigotry, and persecution."--James Madison
Fast forward 100 years...
"My own feeling in the matter is due to my very firm conviction that to put such a motto [IGWT] on coins, or to use it in any kindred manner, not only does no good but does positive harm, and is in effect irreverence, which comes dangerously close to sacrilege." --Theodore Roosevelt
My how times change...
"I don't know that atheists should be considered as citizens, nor should they be considered as patriots. This is one nation under God." --George H.W. Bush
But that's not what the Founding Fathers said...
"[T]he Government of the United States of America is not in any sense founded on the Christian religion." --Treaty of Tripoli, passed Congress, signed by John Adams
"I don't know that atheists should be considered as citizens, nor should they be considered as patriots. This is one nation under God." --George H.W. Bush
Of course the source was this was an aethist reporter. The only source, and later denied by Bush that he ever said it. What a miracle Bush said it, and only to an aethist reporter with no one else there! No camera, no tape recording! So, who's more believable? An atheist reporter with an agenda or the Vice President (at the time) of the United States of America?
<< <i>I've written at length on this topic in other threads, so this time I'll just let our presidents speak for me.
"America should have a foundation free from the influence of clergy." --George Washington
"The Doctrine of the divinity of Jesus is made a convenient cover for absurdity." --John Adams
"History I believe furnishes no example of a priest-ridden people maintaining a free civil government." --Thomas Jefferson
"Fruits of Christianity: pride and indolence in the clergy; ignorance and servility in laity; in both, superstition, bigotry, and persecution."--James Madison
Fast forward 100 years...
"My own feeling in the matter is due to my very firm conviction that to put such a motto [IGWT] on coins, or to use it in any kindred manner, not only does no good but does positive harm, and is in effect irreverence, which comes dangerously close to sacrilege." --Theodore Roosevelt
My how times change...
"I don't know that atheists should be considered as citizens, nor should they be considered as patriots. This is one nation under God." --George H.W. Bush
But that's not what the Founding Fathers said...
"[T]he Government of the United States of America is not in any sense founded on the Christian religion." --Treaty of Tripoli, passed Congress, signed by John Adams >>
------------Flamingo: Those are pretty persuasive quotes and ideas. You're wrong about a higher power, but on the government establishment issue, I agree
I'm an atheist, but I can't for the life of me figure out why this nimrod cares so much about taking the motto off coins. I don't think this guy's an atheist, but actually a guy who does believe in God but hates His guts. To a real atheist, "In God We Trust" is about as meaningless as "In Wile E. Coyote We Trust". I really don't see anything to get upset about.
If you haven't noticed, I'm single and miserable and I've got four albums of bitching about it that I would offer as proof.
<< <i>"I don't know that atheists should be considered as citizens, nor should they be considered as patriots. This is one nation under God." --George H.W. Bush
Of course the source was this was an aethist reporter. The only source, and later denied by Bush that he ever said it. What a miracle Bush said it, and only to an aethist reporter with no one else there! No camera, no tape recording! So, who's more believable? An atheist reporter with an agenda or the Vice President (at the time) of the United States of America? >>
You're wrong on two counts: first, although it was said *to* an "aethist" reporter, there were others present - it was a press conference at O'Hare Airport. Second, Bush didn't deny it. In fact, follow-up letters on White House stationery have confirmed that he stood by his original statement.
I assume you believe that god miraculously appeared in human form, went around raising dead people, and then after being executed himself came back to life and went to heaven. And presumably you believe that a 2000-year-old collection of documents, hand-copied (arguably by people "with an agenda") and translated from an anonymous undiscovered source proves this.
Don't you find it a little hypocritical that you would demand electronic proof of a press conference that took place 20 years ago? Is it really all that unbelievable that Bush might have said that?
However, proof is apparently available. The reporter himself contacted the Bush Presidential Library to see if a tape of the conference or the letters were available. He says they are Item # CF01193-002. You can either submit a FOI request and wait two years or go to College Station and see for yourself. I'd make the drive myself, but you wouldn't believe me anyway because I have an agenda.
<< <i>Let's not turn this into a debate about religion. It's about a motto, it's use, and whether it should continue. >>
Yes indeed.
This is not about God vs. No God. You believe what you want, I'll believe what I want.
This is not about Newdow being a nutjob or an attention whore. He is. That doesn't mean he's wrong.
This is about whether the United States government has the legal authority to place a reference to the Deity on the nation's money. That remains an open question.
IGWT has no historical basis prior to Lincoln and seems contrary to the foundation of the nation, even with the vaguest interpretation of the deity referenced. To those whom it is an important part of their lives and outlooks, do you really need to be reminded of it everytime you negotiate a sale with cash? Does your faith require it? And should it be in everyone's face who believes contrary 100%? Regardless of my own religious alliance, I feel passionately about this as well as the placement of presidents and other real people on our coins and currency. Nothing against any of the ones currently circulating particularly but they don't belong there. The personification of Liberty was great and creative. The other mottos represent the real USA -- EPU for the unity of our states and Liberty for itself as a primary virtue of our government. This really is not a matter for religious debate nor is a slap at Christians or anyone else if it is removed.
This country has it's roots in christianity, whether the left (commies) like it or not. This business with removing crosses, and historical monuments because they remind us of our begininngs and our belief in a higher power (God), is repugnant. This is being spearheaded by a minority yes a minority of loudmouths and the commie circuit judgeswho go along with it. Now it is religion, and we are currently being robbed of our identity and language. Half the country is now in spanish (look around), we are slowly loosing our identities. This is a deep rooted problem created by the left mainly (agnostic) who see religion as an impediment to their goals. You ask what goals?
Homosexuality the total acceptance of it and the teaching of your children in school that it is an alternative choice. The acceptance of abortion on demand including partial birth abortion. The repeal of the death penalty Single parenthood, who needs parents when you can just have a Mom, or maybe two Moms, or maybe two Dads. The destruction of the family unit The surrender of all firearms The destruction of the middle class
This is the progression of the moral decline of this country, how many of you really belive that it is better?
<< <i>"I don't know that atheists should be considered as citizens, nor should they be considered as patriots. This is one nation under God." --George H.W. Bush
Of course the source was this was an aethist reporter. The only source, and later denied by Bush that he ever said it. What a miracle Bush said it, and only to an aethist reporter with no one else there! No camera, no tape recording! So, who's more believable? An atheist reporter with an agenda or the Vice President (at the time) of the United States of America? >>
You're wrong on two counts: first, although it was said *to* an "aethist" reporter, there were others present - it was a press conference at O'Hare Airport. Second, Bush didn't deny it. In fact, follow-up letters on White House stationery have confirmed that he stood by his original statement.
I assume you believe that god miraculously appeared in human form, went around raising dead people, and then after being executed himself came back to life and went to heaven. And presumably you believe that a 2000-year-old collection of documents, hand-copied (arguably by people "with an agenda") and translated from an anonymous undiscovered source proves this.
Don't you find it a little hypocritical that you would demand electronic proof of a press conference that took place 20 years ago? Is it really all that unbelievable that Bush might have said that?
However, proof is apparently available. The reporter himself contacted the Bush Presidential Library to see if a tape of the conference or the letters were available. He says they are Item # CF01193-002. You can either submit a FOI request and wait two years or go to College Station and see for yourself. I'd make the drive myself, but you wouldn't believe me anyway because I have an agenda.
So? It's been 2-1/2 years and the so-called documents proving this have still never turned up. Only conspiracy theorists would still believe that Bush actually said this. It's nonsense.
How about we do it with a vote across the country, the way it should be done as was done with the marriage ban? When the vote is over the 30% such as yourself who vote against it can be sent to internment camps.
<< <i>Let's not turn this into a debate about religion. It's about a motto, it's use, and whether it should continue. >>
Yes indeed.
This is not about God vs. No God. You believe what you want, I'll believe what I want.
This is not about Newdow being a nutjob or an attention whore. He is. That doesn't mean he's wrong.
This is about whether the United States government has the legal authority to place a reference to the Deity on the nation's money. That remains an open question. >>
Absolutely, except for it being an open question. It wasn't an open question when it was first employed but an exploitation of national weakness. This nation doesn't suddenly become a representative of heathen virtues by not including a deity in our government fuctions. A deity is simply unwelcomed into our government as it was founded as such is entirely unnecessary. A deity or deities is/are necessary for some people by their personal declarations to that effect. All the power to each individual and we should collectively support their right to be as they are provided they don't infringe on another's similar right.
Is IGWT really what this nation is all about or so prominent in our underpinnings that it should be declared on every product of the BEP? Any critical read of the Federalist and Anti-federalists Papers should sort it out that this is not the case.
So? It's been 2-1/2 years and the so-called documents proving this have still never turned up. Only conspiracy theorists would still believe that Bush actually said this. It's nonsense. >>
Hey da wha? Bush's own librarians said that he said it. Only Bush apologists would deny it.
<< <i>Absolutely, except for it being an open question. >>
Well, of course I agree with you, but as this soon to be 100+ post thread indicates, there appears to be much yet to debate.
<< <i>This country has it's roots in christianity, whether the left (commies) like it or not. This business with removing crosses, and historical monuments because they remind us of our begininngs and our belief in a higher power (God), is repugnant. This is being spearheaded by a minority yes a minority of loudmouths and the commie circuit judgeswho go along with it. >>
IN GOD WE TRUST...............................after more then a century and a quarter of use on U.S coins and currency, this motto now has as much significance on our coinage as any of the other required markings.
The beauty of this nondenominational motto is that all religions can identify, God being universal.
The only ones who really do disagree with the motto in its generic form are the atheists among us and they, by their own admission, are irrelevant (i.e. a living thing without a soul, aimlessly wandering the planet without a purpose.)
Comments
There is no need for any motto to be mandated.
<< <i>IIf one believes in some God, why would they choose to remove "In God We Trust" from our currency? >>
Regardless of one's philosophical outlook, there's an artistic argument to be made that coin design would be cleaner without un-needed cluter...
With that said, I actually like "e pluribus unum"...
Robert A. Heinlein
"In God(s)(ess)(esses) We Trust"
Robert A. Heinlein
<< <i>I agree to both but does the phrase fit the current nation? >>
Last poll I seen said that currently about 85% of the people of this nation believe in GOD or at least a creator of one type or another so ya I feel it fits. Just my opinion.
1969s WCLR-001 counterclash
I shouldn't have been there in the first place. But, because it's been there so long, just leave it.
<< <i>No, but it was in the First Amendment to the Constituion as the Establishment Clause. It is a biggie. How would you feel if they changed it to say "One nation under Allah"? >>
Why do people always assume the word "God" MUST be the Christian God? And in the same vein, why do people always assume prayer MUST be to the Christian God?
<< <i>Why do people always assume the word "God" MUST be the Christian God? And in the same vein, why do people always assume prayer MUST be to the Christian God? >>
Hmmm... because the country's population is massively Christian? This certainly excludes all the polytheist religions, doesn't it?
Robert A. Heinlein
<< <i>
<< <i>I don't think that's what it meant. And "separation of church and state" is not in our constitution. >>
No, but it was in the First Amendment to the Constituion as the Establishment Clause. It is a biggie. How would you feel if they changed it to say "One nation under Allah"? >>
Where does the First Amendment require an absolute elimination of any mention of God in any public place? The First Amendment says, literally, that the government may not make any law respecting an establishment of religion. For the first 175 years of this country, that was understood by the courts to mean literally what it says - that the government may not establish a religion -- i.e., no state-sponsored religion is allowed.
The "wall of separation between Church and State" is not written into our Constitution. It's a modern Supreme Court interpretation of the First Amendment, based partially on a single letter Thomas Jefferson wrote, that disregards the longstanding interpretation and the interpretation of many other founding fathers. It's not the only interpretation, and many scholars argue that it's not even the correct interpretation.
This is just an attempt by the minority to try and rule over the majority period.....
<< <i>Hmmm... because the country's population is massively Christian? This certainly excludes all the polytheist religions, doesn't it? >>
This country, although having a majority of those that do believe in a god do believe in the Christian God, have many people that believe in many different gods.
https://www.pcgs.com/SetRegistry/collectors-showcase/world-coins/one-coin-per-year-1600-2017/2422
<< <i>In twenty years, are we going to have coins that simply have the denomination on one side, and "legal tender" on the other? >>
This would be better then the SBA Dollars
<< <i>In twenty years, are we going to have coins that simply have the denomination on one side, and "legal tender" on the other? >>
We are getting close with the Euro. Now we just need coinage called the Earth.
However, If it were to go I would want it replaces With democracy, freedom, or something.
Much like the French used to have Liberte, Equalite, Fraternite on their coins. Quite meaningful really
And get rid of E Plurbius Unum. Get something cooler in Latin, like Veni, Vidi Vici, or Timidi Mater Non Flet
/can't believe I complimented the french
Beauty truth,
that is all ye know on earth
and all ye need know
I like the way you think. Although not a christian I am very religious. Liberty is so much more important than a generic "god". We need Liberty now more than ever as we side into theocracy.
Didn't wanna get me no trade
Never want to be like papa
Working for the boss every night and day
--"Happy", by the Rolling Stones (1972)
<< <i>flaminnio
Are you perchance on the Fark forums as well? >>
Sometimes, but I have to have something really funny and/or stupid to say to post. I don't get caught up in stuff there.
<< <i>Now we just need coinage called the Earth >>
No, that may offend any potential extra-terrestial that may come here.
https://www.pcgs.com/SetRegistry/collectors-showcase/world-coins/one-coin-per-year-1600-2017/2422
"America should have a foundation free from the influence of clergy." --George Washington
"The Doctrine of the divinity of Jesus is made a convenient cover for absurdity." --John Adams
"History I believe furnishes no example of a priest-ridden people maintaining a free civil government." --Thomas Jefferson
"Fruits of Christianity: pride and indolence in the clergy; ignorance and servility in laity; in both, superstition, bigotry, and persecution."--James Madison
Fast forward 100 years...
"My own feeling in the matter is due to my very firm conviction that to put such a motto [IGWT] on coins, or to use it in any kindred manner, not only does no good but does positive harm, and is in effect irreverence, which comes dangerously close to sacrilege." --Theodore Roosevelt
My how times change...
"I don't know that atheists should be considered as citizens, nor should they be considered as patriots. This is one nation under God." --George H.W. Bush
But that's not what the Founding Fathers said...
"[T]he Government of the United States of America is not in any sense founded on the Christian religion." --Treaty of Tripoli, passed Congress, signed by John Adams
Free Trial
Of course the source was this was an aethist reporter. The only source, and later denied by Bush
that he ever said it. What a miracle Bush said it, and only to an aethist reporter with no one else there! No camera, no tape recording! So, who's more believable? An atheist reporter with an agenda
or the Vice President (at the time) of the United States of America?
Free Trial
<< <i>I've written at length on this topic in other threads, so this time I'll just let our presidents speak for me.
"America should have a foundation free from the influence of clergy." --George Washington
"The Doctrine of the divinity of Jesus is made a convenient cover for absurdity." --John Adams
"History I believe furnishes no example of a priest-ridden people maintaining a free civil government." --Thomas Jefferson
"Fruits of Christianity: pride and indolence in the clergy; ignorance and servility in laity; in both, superstition, bigotry, and persecution."--James Madison
Fast forward 100 years...
"My own feeling in the matter is due to my very firm conviction that to put such a motto [IGWT] on coins, or to use it in any kindred manner, not only does no good but does positive harm, and is in effect irreverence, which comes dangerously close to sacrilege." --Theodore Roosevelt
My how times change...
"I don't know that atheists should be considered as citizens, nor should they be considered as patriots. This is one nation under God." --George H.W. Bush
But that's not what the Founding Fathers said...
"[T]he Government of the United States of America is not in any sense founded on the Christian religion." --Treaty of Tripoli, passed Congress, signed by John Adams >>
------------Flamingo: Those are pretty persuasive quotes and ideas. You're wrong about a higher power, but on the government establishment issue, I agree
<< <i>Of course the source was this was an aethist reporter. >>
Shoot the messenger? C'mon, you gotta do better than that.
>>>My Collection
-- Adam Duritz, of Counting Crows
My Ebay Auctions
TC71
<< <i>If 85% of the population believes in "god", then to be fair, 15% of the coins issued should look like this:
Now that's funny.
<< <i>I think it shoudl stay as a reminder as to who we should depend on for the missing 18 cents worth of metal in a quarter.
However, If it were to go I would want it replaces With democracy, freedom, or something.
Much like the French used to have Liberte, Equalite, Fraternite on their coins. Quite meaningful really
And get rid of E Plurbius Unum. Get something cooler in Latin, like Veni, Vidi Vici, or Timidi Mater Non Flet
/can't believe I complimented the french >>
...or how about Illegitimi nil carborundum...or more accurately...Noli nothis permittere te terere...just a thought...Leo
Successful BST transactions with: SilverEagles92; Ahrensdad; Smitty; GregHansen; Lablade; Mercury10c; copperflopper; whatsup; KISHU1; scrapman1077, crispy, canadanz, smallchange, robkool, Mission16, ranshdow, ibzman350, Fallguy, Collectorcoins, SurfinxHI, jwitten, Walkerguy21D, dsessom.
<< <i>"I don't know that atheists should be considered as citizens, nor should they be considered as patriots. This is one nation under God." --George H.W. Bush
Of course the source was this was an aethist reporter. The only source, and later denied by Bush
that he ever said it. What a miracle Bush said it, and only to an aethist reporter with no one else there! No camera, no tape recording! So, who's more believable? An atheist reporter with an agenda
or the Vice President (at the time) of the United States of America? >>
You're wrong on two counts: first, although it was said *to* an "aethist" reporter, there were others present - it was a press conference at O'Hare Airport. Second, Bush didn't deny it. In fact, follow-up letters on White House stationery have confirmed that he stood by his original statement.
I assume you believe that god miraculously appeared in human form, went around raising dead people, and then after being executed himself came back to life and went to heaven. And presumably you believe that a 2000-year-old collection of documents, hand-copied (arguably by people "with an agenda") and translated from an anonymous undiscovered source proves this.
Don't you find it a little hypocritical that you would demand electronic proof of a press conference that took place 20 years ago? Is it really all that unbelievable that Bush might have said that?
However, proof is apparently available. The reporter himself contacted the Bush Presidential Library to see if a tape of the conference or the letters were available. He says they are Item # CF01193-002. You can either submit a FOI request and wait two years or go to College Station and see for yourself. I'd make the drive myself, but you wouldn't believe me anyway because I have an agenda.
Read about it.
<< <i>I assume you believe that god miraculously appeared in human form...... >>
Let's not turn this into a debate about religion. It's about a motto, it's use, and whether it should continue.
Nobody "wins" debates that pit logic against faith, and will only serve to offend someone.
<< <i>
<< <i>What ever happened to separation of church and state? >>
>>
This was, is and always will be a Christian country. Learn to live with it!!
<< <i>This was, is and always will be a Christian country. Learn to live with it!! >>
WOW ... it is starting to sound like IRAQ in here.
<< <i>Let's not turn this into a debate about religion. It's about a motto, it's use, and whether it should continue. >>
Yes indeed.
This is not about God vs. No God. You believe what you want, I'll believe what I want.
This is not about Newdow being a nutjob or an attention whore. He is. That doesn't mean he's wrong.
This is about whether the United States government has the legal authority to place a reference to the Deity on the nation's money. That remains an open question.
I was thinking the same thing. That reply could definitely lead this in a different direction.
https://www.pcgs.com/SetRegistry/collectors-showcase/world-coins/one-coin-per-year-1600-2017/2422
<< <i>This was, is and always will be a Christian country. Learn to live with it!! >>
See, both sides have their share of nutjobs
Should be changed to: "In Fiat We Trust"
NSDR - Life Member
SSDC - Life Member
ANA - Pay As I Go Member
crosses, and historical monuments because they remind us of our begininngs and our belief in a higher power
(God), is repugnant. This is being spearheaded by a minority yes a minority of loudmouths and the commie
circuit judgeswho go along with it.
Now it is religion, and we are currently being robbed of our identity and language. Half the country is now in
spanish (look around), we are slowly loosing our identities. This is a deep rooted problem created by the left
mainly (agnostic) who see religion as an impediment to their goals. You ask what goals?
Homosexuality the total acceptance of it and the teaching of your children in school that it is an alternative choice.
The acceptance of abortion on demand including partial birth abortion.
The repeal of the death penalty
Single parenthood, who needs parents when you can just have a Mom, or maybe two Moms, or maybe two Dads.
The destruction of the family unit
The surrender of all firearms
The destruction of the middle class
This is the progression of the moral decline of this country, how many of you really belive that it is better?
<< <i>
<< <i>"I don't know that atheists should be considered as citizens, nor should they be considered as patriots. This is one nation under God." --George H.W. Bush
Of course the source was this was an aethist reporter. The only source, and later denied by Bush
that he ever said it. What a miracle Bush said it, and only to an aethist reporter with no one else there! No camera, no tape recording! So, who's more believable? An atheist reporter with an agenda
or the Vice President (at the time) of the United States of America? >>
You're wrong on two counts: first, although it was said *to* an "aethist" reporter, there were others present - it was a press conference at O'Hare Airport. Second, Bush didn't deny it. In fact, follow-up letters on White House stationery have confirmed that he stood by his original statement.
I assume you believe that god miraculously appeared in human form, went around raising dead people, and then after being executed himself came back to life and went to heaven. And presumably you believe that a 2000-year-old collection of documents, hand-copied (arguably by people "with an agenda") and translated from an anonymous undiscovered source proves this.
Don't you find it a little hypocritical that you would demand electronic proof of a press conference that took place 20 years ago? Is it really all that unbelievable that Bush might have said that?
However, proof is apparently available. The reporter himself contacted the Bush Presidential Library to see if a tape of the conference or the letters were available. He says they are Item # CF01193-002. You can either submit a FOI request and wait two years or go to College Station and see for yourself. I'd make the drive myself, but you wouldn't believe me anyway because I have an agenda.
Read about it. >>
So? It's been 2-1/2 years and the so-called documents proving this have still never turned up. Only
conspiracy theorists would still believe that Bush actually said this. It's nonsense.
Free Trial
<< <i>I voted Yes.
How about we do it with a vote across the country, the way it should be done as was done with the marriage
ban?
When the vote is over the 30% such as yourself who vote against it can be sent to internment camps.
<< <i>
<< <i>Let's not turn this into a debate about religion. It's about a motto, it's use, and whether it should continue. >>
Yes indeed.
This is not about God vs. No God. You believe what you want, I'll believe what I want.
This is not about Newdow being a nutjob or an attention whore. He is. That doesn't mean he's wrong.
This is about whether the United States government has the legal authority to place a reference to the Deity on the nation's money. That remains an open question. >>
Absolutely, except for it being an open question. It wasn't an open question when it was first employed but an exploitation of national weakness. This nation doesn't suddenly become a representative of heathen virtues by not including a deity in our government fuctions. A deity is simply unwelcomed into our government as it was founded as such is entirely unnecessary. A deity or deities is/are necessary for some people by their personal declarations to that effect. All the power to each individual and we should collectively support their right to be as they are provided they don't infringe on another's similar right.
Is IGWT really what this nation is all about or so prominent in our underpinnings that it should be declared on every product of the BEP? Any critical read of the Federalist and Anti-federalists Papers should sort it out that this is not the case.
NSDR - Life Member
SSDC - Life Member
ANA - Pay As I Go Member
<< <i>Read about it.
So? It's been 2-1/2 years and the so-called documents proving this have still never turned up. Only
conspiracy theorists would still believe that Bush actually said this. It's nonsense. >>
Hey da wha? Bush's own librarians said that he said it. Only Bush apologists would deny it.
<< <i>Absolutely, except for it being an open question. >>
Well, of course I agree with you, but as this soon to be 100+ post thread indicates, there appears to be much yet to debate.
<< <i>This country has it's roots in christianity, whether the left (commies) like it or not. This business with removing
crosses, and historical monuments because they remind us of our begininngs and our belief in a higher power
(God), is repugnant. This is being spearheaded by a minority yes a minority of loudmouths and the commie
circuit judgeswho go along with it. >>
IN GOD WE TRUST...............................after more then a century and a quarter of use on U.S coins and currency, this motto now has as much significance on our coinage as any of the other required markings.
The beauty of this nondenominational motto is that all religions can identify, God being universal.
The only ones who really do disagree with the motto in its generic form are the atheists among us and they, by their own admission, are irrelevant (i.e. a living thing without a soul, aimlessly wandering the planet without a purpose.)
No