<< <i> Nowdays the U.S. is not nearly as religious or moral as it once was, >>
I am not so sure about that. At the time IGWT was added we were killing each other in the Civil War, the Confederate states still had slavery, we were killing Indians in the West, we were discriminating against the free blacks, as well as the Irish and Chineese, the Mormons had moved to Utah only 20 years before to escape violence against them, women could not vote and had limited educational and professional opportunities, factories in the North employed child labor at low pay and in terrible working conditions, and adult laborers did not fare much better.
CG >>
Absolutely true ! The atrocities committed throughout history in the name of religion are the most heinous horrors mankind has ever had to experience.
It not a question of belief. Should we put God's name on an instrument that has been used by the central bankers to inflate away the savings of the American people.
Put God's name on something we can be proud of, not a tool of deceit.
<< <i>It not a question of belief. Should we put God's name on an instrument that has been used by the central bankers to inflate away the savings of the American people. >>
lol...This place is a riot....can I have all your tools of deceit?...Or better yet will you donate the nasty stuff to charity?..lol...
<< <i>I really should not have read this thread. I do not like the fact that there are so many closed-minded people here for whom I have lost complete respect >>
Just make sure that "closed-minded" does not mean "people that I do not agree with". Despite the fact that I hold many unpopular opinions, I consider myself to have a very open mind.
I should stick to debating with scientists. We call such constructive criticism peer review and correction is occasionally met with gratitude. I also think my mind is pretty open, or hope to believe it is.
<< <i>Just make sure that "closed-minded" does not mean "people that I do not agree with". Despite the fact that I hold many unpopular opinions, I consider myself to have a very open mind. >>
I consider the possibility that any one of these people may be right. However, I am quite disheartened by how many people are 100% sure that their way is the only way. I think that it exemplifies how society has been devolving spiritually as of late. Zealots of any sort, be it religious, athiestic, or other have always brought impending doom to the societies in which they have risen to power. Tolerance and open-mindedness is most likely the best path for a civilization that desires to become truly great. Then again, I could be wrong
<< <i>A majority in this country disapprove of the job Bush and Cheney are doing >>
LOL...and yet they would still do a beter job than a democrat.....If the so-called press would do a better job of reporting, the polls would show a different result. >>
You probably wish that is true!
On security Bush is still batting 68% approval
Do not flatter yourself, it is not the left taking Bush's numbers down it is the moderate to right wing of the republican party that is. And this is because he is not fulfilling his promises of what the people want.
#1 Constitutional ban on gay marriage #2 Deportation of illegal aliens, and barriers erected #3 Privatizing social security #4 Stricter control of abortion
Bush won both electorally and the popular vote which by the way Clinton did not win the popular vote in either election. Bush's numbers are where they are because of his party, not the demosocialists. Bush's big mistake was alienating the right. But of course this group will not leave the party only Bush in preperation for the next election.
Some things Bush is doing right, the economy, and security.
You said; The Declaration of Independence, as I have previously mentioned, is not the legal foundation of our government.
As I previously mentioned, I see it differently. I’m persuaded that the Constitution (and our Nation itself) is derived from the Declaration of Independence and the values that it proclaimed. Without it, there would be no nation and without the nation there would be no Constitution. Law flows from values and legal standing.
You said; ”There was no government when it was penned…
Well, you are just plain wrong. The last paragraph of the Declaration of Independence says:
"We, therefore, the Representatives of the united States of America,in General Congress, Assembled, appealing to the Supreme Judge of the world…. (bold is mine)
This section from the Declaration of Independence plainly shows that the United States of America existed as a Nation with the Declaration of Independence and, its government is explicitly stated to have existed at the time the Declaration of Independence was made too (as the above section clearly illustrates). If you still think that I’m wrong, please tell me why you think the above quote taken directly from the Declaration of Independence does not mean the United States and its govt. existed at the time of the Declaration of Independence.
To suggest that our government is based on the DoI is (1) a great example of the poor state of education in this country and…
As the above section of the Declaration of Independence shows, you are mistaken – and the “poor state of education” that you mentioned must be coming from your part of the country Coxe.
Lastly, I’m still looking forward to your response on why you think the Founders used the name GOD in their many public communications as well as when enacting legislation in a governmental capacity, for example: Washington’s Thanksgiving Holiday Proclamation in 1789 which richly and abundantly evokes the name of GOD, and Lincoln’s Proclamation in 1863 which also richly evokes the name of GOD. There were many other examples too of course. Thank you again for your reply Coxe. matteproof
Hi jdelage. You said, “If they had meant God, they would have said God. They chose "creator" because it is an undefined, and potentially not divine, concept…”
If the word “Creator” did not mean GOD as you suggest (“potentially not divine”) then exactly who or what is this “not divine” entity that the Founders referred to as “Creator?” The Founders credited the “Creator” as the entity who gives: LIFE, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness. What other entity named “Creator” can give those things? Would you be willing to cite some sources to support your suggestion that the word “Creator” in the Declaration of Independence did not refer to GOD? I’ve never heard that suggested before.
Also, in the last paragraph of the Declaration of Independence, the founders appealed to “the Supreme Judge of the World.” Who do you think they were referring to? Thanks for your thoughts jdelage. matteproof
<< <i>"We, therefore, the Representatives of the united States of America,in General Congress, Assembled, appealing to the Supreme Judge of the world..
Lastly, I’m still waiting for your response on why you think the Founders used the name GOD in their many public communications as well as when enacting legislation in a governmental capacity, for example: Washington’s Thanksgiving Holiday Proclamation in 1789 which richly and abundantly evokes the name of GOD, and Lincoln’s Proclamation in 1863 which also richly evokes the name of GOD. >>
Yes, the U.S was a country right from the Declaration, through the Articles of Confederation, and right on to the Constitutiuon...................................and devinely inspired too!!
<< <i>You said; ”There was no government when it was penned…
Well, you are just plain wrong. The last paragraph of the Declaration of Independence says:
"We, therefore, the Representatives of the united States of America,in General Congress, Assembled, appealing to the Supreme Judge of the world…. (bold is mine)
This section from the Declaration of Independence plainly shows that the United States of America existed as a Nation with the Declaration of Independence and, its government is explicitly stated to have existed at the time the Declaration of Independence was made too (as the above section clearly illustrates). If you still think that I’m wrong, please tell me why you think the above quote taken directly from the Declaration of Independence does not mean the United States and its govt. existed at the time of the Declaration of Independence. >>
I will stand corrected technically, but it was not a mature government in the sense that they simply had national aspirations at that point. But no use splitting hairs on it.
I will maintain that the Constitution did not flow from the Declaration of Independence. It is the product of much debate far separated from the incidence of that letter. In the end, the government formed was not theistic and certainly not Christian. (I am personally offended everytime I hear someone saying the Christians are taking back America.) Many of the players were Christians (but not all -- particularly the chief financer of the revolution), of varying degrees of commitment. The culture was perhaps more theist than today but the government produced was deliberately not. It is, however, accommodating and respectful to everyone's philosophy provided it does not infringe on another's.
As long as we have a citizen who is Buddhist, atheist, agnostic or anyone who either does not place their trust in a deity or is offended by it being engraved on our money, we shouldn't have it. It really serves no purpose. It is divisive, not unifying, and is a misrepresenting declaration. If the founder's wanted to put it on the money, they would have. It was commonplace worldwide. In fact, it is clear that they deliberately excluded a reference to G-d.
Don't assume everyone who takes this position is an atheist or even anti-Christian. I would feel exactly the same way if I was an evangelical Christian.
Sigh...most people do not want "freedom of religion." They want freedom of THEIR religion. What if the coins said "in Allah we trust" or how about "In Zeus we trust?"
Those people claiming religious tollerance would SCREAM to have that removed because what they would truly like is a christian theocracy, not a society that values all religions.
<< <i>Sigh...most people do not want "freedom of religion." They want freedom of THEIR religion. What if the coins said "in Allah we trust" or how about "In Zeus we trust?"
Those people claiming religious tollerance would SCREAM to have that removed because what they would truly like is a christian theocracy, not a society that values all religions. >>
Yes, a Christian theocracy, BUT one that does tolerate and value ALL religions.
After all, this country WAS founded upon Christian values; has always been and remains an overwhelmingly Christian beliving population.
Tolerance of all religious beliefs is a critical component of the USA but, it is time for the tail to stop wagging the dog (i.e. minority religious beliefs are NOT being persucuted).
In fact, minority religious beliefs are VERY well protected, but practitioners of minority religions must understand that the effect of Christianity is everywhere in this country and they will just have to accept that (i.e. Leave Christian symbols alone!).
<< <i>After all, this country WAS founded upon Christian values; has always been and remains an overwhelmingly Christian beliving population. >>
This is simply untrue. This country was founded by pragmatists on pragmatic values. It is true that most of these individuals were also religious but not all. The founders went to a great deal of effort to keep a distance between religion and government. It was not until (nearly) a hundred years later that this motto began appearing on coinage, and even then was largely the result of the agonies inflicted by the civil war.
<< <i>lol...This place is a riot....can I have all your tools of deceit?...Or better yet will you donate the nasty stuff to charity?..lol... >>
I guess you haven't been around long enough to know when gas was 30 cents and a coke was a nickel. The value has continued to fall (while they got richer) since the nations bankers created the Federal Reserve and took over the currency.
<< <i>They want freedom of THEIR religion. What if the coins said "in Allah we trust" or how about "In Zeus we trust?" >>
effectively the do. Allah and Zeus are both considered "god"s to their believers. God is in no way a "Christian" symbol, Christ is.
The statement is using "God" to represent the most supreme being irregardless of if you believe, Christian, Buddhist or old mythological. It still applies.
<< <i>The statement is using "God" to represent the most supreme being irregardless of if you believe, Christian, Buddhist or old mythological. It still applies. >>
Hate to give this thing more inertia, but I have to point out that some faiths, like Buddhism, do not have a deity. The G in IGWT necessarily demonstrates a preference of deist religions over non-deist ones, a direct confrontation with the establishment clause of the first amendment.
Enough has been stated about this debate in this and other threads. Just wanted to point out that the idea of interpretting a vague deity into this is still an issue.
Comments
<< <i>
<< <i> Nowdays the U.S. is not nearly as religious or moral as it once was, >>
I am not so sure about that. At the time IGWT was added we were killing each other in the Civil War, the Confederate states still had slavery, we were killing Indians in the West, we were discriminating against the free blacks, as well as the Irish and Chineese, the Mormons had moved to Utah only 20 years before to escape violence against them, women could not vote and had limited educational and professional opportunities, factories in the North employed child labor at low pay and in terrible working conditions, and adult laborers did not fare much better.
CG >>
Absolutely true !
The atrocities committed throughout history in the name of religion are the most heinous horrors mankind has ever had to experience.
Put God's name on something we can be proud of, not a tool of deceit.
<< <i>It not a question of belief. Should we put God's name on an instrument that has been used by the central bankers to inflate away the savings of the American people. >>
lol...This place is a riot....can I have all your tools of deceit?...Or better yet will you donate the nasty stuff to charity?..lol...
<< <i>I really should not have read this thread. I do not like the fact that there are so many closed-minded people here for whom I have lost complete respect
Just make sure that "closed-minded" does not mean "people that I do not agree with". Despite the fact that I hold many unpopular opinions, I consider myself to have a very open mind.
NSDR - Life Member
SSDC - Life Member
ANA - Pay As I Go Member
<< <i>Just make sure that "closed-minded" does not mean "people that I do not agree with". Despite the fact that I hold many unpopular opinions, I consider myself to have a very open mind. >>
I consider the possibility that any one of these people may be right. However, I am quite disheartened by how many people are 100% sure that their way is the only way. I think that it exemplifies how society has been devolving spiritually as of late. Zealots of any sort, be it religious, athiestic, or other have always brought impending doom to the societies in which they have risen to power. Tolerance and open-mindedness is most likely the best path for a civilization that desires to become truly great. Then again, I could be wrong
<< <i>
<< <i>A majority in this country disapprove of the job Bush and Cheney are doing >>
LOL...and yet they would still do a beter job than a democrat.....If the so-called press would do a better job of reporting, the polls would show a different result. >>
You probably wish that is true!
On security Bush is still batting 68% approval
Do not flatter yourself, it is not the left taking Bush's numbers down it is the moderate to right
wing of the republican party that is.
And this is because he is not fulfilling his promises of what the people want.
#1 Constitutional ban on gay marriage
#2 Deportation of illegal aliens, and barriers erected
#3 Privatizing social security
#4 Stricter control of abortion
Bush won both electorally and the popular vote which by the way Clinton did not win the popular vote in either election.
Bush's numbers are where they are because of his party, not the demosocialists. Bush's big mistake was alienating the
right. But of course this group will not leave the party only Bush in preperation for the next election.
Some things Bush is doing right, the economy, and security.
You said; The Declaration of Independence, as I have previously mentioned, is not the legal foundation of our government.
As I previously mentioned, I see it differently. I’m persuaded that the Constitution (and our Nation itself) is derived from the Declaration of Independence and the values that it proclaimed. Without it, there would be no nation and without the nation there would be no Constitution. Law flows from values and legal standing.
You said; ”There was no government when it was penned…
Well, you are just plain wrong. The last paragraph of the Declaration of Independence says:
"We, therefore, the Representatives of the united States of America,in General Congress, Assembled, appealing to the Supreme Judge of the world…. (bold is mine)
This section from the Declaration of Independence plainly shows that the United States of America existed as a Nation with the Declaration of Independence and, its government is explicitly stated to have existed at the time the Declaration of Independence was made too (as the above section clearly illustrates). If you still think that I’m wrong, please tell me why you think the above quote taken directly from the Declaration of Independence does not mean the United States and its govt. existed at the time of the Declaration of Independence.
To suggest that our government is based on the DoI is (1) a great example of the poor state of education in this country and…
As the above section of the Declaration of Independence shows, you are mistaken – and the “poor state of education” that you mentioned must be coming from your part of the country Coxe.
Lastly, I’m still looking forward to your response on why you think the Founders used the name GOD in their many public communications as well as when enacting legislation in a governmental capacity, for example: Washington’s Thanksgiving Holiday Proclamation in 1789 which richly and abundantly evokes the name of GOD, and Lincoln’s Proclamation in 1863 which also richly evokes the name of GOD. There were many other examples too of course. Thank you again for your reply Coxe.
If the word “Creator” did not mean GOD as you suggest (“potentially not divine”) then exactly who or what is this “not divine” entity that the Founders referred to as “Creator?” The Founders credited the “Creator” as the entity who gives: LIFE, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness. What other entity named “Creator” can give those things? Would you be willing to cite some sources to support your suggestion that the word “Creator” in the Declaration of Independence did not refer to GOD? I’ve never heard that suggested before.
Also, in the last paragraph of the Declaration of Independence, the founders appealed to “the Supreme Judge of the World.” Who do you think they were referring to? Thanks for your thoughts jdelage.
<< <i>"We, therefore, the Representatives of the united States of America,in General Congress, Assembled, appealing to the Supreme Judge of the world..
Lastly, I’m still waiting for your response on why you think the Founders used the name GOD in their many public communications as well as when enacting legislation in a governmental capacity, for example: Washington’s Thanksgiving Holiday Proclamation in 1789 which richly and abundantly evokes the name of GOD, and Lincoln’s Proclamation in 1863 which also richly evokes the name of GOD. >>
Yes, the U.S was a country right from the Declaration, through the Articles of Confederation, and right on to the Constitutiuon...................................and devinely inspired too!!
<< <i>You said; ”There was no government when it was penned…
Well, you are just plain wrong. The last paragraph of the Declaration of Independence says:
"We, therefore, the Representatives of the united States of America,in General Congress, Assembled, appealing to the Supreme Judge of the world…. (bold is mine)
This section from the Declaration of Independence plainly shows that the United States of America existed as a Nation with the Declaration of Independence and, its government is explicitly stated to have existed at the time the Declaration of Independence was made too (as the above section clearly illustrates). If you still think that I’m wrong, please tell me why you think the above quote taken directly from the Declaration of Independence does not mean the United States and its govt. existed at the time of the Declaration of Independence. >>
I will stand corrected technically, but it was not a mature government in the sense that they simply had national aspirations at that point. But no use splitting hairs on it.
I will maintain that the Constitution did not flow from the Declaration of Independence. It is the product of much debate far separated from the incidence of that letter. In the end, the government formed was not theistic and certainly not Christian. (I am personally offended everytime I hear someone saying the Christians are taking back America.) Many of the players were Christians (but not all -- particularly the chief financer of the revolution), of varying degrees of commitment. The culture was perhaps more theist than today but the government produced was deliberately not. It is, however, accommodating and respectful to everyone's philosophy provided it does not infringe on another's.
As long as we have a citizen who is Buddhist, atheist, agnostic or anyone who either does not place their trust in a deity or is offended by it being engraved on our money, we shouldn't have it. It really serves no purpose. It is divisive, not unifying, and is a misrepresenting declaration. If the founder's wanted to put it on the money, they would have. It was commonplace worldwide. In fact, it is clear that they deliberately excluded a reference to G-d.
Don't assume everyone who takes this position is an atheist or even anti-Christian. I would feel exactly the same way if I was an evangelical Christian.
NSDR - Life Member
SSDC - Life Member
ANA - Pay As I Go Member
Those people claiming religious tollerance would SCREAM to have that removed because what they would truly like is a christian theocracy, not a society that values all religions.
<< <i>So the guy who is suing to take "Under God" out of the pledge of allegence has found a new target Article >>
Looks like he really needs to get a life - and maybe some religion to boot!
<< <i>Sigh...most people do not want "freedom of religion." They want freedom of THEIR religion. What if the coins said "in Allah we trust" or how about "In Zeus we trust?"
Those people claiming religious tollerance would SCREAM to have that removed because what they would truly like is a christian theocracy, not a society that values all religions. >>
Yes, a Christian theocracy, BUT one that does tolerate and value ALL religions.
After all, this country WAS founded upon Christian values; has always been and remains an overwhelmingly Christian beliving population.
Tolerance of all religious beliefs is a critical component of the USA but, it is time for the tail to stop wagging the dog (i.e. minority religious beliefs are NOT being persucuted).
In fact, minority religious beliefs are VERY well protected, but practitioners of minority religions must understand that the effect of Christianity is everywhere in this country and they will just have to accept that (i.e. Leave Christian symbols alone!).
<< <i>After all, this country WAS founded upon Christian values; has always been and remains an overwhelmingly Christian beliving population.
>>
This is simply untrue. This country was founded by pragmatists on pragmatic values. It is
true that most of these individuals were also religious but not all. The founders went to a
great deal of effort to keep a distance between religion and government. It was not until
(nearly) a hundred years later that this motto began appearing on coinage, and even then
was largely the result of the agonies inflicted by the civil war.
<< <i>lol...This place is a riot....can I have all your tools of deceit?...Or better yet will you donate the nasty stuff to charity?..lol... >>
I guess you haven't been around long enough to know when gas was 30 cents and a coke was a nickel. The value has continued to fall (while they got richer) since the nations bankers created the Federal Reserve and took over the currency.
<< <i>They want freedom of THEIR religion. What if the coins said "in Allah we trust" or how about "In Zeus we trust?" >>
effectively the do. Allah and Zeus are both considered "god"s to their believers. God is in no way a "Christian" symbol, Christ is.
The statement is using "God" to represent the most supreme being irregardless of if you believe, Christian, Buddhist or old mythological. It still applies.
<< <i>The statement is using "God" to represent the most supreme being irregardless of if you believe, Christian, Buddhist or old mythological. It still applies. >>
Hate to give this thing more inertia, but I have to point out that some faiths, like Buddhism, do not have a deity. The G in IGWT necessarily demonstrates a preference of deist religions over non-deist ones, a direct confrontation with the establishment clause of the first amendment.
Enough has been stated about this debate in this and other threads. Just wanted to point out that the idea of interpretting a vague deity into this is still an issue.
NSDR - Life Member
SSDC - Life Member
ANA - Pay As I Go Member