<< <i>Coinage sporting a particular religious view minted by our Government using our tax dollars crosses the line to any clear-thinking person. >>
That's a load of crap. The intent of the First Amendment is to guarantee freedom of religion. The motto does not infringe that freedom in the least. Thus, it's silly to argue that it's a violation of the Amendment. Now, the fact that it irritates you atheists is just a bonus.
"That's a load of crap. The intent of the First Amendment is to guarantee freedom of religion."
That's included in the larger intent to help guarantee that our Government didn't get in bed with religion, which leads to all sorts of problems. If you read up on the reasoning behind that part of the First Amendment you will see it was not just about being free to practice whatever religion you want. You may be free to practice whatever religion you want WHILE Government is STILL TOO IN BED WITH one particular religion.
"The motto does not infringe that freedom in the least. "
It's already been explained that "infringing on freedom of religion" is NOT the crux of the issue in regard to the motto. Respecting the principles of freedom, which includes guarding our tax dollars from being used to promote a particular religious view (there is only one God, and trust in it), is the crux of the issue.
No matter how many times you try to limit the issue to something narrow-minded like "freedom of religion" as if people can't have that WHILE the Government is doing inappropriate things we should fix, it doesn't make it so. No matter how many times you want to pretend that not allowing laws that respect an establishment of religion means that the Government promoting religion on coins is OK because it's not a "state-sanctioned church" that doesn't make it so.
"Thus, it's silly to argue that it's a violation of the Amendment."
What's silly is arguing that printing "there is one God and trust in it" on coins with our tax dollars is appropriate and in-line with the principles of freedom our Founders sought to protect. You know, those crazy guys who did NOT put religion on the coins FOR A REASON. What do you think that reason was, Russ? Could it be for the same reason they didn't allow ANY religious instruction in the first tax-funded public schools.
Ignoring the facts doesn't make you right.
"Now, the fact that it irritates you atheists is just a bonus."
I'm agnostic and I feel that my religious views ("there might be a God but no one knows for sure") should NOT be printed on all of our coins. Why? I'm not selfish and I understand that principles need to guide decisions like changing the Pledge to a Pray, or adding religion on our coinage.
24HourForums.com - load images, create albums, place ads, talk coins, enjoy the community.
<< <i>The motto does not infringe that freedom in the least. >>
As a motto for our country, it does not represent anyone that does not partake in a montheist religion, and to exclude on the basis of religious beliefs is to infringe upon freedom.
<< <i>so, those of you that have a "problem" with IGWT being on our coinage....
Am I to assume you don't collect any coinage with this phrase on it or it is ok to collect and/or spend?
I would think if you feel that strong about it, you'd do neither. >>
Actually, yes, that's the primary reason I stopped collecting coins. I'm not interested in collecting items with religions slogans that I do not agree with. If I do start again, I'll collect early gold.
So how is it that a trust in God shows any religious preference? Help me here...In God we trust has nothing to do with any organized religion be it the Church of England or Zoroastrainism or any other religion. IGWT simply states that this nation was established with a trust in God. The assumption that trust in God and religious beliefs are the same is poor logic. From Encarta:
re·li·gion [ ri líjjən ] (plural re·li·gions) noun Definition:
1. beliefs and worship: people's beliefs and opinions concerning the existence, nature, and worship of a deity or deities, and divine involvement in the universe and human life 2. system: an institutionalized or personal system of beliefs and practices relating to the divine 3. personal beliefs or values: a set of strongly-held beliefs, values, and attitudes that somebody lives by 4. obsession: an object, practice, cause, or activity that somebody is completely devoted to or obsessed by The danger is that you start to make fitness a religion. 5. christianity monk's or nun's life: life as a monk or a nun, especially in the Roman Catholic Church
Making the great leap to trusting in God equals some form of organized religion is an assumption without any merit.
Mhammerman, printing "trust in one God" falls into several of your definitions quite well. The First Amendment frowns upon practices by Government (laws) that even respect an establishment of the word you defined.
24HourForums.com - load images, create albums, place ads, talk coins, enjoy the community.
Excellent argument "By virtue of the fact that it excludes millions of people who have religious views like mine (agnostic)."
It is difficult to see how being agnostic precludes you from trusting in God.
From Encarta again:
ag·nos·tic [ ag nóstik ] (plural ag·nos·tics)
noun
Definition:
1. somebody denying God's existence is provable: somebody who believes that it is impossible to know whether or not God exists
I would have to stand in the same line as the agnostics in that it is difficult for me, or anyone to prove that God exists. On the other hand, I would have to express a personal "faith" that God does exist, though I can not prove that. So if I'm an agnostic because I can't prove that God exists yet I have "faith" that God does exist then am I religious?
Damn, this reminds me of Logic 101 and reading all those arguments by St. Thomas Aquinas (boring) St. Thomas Aquinas
That's why I collect coins instead of studying philosophy.
Nice discourse but I'm not convinced that In God We Trust tramples on anyone's first ammendment rights, nor does the Supreme Court so maybe I'm thankful for that.
"It is difficult to see how being agnostic precludes you from trusting in God."
Because I do not trust in God maybe?
Forget about definition games for a second. If my position is that there can easily NOT be a God and/or that no one knows including me, how on Earth would "trust God" represent ME? I don't believe (take the position that) there is a God, just that it is possible. My religious view is that I don't see reason to think there has to be just one God so why on Earth would the endorsement of monotheism represent ME? Even if there is a God, it's not my religious view that it can be "trusted."
So, I do not trust in a God I do not know exists, nevermind assume they are trustworthy, and nevermind assume they are the only God.
ag-nos-tic /ægˈnɒstɪk/ Pronunciation Key - Show Spelled Pronunciation[ag-nos-tik] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation
–noun 1. a person who holds that the existence of the ultimate cause, as God, and the essential nature of things are unknown and unknowable, or that human knowledge is limited to experience. 2. a person who denies or doubts the possibility of ultimate knowledge in some area of study. –adjective 3. of or pertaining to agnostics or agnosticism. 4. asserting the uncertainty of all claims to knowledge.
24HourForums.com - load images, create albums, place ads, talk coins, enjoy the community.
<< <i>"Now, the fact that it irritates you atheists is just a bonus."
I'm agnostic >>
Another load of crap. Or, did you forget that there are still plenty of people here who read your constant attacks on people of faith in the OF? If you're going to lie, Frank, you might want to try it somewhere where people don't know the real you.
"Another load of crap. Or, did you forget that there are still plenty of people here who read your constant attacks on people of faith in the OF? If you're going to lie, Frank, you might want to try it somewhere where people don't know the real you."
Russ, I know it's difficult to be wrong three posts in a row, and even harder to put aside your juvenile teen chatroom skills, but I'm agnostic: I believe it is possible there's a God, and I find it at least somewhat delusional, on some level, for grown people to act like they know there is - especially when they pick one particular religious club to deem as right. I don't believe that's in conflict with things I've posted in the past. Thanks for coming in today though, Russ.
24HourForums.com - load images, create albums, place ads, talk coins, enjoy the community.
Russ, the basic position I just descrbed hasn't changed. Come on Russ, pick and choose better than THAT if you are going to slime out into teenage personal attack land. Hang in there, buddy - better opportunities await us. Remember, take it easy on me. I find you VERY powerful, impressive, intimidating.
24HourForums.com - load images, create albums, place ads, talk coins, enjoy the community.
Yes, since I am so important to Russ, I would like him to point out how my past posts were so different in position from what I just described myself to feel about the topic.
24HourForums.com - load images, create albums, place ads, talk coins, enjoy the community.
Isn't it queer that the people who don't see any religious intent in "In God We Trust" are usually the same people who want to ban the teaching of science in public schools because they consider it a religion?
Frank Provasek - PCGS Authorized Dealer, Life Member ANA, Member TNA. www.frankcoins.com
<< <i><< I believe it is possible there's a God >>
Tell it to the members of your commune. They might believe it. The members here know the truth.
Russ, NCNE >>
what is the truth? >>
The truth is that Frank is a raging anti-Christian atheist bigot who's trying to re-write history while it's still fresh in the minds of those who read his constant, vitriolic attacks on those of faith. In other words, he's a liar.
<< <i>The truth is that Frank is a raging anti-Christian atheist bigot who's trying to re-write history while it's still fresh in the minds of those who read his constant, vitriolic attacks on those of faith. In other words, he's a liar. >>
Just clarifying that Russ is referring to FoundingFather, and not FrankCoins (who has recently joined the thread). The order of posts makes that a bit ambiguous, and I want to make sure the proper person is being flamed.
"The truth is that Frank is a raging anti-Christian atheist bigot who's trying to re-write history while it's still fresh in the minds of those who read his constant, vitriolic attacks on those of faith. In other words, he's a liar."
The basic position I described earlier is accurate. I feel the same way about Christianity as I do about any other religion. Your name-calling and other juvenile tactics are very impressive (and effective), however, that is all you are doing verses showing how I was wrong.
Russ, it's time to shut off the computer and go find a nice lady friend or something. You are way too caught up in the past and who posted what, etc. It's like you are stuck in junior high. Come on man, relax.
24HourForums.com - load images, create albums, place ads, talk coins, enjoy the community.
As a Catholic, "In God We Trust" does not conflict with MY religion, but I am intellectually honest enough to know that it conflicts with the beliefs (or lack thereof) of others and also with both the Constitution and the "original intent" of the Founders. Where are the conservatives who want "originalist" judges when this issue comes up?
Frank Provasek - PCGS Authorized Dealer, Life Member ANA, Member TNA. www.frankcoins.com
"The truth is that Frank is a raging anti-Christian atheist bigot who's trying to re-write history while it's still fresh in the minds of those who read his constant, vitriolic attacks on those of faith. In other words, he's a liar."
The basic position I described earlier is accurate. I feel the same way about Christianity as I do about any other religion. Your name-calling and other juvenile tactics are very impressive (and effective), however, that is all you are doing verses showing how I was wrong.
Russ, it's time to shut off the computer and go find a nice lady friend or something. You are way too caught up in the past and who posted what, etc. It's like you are stuck in junior high. Come on man, relax. >>
Pot calling the kettle black. The king of name calling and mud slinging can't even keep himself from doing the same when criticizing another for doing it. This is a constant theme.
Hi Rob! Go back and read the thread and see who, sadly, got way too concerned about me and got personal. Russ seems to be an angry guy, I hope you can help him.
Now, back on topic. Try to refrain from "getting me" Rob, I know it's hard because it feels good for you.
Rob, how does IGWT represent atheists and agnostics and those who don't subscribe to monotheism?
24HourForums.com - load images, create albums, place ads, talk coins, enjoy the community.
"As a Catholic, "In God We Trust" does not conflict with MY religion, but I am intellectually honest enough to know that it conflicts with the beliefs (or lack thereof) of others and also with both the Constitution and the "original intent" of the Founders."
That's very fair and intellectually honest of you. While we are on two different pages since you are religious, we would get along fine as I can respect you fully and your decision to decorate your house with religious items if you want. It's not like it would "bother me" if I was there, either. I'm not uptight like that. But I just think with tax dollars we should, based upon the long-term principles of freedom and the warnings of history, keep Government out of bed with religion whenever we reasonably can.
24HourForums.com - load images, create albums, place ads, talk coins, enjoy the community.
<< <i>We must have a different mod today.......!!!......... >>
It comes and goes. I would just like some consistency. If it's OK to let it all hang out, then fine, and the OF gets to come back. If not, take control, and don't let the coin forum become OF-Lite™. You don't get to kill it and then just let this forum degenerate. And btw, I like these free-for-alls, as long as everyone gets to do it. But there should be a forum for it.
Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?
Apropos of the coin posse/aka caca: "The longer he spoke of his honor, the tighter I held to my purse."
<< <i>If they can find a judge to rule a cross on public land is government sponsorship of a specific religion, they will have no problems finding a judge on this issue. Next all crosses will be removed from highways (and places like Arlington National Cemetary). The Supreme Court building will need to be demolished and re-built due to the Ten Commandments being built into it. We are no longer a land of the people, but a land where the minority pushes their beliefs on the majority. >>
And a land where our CIC pushes his beliefs on torture on both the majority (2/3 or greater majorities of the public say torture is NEVER acceptable), and our the elected representatives in the legislative branch (who passed the torture ban by 90-9 and 270-179 majorities) by attaching a signing statement alleging that he can ignore the law in his capacity as CIC. When such affronts to checks and balances between the legislative and executive branch occur, we are "no longer a land of the people", as you assert.
Comments
<< <i>Coinage sporting a particular religious view minted by our Government using our tax dollars crosses the line to any clear-thinking person. >>
That's a load of crap. The intent of the First Amendment is to guarantee freedom of religion. The motto does not infringe that freedom in the least. Thus, it's silly to argue that it's a violation of the Amendment. Now, the fact that it irritates you atheists is just a bonus.
Russ, NCNE
That's included in the larger intent to help guarantee that our Government didn't get in bed with religion, which leads to all sorts of problems. If you read up on the reasoning behind that part of the First Amendment you will see it was not just about being free to practice whatever religion you want. You may be free to practice whatever religion you want WHILE Government is STILL TOO IN BED WITH one particular religion.
"The motto does not infringe that freedom in the least. "
It's already been explained that "infringing on freedom of religion" is NOT the crux of the issue in regard to the motto. Respecting the principles of freedom, which includes guarding our tax dollars from being used to promote a particular religious view (there is only one God, and trust in it), is the crux of the issue.
No matter how many times you try to limit the issue to something narrow-minded like "freedom of religion" as if people can't have that WHILE the Government is doing inappropriate things we should fix, it doesn't make it so. No matter how many times you want to pretend that not allowing laws that respect an establishment of religion means that the Government promoting religion on coins is OK because it's not a "state-sanctioned church" that doesn't make it so.
"Thus, it's silly to argue that it's a violation of the Amendment."
What's silly is arguing that printing "there is one God and trust in it" on coins with our tax dollars is appropriate and in-line with the principles of freedom our Founders sought to protect. You know, those crazy guys who did NOT put religion on the coins FOR A REASON. What do you think that reason was, Russ? Could it be for the same reason they didn't allow ANY religious instruction in the first tax-funded public schools.
Ignoring the facts doesn't make you right.
"Now, the fact that it irritates you atheists is just a bonus."
I'm agnostic and I feel that my religious views ("there might be a God but no one knows for sure") should NOT be printed on all of our coins. Why? I'm not selfish and I understand that principles need to guide decisions like changing the Pledge to a Pray, or adding religion on our coinage.
<< <i>The motto does not infringe that freedom in the least. >>
As a motto for our country, it does not represent anyone that does not partake in a montheist religion, and to exclude on the basis of religious beliefs is to infringe upon freedom.
>>>My Collection
Chicolini: Mint? No, no, I no like a mint. Uh - what other flavor you got?
<< <i>Well, at least we got to 100....
Yup
<< <i>so, those of you that have a "problem" with IGWT being on our coinage....
Am I to assume you don't collect any coinage with this phrase on it or it is ok to collect and/or spend?
I would think if you feel that strong about it, you'd do neither. >>
Actually, yes, that's the primary reason I stopped collecting coins. I'm not interested in collecting items with religions slogans that I do not agree with. If I do start again, I'll collect early gold.
Joe
re·li·gion [ ri líjjən ] (plural re·li·gions)
noun
Definition:
1. beliefs and worship: people's beliefs and opinions concerning the existence, nature, and worship of a deity or deities, and divine involvement in the universe and human life
2. system: an institutionalized or personal system of beliefs and practices relating to the divine
3. personal beliefs or values: a set of strongly-held beliefs, values, and attitudes that somebody lives by
4. obsession: an object, practice, cause, or activity that somebody is completely devoted to or obsessed by
The danger is that you start to make fitness a religion.
5. christianity monk's or nun's life: life as a monk or a nun, especially in the Roman Catholic Church
Making the great leap to trusting in God equals some form of organized religion is an assumption without any merit.
<< <i>So how is it that a trust in God shows any religious preference? Help me here... >>
What about atheists?
By virtue of the fact that it excludes millions of people who have religious views like mine (agnostic).
Excellent argument
"By virtue of the fact that it excludes millions of people who have religious views like mine (agnostic)."
It is difficult to see how being agnostic precludes you from trusting in God.
From Encarta again:
ag·nos·tic [ ag nóstik ] (plural ag·nos·tics)
noun
Definition:
1. somebody denying God's existence is provable: somebody who believes that it is impossible to know whether or not God exists
I would have to stand in the same line as the agnostics in that it is difficult for me, or anyone to prove that God exists. On the other hand, I would have to express a personal "faith" that God does exist, though I can not prove that. So if I'm an agnostic because I can't prove that God exists yet I have "faith" that God does exist then am I religious?
Damn, this reminds me of Logic 101 and reading all those arguments by St. Thomas Aquinas (boring)
St. Thomas Aquinas
That's why I collect coins instead of studying philosophy.
Nice discourse but I'm not convinced that In God We Trust tramples on anyone's first ammendment rights, nor does the Supreme Court so maybe I'm thankful for that.
Coin ON!
"It is difficult to see how being agnostic precludes you from trusting in God."
Because I do not trust in God maybe?
Forget about definition games for a second. If my position is that there can easily NOT be a God and/or that no one knows including me, how on Earth would "trust God" represent ME? I don't believe (take the position that) there is a God, just that it is possible. My religious view is that I don't see reason to think there has to be just one God so why on Earth would the endorsement of monotheism represent ME? Even if there is a God, it's not my religious view that it can be "trusted."
So, I do not trust in a God I do not know exists, nevermind assume they are trustworthy, and nevermind assume they are the only God.
ag-nos-tic /ægˈnɒstɪk/ Pronunciation Key - Show Spelled Pronunciation[ag-nos-tik] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation
–noun
1. a person who holds that the existence of the ultimate cause, as God, and the essential nature of things are unknown and unknowable, or that human knowledge is limited to experience.
2. a person who denies or doubts the possibility of ultimate knowledge in some area of study.
–adjective
3. of or pertaining to agnostics or agnosticism.
4. asserting the uncertainty of all claims to knowledge.
...unless your offended by expiration dates
... or your own name is somehow sinful to behold on your platinum card...
aw heck, just pay with beads!
(we fooled some Indians, why not the clerk at WalMart!)
<< <i>If the slogan on money offends you, simply use plastic
And if the lack of a deity on coins offends you, be sure to not collect any pre-1864 coins.
You can send all your godless coins to me, if they trouble you so.
<< <i>"Now, the fact that it irritates you atheists is just a bonus."
I'm agnostic >>
Another load of crap. Or, did you forget that there are still plenty of people here who read your constant attacks on people of faith in the OF? If you're going to lie, Frank, you might want to try it somewhere where people don't know the real you.
Russ, NCNE
I believe these types of discussions do have a place on a Numismatic based forum.
Russ, I know it's difficult to be wrong three posts in a row, and even harder to put aside your juvenile teen chatroom skills, but I'm agnostic: I believe it is possible there's a God, and I find it at least somewhat delusional, on some level, for grown people to act like they know there is - especially when they pick one particular religious club to deem as right. I don't believe that's in conflict with things I've posted in the past. Thanks for coming in today though, Russ.
I do find it highly improbable that the creation fables of any one single group of humans has the entire history of the universe correct
Liberty: Parent of Science & Industry
<< <i>I believe it is possible there's a God >>
Tell it to the members of your commune. They might believe it. The members here know the truth.
Russ, NCNE
Your streak is much, much longer than that Frank.
<< <i>
<< <i>I believe it is possible there's a God >>
Tell it to the members of your commune. They might believe it. The members here know the truth.
Russ, NCNE >>
what is the truth?
Is it really nice to crush me like that? No warning, nothing? You need a hug today too, Robbie?
Hang strong, Rob!
Yes, since I am so important to Russ, I would like him to point out how my past posts were so different in position from what I just described myself to feel about the topic.
<< <i><< I believe it is possible there's a God >>
Tell it to the members of your commune. They might believe it. The members here know the truth.
Russ, NCNE >>
what is the truth? >>
The truth is that Frank is a raging anti-Christian atheist bigot who's trying to re-write history while it's still fresh in the minds of those who read his constant, vitriolic attacks on those of faith. In other words, he's a liar.
Russ, NCNE
<< <i>The truth is that Frank is a raging anti-Christian atheist bigot who's trying to re-write history while it's still fresh in the minds of those who read his constant, vitriolic attacks on those of faith. In other words, he's a liar. >>
Just clarifying that Russ is referring to FoundingFather, and not FrankCoins (who has recently joined the thread). The order of posts makes that a bit ambiguous, and I want to make sure the proper person is being flamed.
Hi again, Russ sweetie,
"The truth is that Frank is a raging anti-Christian atheist bigot who's trying to re-write history while it's still fresh in the minds of those who read his constant, vitriolic attacks on those of faith. In other words, he's a liar."
The basic position I described earlier is accurate. I feel the same way about Christianity as I do about any other religion. Your name-calling and other juvenile tactics are very impressive (and effective), however, that is all you are doing verses showing how I was wrong.
Russ, it's time to shut off the computer and go find a nice lady friend or something. You are way too caught up in the past and who posted what, etc. It's like you are stuck in junior high. Come on man, relax.
<< <i>LOL Flaminio.
Hi again, Russ sweetie,
"The truth is that Frank is a raging anti-Christian atheist bigot who's trying to re-write history while it's still fresh in the minds of those who read his constant, vitriolic attacks on those of faith. In other words, he's a liar."
The basic position I described earlier is accurate. I feel the same way about Christianity as I do about any other religion. Your name-calling and other juvenile tactics are very impressive (and effective), however, that is all you are doing verses showing how I was wrong.
Russ, it's time to shut off the computer and go find a nice lady friend or something. You are way too caught up in the past and who posted what, etc. It's like you are stuck in junior high. Come on man, relax. >>
Pot calling the kettle black. The king of name calling and mud slinging can't even keep himself from doing the same when criticizing another for doing it. This is a constant theme.
Now, back on topic. Try to refrain from "getting me" Rob, I know it's hard because it feels good for you.
Rob, how does IGWT represent atheists and agnostics and those who don't subscribe to monotheism?
Liberty: Parent of Science & Industry
It doesn't, and I go by Robert and not Robbie, Rob, Bobby, or anything else you can come up with.
"As a Catholic, "In God We Trust" does not conflict with MY religion, but I am intellectually honest enough to know that it conflicts with the beliefs (or lack thereof) of others and also with both the Constitution and the "original intent" of the Founders."
That's very fair and intellectually honest of you. While we are on two different pages since you are religious, we would get along fine as I can respect you fully and your decision to decorate your house with religious items if you want. It's not like it would "bother me" if I was there, either. I'm not uptight like that. But I just think with tax dollars we should, based upon the long-term principles of freedom and the warnings of history, keep Government out of bed with religion whenever we reasonably can.
Great, then we agree. No need for personal bull. This is a fantastic breakthrough for us.
<< <i>We must have a different mod today.......!!!
It comes and goes. I would just like some consistency. If it's OK to let it all hang out, then fine, and the OF gets to come back. If not, take control, and don't let the coin forum become OF-Lite™. You don't get to kill it and then just let this forum degenerate. And btw, I like these free-for-alls, as long as everyone gets to do it. But there should be a forum for it.
Apropos of the coin posse/aka caca: "The longer he spoke of his honor, the tighter I held to my purse."
<< <i>If they can find a judge to rule a cross on public land is government sponsorship of a specific religion, they will have no problems finding a judge on this issue. Next all crosses will be removed from highways (and places like Arlington National Cemetary). The Supreme Court building will need to be demolished and re-built due to the Ten Commandments being built into it. We are no longer a land of the people, but a land where the minority pushes their beliefs on the majority. >>
And a land where our CIC pushes his beliefs on torture on both the majority (2/3 or greater majorities of the public say torture is NEVER acceptable), and our the elected representatives in the legislative branch (who passed the torture ban by 90-9 and 270-179 majorities) by attaching a signing statement alleging that he can ignore the law in his capacity as CIC.
When such affronts to checks and balances between the legislative and executive branch occur, we are "no longer a land of the people", as you assert.