![[mccookgazette.com]](http://www.mccookgazette.com/images/nameplate31.png)
|
|
Fair and Breezy ~ High: 85°F ~ Low: 57°F Monday, May 21, 2012 |
|
In Government We TrustPosted Thursday, May 28, 2009, at 12:37 PM
Why have "In God We Trust" on the currency of the United States? Currently, in our education system, children are taught that the Bible is a fairy tale. They are taught that God creating Heaven and Earth is a myth, a myth spun to give the feeble minded something to beleive in. What evidence, other than a soldiers prayer during a battle for his life, exists that we trust in God? Haven't we banned God from our schools? How can we trust God, and kick him out of our schools at the same time? In the Pledge Of Allegiance, we say "One Nation under God". Are we one nation under God? Be honest. I know that this phrase was added to the Pledge in the 50's, maybe we were one nation under God then, but now? President Obama said we are not a Christian Nation. If that be so, then take Gods' name off the money. If, as you on the left say, God is a cruel myth, then why have a name like that on the money? Kinda stupid ain't it? If, I am right, and God exists, how do we know He wants His name on the USA's money? Maybe it is an affront to God to be associated with a country that teaches in their schools that He is a fairy tale, or executes so many innocent babies. Maybe God doesn't want His name on money that is stolen from our children, phony, or borrowed from our enemies. In my study of the Bible, I find that God is adamant about His name. Since President Obama declared to the world that we are not a Christian nation, then PROVE it Obama! Take God's name off the money. Stop saying we are "one nation under God" in the Pledge, because we are not. Let's quit lying, to ourselves, to the world. Why have people swear an oath with their hand on a fairy tale? When President Obama was sworn in, his hand was on a Bible. Why? Don't you on the left think God is a myth? You want your President swearing an oath with his hand on a myth? Or do you think it is okay because it will confuse the dumb Christians. Throwing the dumb Christians a bone or two will keep them in line, is that it? (Actually, that is fairly smart of you on the left. The Christian community has shown little resistance to your agenda. Keeping these two "tokens", could keep the Christians quiet, and in their place) So, you who trust in Government, you on the religious left, you now control things. If we are not a Christian nation, then take action to fully separate the USA from the fairy tale. Comments Showing most recent comments first [Show in chronological order instead] |
Hot topics Risking My Life Is The Bravest Thing You Do(77 ~ 12:03 PM, Oct 30)
Hayseed
Paybacks and Nuttiness
I Am Ready For REFORM!
Lib Kicker
|
Email link
Read comments (23)
Blog archive
![[Feed icon]](http://www.mccookgazette.com/images/icons/feed-icon-14x14.png){kind=icon}
SWNebr Transplant -
You say we are not a Atheist nation... But we are a SECULARIST nation, it simply contradicts that by putting an "In God We Trust" on our currency.
I don't trust god at all, but i'm not any less of an American than anyone else.
RMontana that makes no sense what-so-ever. Then again I doubt you have a good understanding of history and just make it up.
Just because you blindly oppose something does not make you a hero and doesn't make someone likely to keep the Nazis out of Germany.
The Nazis didn't take over in Germany because no one wouldn't stand up to them. They took over because they said what people wanted to hear and then used to fear and torture to stay in power. Sounds more like the previous administration. I mean seriously, everytime I piece of bad news was about to come out during our last administration, a new terror threat miracously diverted our attention. Bushco by the time they finally got rid of the terror alert level sounded like the boy who cried wolf.
Just so I get this straight. Sam offers his opinion on what he thinks is wrong with school system, I correct him with the facts and ask him to provide facts of his own. He doesn't, he completely ignores my request for facts and then claims he did in fact give facts, when did didn't ... and that's me trashing him?
Okay just wanted to make that clear.
By the way RMontana, is that you Sceptre or G5? Good thing you aren't a superhero you can never keep your identy secret for long.
"the mccook reader says that money is the cause of all our problems. Typical follower. the truth is that "the love of money" is the root of all evil."
Is that not what I just said? Did you just try to impune my point, and then counter it with the exact same point?
That would be like me saying, "Ha ha. RMontana is against abortion. Well, the truth is. Abortion is wrong"
I don't get it?
Once again Sam, I think you are right on the money. I have to shake my head at the stupidity that these liberals engage in.
the mccook reader says that money is the cause of all our problems. Typical follower. the truth is that "the love of money" is the root of all evil.
Hendricks - I read your comments, and I more clearly understand how the nazis took over in germany. with help from people like you.
I am not a dummy, I can read. Eldridge kicks your fanny, and you have nothing to say to him but trash.
First of all I don't support abortion. I think it is a horrible way for a woman to get out of an abortion. That is a huge misgiving that those who oppose abortion try to paint on those that are pro-choice.
I am pro-choice. What that means is I believe that if a woman truly wants to (or has to) get an abortion that is a choice between her, her doctor, and her God. It is not up to me, or you, or anyone else but those three. And everyone knows, but would never admit, that if abortion was ever made illegal once again in the country that it wouldn't stop abortions. Women would just go back to the dark corner with a wire coat hanger.
So you aren't that different, because you just grouped everyone who is pro-choice into a small group of people who make comments like decrying how conservative can be for the death penalty but against abortion. I never said anything remotely close to that.
But you caught me, I spend all my days just trying to trick people into saying something that I can pounce on (yes that's a joke and yes that is sarcasm).
As I explained in my blog which apparently was not read, the reason I didn't list the faults of the left is because they have been listed ad naseum on this site alone. I felt it wasn't needed.
I try to live my life as an open book. I don't ask that anyone cowtow to my beliefs or agree with me, because that would be wasting my breath.
The only thing that I want answered is how can someone say they want the innocent protected, but can push their morality aside and let someone get tortured when it isn't known whether they are guilty or not.
As a final note, it has come out that two of our biggest leads that lead to some of our biggest captures including Saddam Hussein were giving to us without torture.
One gave up all the information he had (which lead to the arrest of 20th hijacker) shortly after 9/11 after being given sugar free cookies because he was diabetic.
The other that gave up the leader of "al Qaeda in Iraq" and Saddam Hussein gave up all of his information after an FBI agent apologized to him for the behavior of those Americans that tortured.
So at this point that is useful information received from not torturing and using good old American interrogation at least up to 10 terrorists arrested, useful information received from torture ZERO.
I really don't think God could care less about what's on our money. And either should we. Money, after all, is what is ruining our nation.
I don't think any thinking person really believes much of what Sam says. He just rants with his psuedo-religiosity that I feel must be designed only to rile people up. I don't feel the need to feed into his silliness.
jhat makes some good points, although I think you are leaving millions of people out of your blame. We are all responsible, pointing fingers and blaming others does no good.
Mike:
I think there needs to be a new word to describe the hypocrisy of someone hypocritally calling someone else a hypocrite. Kinda makes my head hurt just thinking about it. Not that we aren't all hypocrites in our own ways, but Liberals often decry Conservatives for being hypocrites for supporting death penalty but not abortion, could someone tell me why it doesn't work the other way?
I'm glad you mentioned that both sides are equally to blame, but it does come off a little disengenuous when you then only provide examples of the other sides failures. Especially when you are mad that a fringe thinker doesn't agree with you and comment that he took your bait, why do you try to "bait" others? Although it does explain why you thought I was trying to trick you in a previous post on you blog. We generally view others as we view ourselves, in my opinion, and if you are a person who tries to trick others you would think that they are trying to trick you as well. Do you think you'll ever be able to change him mind? I find that no more likely than that he will change yours, luckily not all posters and presumably readers are not so in goose step lock with the fringes as you two appear to be.
That was a bunch of hogwash and you know it sam. You are exactly what I am talking about. I made a point to say that both sides are equally to blame for the mess we are in, but I also made the point to show what conservatives have done. Like a true American conservative (the new breed not the George Wallace breed) you took the bait and attack everything liberal and blame everything that is wrong in your life on every liberal there is.
I'd sure like to know where all these people that are speaking out are, because the only protests that I have seen were the tea party protests and the organizers made a point to say that the protests were not about Obama. Were they lying?
What a nice ugly canard you just laid out for everyone sam with the dead and phony Democrats voting. To bad that's from the 50s. And what exactly is a phony Democrat anyways? I don't get that at all.
The only phony, angry and malicious hope that I see being spouted right now is from you sam.
You talk about morales but you don't practice it. You talk about baby killing but you don't care if we torture fellow human beings. The true test of your faith and your belief in the Constitution is to see what someone else does to Americans and still stand up and demand that we put them through our court system.
And since YOU have decided that I belong to some sort of religion of liberalism I guess I can go apply for some tax credits, because you have made it pretty clear that YOU and ONLY YOU are right and everyone needs to get in goose step lock with you.
Hitler would proud of the hate that you spew from time to time.
Bush was a moderate?
Economically,
Bush was simply flawed with the same flaw the republican party has been infected with since the 80's. Fiscal Conservatism is supposed to be about cutting taxes and cutting spending. But the past three Republican administrations seem to have forgotten about the second part.
Socially,
Bush was very socially conservative. Abstinence education, opposition to abortion, etc.
And the blame for this crisis does not rest squarely on anyONE's shoulders. All politicians deserve some blame, as does the majority of the banking/financial services industry.
Some of the big blame lies with the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act. It was a Republican-backed bill, but it had plenty of democratic support (as well as President Clinton's). It repealed part of the Depression-era Glass-Steagall Act, which prohibited bank holding companies from owning other financial companies.
This deregulation DID lead to short-term growth of the financial sector. But ultimately, it led us into this mess of corporate holdings that are too big to fail passing around bad debt like a holiday fruitcake no one wants to eat.
Laying the blame solely on Democrats is ludicrous. We know now that the economic recession started in Winter 2007, and the Democrats took power in congress in Spring 2007. That is not enough time to thoroughly screw our economy without some help.
You are wrong as usual Michael. Conservatives have not been in power. It was the leftist Dems in Congress that gave us the mess we were in today. Bush was no conservative, moderate at best, and you know that.
You are still doing what you folks on the the left always do, screw things up and blame everybody else.
Every single statement you made to montana was nothing but religious leftist propaganda. I won't even waste time answering it, again.
Folks are waking up out the Obama and leftist fog. More and more folks are starting to speak out.
Soon there will be as many unemployed as there were dead and phony Democrats that voted in the last election.
You won't be able to wrongly blame Bush forever. It was Democrats that set in motion the perils we face today. Ugly Democrats, and the spineless Republicans who refused to fight.
I still have true hope, not the phony, angry and malicious hope that Obama preaches. The hope I have comes from God. The hope that men can call upon Almighty God for help when their country faces grave danger.
SWNebr,
haha. No need to apologize. That is a funny phrase. But I use it because despite the fact that many Buddhists ARE atheists, I still would not classify them with typical atheists/agnostics, because they still have beliefs in the supernatural (just not in a god).
By the way Sam, just a point of contention. In your blog you say that you realize that the phrase "under God" was added to the pledge in the '50s (an action that the original author's family loudly objected to), but then you state/ask that we were one nation under God then, but not now?
Are you saying that until that point we weren't one nation under God, because it wasn't in our anthem?
RMontana
Let's see conservatives resided over the formation and deepening the the recession we are stuck in today.
Conservatives open up businesses to deregulation which really got the ball rolling towards the recession.
Conservatives resided over many of our rights being restricted during the last 8 years (but by God go and buy a hummer and show those terrorists)
Conservatives completely shelved their morality to defend torture any way they could over the last 8 years.
Oh yeah liberals have ruined this country.
Actually both sides can take blame in the sad shape this country is in right now. But neither side wants to take blame, they just want to blame someone else. That is what our culture has sunk to, the attitude of "It's not my fault, it's everyone else's."
Before I get jumped for attacking the other side. I wasn't attacking, merely pointing out that conservatives have caused some of what's going on today. Also, I did this because I know there's a plethora of conservatives on here that will provide a list of what liberals have done.
I'm sorry jhat, I was mostly just gently chiding you for using the term atheistic religion which seems an oxymoron. I would be fine without any reference to God in any governmental capacity, however I want the government out of most things.
SWNeb,
I think, for the most part, atheists do not consider atheism a religion, but a lack of religion. However, the supreme court has ruled that atheism (non-belief) is protected under the first amendment along with all religions.
I think the point I was trying to make was just that by endorsing monotheism (one god) on our currency, we exclude atheistic religions (no gods) and polytheistic religions (many gods), and the most logical solution would be to not mention god at all. For the government to remain completely neutral and non-involved.
That being said, I don't really care THAT much. True, I do think it should be on the money in the first place, but I think that there are bigger fish to fry right now. And the backlash that would result from removing it from the money would not be worth it.
The biggest mistake Christian churches made was to accept these ridiculous tax breaks. That made the churches an ally in the governments plan to control people in America by using the tax code and the IRS.
That is also why so many Christian Churches in America are impotent, basically worthless.
I read your blog "the culprit" Sam. You really ticked me off, because I knew what you were doing. You were talking to me, and many other Christians sitting in our fat pews, wringing our hands and doing nothing, while the liberals ruin this country.
As far as I know atheist do not consider atheism as a religion. Maybe they should, though, just to get the tax breaks.
Sam:
That was a joke. Who trusts the government to do anything well?
jhat:
No need to be so literal, just trying to make a point. Not being an atheist I don't know but; do atheists consider atheism a religion? An interesting conundrum. A man who tries to make everyone happy, pleases no one. There will always be people who are offended by anything, how do we decide who should be offended today?
SWNebr,
"Just because we are not a "Christian Nation" doesn't mean we are an atheistic nation."
Absolutely agreed. We are a secular nation. A nation of many, many religions (and non-religion) that equally treats and respects all of them (at least that is the ideal). Too many people feel that secular means 'atheistic', when actually many Christians are secularists. They do not want the nation to endorse their religious choices, just as I don't want the government to endorse mine.
"Currency doesn't state "We Trust in the Holy Trinity" or anything else that would exlude any other religions."
I have to disagree. The reference to god excludes atheists/agnostics, as well as any polytheistic religions (religions with more than 1 god, like hinduism or paganism), as well as atheistic religions like Buddhism, which do not include belief in a deity.
It is possible to view the "God" on the currency as an amorphous god, one that represents whatever you believe in. But it's a bit of a stretch for people who believe in many gods, or no gods at all.
I like the original motto better, e pluribus unum. Out of many, one.
I believe you may have taken Obama out of context, because they point he was trying to get across was that were are not ONLY a christian nation. Could he have said it better? Of course.
I believe jhat, that it is customary that if you are not going to take your oath of office on a religious document that you do in fact take the oath on the constitution. Honestly, and don't take this as an attack, but I would rather our nationally elected officers take their oath on the constitution, because they are elected to uphold and protect that great document.
My grandmother used to always say the proof is in the pudding, so once again sam I want proof. I'm not trying to be disrespectful to you, but can you show me proof where the school system is actively trying to teach children that God and the Bible are fairy tales?
By the way, the whole, school systems have taken God out of schools is a huge myth. Every month there are prayers led around flag poles. There are several religious groups on campuses everywhere. Sports teams pray after every game (and usually opposing teams join in on the prayer). There are classes taught that discuss all the major religions of the world.
And like my mentor likes to say, "Anyone who believes that prayer has been taken out of school just needs to come to school on test day."
I am interested to know, why do you think the value of our money would decline if we took God off the money, and slapped government in His place?
Jhat - thanks for a thoughtful response, as usual. I mean no disrepect by this, God Bless you.
Just because we are not a "Christian Nation" doesn't mean we are an atheistic nation. We are still a nation comprised of Christians as well as Hindus, Muslims, Jews, followers of Asatru, etc. Currency doesn't state "We Trust in the Holy Trinity" or anything else that would exlude any other religions. Besides I always viewed god as more of a title than a name but I could be wrong. If one insists on trying to twist words to fit his ideas, he will end up looking foolish. Additionally, if currency was changed to trusting in government, I think that would cause the value of the dollar to plummet at an even more alarming rate :)
Sam,
I agree. Take God off the dollar. Take him out of the pledge. He doesn't belong there.
From a secular standpoint, our government has no business endorsing any religion (or religion itself). As you stated, the motto (printed on the money) was changed in the 50's, along with the pledge of allegiance. It was done to rally the country against the 'godless' communists. It was done to create a feeling of solidarity and superiority in the citizens of our country. (Much the same as during the civil war, when the Union added "In God we Trust" to the coins. They wanted to declare that they God was on their side of the slavery issue).
And from a Christian standpoint, why would you WANT God on the money? And why would you want religion mixed with your government at ALL? That seems pretty contrary to the message from the Bible. (But maybe I'm reading it wrong.)
Obama CAN'T take "In God we Trust" off the currency. He's not a king or dictator. Congress would have to do that. Of course, he could have the Treasury Secretary ASK them to, but it is up to congress. (But considering the other pressing issues on the table, I don't expect them to get around to it anytime soon).
You go on to accuse the left of Godlessness. A misconception. I will take 'left' to mean the people who voted for obama (~70 million) or the number of registered democrats (~72 million). Of course, it's difficult to pinpoint the number of atheist/agnostics. The American Religious Identification Survey (ARIS) puts the number at ~3.6 million.
So even if EVERY SINGLE atheist were a 'leftist', they would still make up only 5% of the left. And I can assure you that there are many conservative atheists (usually not socially conservative, but fiscally conservative).
The rhetoric claiming that the left is 'godless' or 'atheistic' smacks of the 1950's, when our government used the same shtick to unify the people against communism. At least back then it was (partially) true.
President Obama swore in on the Bible because he's Christian, and it's a tradition. I fully expect that when we elect a Jewish president, he will swear in on the Torah. Or when we elect a Muslim president, he will swear in on the Koran. And when we elect an atheist president, he will swear in on his own recognizance (or the constitution, which actually seems like it would be appropriate for everyone).
Personally, if I'm ever elected president (unlikely), I will swear in on the Thomas Jefferson bible. You know, the one he went through and edited out all of the miracles and Jesus' claims to divinity. It would keep the tradition alive, not go against my beliefs, and honor one of the founding fathers. Win, win, win.