The queen is a lesbian?

50 pence piece are all I can think of otherwise.

i don't think it should be removed, but as long as the current stuff isn't void and i can still use the stuff that says 'in god we trust' i don't really care.

You just reminded me of a HUGE grip of mine.

So we spend all this money making new money to curb counterfeiting ..
But we still accept the easy to fake money.
So I'm a counterfeiter .. "Ok I can print off this easy stuff .. or try to print off this harder stuff ..hmmmm"

You know kirb, I never thought you could look like a bigger tool than SAJN.

Guess I was wrong.

Christ, it's just a phrase on some paper. I fail to see the big deal. Either it stays or it goes--either way, it's still spendable.

It'd be a simple matter to phase it out though. New currency is minted all the time, so it'd be a relatively simple matter to replace the phrase over the course of a decade or so.

I think it's kind of difficult to believe this nation was founded on Christianity when many of the founders were deists, if not outright critics of Christianity, specifically it's institutionalization. Why would someone found a nation devoted to a God that doesn't give a crap about them one way or the other?

I think there should be a national contest to get someones phrase of choice.

"this is my scrill foo!"

You once joined me in a thread where we argued that the offense of CAD's Wintereenmas on a bomb was our right, and that even if people didn't agree with it, that they recognize why it disturbed us. I'm not being a tool, and I don't care about it that much, but it's just disturbing and annoying and frustrating to me. It also is the basis of a lot of lies and laws. It should be gone.

You're talking about people worshipping a money god at altars we call ATMs.

Money's just a goddamn replacement (and a more efficient one) for bartering. Just because I've been on your side before doesn't mean you aren't acting silly now.

Better yet...why would someone found a nation devoted to a God whose existence isn't a certainty?

One vote for:

Empirically speaking, nothing is a certainty.

And there goes the thread.

Thanks for playing devil's advocate.

Founded on != Devoted too.

The people who argue that the country is founded on Christianity most often are talking about the philosophy Jesus pushed : Basically, shut the **** up and stop being such *******s to each other. It's a very libertarian philosophy.

I don't know or care what the founding fathers were founding it on. I wasn't there. All I know about them is what other douchebags have told me about them, filtered through two or three minds already. So screw that ****. Who cares?

Amazing that the philosophy Jesus pushed isn't what Christian churches actually support.

here here JM.

after your recent posts, i'm almost ashamed to agree with you here.

Sorry, I'm too busy not giving a **** to care.

You cared enough to reply to his message.

I don't think it would be a simple as that. Someone out there will make a big deal of it.

I don't really think it affects anything

If we really want separation of church and state, we should be focusing on prop 8

There's a good argument that the Founders didn't really mean this to be a nation founded on Christianity. There's also a pretty good argument, as JM pointed out, that we shouldn't care what they thought.



-- Justice Thurgood Marshall, in his bicentennial speech

I agree completely, I just don't think it should be there. Especially when it was only added this century, and especially when it's so easy to fade out. Like Detty said, just stop printing it, it'll fade out eventually.

On a similar note, "under God" should be removed from the Pledge of Alleigence, it wasn't originally there. Actually, the Pledge should be done away with completely, because it's nationalistic garbage. It was meant to celebrate Columbus Day and has somehow managed to make its way into every classroom in the United States.

I said "No", and not just because I'm Christian. I don't see why some people are uncomfortable that our country was founded by a bunch of Christians, and even earlier settled by people who were seeking religious freedom (to establish their own form of Christianity). At least, that's the only reason I can imagine why some people would want to remove those words.

It happened, it's called history, if we try to erase it we'll just make the same mistakes over and over and never learn (no, I don't think America was a mistake, I'm speaking generically). No one tries to change history unless they're afraid of the message it sends... and one should never need to fear the truth (OK so this is a Christian point of view, not sure if everyone else would agree here).

Granted, after rereading that last paragraph, this probably isn't anything so dramatic, but still... WHY remove them? Because they offend some people? Taking offense at something you dislike is a conscious choice, usually followed by complaining. Waste of everyone's time when you could just ignore it and focus on more important things on your life than the writing on your quarter.

In the poll I said I'd be offended because I find the whole "try to avoid offending everyone" political correctness stuff funny, because just by choosing to be offended I can singlehandedly make it fail.

MY POST, TL;DR EDITION:

In short, the people who take the time to actually read their money and process what is written there (apart from the crucial denominational information) and then go and complain about it have too much time on their hands and should get a real hobby.

A surprising majority of the framers were not Christian. Despite Christians being the majority in the country.

Therefore, it is wrong to say the country was founded by a 'bunch of Christians'. If anything, it was founded by a bunch of libertarians.

People love to whine about political correctness and anti-offensiveness.

Here's the thing: that whole stance is a stereotyped strawman that people use to dismiss points that deserve legitimate consideration.

For example, people who object to using "gay" to mean "stupid". This isn't an issue of protecting overly sensitive people who go home and cry at every off-color remark. This is an issue because it reflects a broader social problem, which is that homosexuality is viewed in a negative light. Using "gay" to mean "stupid" perpetuates a climate in which our society says that the two are the same. It's one thing to have you feelings hurt by some remark; it's completely another to grow up with everyone around you treating a basic part of your identity as worthy of derision.
So, yes, it's a symptom, and people who try to forbid it are largely missing the point. But (like sneezing is a symptom of a cold), it also contributes to the problem, and the urge to address it is a reasonable one.

More directly on topic, having "in God we trust" is not an issue that has anything to do with history. It's an issue because we have the government printing public declarations of allegiance to a particular subset of religions. My inner atheist doesn't shed a tear ever time I look at a dollar bill; it's not a big deal, but can't we all agree on principle that it's wrong?

*slowclaps*

Religious choice and freedom is for the individual. When it extends to society and government people begin to lose that freedom. Having something referencing a God or religious view in something that is manufactured by the government implies the government, and the nation, holds that view - that God is an entity acknowledged by the government, and by extension the religion it empowers.

There are views that seem unfounded and illogical without considering a religious perspective (see: Prop 8) which are apparent within government descision making. This is a scarey situation for atheists and even people of religions outside of Christianity. Your country was founded by people who wanted religious freedom for themselves, and history so far as shown that nations and religions all over the world aren't always so keen on sharing that freedom.

It is not a waste of time to defend your own freedoms. And to live in a nation that is neutral to religion is of benifit to everyone. To simply ignore it for more "important" things is an immensely cowardly thing to do.

I mean, I'm not Jewish, why should I care what the Nazis did? Right? The comparison might not be fair, but it certainly illustrates your kind of thinking.

I'm with Kirby on this one. I don't think 'offended' is the right word, but I get frustrated and disappointed being constantly reminded that history can always be twisted for political reasons without anyone noticing.

.....


http://www.usconstitution.net/constframedata.html

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Founding_Fathers_of_the_United_States#Religion

That's a good way of putting it, Fardreamer.


But it wasn't added until the 1950's. So, by your logic, removing it would be unerasing history.

I think he meant the important ones.

Which ones are you refering to? Benny Franklin was the only "major" one that attended the convention and was not Christian (he was athiest). GW, Hamilton, and Madison attended and were Episcopalian.

Others (TJ, John Adams, etc.) did not attend/partake in the convention.

(Sorry if I'm derailing at all -- the false phrase "most of the framers were not christian" just gets to me :P)

Those damn cowards, concentrating on things that actually make a difference and have a significant effect on society!

"Not fair"? It's down right stupid. You're comparing genocide to text on paper few people even bother read and has no impact on anyone's life.

Ugh, what a ridiculous comparison, Godwin's law strikes again.

Even if the US were founded as a Christian nation, that still wouldn't be a particularly compelling argument. For how many years are you supposed to blindly assume that people were correct just because they founded your nation? Yes, they freed you from oppression and tyranny and all that, but that doesn't mean they knew everything and it doesn't mean that everything in your constitution is so infallible to warrant being unquestioningly upheld.

I meant ignoring it just because it would be easier than addressing the issue was cowardly. That's why I put important in inverted commas. "In God We Trust" in and of itself may not have a significant effect society but the interaction of religion and government does.



The analogy I was trying to make was ignoring the genocide simply because it didn't directly affect me to ignoring "In God We Trust" because it does not have a direct personal effect on someone, despite the larger implications relating to the argument of religion's place within government, much in the way the results of WWII effected everyone. The anology may not be fair in subject but I think it is semantically.

Sorry if that wasn't clear.

I remember watching this Discovery Channel thing:

They want to change the American dollar as least as possible. They claim that people view it (The way it is) and associate (I think they want to say power) with it.

It's going to stay green. It's not going to be changed to plastic (Boo). The words are going to be kept the same.




But back to the topic, should it be removed looks like we're about even here. I think the "I don't cares" win out and we should toss a coin.

In heaven their money says "In America we trust".

That... sounds really ridiculous.





But what should be written on that coin?

"metal worth more than face value"

"don't trust this"