AzSkinsFan63 Posted September 25, 2009 Share Posted September 25, 2009 Absolutely. Most of the founding fathers were deists anyhow, a fact that many people forget or do not know. http://www.worldministries.org/prophecynewsarticles/america_heritage/080501_The_Founding_Fathers_on_Jesus_Christianity_and_the_Bible_americaheritage.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bcl05 Posted September 25, 2009 Share Posted September 25, 2009 As an atheist, I don't like it, but don't think we should spend any time or effort to change it. Not worth the trouble. Anything like this that "assumes" religion or religiosity is theoretically a problem, and while I'd like to not have them, I'm certain the ruckus raised would not be worth it... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Destino Posted September 25, 2009 Share Posted September 25, 2009 I'd say absolutely not. I don't want an atheist government. I want one that celebrates religions and their historic significance openly. I don't want one that rams one faith down my throat but I want one that isn't afraid of religion either. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Destino Posted September 25, 2009 Share Posted September 25, 2009 The Illuminati will never let that happen.Remlik. shhh fool don't bring us into this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
81artmonk Posted September 25, 2009 Share Posted September 25, 2009 Seems like a why bother kind of issue. It really does not cause harm to those who don't believe in God and does little to promote one religion above another.In my opinion, it's one of those issue not worth getting worked up over. Couldn't agree more. It's one of those issues that begs one to explain why would that saying on your money bother you so much that you couldn't function in society, that you would waste time and effort trying to get it removed? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoCalSkins Posted September 25, 2009 Share Posted September 25, 2009 Couldn't agree more. It's one of those issues that begs one to explain why would that saying on your money bother you so much that you couldn't function in society, that you would waste time and effort trying to get it removed? Why would anyone need that on money to validate their belief in their imaginary friends and waste time and effort keeping it there? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
techboy Posted September 25, 2009 Share Posted September 25, 2009 Why would anyone need that on money to validate their belief in their imaginary friends and waste time and effort keeping it there? First comment didn't get the rise you wanted, huh? Oh well... better luck with this one! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Predicto Posted September 25, 2009 Share Posted September 25, 2009 http://www.worldministries.org/prophecynewsarticles/america_heritage/080501_The_Founding_Fathers_on_Jesus_Christianity_and_the_Bible_americaheritage.html Those out of context quotes are of little use here. Yes, the founding fathers almost all were christians, just like the rest of the people in the colonies. That doesn't mean that they intended to, or did, create a nation on christian principles. The guiding principles were those of the Enlightenment, not Christianity . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
killerbee99 Posted September 25, 2009 Share Posted September 25, 2009 Enlighten => to light => illuminate => Illuminati Yes I am bored Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ax Posted September 25, 2009 Share Posted September 25, 2009 Yes, the founding fathers almost all were christians, just like the rest of the people in the colonies. Christian slave owners, thank you very much. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darth Tater Posted September 25, 2009 Share Posted September 25, 2009 It doesn't have the reason that I don't think it should not be removed. With this funny money we'd better trust in something greater. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
techboy Posted September 25, 2009 Share Posted September 25, 2009 Christian slave owners, thank you very much. As with everything else involving the Founding Fathers, it's nonsensical to put them into one box. Some of them were slave owners. Some were not. Ben Franklin was the founder of Pennsylvania's first abolitionist organization, for instance. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AsburySkinsFan Posted September 25, 2009 Share Posted September 25, 2009 Christian slave owners, thank you very much. Greek slave owners = Greek Philosophy bad....thank you very much. European slave owners = Enlightenment Philosophy bad....thank you very much. African slave owners = Africans bad....thank you very much. BTW Ax, you're being lazy you can do better than this weak sauce logic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Henry Posted September 25, 2009 Share Posted September 25, 2009 Ben Franklin was the founder of Pennsylvania's first abolitionist organization, for instance. And a slave owner. Go figure. By the way, I agree with you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
XsamhainX_999 Posted September 25, 2009 Share Posted September 25, 2009 I find the phrase appropriate. It should definitely stay. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Koala Posted September 25, 2009 Share Posted September 25, 2009 Just to play devil's advocate, dont you think this phrase favors monotheistic religions? Imagine if it said, "In the gods we trust." Would you still be neutral? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bang Posted September 25, 2009 Share Posted September 25, 2009 Couldn't agree more. It's one of those issues that begs one to explain why would that saying on your money bother you so much that you couldn't function in society, that you would waste time and effort trying to get it removed? Every once in a while I agree 100% with you. ~Bang Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kilmer17 Posted September 25, 2009 Share Posted September 25, 2009 shhh fool don't bring us into this. We're starting a new secret society within this secret society. That way we can expose the secrets we want people to believe after we've changed them. Their will be onion dip at the meeting tomorrow. I'll email you the directions to Freds house. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PokerPacker Posted September 25, 2009 Share Posted September 25, 2009 Fixed it for you. But that is beside the point since "In God we Trust" appeared on our currency in 1964.http://www.ustreas.gov/education/fact-sheets/currency/in-god-we-trust.shtml I was actually just reading up on it. It didn't appear on paper currency until then, but had been around since 1860's on some coins as a result of religious lobbying. Either way, its just another instance of religion forcing its way into the government. Its not like the founding fathers had it put on our currency thus a tradition, it is just like the Pledge where people decided to force God into something having nothing to do with the deity. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Predicto Posted September 25, 2009 Share Posted September 25, 2009 We're starting a new secret society within this secret society. That way we can expose the secrets we want people to believe after we've changed them.Their will be onion dip at the meeting tomorrow. I'll email you the directions to Freds house. Fred's house again? Dammit. Last time his cable conked out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kilmer17 Posted September 25, 2009 Share Posted September 25, 2009 Fred's house again? Dammit. Last time his cable conked out. Not THAT Fred. The other one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scruffylookin Posted September 25, 2009 Share Posted September 25, 2009 As an atheist, I don't like it, but don't think we should spend any time or effort to change it. Not worth the trouble. Anything like this that "assumes" religion or religiosity is theoretically a problem, and while I'd like to not have them, I'm certain the ruckus raised would not be worth it... As a fellow atheist, I agree in principle with what you said here. I too think it's not really worth the trouble. The thing that we need to worry about is that while we won't spend the time to change it, we have the "other side" very much spending alot of time infusing the concept of a higher power on us. As has been noted, "In God We Trust" was added not upon the founding of this nation, but rather 40 or 50 years ago. Same with "Under God" in the Pledge. Seems like one side likes to change things in their favor and then we are expected not to be "spoil sports" in trying to change it back to the way it was before. Not a big thing in the grand scheme of things but I say let's change it from "In God We Trust" to "All Hail the Flying Spaghetti Monster". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Destino Posted September 25, 2009 Share Posted September 25, 2009 We're starting a new secret society within this secret society. That way we can expose the secrets we want people to believe after we've changed them.Their will be onion dip at the meeting tomorrow. I'll email you the directions to Freds house. Am I bringing the avocados for the grand ceremony again? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kilmer17 Posted September 25, 2009 Share Posted September 25, 2009 Am I bringing the avocados for the grand ceremony again? Yes. P's bringing the cheetos. And Ive got a good lead on cheap duct tape. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Madison Redskin Posted September 25, 2009 Share Posted September 25, 2009 I don't see what the big deal is, and I'm agnostic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.