Atheists Go After ‘In God We Trust’ Using The Right-Wing’s Own Religious Freedom Bills

  • metta

    Posts: 39075

    Apr 11, 2016 11:45 PM GMT
    Atheists Go After ‘In God We Trust’ Using The Right-Wing’s Own Religious Freedom Bills


    http://www.liberalamerica.org/2016/04/05/atheists-go-god-trust-using-right-wings-religious-freedom-bills/
  • FRE0

    Posts: 4860

    Apr 12, 2016 6:23 PM GMT
    Slogans like "In God we trust" become meaningless because they are so common. Religious people should understand that they trivialize religion and serve no useful purpose for anyone. It would be better just to phase out such slogans.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 12, 2016 6:42 PM GMT
    The dumbest thing I've heard since learning that the US Supreme Court decided that atheism "no religion" is actually a religion requiring protection under the Establishment Clause. icon_rolleyes.gif
  • FRE0

    Posts: 4860

    Apr 12, 2016 8:46 PM GMT
    One of the definitions of religion provided here could include atheism:

    http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/religion

    However, this is simply a matter of semantics and, in general, it is not very productive to argue about semantics. Read this quotation of Lewis Carroll:

    http://www.goodreads.com/quotes/12608-when-i-use-a-word-humpty-dumpty-said-in-rather

    From the link:

    “When I use a word,’ Humpty Dumpty said in rather a scornful tone, ‘it means just what I choose it to mean — neither more nor less.’

    ’The question is,’ said Alice, ‘whether you can make words mean so many different things.’

    ’The question is,’ said Humpty Dumpty, ‘which is to be master — that’s all.”

    ***********

    For the record, although I am a Christian, I believe in freedom of religion and also believe that atheists should not be put down in any way for believing that there is no God.
  • Relajado

    Posts: 409

    Apr 12, 2016 9:54 PM GMT
    Atheism is an absence of religion and therefore noy a religion. Sorry.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 12, 2016 10:37 PM GMT
    theantijock%20engage%20stalker%20reducti

    Relajado saidAtheism is an absence of religion and therefore not a religion. Sorry.


    You could argue that variously but that's not quite correct regarding law....
    see
    http://www.religionnews.com/2014/04/22/army-approves-humanist-religious-preference/
    Army approves ‘humanist’ as religious preference

    &
    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/federal-prisons-humanism_us_55b7eeebe4b0224d8834564c
    Federal Prisons Will Now Recognize Humanism As A Religion

  • FRE0

    Posts: 4860

    Apr 12, 2016 10:39 PM GMT
    Actually, atheism is a religion. Words, including atheism, mean exactly what I want them to mean, no more or no less.
  • Relajado

    Posts: 409

    Apr 12, 2016 10:47 PM GMT
    Sorry.

    Religions are religions.

    The absence of religion is atheism and therefore is not.

    Or will you argue next that dark rather than being an absence of light is in fact light?

    Sorry i know how desperate some Christians are for atheism to be a religion but it's really not.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 12, 2016 10:53 PM GMT
    Atheism a belief system just as a religion is a belief system but not all belief systems are religions.

    But just as a female is not a male yet law needs to treat them both as humans equally, atheism ought to be treated at least equal to theism, assuming of course that rational thinking is at last equal to magical thinking.
  • jeepguySD

    Posts: 651

    Apr 12, 2016 11:05 PM GMT
    FRE0 saidActually, atheism is a religion. Words, including atheism, mean exactly what I want them to mean, no more or no less.


    Bill Maher sums it up rather succinctly: "Atheism is a religion like abstinence is a sex position."

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A41WZBcmnfc

    Even though I balk at atheism being characterized as a religion, I do believe that atheism is as protected under the Constitution as is any religion. Just as religious people have freedom of religion, atheists should have freedom from religion, especially in their government which is supposed to be separate from the church.

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 13, 2016 1:44 AM GMT
    I think if the framers of the Constitution intended for people to have freedom from religion they would have said so. Leave it to the lawyers to spend the last 150 years tweaking the wording to suit whatever interest is paying them.

    Regardless, the writing is on the wall. The US will become increasingly multi-cultural and inevitably the Supreme Court will rule that all governments must act as atheistic as possible, with zero tolerance for any reference to God on any government logo, document, procedure etc.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 13, 2016 2:02 AM GMT
    YVRguy saidI think if the framers of the Constitution intended for people to have freedom from religion they would have said so. Leave it to the lawyers to spend the last 150 years tweaking the wording to suit whatever interest is paying them.

    Regardless, the writing is on the wall. The US will become increasingly multi-cultural and inevitably the Supreme Court will rule that all governments must act as atheistic as possible, with zero tolerance for any reference to God on any government logo, document, procedure etc.


    https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Letter_to_the_Danbury_Baptists_-_January_1,_1802
    President Thomas Jefferson's Response

    January 1, 1802

    Gentlemen,

    The affectionate sentiments of esteem and approbation which you are so good as to express towards me, on behalf of the Danbury Baptist Association, give me the highest satisfaction. My duties dictate a faithful and zealous pursuit of the interests of my constituents, and in proportion as they are persuaded of my fidelity to those duties, the discharge of them becomes more and more pleasing.

    Believing with you that religion is a matter which lies solely between man and his God, that he owes account to none other for his faith or his worship, that the legislative powers of government reach actions only, and not opinions, I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should "make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof," thus building a wall of separation between church and State. Adhering to this expression of the supreme will of the nation in behalf of the rights of conscience, I shall see with sincere satisfaction the progress of those sentiments which tend to restore to man all his natural rights, convinced he has no natural right in opposition to his social duties.

    I reciprocate your kind prayers for the protection and blessing of the common Father and Creator of man, and tender you for yourselves and your religious association, assurances of my high respect and esteem.

    Thomas Jefferson
    President of the United States


    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treaty_of_Tripoli
    The Treaty of Tripoli (Treaty of Peace and Friendship between the United States of America and the Bey and Subjects of Tripoli of Barbary) was the first treaty concluded between the United States and Tripolitania, signed at Tripoli on November 4, 1796, and at Algiers (for a third-party witness) on January 3, 1797. It was submitted to the Senate by President John Adams, receiving ratification unanimously from the U.S. Senate on June 7, 1797, and signed by Adams, taking effect as the law of the land on June 10, 1797.

    Article 11:
    As the Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion
    ...


    GOP-elephant-egg-on-face-by-Bill-Day-Cag
  • Hypertrophile

    Posts: 1021

    Apr 13, 2016 2:33 AM GMT
    YVRguy saidI think if the framers of the Constitution intended for people to have freedom from religion they would have said so. Leave it to the lawyers to spend the last 150 years tweaking the wording to suit whatever interest is paying them.

    Regardless, the writing is on the wall. The US will become increasingly multi-cultural and inevitably the Supreme Court will rule that all governments must act as atheistic as possible, with zero tolerance for any reference to God on any government logo, document, procedure etc.


    That's only fair. The only way we, through government of/by/for the People, can be all inclusive is to not recognize any religion. If we allow religious symbols, expressions, texts, etc. into the public square, then we have to include all of them, which is totally impractical.

    Consider the fluid nature of belief. In 1776, the most popular religions were Anglican, Presbyterian, and Congregationalist, but the non-religious were the majority. Today, it's Catholic, Baptist, and Methodist. All Protestants outnumber the Catholics, and secular/non-religious is second only to Christianity.

    Religion then is a personal belief which is subject to change. That is why I believe the Declaration of Independence contains the rather cryptic expressions, "Nature's God", and "their Creator", rather than "God". IMO "Endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights" means simply "We have these rights because we exist." Were our government to get involved in the religion business, that would chip away at the personal nature of religion.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 13, 2016 3:16 AM GMT
    FRE0 saidSlogans like "In God we trust" become meaningless because they are so common. Religious people should understand that they trivialize religion and serve no useful purpose for anyone. It would be better just to phase out such slogans.


    We as a people will NOT get to the Promised Land.

    We as a people cannot say, In God We Trust?
  • Wendigo9

    Posts: 426

    Apr 13, 2016 4:23 AM GMT
    It's the plymouth rock stunt all over again, now you see why england (way back then) got rid of over-the-top christians.

    Cross suckers want to control the world, their history of "convert or die" towards all other cultures they meet can't be ignored. Look through the history books, then try and argue about how "thou shalt not kill" and mass murder in their god's name, isn't a contradiction to their so called faith.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 13, 2016 4:57 AM GMT
    Hypertrophile said
    YVRguy saidI think if the framers of the Constitution intended for people to have freedom from religion they would have said so. Leave it to the lawyers to spend the last 150 years tweaking the wording to suit whatever interest is paying them.

    Regardless, the writing is on the wall. The US will become increasingly multi-cultural and inevitably the Supreme Court will rule that all governments must act as atheistic as possible, with zero tolerance for any reference to God on any government logo, document, procedure etc.


    That's only fair. The only way we, through government of/by/for the People, can be all inclusive is to not recognize any religion. If we allow religious symbols, expressions, texts, etc. into the public square, then we have to include all of them, which is totally impractical.

    Consider the fluid nature of belief. In 1776, the most popular religions were Anglican, Presbyterian, and Congregationalist, but the non-religious were the majority. Today, it's Catholic, Baptist, and Methodist. All Protestants outnumber the Catholics, and secular/non-religious is second only to Christianity.

    Religion then is a personal belief which is subject to change. That is why I believe the Declaration of Independence contains the rather cryptic expressions, "Nature's God", and "their Creator", rather than "God". IMO "Endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights" means simply "We have these rights because we exist." Were our government to get involved in the religion business, that would chip away at the personal nature of religion.


    The DoI refers to the Creator, Supreme Judge, and Divine Providence. These are very traditional ways of referring to God not nature. These are not "cryptic" terms at all.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 13, 2016 7:37 AM GMT
    I don't care if someone's, Christian, Muslim, Jewish, atheist or a vegan! icon_lol.gif the constitution calls for separation of church and state, so in that way it's unconstitutional.

    Other (non-theocratic countries) also don't swear their presidents in on a religious book (in the U.S. the Bible of course).

    Also, to put in context, it's not always been that way: in 1864 it went on coins for the first time and only in 1956 on paper money (Eisenhower - Republican).
  • Scotticvs

    Posts: 10

    Apr 13, 2016 8:07 AM GMT
    I almost want to argue that atheism is actually more of a religion than, say, agnosticism. On the one hand, atheism draws a sharper conclusive belief. The belief and acceptance that there is no God or gods or deities. Agnosticism is more on the fence about the question.

    Personally, I prefer the term 'belief' over 'religion'. It's more accurate to the issue of "What is your understanding of the Universe and Life?" Religion to me suggests more of a foundation of sorts, a dogmatic and specific belief system with clerical leadership, a clearly defined canon, etc. But many of us don't have that sort of religion, we're more "spiritual" or "mystic" or "skeptical".
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 13, 2016 12:23 PM GMT
    Amendment I. "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 13, 2016 1:59 PM GMT
    atheism is a belief system, religion
    ignostic is dont care / cant verify god(s) existence

    "In God We Trust"; became popular as a 1950's cold war marketing effort against the god free communists.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 13, 2016 2:01 PM GMT
    Scotticvs saidI almost want to argue that atheism is actually more of a religion than, say, agnosticism. On the one hand, atheism draws a sharper conclusive belief. The belief and acceptance that there is no God or gods or deities. Agnosticism is more on the fence about the question.

    Personally, I prefer the term 'belief' over 'religion'. It's more accurate to the issue of "What is your understanding of the Universe and Life?" Religion to me suggests more of a foundation of sorts, a dogmatic and specific belief system with clerical leadership, a clearly defined canon, etc. But many of us don't have that sort of religion, we're more "spiritual" or "mystic" or "skeptical".


    That's a pretty good understanding of it particularly by atheism being as conclusive as religion can be. Though I don't know if I'd describe agnosticism as being on the fence because that seems to describe a more wishy-washy stance when it can be just as conclusive, stating simply that the answer to the question of God can't be known. So on the one hand, there's that conclusiveness, but on the other hand there's a skepticism about it and thereby a critical thinking which might allow for exploration of either side of that fence which is not fence sitting, but rather the courage (or misstep, haha, as the case may be) to trespass.

    Also, while I described above that either would be a belief system, by that--because "belief" can itself have religious connotation--the more accurate but sometimes highfalutin or flakey sounding term for it might be better described not as belief but rather as construct.
  • Relajado

    Posts: 409

    Apr 13, 2016 2:57 PM GMT
    pellaz saidatheism is a belief system, religion
    ignostic is dont care / cant verify god(s) existence

    "In God We Trust"; became popular as a 1950's cold war marketing effort against the god free communists.


    A belief is imposing ideas upon yout world. Atheism is having no such belief and therefore cannot be a belief.
  • NerdLifter

    Posts: 1509

    Apr 13, 2016 5:01 PM GMT
    Relajado said
    pellaz saidatheism is a belief system, religion
    ignostic is dont care / cant verify god(s) existence

    "In God We Trust"; became popular as a 1950's cold war marketing effort against the god free communists.


    A belief is imposing ideas upon yout world. Atheism is having no such belief and therefore cannot be a belief.

    Even if you use your own argumentation, atheism in itself being defined as a rejection of belief, that in itself is a belief-system. And since when is belief defined as "imposing ideas upon your world"? Sounds vague, semantic, and subjective in definition.

    I'm trying to not take sides here, but you need to rethink your reasoning since it can be picked apart from multiple angles.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 13, 2016 6:14 PM GMT
    Well tbh Money is God to the people. Just take out "God" and replace it with "Money" and be honest with yourself for once, America.


    Also, how is not believing in any religions or Gods a religion? Not when garbage has more in common with religion.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 13, 2016 6:35 PM GMT
    pellaz saidatheism is a belief system, religion
    ignostic is dont care / cant verify god(s) existence


    Choosing not to "believe" in a religion that has no proof of God does not make you religious. It means you reject religion all together. It is not a religion when you reject the lies you call a belief system.