It’s on: Atheists want “In God We Trust” removed from Capitol visitor’s center
posted at 7:34 pm on July 17, 2009 by Allahpundit
We’re never going to have an atheist president, are we?
Besides the one we have now, I mean. OH YES.
The Freedom From Religion Foundation, a Wisconsin-based church-state watchdog group, claimed the engravings are unconstitutional and would exclude the 15% of Americans who identify themselves as non-religious…
Sen. Jim DeMint, R-S.C., who sponsored the bill in the Senate, said historical references to God should not be censored for political correctness.
“The Founders based the Constitution and our laws on religious faith and principles that clear the way for individual freedom,” he said in a statement. “Our true motto, ‘In God We Trust,’ expresses this fact, and we cannot allow a whitewash of America’s religious heritage.”
However, Gaylor said the mottos are inaccurate since “In God We Trust” and the insertion of “under God” into the Pledge of Allegiance were adopted in the 1950s as anti-communist measures.
“They wanted this up there because they think God is the foundation of our government,” Gaylor said. “Boy, are they misinformed.”
Before anyone says something smart-assed, no, atheists aren’t pro-communist. (Not anymore, at least.) I would have let this one go given that (a) no one pays much attention to the “In God We Trust” stuff anyway and (b) the bad press derived from a lawsuit will outweigh the gain from shielding soft-headed believers from a motto engraved in rock except that, per the Establishment Clause, they do have a point. What’s a prudent atheist to do?
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2 3 4 … 8 Next »
Cherry picking liar.
atheling on July 17, 2009 at 8:02 PM
Hey, does that mean all of the HotAir bloggers can have all the atheists money. Alright!!!!!
yoda on July 17, 2009 at 8:02 PM
No such thing as a “conservative” atheist.
Atheists are simply liberals with a tight wallet.
atheling on July 17, 2009 at 8:03 PM
i’m gay and i’d push my own mother out of the way to get a good look at that!!!!
Ghoul aid on July 17, 2009 at 8:03 PM
I can walk the dog, chew gum, pray, and hum the theme to Full House all at the same!
Then I woke up, kicked the dog and fell down the stairs.
Ugly on July 17, 2009 at 8:03 PM
woohoo! atheism fight!
Now there’s something everyone can agree with :)
As an atheist, I don’t believe in hell…guess I can ignore your directive ?
Dawkins is a prick, no doubt. I certainly don’t worship him–being an ass isn’t necessary to advance one’s cause. Too bad he doesn’t know that.
BryanS on July 17, 2009 at 8:04 PM
But is there a Waffle House at the visitor center? I think thats the most important thing.
marmaran on July 17, 2009 at 8:04 PM
DING DING DING DING DING!
Johnny, tell her what she’s won!
Well Bob, she’s won a lifetime supply of Rice-a-Roni, the San Francisco, a case of turtle wax, and 10,000 yards of dental floss!
MadisonConservative on July 17, 2009 at 8:04 PM
Another demonstration of why many of us cringe every time registration is re-opened.
Seriously- do you bother engaging your brain even a little before posting?
Hollowpoint on July 17, 2009 at 8:04 PM
What?
There are, to my surprise actually, a whole slew of conservative atheists. I’m Catholic, so that’s where I stand. And “In God We Trust” stays.
You simply don’t know very many atheists, obviously.
JetBoy on July 17, 2009 at 8:05 PM
The world is flat.
MadisonConservative on July 17, 2009 at 8:05 PM
How so? What does god have to do with being conservative?
BryanS on July 17, 2009 at 8:05 PM
More stupid atheist tricks:
atheling on July 17, 2009 at 8:06 PM
I knew you were stupid.
atheling on July 17, 2009 at 8:06 PM
I won SanFran? Great. Fence it off and sell it to China.
Emily M. on July 17, 2009 at 8:07 PM
Stereotypes. Gotta
lovehate ‘em!portlandon on July 17, 2009 at 8:07 PM
So… you’re calling AP a liberal ?!? I don’t know if he’s tight with his wallet, but a LIBERAL !!!???!!! LOL
db on July 17, 2009 at 8:07 PM
Damn, that’s a stinger. Phew. Remind me not to piss YOU off.
LiquidH2O on July 17, 2009 at 8:07 PM
Not saying there was any litigation.
But I’m sure I’ve heard of some fringe Fundamentalists who at least publish and speak of it.
JetBoy on July 17, 2009 at 8:07 PM
Start with the Ten Commandments. How about the Declaration of Independence? How about the foundation of this nation, where our rights come from GOD, not man, or from the government. Idiot atheists want to destroy that foundation, which will erode our rights.
Get a clue!
atheling on July 17, 2009 at 8:08 PM
I figured I’d mimic your paradigm. There are no conservative atheists, the world is flat, and Pets.com was a reliable long-term investment.
Yayyyyyyy.
MadisonConservative on July 17, 2009 at 8:08 PM
That reminds me of another saying:
Every liberal is a conservative that hasn’t been mugged yet.
LiquidH2O on July 17, 2009 at 8:10 PM
Yawn.
atheling on July 17, 2009 at 8:10 PM
A lot of younger people are agnostic because having faith in something they can’t prove but requires faith in something not tangible. It’s not cool to believe in anything that isn’t science. But then you have to stop and think about the fact that science changes almost constantly and most of it’s believers are hardly monolithic it doesn’t appear to be a secure place to hang your hat.
Cindy Munford on July 17, 2009 at 8:10 PM
Okay, I’m a fairly strong agnostic, but I think that any divorcing of the religious basis of our classically liberal regime is simply ahistorical and willfully blind. The justification for the existence of our nation, our raison d’être if you will, is found in the Declaration of Independence. It is Natural Right, the idea that we, as individuals, have certain rights that are infinite and indefeasible. These are rights that are not given to one by government or by social norms, but rather they are gifts endowed by God. The origin of these rights is inexorable with the ideas of 17th-18th century Protestantism, and the idea that one would divorce that is ludicrous. Like it or not, our liberal free society is based on a rights doctrine that necessitates transcendent origins. It just so happens that those origins in the United States are Judeo-Christian. And it would be nice if we respected and acknowledged that fact.
jlerner on July 17, 2009 at 8:11 PM
That’s great!
When can you start?
Kensington on July 17, 2009 at 8:11 PM
Except, maybe, global warming…
db on July 17, 2009 at 8:12 PM
Too funny. Watch out, Mom!
Cindy Munford on July 17, 2009 at 8:12 PM
Meh. The religious aspect of colonial life and its impact on our form of government is overstated.
ernesto on July 17, 2009 at 8:13 PM
Ten commandments–not part of our constitution. And where is the law that says I have to acknowledge god? Where is the law that says I cannot insult god? Where is the law requiring I remember the sabath? Maybe you should honor your father and mother, but don’t know what law says I have to.
Also, Declaration of Independence != Constitution .
BryanS on July 17, 2009 at 8:13 PM
What.. so now it’s ok just because we have a communist President?
sheesh!
katy on July 17, 2009 at 8:14 PM
An atheist is a man with no invisible means of support.
Tav on July 17, 2009 at 8:15 PM
I think you misstate where the faith in science lies. It lies in a faith in the process as a means of determining the laws of nature. The results are only as constant as our knowledge is–which is changing all the time of course.
BryanS on July 17, 2009 at 8:15 PM
Ugh…once again reminded why I hate atheist threads.
atheling, please get over yourself. I’m a Christian, and I know all about the many frivolous lawsuits atheist groups file, but right now you’re making religious people come off badly with your stereotypes. Religiosity and conservatism aren’t synonyms.
Emily M. on July 17, 2009 at 8:16 PM
Says who, you? LOL!
Fletch54 on July 17, 2009 at 8:16 PM
Hey Allah, Jim Geraghty is playing MM appearance on Bill Maher’s show. Bless her heart.
Cindy Munford on July 17, 2009 at 8:16 PM
Thank you for articulating what the idiot atheists and their lapdog followers on this blog seem to ignore or are ignorant of.
They are barbarians. No great civilization ever came from atheism. There are no great atheist heroes. In fact, all true cultures, whether they are of the Ming dynasty, or of the smallest pygmy tribe, possess a sense of the transcendent. Atheism denies that, and is a barbaric, uncultured, uncivilized movement of blind egotists who wish to enforce their fascist agenda upon those who believe.
Atheist societies, such as that of Communist China, and the Soviet Union, are responsible for the destruction, murder, and persecution of millions of people.
That is atheism’s “heritage”.
atheling on July 17, 2009 at 8:16 PM
True. The founding fathers were careful in the wording…not mentioning God, but “Our Creator”.
JetBoy on July 17, 2009 at 8:17 PM
Blasphemy is a victimless crime.
Tav on July 17, 2009 at 8:17 PM
Oh brother…Breaking News for Cronkite.
Emily M. on July 17, 2009 at 8:19 PM
Emily M:
I’m not turning the other cheek. I’ve had it with these jerks. It’s war.
atheling on July 17, 2009 at 8:20 PM
God Speed Walter Cronkite………
……. I did not share your politcs, but may you rest in peace.
Seven Percent Solution on July 17, 2009 at 8:20 PM
But you have scientists who take different sides of issues all the time and they all abide by the same process. And given the recent politicalization of science it hardly holds up the the pure reputation that people like to ascribe.
Cindy Munford on July 17, 2009 at 8:20 PM
As a prudent atheist myself, I’d say if “In God We Trust” bugs you, rethink your atheism. My disbelief if not challenged by a motto on a coin or a building. Want to know what harms the general acceptance of reasonable atheists into political life? BS like this.
elcapt on July 17, 2009 at 8:20 PM
Mr. Pundit, sir?
This would be a good topic to try out that comment rating system you’re interested in, no?
Skandia Recluse on July 17, 2009 at 8:21 PM
One wonders why unbelief in a thing even needs to be a cause.
TheUnrepentantGeek on July 17, 2009 at 8:21 PM
So? What’s the difference? God… Creator… Allah… Yahweh…
What the hell?
atheling on July 17, 2009 at 8:21 PM
More careful even than that. Our constitution makes absolutely no mention of a creator.
BryanS on July 17, 2009 at 8:21 PM
Oh God.
hillbillyjim on July 17, 2009 at 8:21 PM
Atheism is actually a fascinatingly rare condition. Oh, not that there aren’t folks who don’t believe in this god or that, in fact I utterly reject the claim to divinity of most so-called ‘gods’.
And it is just this– the jaw-droppingly vague reference to deity we find in our the motto ‘In God We Trust’ or ‘One Nation, under God’ that I find objectionable.
I do not believe in deity in general, but in Deity as asserted with all of its particularity in His Word. I reject the notion of formalized school prayer by public school teachers and the generic national religion which takes a pass at particularity.
Either assert particular belief in the God who Is, or be done with the assertions of divinity as nothing in particular as being truly worthless.
It’s not hard to deny an undefined deity. Indeed, it is harmful to endure such theological nonsense– such ‘belief’ is ill-suited to deal with particularity of One who Is.
Scribbler on July 17, 2009 at 8:21 PM
Thank you. I wish more atheists were like yourself.
atheling on July 17, 2009 at 8:21 PM
OT – Walter Chronkite has passed at age 92…
ladyingray on July 17, 2009 at 8:22 PM
As one need not be necessary to establish a government of the people, by the people, and for the people. The American Experiment is one of self-governance, not religious governance.
ernesto on July 17, 2009 at 8:23 PM
-1 (just kidding)
db on July 17, 2009 at 8:23 PM
Take the James Madison approach and assume the Bill of Rights does not exist. The Federal government could not establish a church since that power is not granted to it by the states. The federal government obviously can build its own buildings and decorate them. If congress OK’s this decoration, if it it even needs this OK, I do not see anything wrong with it.
WashJeff on July 17, 2009 at 8:23 PM
Sayings on buildings do not establish religions
Nuff said
CWforFreedom on July 17, 2009 at 8:23 PM
One wonders why unbelief in a thing even needs to be a “cause” in the first place.
Are you a member of the Santa Clause Does Not Exist Brigades too?
TheUnrepentantGeek on July 17, 2009 at 8:23 PM
In Matthew 22:21, Jesus said “Render therefore unto Caesar the things which are Caesar’s; and unto God the things that are God’s.” That clearly provides a biblical basis for the separation of church and state.
However, atheists would have us reject the Bible’s teachings… so, I guess they oppose the Establishment Clause.
malclave on July 17, 2009 at 8:23 PM
Regardless of anyone’s personal beliefs it is wrong to try to erase the religious beginnings of our nation. If atheist continue to try it is only going to encourage hard feelings within the population.
Cindy Munford on July 17, 2009 at 8:24 PM
Agreed on the politicization of science–but I would argue that is a failure in following the process. However over time, the whim of the day (global warming anyone :) ) eventually succumbs to the facts.
I think science as talked about in the press has that purity of reputation going on. They report scientific studies as proof that one thing or other is good/bad for you. All dribble! But then again, we around here don’t trust the press too much, right :?)
BryanS on July 17, 2009 at 8:24 PM
There are no conservative atheists.
Conservatives believe in the conservation of the rule of government as ordered by the founding documents. The DoI establishes the authority for the order based on rights from the Creator.
If you do not believe in a Creator, then you derive your political views from alternative sources. Atheists may ape conservative values when it suits their own personal philosophy of get government out of the bedroom/bong/etc, but they are not conservatives.
Even AP will admit as much. He is a libertarian, as most people who pretend to be both atheist and conservative are.
Spirit of 1776 on July 17, 2009 at 8:25 PM
The declaration does. So?
TheUnrepentantGeek on July 17, 2009 at 8:25 PM
Really?
Sometimes I swear you just post to see your own comments
CWforFreedom on July 17, 2009 at 8:25 PM
Erasing them is indeed asking too much. Those “religious beginnings”, however, seem oft overstated.
ernesto on July 17, 2009 at 8:26 PM
Well i certainly don’t post to hear from you, thats for sure.
ernesto on July 17, 2009 at 8:27 PM
It’s about purpose. It’s exactly where it should be.
The Constitution describes the workings of government within civil law, and the limitations for it. The Declaration provides the authority.
Spirit of 1776 on July 17, 2009 at 8:28 PM
And that’s …. the way is was.
hillbillyjim on July 17, 2009 at 8:28 PM
And apparently the commies never got over it.
Itchee Dryback on July 17, 2009 at 8:29 PM
I say leave it in, it defines what America is. As I mentioned in an earlier thread, the Founders envisioned a particular type of lifestyle, upon which to build a country. By removing reference to God, they would be denying their heritage.
There is an old saying:- you made your bed ….
OldEnglish on July 17, 2009 at 8:30 PM
atheling on July 17, 2009 at 8:30 PM
So you don’t even believe in Christianity? Why would you expect atheists to?
Esthier on July 17, 2009 at 8:30 PM
So our laws are governed by the US Constitution, not the Declaration of Independence. It is a rally cry–nothing more.
BryanS on July 17, 2009 at 8:31 PM
Brilliant. Use Lincoln’s word, who said “… and that government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the earth” by extracting them from the sentence where he immediate prefaced that phrase with: “that this nation, under God,”
Spirit of 1776 on July 17, 2009 at 8:31 PM
I don’t want to appear to be anti-science, I am not. I wish I understood better than I do because it is fascinating. My argument was more in the line of science being a reason not to believe in God. A battle between “concrete” and faith. Since I receive so much peace and appreciation from my faith I don’t understand the rejection. But that’s okay, I don’t bust on people about it because if is absolutely something that has to be embraced not imposed.
Cindy Munford on July 17, 2009 at 8:32 PM
atheling on July 17, 2009 at 8:32 PM
I can emphasize with differing religious concepts of God, and I can emphasize with people who believe in God generally but don’t have a denomination (i.e. they believe in a God but don’t know who or what he is and don’t think anyone else does either), but anyone who has a worldview that starts with the universe not being created by a ‘creator’ has a fatally flawed viewpoint that is predisposed to both the law of cause and effect and to the necessary existence of magic (magic being necessary to solve the infinite regression of the ‘who created the creator’ conundrum), and thus these types of disbelievers should be considered functionally insane. Hence, they should be ignored. In other words, the litmus test for sanity is: you believe in at least some kind of God and you believe in magic. Verdict: the athiests are whacked out, and In God We Trust stays. Thank you.
Godzilla on July 17, 2009 at 8:32 PM
Call your Democrat representatives and make impassioned demand.
Buddahpundit on July 17, 2009 at 8:33 PM
Your liberal pandering under the guise of ‘blogging’ is getting tedious.
Imho, that is.
frizzbee on July 17, 2009 at 8:33 PM
That should be predisposed *against* the law of cause and effect and…etc. A Fruedian slip? Hmmm…
Godzilla on July 17, 2009 at 8:34 PM
I like God
I don’t like God.
You’re a fool.
No, you’re a fool.
Na na na na na.
Na na na na na.
Rinse and repeat.
Michael Jackson is still dead.
Well, so’s Walter Cronkite.
Na na na na na.
Huh????
hillbillyjim on July 17, 2009 at 8:34 PM
I have never seen any science that is mutually exclusive with faith.
db on July 17, 2009 at 8:35 PM
“However, Gaylor said the mottos are inaccurate since “In God We Trust” and the insertion of “under God” into the Pledge of Allegiance were adopted in the 1950s as anti-communist measures.
“… that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights …”
Gee, I wonder to whom was Jefferson referring.
Dusty on July 17, 2009 at 8:35 PM
So important! Good thing these atheists have their priorities straight.
Grayson on July 17, 2009 at 8:36 PM
I disagree. Almost every bastion of higher learning in this country that works so diligently at the removal of God started out as a religious institution. And churches were much given to politics in the beginning of our nation since everybody went to church back then.
Cindy Munford on July 17, 2009 at 8:36 PM
That may or may not be true, but the religious origins of the philosophical concepts that culminate in our founding is obvious. The justification for the right of self preservation in that Cartesian totalitarian Hobbes comes from a restatement of basic Biblical concepts (concepts that were understood in a very iconoclastic manner by Hobbes, but still ultimately Biblical concepts). This formulation of a Natural Right played a major role in the expansion of those rights in the greatest of Enlightenment thinkers John Locke, in which these rights were expanded to “life, liberty, and estate.” And this in turn, naturally, became the primary justification of our independence.
I don’t want to get onto a longer talk about Natural Right than needs to be, but it must be said that one cannot divorce basic religious precepts from this great metaphysical construct that provides the intellectual justification for a free society.
I must put one caveat here: I am in no way arguing that the United States is an explicitly Christian nation, nor am I arguing that atheism is stupid, pernicious, or anti-American. I am arguing, however, that the role of religion in the intellectual foundations of our nation is undeniable.
jlerner on July 17, 2009 at 8:36 PM
Nah. Just himself/herself.
anuts on July 17, 2009 at 8:36 PM
Last verse of our national anthem:
Congress may have only confirmed it as our motto in the 1950′s, but it goes back at least to the war of 1812.
And who might be behind this endeavor to remove this motto? Link
Christian Conservative on July 17, 2009 at 8:36 PM
Wrong. I don’t have time to explain to you what Jesus meant by that, nor do I care to. If it means what you erroneously think it means, we would never have founded this country, and we never would have fought against tyranny.
atheling on July 17, 2009 at 8:37 PM
Ernie
don’t be so sensitive . I did not mean to hurt your feelings.
So now we have established that you do not post for me.
You little boys kill me
CWforFreedom on July 17, 2009 at 8:37 PM
It may be because he is such a follower of Thomas Jefferson.
I have examined all the known superstitions of the world and I do not find in our particular superstition of Christianity one redeeming feature. They are all alike founded on fables and mythology. Millions of innocent men, women, and children, since the introduction of Christianity, have been burnt, tortured, fined, and imprisoned. What has been the effect of this coercion? To make one half the world fools and the other half hypocrites; to support roguery and error all over the earth. (Thomas Jefferson)
Tav on July 17, 2009 at 8:37 PM
I agree–the Dawkins types that claim science disproves god go further than I would. I choose not to believe simply because there is no evidence that convinces me that there is a god. In that way, I guess, I can say that I use science as a way to justify my disbelief. I’d hardly say that science proves there is no god.
BryanS on July 17, 2009 at 8:38 PM
Wrong. Read up on Clarence Thomas.
For crying out loud, this is why our country is a mess. We have people voting who are completely ignorant of what this nation is all about, and of the nature of its founding.
atheling on July 17, 2009 at 8:38 PM
it is not that difficult
CWforFreedom on July 17, 2009 at 8:39 PM
Oh, yeah, and don’t forget,
and,
The last one sounds faintly similar to “In God We Trust”.
Dusty on July 17, 2009 at 8:40 PM
Good luck. Though I can’t see how arguing that a sign establishes a religion in any way helps.
I don’t know. Isn’t imitation supposed to be the more sincere form of flattery?
Esthier on July 17, 2009 at 8:40 PM
I agree.
Cindy Munford on July 17, 2009 at 8:42 PM
I know exactly what it means and have argued here several times that it doesn’t mean we’re to just take punches.
However, it also doesn’t mean you’re supposed to be an @ss for the sake of being an @ss.
She, unless I’m remembering incorrectly.
Esthier on July 17, 2009 at 8:43 PM
Our founders may have been men of god–many deists among them. Religion I would concede even inspired them to create the government they did. But they stopped short from citing any form of inspiration or authority within the text of our constitution.
BryanS on July 17, 2009 at 8:43 PM
But absolutely necessary to give credence to the concept of inalienable rights. In fact, it was that phrase in the Declaration which made it unique and important to the experiment of our country. If certain rights were/are endowed by our creator, then no man has any authority whatsoever to take them away. The BOR in the Constitution further specifies those rights.
anuts on July 17, 2009 at 8:45 PM
If the well is poisoned, it’s because self-styled Christians have poisoned it. The Christian Renewal movement has explicitly attacked the Constitutional separation of church and state (and its prohibition on religious tests for public office). Where in the USA could anyone run for office, even dogcatcher, and get elected as an avowed atheist? Atheists are perhaps 8-16% of the US population, but are about 0.2% of persons in prison. The objective evidence says atheists are more law-abiding than Christians, and far more law-abiding than Muslims. Despite this, lots of Christian sects relentlessly attack atheists. Why? Because they’re “the competition”? Because someone who doesn’t believe is a bigger threat than someone who believes in Allah? Because they’re a disunited minority, and safe to attack with impunity? (How very un-Christlike.)
It’s hypocrisy like this which destroyed my own belief. Atheists would be right alongside you in this battle if you weren’t so busy driving them away. If you want allies, SHUT YER DAMN PIE–HOLES. Quit demanding special respect or privileges for any religion; Islam will be destroyed if theocracy is criminalized, but Christianity will not. Purge religious dogma from public schools and public funding; Islam is a parasite and cannot survive without it, any more than Marxism can. And respect other people, inwardly as much as outwardly (in other words, exactly as an observant Muslim cannot do); atheists may be as mistaken as the observers of contrary sects, but that does not make them evil. If you want their support, don’t treat them that way.
Luka on July 17, 2009 at 8:45 PM
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2 3 4 … 8 Next »