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 Jim DeMint, R-S.C., who sponsored the bill in the Senate, said historical references to God should not be censored for political correctness.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 … 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next »
There is a difference. Marxism is a religion made by the people. Theism is made for the people.
OldEnglish on July 17, 2009 at 10:56 PM
You’re just mad because you aren’t a sexual revolutionary.
Rightwingguy on July 17, 2009 at 10:56 PM
That was precisely the argument of Marx, that states use religion to control their population. I wouldn’t say that this argument is a “selling point”.
BryanS on July 17, 2009 at 10:57 PM
But isn’t there a difference between acknowledging the religion of the historic people of America and an alien creed?
Now I already now the answer – which is that America is secular and so Christianity is no more significant than Zoroastrianism. But did anyone believe that prior to the present generation?
Did the men who defended the U.S. against the Godless Commies in the 1950s realise that the freedom to be an anti-American Godless Communist is actually what defines Americans in their entirety, and is the most sacrosanct freedom layed down in the Constitution?
aengus on July 17, 2009 at 10:58 PM
That’s an awesome picture. LOL.
BryanS on July 17, 2009 at 10:59 PM
Well my whole point is that they have invented it. Its the same reason we “need” the outrage of the day, its the same reason we “need” racial tensions, its the same reason we “need” government to save us from each and every thing, because there are people at the top and small time hustlers toward the bottom that stand to gain much from its exploitation.
Its “empire” building, the empire is measured in adherents and the zealousness of their loyalty, from the first guy in a loincloth who realized that he could not control large groups of people by force alone because they can overtake him to the schmuck who sits on his golden chair in Rome with his prada shoes telling us to not be materialistic.
LevStrauss on July 17, 2009 at 11:00 PM
But I said that Marxism is the same thing. Meet the new boss same as the old boss. All Marx is doing is taking the same exploitative principle and applying it to his version of “heaven”. Just because Marx made a correct statement about religion doesn’t make him right about everything else. Lets walk and chew gum people.
LevStrauss on July 17, 2009 at 11:03 PM
wow the words of the constitution are of no matter here i see
whether it be “in god we trust” on a building or coin or a cross on a hill a religion is not established.
you sound like a bunch of liberals letting their feelings get in the way.
if you don’t like it…change the constitution or find a judge to your liking-like a good liberal
CWforFreedom on July 17, 2009 at 11:05 PM
Being an atheist does not necessarily mean being a sexual revolutionary. However the most significant cultural event of the last 40 years was the sexual revolution. It has re-shaped modern people to a large extent.
I’m sure there are lots of chaste atheists and ant-theists who took no notice of this. However my argument is that the majority of the atheists on this site (and in society in general) have been shaped by the sexual revolution.
There is no need to become defensive about this. If you are not opposed to sex outside of marriage then there’s no reason to be upset by the term sexual revolutionary. It’s just a description.
aengus on July 17, 2009 at 11:06 PM
Sorry but that is not true. The Marxist would say the same thing you said and just change Marxism and Theism around. They are both method of behavior control, spiced with talk of great rewards and utopia, as long as you are a mindless adherent.
LevStrauss on July 17, 2009 at 11:06 PM
Well as far as zealousness of adherents there are plenty of examples of non-religious groups being maniacal in their devotion. You don’t need religion to bend people to your will, just a convincing ideology. (Ideology can be religion, but not necessarily.) Anyway, my point is that by saying religion was invented to influence people doesn’t totally fit the bill because there are many other ways to do it sans religion.
Rightwingguy on July 17, 2009 at 11:06 PM
Two words for these idiots…. Majority rules…..
ultracon on July 17, 2009 at 11:07 PM
http://www.dakotavoice.com/2009/05/veterans-call-on-americans-to-save-mojave-desert-cross/
Interesting case. May be one to follow closely esp if Sotomayor is confirmed. If the Courts decide the cross has to come down it could mean other memorials that use religious symbols would have to come down.
BUT- I haven’t followed the 9-11 Memorial in Penn closely enough- does it still have the Crescent moon (in the fall the curve of the path of the trees will be in a crescent shape and the leaves turning red) unless they changed that.
If they decide against religious symbols will they force that memorial to change its design also?
journeyintothewhirlwind on July 17, 2009 at 11:08 PM
I think you are right–religion was not “invented” to control people, just used for that purpose.
BryanS on July 17, 2009 at 11:09 PM
I liked it better when you just said “sexual revolutionary” and left it at that. I think I found a new self-identifying label. “Hi, I’m such and such. I’m a sexual revolutionary. (eyebrow waggle)”
Rightwingguy on July 17, 2009 at 11:09 PM
Rightwingguy on July 17, 2009 at 11:06 PM
I agree with the idea that there are nonreligious ideologies invented to influence people, same thing I am saying about Marxism, same faith the socialists here have in government, yes there are many, religion is still one of them, and probably the oldest but we will never know for sure.
LevStrauss on July 17, 2009 at 11:10 PM
Psst people have been have sex outside of marriage for a long long time. You are no revolutionary buy hey if it makes you feel cool have at it.
CWforFreedom on July 17, 2009 at 11:11 PM
Well it certainly can be.I don’t see how my little theist unaffiliated self is being controlled by my religion, though. I think that if you accept whatever you are given blindly (religion, Obama talking points, etc.) you will be controlled. And that wouldn’t apply to any of us. We aren’t libs.
Rightwingguy on July 17, 2009 at 11:11 PM
I must point out that even though I am a believer, I am able to see a smooth slab of marble or granite without saying, “You know what needs to be engraved in that?”.
Cindy Munford on July 17, 2009 at 11:13 PM
Well my position is that religion can be used to influence people. It has been used to influence people. But if you have critically examined your belief system and it makes you fell happy, what’s the harm? I don’t agree having religion forced on anybody and I don’t like self-righteous religious dudes telling me I’m damned because I haven’t repented properly or whatever.
Rightwingguy on July 17, 2009 at 11:14 PM
Agreed. The KISS principle is lost on our beloved leaders, though.
Rightwingguy on July 17, 2009 at 11:15 PM
That and the Constitution
CWforFreedom on July 17, 2009 at 11:16 PM
Right, but we’re talking about it in a public forum. That is not historically usual. It would have been a hidden activity in most time periods.
Also I’m not claiming to be a revolutionary, and I’m not gay (as you claimed earlier).
aengus on July 17, 2009 at 11:17 PM
Who are they trying to impress? It is seldom me, so it must be another bone thrown at a union or a lawyer.
Cindy Munford on July 17, 2009 at 11:17 PM
I’ve just come to realize that politicians on both sides are about as equally dense and crooked. There are some good ones, but they get drowned out by the Sanford’s, the Boxer’s, and the Kennedy’s.
Rightwingguy on July 17, 2009 at 11:18 PM
aengus it is ok …we don’t care
:)
CWforFreedom on July 17, 2009 at 11:19 PM
I think you’re on the cusp of why this has been a problem. If the statement wasn’t there in the first place, there probably wouldn’t be much hue and cry for one to be placed there. Once there, it’s fought over as if it was a challenge to one’s religion.
BryanS on July 17, 2009 at 11:19 PM
Atheism is a dead philosophy.
Communism is the logical conclusion of atheism and it has already been proven to be a failure and nothing but catastrophic for the people affected by it.
Atheism died in the late 1980′s why are you still bitterly clinging?
It’s the definition of insanity..banging your head against a wall a thousand times and hoping for a different result.
It doesn’t work.
Orthodox Christianity however, DOES WORK.
This is proven definitively by the countless Saints that are produced by the Orthodox Church.
MaximusConfessor on July 17, 2009 at 11:20 PM
Speaking of Orthodox Saints.
This man is a real Orthodox Christian Saint.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gsDk0M-AE1k&
BTW this video definitvely and beyond a reasonable doubt, proves the link between Atheism and communism,proves how flawed it is and no atheist can defeat this simple logic.
MaximusConfessor on July 17, 2009 at 11:20 PM
Does being a caricature of a religious zealot win many arguments for you?
BryanS on July 17, 2009 at 11:21 PM
Why couldn’t it have been something cooler than “In God we Trust”. Yeah that’s fine I guess but something like “Der Wille zur Macht” would have been better.
Rightwingguy on July 17, 2009 at 11:21 PM
Well watch out, the Catholic church is trying to catch up.
Rightwingguy on July 17, 2009 at 11:23 PM
I have already defeated you in this debate Bryan.
There is nothing you can say to disprove me.
An argument on the other hand is something different.
i can defeat you over and over again but it will not change your mind until you are intellectually honest.
MaximusConfessor on July 17, 2009 at 11:24 PM
You’re insane and existentialist to the core.
You’re revoltingly obsessed with the notion of others committing suicide. I think it is a serious fetish of yours. Keep on keepin’ on, though. You’ll be re-banned soon enough, SaintOlaf.
MadisonConservative on July 17, 2009 at 11:25 PM
Okay, now I am seriously guffawing out loud.
MadisonConservative on July 17, 2009 at 11:26 PM
Heh…referencing Nietzsche would be a surefire way to throw Christianists into a tizzy :)
BryanS on July 17, 2009 at 11:26 PM
aengus –
your revolution has done much for our country:
From Crossroadsinitiative.com
It also has led to
- 70 percent of black children to be born out of wedlock
- 30 percent of whites to be born out of wedlock
If you want to help move people into poverty this is one of the best things you can do.
In the general population there are 12 million new cases of STDs yearly. I have read that at any one time 40-60 million people have an STD.
Nice work there revolutionary
CWforFreedom on July 17, 2009 at 11:27 PM
The refrain of this song sums up my thoughts about you best, I think.
BryanS on July 17, 2009 at 11:28 PM
This is absolutely incorrect, but just for disclosure I do not characterize myself as an atheist. You can have communism and religion, communism and atheism are not mutually exclusive just because Marx thought so.
Ummm religious affiliation is declining, you could say it is dying, but ideas go back and forth. Religions have come and gone even before recorded history. There are revivals and declines. Zeus is dead, and Jesus is dying, nobody even bothers with the Cult of Demeter anymore, etc. Ideas, beliefs, norms, philosophies, etc. change over time and always have, even the religions themselves change over time, your statement is completely narrow sighted.
LevStrauss on July 17, 2009 at 11:30 PM
Eh. I think it sounds cool. Nietzsche had some pretty cool quotes. I liked a web page called “Nietzsche Family Circus” which pairs a random Family Circus comic with a random Nietzsche quote.
Rightwingguy on July 17, 2009 at 11:30 PM
Just to remind everyone…”Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;” I say it stays…
StarLady on July 17, 2009 at 11:31 PM
True, that. Nietsche together with Family Circus–what a great idea!
BryanS on July 17, 2009 at 11:34 PM
Your schtick, pretending that I am in favour of the sexual revolution when actually I oppose it, is not particularly funny.
However the statistics you posted are instructive. Sexually transmitted diseases are turning into an epidemic. This is a direct consequence of the sexual revolution.
Why this is considered funny – like a kind of running joke – is difficult for me to understand. It strikes me as pure nihilism.
aengus on July 17, 2009 at 11:35 PM
One great quote would be: “Liberalism is the transformation of mankind into cattle.” On that we can all agree. Thanks Nietzsche!
Rightwingguy on July 17, 2009 at 11:35 PM
Rightwingguy on July 17, 2009 at 11:30 PM
One that is very fitting for these religion threads is “when a religion comes to prevail it makes enemies of those who would be its first disciples”.
LevStrauss on July 17, 2009 at 11:36 PM
I think its because you started off with “sexual revolutionary” which sounds so dramatic and grandiose that it sounded absurd. I didn’t mean any offense by my jesting.
Rightwingguy on July 17, 2009 at 11:38 PM
Don’t forget two of my favorite. “God is dead”- Very direct. Tell me what you REALLY think, Nietzche.
AND….
“Two great European narcotics: alcohol and religion.” – I always loved a good religious keg stand.:-)
Rightwingguy on July 17, 2009 at 11:40 PM
That sounds like a threat, and yet, in that context also… sounds kinda nice.
I have no idea what it is. I just know that we’ll perceive it differently when we’re there.
Even if all you want is your own pleasure, it’s still more significant if you believe there will be no pleasure once you’re dead.
I’m really not going with the hard argument.
No, but it is childish.
Only because the words have meaning. If it was something closer to, “Santa Clause makes life happy” which is what many Christians are told atheists see us as, then I can’t imagine getting upset about it.
I’d worry about the state of our nation, but no more so than when Obama was elected. If voicing a trust in God meant a set of rules were being enacted, I’d completely understand.
Esthier on July 17, 2009 at 11:44 PM
Fair enough. I admit it sounds a little silly. It’s just that having thought about it for a while, it seems like the most appropriate descriptor.
aengus on July 17, 2009 at 11:46 PM
The problem with atheists is atheism. Many of them sit around waiting (and, realistically, wanting) to be offended, so to retain their comfort zone they lash out at people of any faith other than humanism.
I believe, for my own life, in the God of Abraham, Issac, and Jacob–the Majesty of the Hebrew Scriptures and the New Testament. I encounter people of various Faiths, and accept them as they are. Despite the lib propaganda, I don’t seek to exclude people who have spiritual differences from what I hold.
Atheists are a world unto their own. Since, and where they always seem to find offense, they want the rest of the country to change for them, rather than let people be. To me, liberty means letting my neighbor be himself unless he tries forcing his way into my home with a weapon in his hand and evil intent in his heart.
Liam on July 17, 2009 at 11:46 PM
Well that was something he did well. I remember somwhere in one of his books he talks about other philosophers diluting and watering down their statements, while his is very concentrated. I found that to be a good observation.
LevStrauss on July 17, 2009 at 11:46 PM
aengus- you said:
How did I pretend? From what I read you seemed awfully proud of your revolutionary status and said nothing to be critical of it.
What is funny about anything I posted. It is quite sad.
CWforFreedom on July 17, 2009 at 11:46 PM
Best confession I have read all day. Cheers!
daesleeper on July 17, 2009 at 11:48 PM
No. it cannot be reversed. Marxism comes from within the people, Theism from outside (supernatural).
OldEnglish on July 17, 2009 at 11:53 PM
The stupidity continues
I grew up in the Catholic Church and we were often reminded of our free will. Nothing mindless about that
I suspect you like simplistic generalizations of religious types. It seems then you do not have to think very hard.
CWforFreedom on July 17, 2009 at 11:54 PM
Don’t you think you are over generalizing? I could say the same about people of faith if I only considered the loud voices on right leaning blogs, but many Christians I know–as well as atheists–aren’t as judgmental as you claim all atheists are.
BryanS on July 17, 2009 at 11:55 PM
*Yawn* More atheists-on-the-warpath stuff. OK, let’s say that we remove all references to God from all government-funded whatevers. What will really change? It won’t reduce the number of people who believe in God. If that’s the goal, boy are they misinformed.
ddrintn on July 17, 2009 at 11:57 PM
The lawsuit isn’t about you. I personally wouldn’t spend the effort suing over this, but the issue is about the government sponsoring religious points of view and whether that is permissible.
BryanS on July 18, 2009 at 12:03 AM
Really. I never would have guessed.
Esthier on July 18, 2009 at 12:04 AM
Not me. After they’ve scooped out the Rocky Road and added in my Crunch Bar bites, I just can’t help but leap over the small divider and use my pocket knife to start carving the Ten Commandments into Cold Stone’s.
Esthier on July 18, 2009 at 12:06 AM
I would pay a considerable sum of money to see you do that.
MadisonConservative on July 18, 2009 at 12:09 AM
OK but don’t forget worshipping space aliens (or Satan or whoever you worship) are religions too.
MaximusConfessor on July 18, 2009 at 12:10 AM
They got one on State St…would be safe to do after bar time where such an occurrence wouldn’t look too strange :)
BryanS on July 18, 2009 at 12:11 AM
I bow to both your devotion and your talent.
Cindy Munford on July 18, 2009 at 12:12 AM
I think he likes it a little strange.
Private show for the man in Cheese State.
Esthier on July 18, 2009 at 12:13 AM
But it is about me, and everyone else. Things don’t go on in a vacuum. What’s the dreadful danger that we have people sniffing for references to God to eradicate? We’ll all sleep more soundly knowing that no American Ayatollah is going to parlay “In God We Trust” or your neighborhood creche on the grounds of the warehouse of the county construction warehouse (“violation of the establishment clause!!!”) into a theocracy.
Why don’t the atheists spend as much energy into starting a homeless shelter or something. Then they can win friends and influence people by showing how superior their freedom of thought is.
ddrintn on July 18, 2009 at 12:14 AM
But which is the one true religion, can you remind us? Is it Jew? Catholic? Lutheran? Baptist? so many to choose from. Perhaps you could give us some guidance?
BryanS on July 18, 2009 at 12:15 AM
So speaking of religious zealots. Reminds me of the South Park episode where Cartman keeps hosting Anti/Pro Ginger meetings at the Airport Hilton. “Thanks for choosing the Airport Hilton. You guys need any more drinks? Buffet Items?”
Rightwingguy on July 18, 2009 at 12:16 AM
heh…State St, Madison–rather libertine and out of control around bar time near campus.
BryanS on July 18, 2009 at 12:17 AM
Because atheism is a fundamentally selfish and poisonous philosophy. Nothing good has ever come from it.
MaximusConfessor on July 18, 2009 at 12:18 AM
Why, whichever one produces the most Saints, silly!
Reaps on July 18, 2009 at 12:18 AM
It’s a compulsion. I try to stop myself, but I just can’t imagine living in a world where marble is left without leaving a message, The Message, for any who would follow me.
Esthier on July 18, 2009 at 12:19 AM
Good night folks, sweet dreams.
Cindy Munford on July 18, 2009 at 12:20 AM
According to South Park, its the Mormons.
Rightwingguy on July 18, 2009 at 12:20 AM
My point is that those most offended by this kind of lawsuit wants to make it out as a threat directed AT the religious. It’s just not. Maybe it is perceived as a threat by people of faith, but the purpose of the lawsuit is not to find a way to convert people.
BryanS on July 18, 2009 at 12:23 AM
At least it’s not the scientologists :?)
BryanS on July 18, 2009 at 12:26 AM
The purpose is to keep the state from converting people. I don’t think seeing “In God We Trust” coerces anyone into becoming a hellfire-and-brimstone fundamentalist.
ddrintn on July 18, 2009 at 12:29 AM
I love that one, especially at the end when they tell Cartman the truth about his “new look”.
Esthier on July 18, 2009 at 12:29 AM
Good night, Cindy. Have a great weekend.
Esthier on July 18, 2009 at 12:31 AM
Allah I would think by now your should know better then anyone that “Freedom of Religion” isn’t Freedom from Religion.
Rbastid on July 18, 2009 at 12:34 AM
Of course not, but that’s not the point. Would putting up language on governmetn buildings saying “there is no god” coerce people into becoming hard core atheists?
BryanS on July 18, 2009 at 12:35 AM
What if a politician, who’s on the government payroll and working in a government building, allows the word “God” to escape from his/her lips? Oh my. That’s a clear violation of the establishment clause as well.
ddrintn on July 18, 2009 at 12:37 AM
Not if they say “there is no god”. Maybe atheists are being to timid for you–instead of removing statements supporting god, they should put up statements claiming god doesn’t exist. Is that a better outcome for you?
BryanS on July 18, 2009 at 12:41 AM
But if that politician gets up and says, “I believe in God” or “I pray God helps us”, that would be a violation of separation of church and state in your view?
ddrintn on July 18, 2009 at 12:43 AM
Of course not. And if a government official wants that on his building, I’m not going to freak out even though it is pointlessly insulting.
Also, the sign wouldn’t be establishing a religion.
Esthier on July 18, 2009 at 12:46 AM
They don’t seem to be all that timid, but by all means, they should be able to state whatever they like.
ddrintn on July 18, 2009 at 12:47 AM
Nor does “In God We Trust”. What religion is being established? Judaism? Christianity? Islam?
ddrintn on July 18, 2009 at 12:48 AM
They’ve got one in Greenway Station over in Middleton, too. The staff sucks, so it would be a bonus.
Not to pry, but you wouldn’t be Bryan Schimming, would you?
MadisonConservative on July 18, 2009 at 12:49 AM
You bet your rattlesnake-skin boots I do.
Seventy-three cents it is. Plus eight rupees I found in a laptop bag at work.
MadisonConservative on July 18, 2009 at 12:50 AM
Exactly.
Esthier on July 18, 2009 at 12:51 AM
May you dream of President Fred Thompson, dear lady.
MadisonConservative on July 18, 2009 at 12:52 AM
It’s not worth freaking out over, but for those who do, it’s a legitimate claim. If a phrase is ok, what about other symbols? At what point does one say it’s too much and becomes a pervasive expression of antipathy towards people who don’t agree with that point of view? In my mind, it’s not a huge deal, but where is the line drawn? I think that’s a legitimate thing or atheists to contest.
BryanS on July 18, 2009 at 12:55 AM
Less than a dollar? Can’t imagine I’ve ever been that drunk.
Esthier on July 18, 2009 at 12:56 AM
Then Lev and AP would have to round him up and put him the death camp until he renounces “the rotting corpse” of his “opiate of the masses”.
Long live Marx!
MaximusConfessor on July 18, 2009 at 12:56 AM
Nope.
BryanS on July 18, 2009 at 12:57 AM
Regarding the phrase “in God We Trust”, who’s We?
If either the people in general, or the Government, the country is a Theocracy.
If so, the Atheists have no claim against any theological statement.
OldEnglish on July 18, 2009 at 12:57 AM
I remember when I still thought that was a possibility… Maybe if he’d been younger.
When it establishes a religion or set of beliefs for the country. It’s not as though this hasn’t already been decided.
Beyond that, we’re talking about words.
If we really are that spoiled, then we’re really wasting the freedom that’s been bought by those who came before us and those who are still risking and/or sacrificing their lives to protect this country.
And at that point, we’re on the way out anyway.
Esthier on July 18, 2009 at 1:01 AM
Who’s “God”? What’s “trust”?
The objection to these sorts of things is the establishment of a religion. Mere theism isn’t a religion in itself.
ddrintn on July 18, 2009 at 1:03 AM
Not so long as our laws are based on secular reasoning.
Esthier on July 18, 2009 at 1:04 AM
When the people say so. If “In God We Trust” becomes sufficiently odious to most people, it will change. In the meantime, those who are offended by it can avert their gaze. If people want “God Is Dead” or “There Is No God” to appear on the currency, it will appear.
ddrintn on July 18, 2009 at 1:06 AM
Comment pages: « Previous 1 … 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next »