Separation of Church and State

tres: :Well, I think you're leaving out some other options, most notably Islam- um does "allah" ring a bell?
re Colorado consitution: Section 4. Religious freedom. - The free exercise and enjoyment of religious profession and worship, without discrimination, shall forever hereafter be guaranteed; and no person shall be denied any civil or political right, privilege or capacity, on account of his opinions concerning religion; but the liberty of conscience hereby secured shall not be construed to dispense with oaths or affirmations, excuse acts of licentiousness or justify practices inconsistent with the good order, peace or safety of the state. No person shall be required to attend or support any ministry or place of worship, religious sect or denomination against his consent. Nor shall any preference be given by law to any religious denomination or mode of worship.
please note the words "without discrimination"
i also note that it is only christians that view "In god we trust" as being some sort of universal affirmation-it is not at all universal and is indeed discriminatory. you may of course continue to deny the obvious just as the majority deny the minority, just as the white deny the black, just as manifest destiny deiesthe native americans. equality means equality not the some are more equal than others.

Yes it does ring a bell. My understanding is that it is an arabic word that means "God". Do you have evidence to the contrary, or that Muslims in this country do not know this?


So noted. I see nothing in this text that would make it unlawful to post "In God we trust" in schools. Can you indicate what specific phrase or passage you think does?

some reason you left this sentence out? "i also note that it is only christians that view "In god we trust" as being some sort of universal affirmation-it is not at all universal and is indeed discriminatory. you may of course continue to deny the obvious just as the majority deny the minority, just as the white deny the black, just as manifest destiny denies the native americans. equality means equality, not the some are more equal than others.

Tartarin: Why do they call them nuns? (Old catholic boy joke)

They ain't had none, they don't want none, and they ain'ta gonna git none . . .

tres:

the single most important tenent of Islam is "There is no god but Allah"
i don't really believe the intent was to be redundant in their verbage. but even that begs the question. perhaps substituting Buddha or perhaps Vishnu, or even "the great spirit" of the plains indians would suffice. In other words, Tres the phrase "IN GOD WE TRUST" is discriminatory.

Fair enough. Now show me where the Koran claims that Christians and Jews are not worshiping the same God as Muslims. (And let me point out to you that this is not the same thing as the Koran stating that others are worshiping God in the wrong way.)

tres you are sidestepping the issue."in god we trust" is a blatant statement of religious intent. the question at hand is the mandatory placement of placards in public schools that promote a religious ideology. to say that it does no harm, or that it represents the majority makes it no less offensive. for 200 years we had placards saying "whites only" and that did not refer to clothing. the USA has a history of religious bigotry beginning with christians slaughtering native americans, protestants rejecting irish and italian catholics, the KKK lynching catholics-jews and blacks. removing native american children from their families in order to "christianize" them. all in all not a very pretty or "christ like" attitude and certainly not (in my mind) respecting the beliefs of others.

Does any reasonable person question that the God referred to in the phrase in question is the Judeo-christian God?

Snood -- In a word, No!

Among the groups one protects when one seeks to end references to "god" in public places and ceremonies are those who don't believe there is a god -- not to mention Quakers and others who don't believe in "swearing on the bible" and other such religious displays in a judicial or governmental setting. Another problem: In a secular nation which celebrates its ever changing immigrant population, its melting pot, the continuating of the use of forms which spring from a white Christian culture is just plain hypocritical. "In God We Trust" is a remnant of cultural blindness -- no doubt about it. Sophistries about "including other gods" just don't work -- "god" doesn't belong in State Houses and public schools. Look at the history of these mottos, pledges and avowals in our public life. They spring from mainstream, 19th and 20th century protestant Christianity. Those are the groups which brought us all kinds of prescriptions and prejudices which are gradually cracking and falling: measurement of success in terms of money; "family values;" men as leaders; heterosexuality as inherently more "natural" to homo- or bi-sexuality; inherent superiority of white, nordic peoples; division of labor by gender; humanity as superior species "dominant on the earth;" etc. etc. etc.

dys - With respect, I think you are missing "the point"--or at least my point. You don't like this. Fine. You think it is misguided. Fine. So do I, quite frankly. Allowing the posting of such a sign would make sense to me, but mandating it as you state they are doing does seem a bit over the top to me.

Still, "the point" I was making is that I do not see where this runs contrary to the pertinent section of the constitution of Colorado, which you provided. I assume you agree on that, since you have not pointed me to the language which you believe forbids it. If you do not agree, please show me the language you believe makes this verboten.

And of course there's my other point--that what Colorado chooses to do is hardly a reflection of the current federal administration; which seemed to be the implication you were trying to make in sharing this news. (If I'm wrong about that, please set me straight. I can only tell you what I inferred, but I quite well might be mistaken as to your reasons for bringing this up here.)

An interesting post by Tartarin, and one in which i concur. This country has always shown a tendancy to identify itself as a "christian" nation. The pluralism of which we speak was usually percieved in our history as meaning a plurality of christian sects, often to the exclusion of particular sects which were unpopular, most notably catholics (witness the Lily Whites, anti-catholics, and the thoroughly scurrilous attacks of Thomas Nast in his political cartoons on the catholic church alleging a plot by that institution to destroy the Protestant institutions of the nation). Here is a link to the Treasury's page on the "In God We Trust" motto on the coinage and the scrip:

In God We Trust

I was struck by the following passage in a letter to Chase:

"You are probably a Christian. What if our Republic were not shattered beyond reconstruction? Would not the antiquaries of succeeding centuries rightly reason from our past that we were a heathen nation? What I propose is that instead of the goddess of liberty we shall have next inside the 13 stars a ring inscribed with the words PERPETUAL UNION; within the ring the allseeing eye, crowned with a halo; beneath this eye the American flag, bearing in its field stars equal to the number of the States united; in the folds of the bars the words GOD, LIBERTY, LAW.

"This would make a beautiful coin, to which no possible citizen could object. This would relieve us from the ignominy of heathenism. This would place us openly under the Divine protection we have personally claimed. From my hearth I have felt our national shame in disowning God as not the least of our present national disasters."

The attitude of this correspondent is probably not to be considered unusually in mid-nineteenth century America. However, it does not coincide with the complexion of the nation today, necessarily. Nevertheless, the religious right seems to wish to keep the United States firmly in the "christian camp." Anecdotally, i would note that i have frequently heard fundamentalist who were attempting to proselytize me contend that catholics are not christians--such prejudices die hard.

An excerpt from an editorial page piece from todays WSJ by David Brooks (senior editor at the Weekly Standard and Friday guest on PBS news)

"... He has almost nothing to say about modern business. He has almost nothing to say about evangelicalism or Pentecostalism, arguably the most influential creed of the 20th century. (There are millions of American Pentecostals right now, starting from scratch about a century ago, and there will be, by conservative estimates, one billion Pentecostals in the world by 2050.)"
http://www.opinionjournal.com/la/?id=110003060

blatham - Forgive me my denseness (density?). What inferrence do you intent us to draw from the snippet you shared?

Hear, hear, Tartarin.

Thanks for the link, Blatham. David Brooks is a nasty piece of work -- glib, self-assured, and curiously parochial (which is one of his favorite put-downs of others). Where did these "suits" come from? I mean the slickies like Brooks and Coulter. I keep looking for little wind-up keys on their backs...

David Brooks came down heavily on the parochialism of the Ethical Culture Society (NYC) and I thought I'd post here for the interest of anyone who knows little or nothing about the subject a self-description from their home page:

Our Identity: Who We Are
Ethical Culture is a humanistic religious and educational movement inspired by the ideal that the supreme aim of human life is working to create a more humane society.
Founded in 1876, the New York Society for Ethical Culture is a community bound together by our belief in the worth and dignity of each person and the commitment to help create a better world. We assist each other in developing ethical ideas and ideals, in celebrating life's joys, and in supporting each other through life's crises. We work together to improve our world and the world of our children.

Our Values: What We Believe
The Ethical Culture philosophy requires both an individual and a Community ethic. Neither is sufficient in itself. community is not possible without a sense of the individual, and the individual is incomplete without a sense of community. Both are valued in living an ethical life.
We believe that all individuals:
have inherent worth and dignity;
have the potential to grow and change;
have a responsibility to strive for ethical growth;
have a responsibility to treat others so as to help them realize their fullest potential;
have a responsibility to create a better world; and
have a responsibility to help build an Ethical Culture community that welcomes and involves others.
As an Ethical Culture community we believe that:
we are all part of something that transcends the individual experience;
we have responsibilities to each other, to the Society, and to the community at large;
we are enriched through our interconnectedness with others;
we find confirmation and validation of our own selves and beliefs through our interactions with others; and
we derive some of our strength through our relationships with others.

E Pluribus Unum would be a far more appropriate "National Motto", to my mind. That "In God We Trust" thing seems to me to fly in the face of The First Ammendment.

But, that's not the only Ammendment which I feel is improperly applied. My idea of Gun Control is consistent three-inch 9-round groups at 25 yards, standing offhand rapid fire.



timber

With an airweight J-Frame!

Doing it with a Mod 1911 and Factory Loads gets lots of respect at The Range.



timber