Skip to main content

There is a poll that is going on MSNBC. I copied the results and posted below. Isn't it amazing how 77% out of 6,547,277 Americans still believe In God we trust.

Makes me proud to be an American where at least I know I free, and I won't forget the men who died who gave that Liberty, I'll proudly stand up next you, and defend her still today, There is no doubt I love this land... God bless the U.S.A!



Live Vote
Should the motto "In God We Trust" be removed from U.S. currency? * 6547277 responses

Yes. It's a violation of the principle of separation of church and state.
23%

No. The motto has historical and patriotic significance and does nothing to establish a state religion.
77%
Not a scientific survey. Click to learn more. Results may not total 100% due to rounding.
Internet polls are as reliable as the telephone poll in 1932 that had Hoover being reelected! In other words: worthless.
It's just civil religion anyhow, no real meaning since to issue currency in the name of a deity is debasing to the deity.
The motto of the United States is not "In God we trust," it is "E Pluribus Unum" or "Out of many, one."
quote:
Originally posted by Neal Hughes:
Internet polls are as reliable as the telephone poll in 1932 that had Hoover being reelected! In other words: worthless.
It's just civil religion anyhow, no real meaning since to issue currency in the name of a deity is debasing to the deity.
The motto of the United States is not "In God we trust," it is "E Pluribus Unum" or "Out of many, one."


***
There you go letting your large brain rule you!

You are right "E Pluribus Unum" is the National Motto. But America also has another motto - Look at your Money - It is also an American motto according to the definition of motto. In God we trust, and it should remain on the money for it does speak of the MAJORITY view, irregardless of the name and origin of their "god" or God.

As far as the polling goes, it takes little more time to go door to door these days. So I think the new way is fairly reasonable, while it may not reflect an exact accurate number of people, I can't truly imagine for the life of me that 1 person would sit online and click (I VOTE YES or I VOTE NO) 6 million plus times. "Now that is some understandable sarcasm"!

Good day.
Just by reading this forum should be reason enough to fall at Jesus' feet and beg for forgiveness. This life is a spiritual battle, not flesh. You can believe what you want to right now, but one day everyone will know the truth. We were all created to be worshipers, if your not worshiping the creator, then your worshiping something else. As a christian, look through this forum to see what the atheists are worshipping and thank God that you are not still blinded. Satan may be the ruler right now, but there will come a day. We all have a spirit that knows the truth. You don't have to be "converted", it's just a matter of winning or losing that specific spiritual battle. I love each one of you. I'm praying for you. You can label yourself whatever you want too. Jesus said not too waste your time arguing over words. One day it will be too late. With Love
The law is slow to change for a reason: to prevent a tyranny of the majority, in other words, to preserve the rights of the minority as enumerated in the Constitution and reserved to the people and the states.

I told you I had a big old Neanderthal skull and brow ridges, didn't you catch that? I wasn't joking.

Were 50%+1 to make law, who knows how often we would flipflop on issues that need to be debated and studied and not let knee jerk emotionalism rule.

I have no problem with "In God we trust," as the majority probably look more at the large numbers and pictures of the dead men than they do the writing!

But I don't think it is appropriate on money -- it would be like putting Peter on the quarter and Moses on the nickel! Would the BVM be on ones and ST. John Baptist on fivers?

Now, that would be distasteful! And contrary to the Gospel message, now would it not?
quote:
We were all created to be worshipers, if your not worshiping the creator, then your worshiping something else.

Bushwah. Some of don't worship anything, and find the concept of worship demeaning to everyone involved. Don't speak for people who you don't understand.

quote:
We all have a spirit that knows the truth.
Yes, but some people are religious anyway.

quote:
Just by reading this forum should be reason enough to fall at Jesus' feet and beg for forgiveness.
For reading? How terribly 9th Century of you.

workin, believe what you want, but I'm here to tell you it ain't necessarily so. Those of us who have given up on the lies, broken promises, unrealistic expectations, and intellectual retardation that religion brings have had enough. We're fed up with the society you have foisted upon us, and we're fighting back.

DF
quote:
Originally posted by LMM:
Hi Fishy,
I have to post this. Its too perfect to me. No offense to you or any others. It just shows a lot of the same arguments all of you use. Big Grin


Stupid Atheist Tricks

There are intelligent, educated atheists who can give you a plausible, well-reasoned argument for their position without being offensive. But if you've ever debated atheists on-line, or for that matter in real life, you run into a lot more would-be clever atheists who don't understand the difference between reasoned debate and Christian-baiting. For those folks, I have here collected a list of typical tactics to use.

#1 -- Insist that "religion is illogical," especially if you've had no training in formal logic and couldn't tell a syllogism from a shibboleth.

#2 -- Insist that you "just believe in one less god than you do." Ignore the fact that a Christian monotheist and a Hindu or Neo-Pagan polytheist agree that the supernatural exists, which puts them closer to each other than either is to you. And never agree that a Christian (or whatever) might concede that there is an element of truth in other religions.

#3 -- In any discussion of religion, you must make at least one reference to Santa Claus, the Easter Bunny, the Tooth Fairy, or invisible unicorns.

#4 -- Be sure to mention the Crusades, even if you know nothing of medieval history and couldn't give a concise summary of the events to save your life.

#5 -- Be sure to mention the Inquisition and/or the Witch Trials, because if anyone claiming to be a Christian ever did anything evil, it obviously invalidates that religion.

#6 -- If your opponent brings up the fact that more people have been killed by officially atheist regimes than in all the religious wars and persecutions in history put together (e.g. 80 million by Stalin, 60 million by Mao, 1-3 million by the Khmer Rouge), insist that they weren't "real" atheists, or that "communism is a religion."

#7 -- If your opponent says that if bad atheists don't invalidate atheism, bad Christians don't invalidate Christianity, refuse to concede the point. Bring up the Inquisition or the Crusades again.

#8 -- Claim that "science" somehow proves atheism. Ignore any claim that science can't do any such thing, since it operates on the basis of methodological materialism.

#9 -- Claim that evolution falsifies Genesis. If Christians or Jews claim to have no problem with evolution, accuse them of denying what the Bible actually says.

#10 -- Claim to know more about the Bible than "Christians" do. Ignore the immense implausibility, since Christians are likely to read the Bible every day and study it at home, at church, and on church retreats.

#11 -- This is most important -- insist, as heatedly as any extreme fundamentalist, that the Bible must be read in the most naively literal sense in all passages, and therefore the tiniest mistake or scribal error invalidates the whole thing and any religion based on it.

#12 -- Imply that your opponent is mentally ill. If he/she doesn't seem to get it, be explicit. After all, religion is a form of mental illness. Ignore the fact that theists are no more likely to score high on psychiatric intake tests than anyone else.

#13 -- Two words: Richard Dawkins.


Just now seeing this, LMM. I was trying to figure out what in the world another thread is about & ran across it. I am learning that a decrease in religious discussions on the forums leads to an increase is good health. No kidding! Just call me Valeri Bertinelli. That part's a joke. Don't be calling me Valeri Bertinelli.

I've had all these thrown my way at some point on the forums. It kind of gives me the creeps now. Wink Just vere eez dees leetle school to vich you all go? Hmm?
quote:
Originally posted by GoFish:
Joy and LMM,

Tell me: Which of those list of common responses are the most stupid? Come on, this is your big chance to make an atheist look really stupid. Wink

OK, may not be the most stupid, but since I studied Biology and Chemistry, number nine is the most ridiculous to me. I know evolution occurs, we have fossil evidence, and I believe in the Bible but I do not find the two contradictory. Number 8 is a close second.
quote:
Originally posted by LMM:
quote:
Originally posted by GoFish:
Joy and LMM,

Tell me: Which of those list of common responses are the most stupid? Come on, this is your big chance to make an atheist look really stupid. Wink

OK, may not be the most stupid, but since I studied Biology and Chemistry, number nine is the most ridiculous to me. I know evolution occurs, we have fossil evidence, and I believe in the Bible but I do not find the two contradictory. Number 8 is a close second.


The original statements were:

"#8 -- Claim that "science" somehow proves atheism. Ignore any claim that science can't do any such thing, since it operates on the basis of methodological materialism.

#9 -- Claim that evolution falsifies Genesis. If Christians or Jews claim to have no problem with evolution, accuse them of denying what the Bible actually says."

I agree. They are both stupid statements. However, I have never known an atheist to make those claims.

I've already responded with this:

8: Science never has and never will "prove" atheism (nor will it "disprove god"). That is simply a dumb statement. If I ever see an atheist state that, he will be entered into this thread as a stupid atheist.

9: Evolution falsifies Genesis? Umm, no. Genesis can be interpreted as a metaphor - albeit a poor one IMO. Evolution, however, DOES falsify every argument put forth by Creationism and Intelligent Design. Yes, every argument.


Now, you all have accused the atheists here of using those arguments as if we were reading from a playbook. I certainly have not seen anyone here use those arguments. I cvertainly have never made such stupid claims. In fact, I have never seen those arguments as all. In fact, it appears that the original author of the list purposefully twisted some very logical arguments in order to make a point. Where I come from, this is called propaganda.
quote:
My favorites were #2 and #12, but all of them were pretty funny.


"#12 -- Imply that your opponent is mentally ill. If he/she doesn't seem to get it, be explicit. After all, religion is a form of mental illness. Ignore the fact that theists are no more likely to score high on psychiatric intake tests than anyone else."

Okay, you might have seen me state that someone here is mentally ill. No, not you Nash. Not Meanie, You guy aren't' crazy. Nash, you are simply willfully ill informed on some basic scientific concepts. That is not crazy.

But Braylyn is batspit crazy. Insane. I have, indeed, stated such as will do so again. You two also make fun of batspit crazy religious nutcases. Nash, you probably do so more than I.
What's funny about Richard Dawkins? Sure, he has a sense of humor, but he's no comedian.

Instead, he's an eloquent, erudite voice of reason in a world all too willing to ignore it.

If you can't understand him, sorry. He's an Oxford Professor, a leading intellectual, possessed of a full and elaborate vocabulary, and a best selling author for over 30 years.

If you see him as a threat, go ahead. Make his day. You're right, you know.

DF
quote:
Originally posted by DeepFat:
Nash,

that reference did not describe a "psychiatric intake test".

Anyone else?

DF


I can not give you a link, but having visited many offices of these types for various family members, it is an assessment given to new patients that takes about and hour to do and tries to identify levels of anxiety, depression, O-C disorder and ADD, some personality traits, likes and dislikes and general feelings about themselves and their environment. I have not seen it given in recent years. The most famous question on it was "Do you like to pull the wings off of flies?" or "Do you hurt small animals?" Good psycho questions! Big Grin
Last edited by LMM

Add Reply

Post

Untitled Document
×
×
×
×
Link copied to your clipboard.
×