Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Flying Dice]

Obviously the collective American attention span and multitasking ability is such that we can only focus on a single issue of paramount importance. Since everything else is less important, let's get cracking on a way to halt entropy!

[Urist Imiknorris]

No, the collective American attention span and multitasking ability requires a resolution to each issue before the news comes on with the next one.

[darkrider2]

No, the collective American attention span and multitasking ability requires a resolution to each issue before the news comes on with the next one.

More like until public outrage sparks up over one.

I don't trust most televised news. And they seem a little slow to pick up on issues, though I'm probably being ignorant to some production time issues.

[Karlito]

I'm beginning to think that the best way to get rid of "In God we Trust" on the money is actually just to move away from physical money.

[Sergius]

If this isn't enough reason to get it removed, I don't know what is.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2aoxdbAZLZ4

Seriously.

As long as it is there, people will write shit like this.

It's probably not the only example.

And yes, it has been used over and over in real life to beat heads of atheists.

I can imagine George Bush Sr. saying something like "Atheists can't be citizens! It says so in the Dollar Bill! How can you be Amuhrican and not Trust God? Are you a Commie?"

He actually said the first part, by the way.

[fqllve]

That's one extremely poor quality video with 275 views. Somehow, I'm less than concerned.

I mean, if we get rid of those words that doesn't mean jerks won't have their reasons to say atheists aren't citizens or are unamerican. Frankly, I hear "Our nation's founders were Christians and that means this is a Christian nation" way more often than I hear anything about "In God we trust." We can't sign a petition to abolish ignorance and bigotry. Well, we could, but it's not like it would do anything.

[Sergius]

That's one extremely poor quality video with 275 views. Somehow, I'm less than concerned.

It's part of a movie. That was in theaters. With constant repeats in cable.

Seriously.

Oh look, nobody saw Captain America. I found a 2 minute YouTube video with 100 views. That proves it.

 

[Flare]

Listen, I'm all for change for the better, but I'm just so disappointed people think the words on money are more important than the people on the streets.

Who said it was? Aren't you grasping at strawmen?

[fqllve]

Are you talking about the content of what he says because that's almost impossible to make out because of how poor in quality the video is. I assumed that it was the fact that some bring back Christmas movement is using "In God We Trust" as proof that we should... bring back Christmas.

Regardless, you didn't address the actual point of my post. Removing the words isn't gonna stop people from being dicks about religion, in fact, it's just gonna give them more justification to feed the persecution complexes they all seem to harbor. Not only that, using some phrase on the back of our money as an argument for bigotry is about the silliest trick these guys have in their bag. No one is going to say, "Oh, our money doesn't say 'In God We Trust' anymore so I guess I can stop thinking that all Muslims are terrorists." Jerks will always find a way.

[MetalSlimeHunt]

I disagree. You can reduce egotism by not feeding it, and that applies to this situation. Having their deity's name/title/whatever on the money will make a group feel entitled, or perhaps more accurately, established as the state's religious preference. Removing it leaves the group without justification on this matter. Christians will sound much less legitimate saying that "this is one nation under god" if the motto is something else and the money doesn't say it anymore.

[Sergius]

Yes, obviously I posted a video because of the content. Not for people to gape in awe at the # of views. I couldn't find a better version of that specific scene, but your dismissal out of hand for "not being concerned since it had few views" was pretty rude and COMPLETELY missed the point (that it wasn't about "score" of the video but about what was in it).

I didn't address the rest of your post because I assumed it only had like 6 views so far and thus was of no concern, but you insisted so here it is:

About "people will be dicks no matter what", that's a pointless remark, more so because it's self evident. Do you want to let them say that their dickery is somehow government endorsed because "In God We Trust" and "Nation Under God"? Or you'd rather they just flailed helplessly trying to get in everyone's faces without actual endorsement (or as they say, "proof") that Atheists are Evil and that The U.S. is a Christian Nation?

Jerks will find a way. That's no reason to paint a giant "Kick Me" sign in your ass whenever you see one.

[fqllve]

Okay, wow. Well, I'm sorry for coming across as rude but since you didn't explain why you posted the video and I couldn't understand a thing that was said in it (neither have I seen that scene nor the movie that it's from) I assumed it had something to do with the movement the video was trying to support. Since I thought your point was about the movement the video not having many views means that the movement has little support, a movement with little support is no cause for concern.

Anyway, I apologize, it wasn't my intent to dismiss a point about the scene in the movie (which I still have no idea what that is) so there's no need to jump all over me like that.

I disagree. You can reduce egotism by not feeding it, and that applies to this situation. Having their deity's name/title/whatever on the money will make a group feel entitled, or perhaps more accurately, established as the state's religious preference. Removing it leaves the group without justification on this matter. Christians will sound much less legitimate saying that "this is one nation under god" if the motto is something else and the money doesn't say it anymore.

That's a good a point, but 'In God We Trust' is about the weakest argument anyone has for calling this a Christian nation. In the vast majority of cases I hear something either about the religious makeup of the nation's founders or the percentage of the population who self-identify as Christians. I guess since there's nothing we can do about either of those removing 'In God We Trust' might make a dent, but I doubt it'll do much. I think it would be more effective to try to educate people toward religious tolerance, as exasperating as that can be sometimes.

[Leafsnail]

I think it would be more effective to try to educate people toward religious tolerance, as exasperating as that can be sometimes.

Because of course that's mutually exclusive with changing the money?

[fqllve]

No, but it certainly doesn't receive the same prominence and support as movements of this sort.

[GlyphGryph]

CJ....

What?

Seriously?

In what way does signing a petition to change the slogan on our money prevent us from helping the hungry and the homeless?

No, what prevents us from helping them is that it is a REALLY HARD PROBLEM, with NO EASY SOLUTIONS.

Sure, the slogan thing is like infinity times less important! But it's a REALLY EASY PROBLEM with an EASY AND OBVIOUS SOLUTION.

One that just so happens to not harm the cause you're so keen on advocating in the slightest - something that, perhaps, can't be said of the existence of this message board. You're argument, you're appeal to "we shouldn't do something that should be done because something else needs to be done more" is a recipe for never accomplishing anything, ever.