WorldnetDaily reports today that Militant atheist attorney, Michael Newdow, who nearly succeeded in banning the "under God" Pledge of Allegiance from public schools before he was rejected by the Supreme Court, now continues his jihad against religion by taking aim at banning "In God We Trust" from American currency.
Newdow, just before his scheduled speaking engagement with (who else?) the ACLU, said this to the Oklahoman: "I am about to file to get 'In God We Trust' off the front of our currency. I plan to do that this week."
Later, Newdow had this to say to KWTV in Oklahoma City: "The key principle is that we're supposed to treat everybody equally especially in terms of religious belief. Clearly it's not treating atheists equal with people who believe in God when you say 'In God We Trust' or we are a 'nation under God.'"
So you see, liberalism doesn't discriminate at all...it seeks to destroy traditional society EVERYWHERE, not just in the European countries. Isn't that so egalitarian of them?
Meanwhile, I'm still trying to figure out how handling money that says "In God We Trust" somehow constitutes State sponsored religious coercion.
To me, if the State is forbidden to use the word "God" anywhere at any time it actually constitutes state sponsored atheism. I'm no lawyer, but common sense tells me that if one is forbidden to mention God at all it becomes more than simple separation of Church and State; it is advocating the establishment of an atheist, anti-God nation.
Liberals may find the Roberts/Alito Supreme Court less receptive to such aspirations.
-MZ
Newdow, just before his scheduled speaking engagement with (who else?) the ACLU, said this to the Oklahoman: "I am about to file to get 'In God We Trust' off the front of our currency. I plan to do that this week."
Later, Newdow had this to say to KWTV in Oklahoma City: "The key principle is that we're supposed to treat everybody equally especially in terms of religious belief. Clearly it's not treating atheists equal with people who believe in God when you say 'In God We Trust' or we are a 'nation under God.'"
So you see, liberalism doesn't discriminate at all...it seeks to destroy traditional society EVERYWHERE, not just in the European countries. Isn't that so egalitarian of them?
Meanwhile, I'm still trying to figure out how handling money that says "In God We Trust" somehow constitutes State sponsored religious coercion.
To me, if the State is forbidden to use the word "God" anywhere at any time it actually constitutes state sponsored atheism. I'm no lawyer, but common sense tells me that if one is forbidden to mention God at all it becomes more than simple separation of Church and State; it is advocating the establishment of an atheist, anti-God nation.
Liberals may find the Roberts/Alito Supreme Court less receptive to such aspirations.
-MZ
29 comments:
So, the rightwingnutjobs are all upset that they can't have their theocracy, I see. You guys just can't keep your religion at home where it belongs, you have to shove it down our throats, put it on our money, make us pledge to it in public and bow to it's ten commandments at every government building.
Yet, you have no problem getting into our bedrooms and insulting those who don't "do it" the way you say. You are all a bunch of hypocrites.
Getsit says: So, the rightwingnutjobs are all upset that they can't have their theocracy, I see.
So, Getsit, you believe having a dime say "In God We Trust" on it constitutes a theocracy, eh? It must be banned by law... or censored if you will. Seems to me the only theocracy here is the one you and Newdow are advancing - an "atheistocracy" of sorts banning religion and any references to God.
The totalitarian left certainly despises free speech, don't they?
-MZ
Kev, you are obviously homophobic. What, are you afraid you'll become gay if you are forced to see same-sex kissing? Oh, so make this country into a church and that way you'll not be tempted to go loving other men, is that it?
Who's the real perve here, Kev.
Getsit, please tell me alittle about your political preferences. Do you consider yourself a liberal or conservative? A Democrat or Republican? Which candidate in the last presidential election impressed you most, and why?
-MZ
MZ, I used to consider myself a center-left Republican until the Religious Right hijacked the party. Basically I'm libertarian socially with conservative economic leanings.
I voted for Kerry in the last election, but I voted for Bush Sr. when he ran against Dukakis.
Basically, Kerry might have been flawed but at least he wasn't a bumbling mouthpiece of the Evangelicals. Besides, when you go to war to help line the pockets of a few wealthy oilmen you've lost my vote.
Getsit said: MZ, I used to consider myself a center-left Republican until the Religious Right hijacked the party. Basically I'm libertarian socially with conservative economic leanings.
You are a center-left Republican who voted for John Kerry? The same guy who was ranked as THE most liberal member of the US Senate? I'm sorry, "Leftit" but your antics are looking troller and troller all the time.
How about you admit the truth? You aren't a republican at all and you came to this site with the sole intention of taking juvenile cheap shots at everybody.
Regarding those cheap shots: You aren't very good at it. All you seem to be able to do is call everyone a "homophobe" and accuse us all of being secretly gay.
Wait...doesn't that make YOU the homophob?
-MZ
i heard arafat understood gay guys and had Christians taste his food before he would eat it - or maybe that was saddam - or maybe arafat ate Christian gay guys - or saddam and arafat had gay guys taste them before a Christian guy declared "in G-d we trust" - pour the whine and cut the cheese getsit - i couldn't dream up a more detestable person than you, hard as i try. btw - i don't know if any of the above is true - but do you see how ridiculous it sounds? you are a wart on butt of society.
hey guys - have you had a chance to read "do as i say - not as i do" yet? i'm in the middle of it and what a great expose on leftwing hypocrisy. too bad no one on the left will read it.
IN G_D I TRUST - NOW AND FOREVER!
kuhnkat - i hope you know my previous post was not directed at you - it was directed at getsit - i need to start pointing that out before one of you think i'm ragging on you - my apologies.
Funny how this Getsit character doesn't seem to have an unkind word for France, who stole BILLIONS in oil-for-food money, but thinks our taking out Saddam was war for oil.
I also think it is typical that this leftist doesn't seem to have a single problem with how Islam is behaving, but can't stop attacking us "fascists" for not wanting our children taught all about "my two daddies" in elementary school.
-MZ
hey madze - i had to find my way here through crank files. have you seen the editorial cartoon in this week's week regarding the motion picture rating "R"?
it says R Restricted
under 17 requires
accompanying parent
or guardian to see
this movie.......
having an abortion
does not.
this is hypocrisy to the nth degree. i tried to get there, but i guess it was at max capacity for readers and wouldn't let me in, but we are about to have a severe storm here and maybe it's on my end. anyway, i should probably get off here, pray for protection and read a book.
Nanc,
I really don't know what you mean...What is it you are referring to? As far as the storm, I hope it blows on by without incident. Be safe.
-MZ
madze - every storm that's come through here in the last week or so has caused devastating tornados in other places kentucky, indiana, ohio. the one last night looked like it might finally hit here. haven't had a chance to survey damage this a.m. but we're ok as we know the stormmaker. good day.
Glad to here you're ok, nanc... Even if you are one of those "fascist homophobic theocracy advocates"!
;)MZ
gee madze - you forgot "old female". i am not used to all these terms of endearment.
do you ever read james lileks commentaries? biting sarcasm and wit. he can be found at newhouse news service. i received one in the last couple of days regarding what the presbyterian church (usa)has in common with al qaeda. it's not posted at newhouse yet, but is worth a read. let us know what you think. if i were comp savvy i would scan it to you, but must wait for help from the kidz.
This is too funny. I actually support the effort to remove "In God We Trust" from American currency.
However, to accuse some (or all) Republicans of wanting a theocracy is pure BS. That is nothing but character assassination.
I don’t find the slogan offensive, but I think it doesn’t belong there. It doesn’t hurt me to read it. It isn’t an insult to me. It’s not a conspiracy to make me Christian. It simply reflects old values and culture.
Critics are quick to forget that Christianity is a part of the culture of our civilization, but are quick to remind us of the values of Islamic culture. This reveals the overwhelming influence of partisan politics on everything they do and say. It’s a culture of deceit and bitterness.
Getsit you are an idiot! It’s amazing that there really are people like Getsit in the real world. He or she is like a cartoon character.....
Freedom Now!!!!!!!!!!
Fredomnow,
I respect your views and your desire for our currency not to say "In God We Trust", but shouldn't this be an issue decided by the people and not the courts? If we are to be a free society shouldn't we have the right to have our coins say "In God We Trust" on our money if we want?
Isn't banning the use of these words a form of totalitarianism if the majority desires it? If the rights of the American people are trampled by the special interests what kind of society do we have?
Selective court ordered censorship by the PC Left is one of their biggest weapons in the war to socialize America.
-MZ
MZ,
I'm all for talking about it.
I firmly believe the slogan should go, but I question whether the MAJORITY of Americans are ready for that.
There is the issue of seperation of church and state and the inclusion of the slogan implies that God is acknowledged by the US gov't.
However, to suggest that because of an old slogan Republicans are attempting to establish a theocracy is laughable.
Some people are so intolerant that they make the most baseless accusations based on superficial evidence like the "in god we trust" slogan.
The ACLU needs to justify its existence and is just looking for more work like a lawyer prowling around a hospital emergency room.
Freedomnow,
If the "old slogan", as you say, were to be deemed undesirable by the majority of Americans than, much as I'd be disappointed, I would not try to stop it from being removed by hiring the ACLU to ram it down the country's throat.
We agree, then, that, regardless of personal opinion, the American people have the right to decide if words should stay or go, rather than some elitest group of liberal attorneys who want to dictate to us what we can and can't say.
-MZ
freedomnow - you have stated that you are an atheist which i believe takes a greater leap of faith than i have believing in G-d. as far as i am concerned, G-d is who or what you worship and put above all else. our nation is based upon judeo christian values and our forefathers constructed our framing documents with that in mind. trust me, whether you are an athiest or a purple person, you worship something.
in the u.s. you are free to worship however you feel based upon biblical principles. that's not such a bad thing. if the in G-d we trust goes, it goes, but i will never in my lifetime consider trusting allah or buddha or any other entity. i believe it should be voted on and the majority will rule - let's pray it's the right majority.
europe is finding out just what happens when you take G-d out of the picture. so there must be something to the G-d idea.
hey, a wonderment - do you suppose michael newdow's money BURNS a hole in his pocket? i am in a mood this a.m. good day guys.
yoo-hoo getsit, great article at wnd regarding lightening penalties for bestiality in massachusetts:
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=47416
now you and your friends don't have to worry about serving so much time for your crooked ways if you would just move there. you can do just about what you want in mass and no one even blinks an eye.
OK we agree to disagree, but if you neo-cons make me wear a 777 tattoo on my forehead I will tell Getsit and he (or she) will tell Al Sharpton. Then you will be in big trouble.
(What can I say, I'm desperate for a good neo-con conspiracy. !No War for Talk Radio!)
you are too funny freedomnow - what is this 777 stuff? that is a first for me. although i did hear that hillary's address is 665 - neighbor of the antichrist, to which i always say, "i didn't know she and bill had separate houses!"
ahhhh, christian humor. do you know why Yeshua took a whip to the moneychanger tables in the temple? they hadn't yet invented re-bar!!! arghhhhhhhhhhhh...i guess you had to have been there. good evening.
I dont know if it is really true but it is common to use the number 777 to represent God.
Whether or not it has any biblical significance or is just a popular misconception I dont know.
What is a re-bar?
Nanc & Freedomnow,
I have never heard of the "777" thing, but I do know "770" was the NY address of the late Lubavicher Chabad Rebbe, Menachem Schneerson, and is now considered to be a number for good luck by his followers.
omg freedomnow - it is the steel bar concrete workers put in their pours to reinforce their cement/concrete. it comes in different guages - i have some in my yard that is one and one-quarter inch thick.
the number 7 is the number of completion in the bible. on the seventh day, G-d rested. there have been six millenia give or take - according to christianity in the seventh millenia we will rest as G-d intended. although i am quite interested in gematria as it coincides with the bible, it is not really my specialty.
You know if you said re-bar I would know instantly what you were talking about.
For some reason seeing it in print didnt get any recognition outta me.
I will lay off the chocolate chip cookies.
re-bar, re-bar, re-bar, re-bar...have another ccc, fern.
Post a Comment