It is a Judeo-Christian God of money and secret societies
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Appellate court rules, “In God we trust” is ok
- Thread starter Shaul
- Start date
It is a Judeo-Christian God of money and secret societies
Shad
Veteran Member
Buy gold! /s
Shad
Veteran Member
Understandable use of materials
Currency has been inflated for decades so part of the need is due to said inflation.
Ponder This
Well-Known Member
It seems to me that those arguing that "In God We Trust" is unconstitutional have failed to present a compelling argument.
All I've heard is something along the lines of:
We are atheists; we don't agree with the motto.
We are Christian; we are offended by the motto.
It's not sufficient to disagree with the motto, nor is it sufficient to be offended by the motto.
The subtlety of this may be lost on some people. Not liking the motto is a reason to legislate a different motto, but it is not a reason to judge a motto in a court of law.
Milton Platt
Well-Known Member
I see no good reason for it to be there, but on the other hand, I don't really care that it is. It is obvious that what we as a nation actually trust in is the military/industrial complex.
More? Sheesh, I have a lot already.
There is a fundamental difference. The Indian constitution specifically guarantees the freedom of religion. The Medina Constitution specifically denies it.
Also the Medina Constitution was not a step forward in its time, it was a step backwards.
The Medina Constitution was put in place in 622AD compared to the Indian Constitution in 1949 which makes them not comparable.
There had been fighting in Medina involving mainly its pagan and Jewish inhabitants for around 100 years before 620. The recurring slaughters and disagreements over the resulting claims, especially after the Battle of Bu'ath in which all the clans had been involved, made it obvious to them that the tribal conceptions of blood feud and an eye for an eye were no longer workable unless there was one man with the authority to adjudicate in disputed cases.[9] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constitution_of_Medina
Shad
Veteran Member
More? Sheesh, I have a lot already.
Buy silver too!
its not unconstitutional for public places to be used for public expression of what the majority believes is true or is united in. but its unconstitutional for the government to indorse or subsidize or maintain a church or religion of the state like Rome did, and England does.
so actually all the efforts of schools for example to suppress expressions of belief in God is oppressing the public's right to express in public places. and there's nothing in the constitution that says the US of A is required to be secular.
BilliardsBall
Veteran Member
You mean, manipulate the courts to stack it in favor of one group over another, such as not confirming a justice deliberately for one whole year? Is cheating and lying for Jesus, Christian in your book? Where is love in all this? I don't see it. I'm quite sure Jesus would be surprised to see the Pharisees now calling themselves Christians. Or, actually, maybe not.
Selecting conservative rather than liberal judges is manipulation? Bush and Trump are manipulators but Obama wasn't manipulating?
But it was you that brought that brought up India and the Constitution of Medina.
Your version of history shows a flawed Muslim bias.
But I already have gold and frankincense, is there myrrh?
Shad
Veteran Member
We need some wise men for that.