Florida House Bill Requires "In God We Trust" Displayed In All Public Schools

Jesus. Provocative for the sake of arguing.

No wonder nothing gets done. We elect children.

originally posted by: BlueAjah
a reply to: ignorant_ape

It's not freedom FROM religion.
It's freedom OF religion.
That's a big difference.

In Baphomet we trust.

originally posted by: NarcolepticBuddha

originally posted by: Woodcarver

originally posted by: NarcolepticBuddha

originally posted by: Woodcarver
a reply to: ScatteredThirdAngel

Yea, ok. Just as soon as they prove their version of some god actually exists.

Otherwise fire them all and prohibit them from filling any gov or state position for the rest of their lives.

Just pretend 'they' worship money. It's still printed on money, isn't it? Coincidence?

Anyways, they're just words. Let people cheerlead their words if they want, it never hurt you or me none.

Perhaps you don’t understand the need to separate church from state? Or the reasons why we do not pander to those who believe in Gods?

As I said, it's just words. No one forcing anyone to attend church or announce their beliefs.

Not yet...

a reply to: ScatteredThirdAngel

Too little too late.

Need to abolish the federal dept of education and start over again at the state/county level.

Public schools have been in a state of decline for 40 years.

originally posted by: NarcolepticBuddha

originally posted by: Woodcarver

originally posted by: NarcolepticBuddha

originally posted by: Woodcarver
a reply to: ScatteredThirdAngel

Yea, ok. Just as soon as they prove their version of some god actually exists.

Otherwise fire them all and prohibit them from filling any gov or state position for the rest of their lives.

Just pretend 'they' worship money. It's still printed on money, isn't it? Coincidence?

Anyways, they're just words. Let people cheerlead their words if they want, it never hurt you or me none.

Perhaps you don’t understand the need to separate church from state? Or the reasons why we do not pander to those who believe in Gods?

As I said, it's just words. No one forcing anyone to attend church or announce their beliefs.

what if it read in allah's name we trust...
do you honestly think that this would have been your rebuttal?

a reply to: TrueBrit

....And another thing, while I am at it.

Government, whether local, state or federal, is dirty business. Anyone wanting a sign in every government building, which says "In God We Trust", cannot possibly have any love or respect for God at all. Anyone who does, would want his name as far from that mess as possible.

originally posted by: namehere
a reply to: ignorant_ape

no the first amendment clearly states that laws which are in favor of a religious entity like the catholic church or the church of england shall be prohibited, it doesn't say anything about suppressing expression of religion, that clearly violates the first amendment.

making a law like for example the heresy act of 1554 in england as an example is what the first amendment is talking about, it's not about banning expression or free exercise of religious belief because it offends a certain group of people.

it's about laws favoring a specific religious entity and this law does not force religious practices on anyone, are you honestly telling me that just because something says "in god we trust" it's preventing people from practicing their own beliefs or non-beliefs?

There are plenty of people who don’t believe in any god. There are people who call their God by a specific name other than god. Having the phrase in God we trust displayed on public property, is a specific omage to the Christian God. Having the same phrase on our money is equally reprehensible To anyone who does not adhere to belief in Gods.

a reply to: TrueBrit
people bring corruption to government not the other way around, no government is bad until people manipulate things in their favor or their groups favor, if people weren't prone to abuse and corruption no government would ever fail, human nature is the great destroyer of civil order.

a reply to: ignorant_ape

You don't have to participate, you can look the other way. Never understood why people get so bent out of shape and enraged when God and religion come up.

a reply to: TheMadTitan

No it's not. Look how enraged you guys get when religion is mentioned... Y'all turn into the most hateful of hateful and pull your hair out because of something YOU don't believe in. It's like antifa x10.

originally posted by: BlueAjah

originally posted by: Woodcarver

originally posted by: NarcolepticBuddha

originally posted by: Woodcarver
a reply to: ScatteredThirdAngel

Yea, ok. Just as soon as they prove their version of some god actually exists.

Otherwise fire them all and prohibit them from filling any gov or state position for the rest of their lives.

Just pretend 'they' worship money. It's still printed on money, isn't it? Coincidence?

Anyways, they're just words. Let people cheerlead their words if they want, it never hurt you or me none.

Perhaps you don’t understand the need to separate church from state? Or the reasons why we do not pander to those who believe in Gods?

In that one sentence you show a common misconception. Yes, there should be separation of church and state. But as for "pandering" to those who believe in God?...

The first Amendment says that Congress will make no law "prohibiting the free exercise thereof". That means that no one can prohibit others from freely practicing religion. Your last statement seems to imply that people should be prohibited, or at least discouraged, from practicing religion. That's wrong. The US is a place where people should be able to freely express their faith without fear of retribution or ridicule.

That's because religion is so bad in his opinion that nobody should be allowed to practice it or mention it in public... If you've ever read the Bible, it tells you about those people.

a reply to: ScatteredThirdAngel

Where does it (the law) state where you have to read the signs and convert to Christianity?

originally posted by: Woodcarver

originally posted by: BlueAjah
a reply to: ignorant_ape

It's not freedom FROM religion.
It's freedom OF religion.
That's a big difference.

the first amendment

Amendment I

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.

This is no different than Prohibiting the 10 commandments from being displayed on public property. People who believe in god’s are delusional.

". . .or prohibiting the free exercise thereof."

I mean, you JUST pasted that right before you acted as though it doesn't exist. Stop sweating it though dude, nobody is going to force you to believe in God or go to church, they never have and never will. You were born with the choice to decide whether to believe or not.

a reply to: namehere

Yes... but they ALWAYS bring it.

You do not place a sign connecting God with a mode of governance, unless that governance is perfect. Because it cannot be perfect, requiring as it does human operatives, you do not connect those things together. Its pretty simple. If you love God, leave Him out of it, where his name cannot be dirtied by it. Heck, theres an entire church to clean up, all the molesters and the embezzlers, the power trippers and the phobics. The church itself needs a torch taking to much of it, and no one seems willing there either.

Adding his name to something which is so utterly prone to become corrupt is not a thing someone would do if they understood God or loved him at all.

a reply to: Woodcarver

and so what? it's not preventing you or anyone from expressing your beliefs or non-beliefs as i just said, removing religious expression just because it might offend people is called suppression of religion, it's illegal or can people not read what the first amendment actually says? "or prohibiting the free exercise thereof"

laws based on the demands of a specific religious institution is what is prohibited, it says nothing about prohibiting the expression of religious belief by the state or the people, two completely different thing. secularism is about the power of the state being separate from the power of a religious institution, it's not about whether someone is offended or not.

They should just change it to "in gods we trust" seeing people believe in many different ones.

a reply to: odzeandennz

Every religious group believes in God, they just have different names for it. That's why God was chosen.

a reply to: DBCowboy

Must be written in code language somewhere.

How about a nice middle ground?

In guns we trust.

a reply to: testingtesting

No. America has used this our entire lives. It was never a problem until whiners came along and started whining. The same ones that tell you to look the other way if you're offended by something, those people.