Agreed. But I was responding to suggestions that “One Nation Under God” and “In God We Trust” were:
and
They aren’t that. They are a religious message, and thus shouldn’t be in the Pledge/on money, but the message isn’t a Christian one, it’s a monotheistic one.
The only thing ‘monotheistic’ about the people who had those phrases incorporated are that they believe there is only ONE god…their god…the Christian god.
In terms of national symbology, it doesn’t matter what those people personally believed, only what the phrases actually say.
It may not be monotheistic in that it is explicitly determining which God exists, but it is monotheistic in proclaiming that only one god exists.
Quite. Although immigration is changing this in some respects the UK does not take religion seriously. Regular Church attendance is miniscule (and Anglicanism in the Uk is only 2 notches above atheism anyway) and while in the USA making a fine show of kow-towing to Christianity is practically mandatory if you want political office we in the UK don’t really care. And we are certainly deeply suspicious of politicians that do make a big deal of it.
We don’t trust them and quite rightly. Especially with the continually festering example of Northern Ireland we don’t want politicians taking their cue from their own personal deities.
Better than those who prove themselves to be ignorant by comparing Middle Eastern religiosity to that of Europe.
And the Muslim God, and the God of the Jews as well.
And in a bit of irony, most Christmas and Easter traditions that are widely celebrated are more pagan than not, due to syncretism during various missionary efforts while Europe was being Christianized.
Right, they’re decreasing, and also, they’re not federal. But they do exist. They’re pretty minor in any case, mostly things like not being able to buy liquor on Sunday morning (because you should be in church, dadgummit!) Clearly a Christian bias here, though.
Yeah, a secular holiday whose name begins with “Christ”. Christmas is in the process of becoming a secular holiday. It originally was a pagan one, became coopted into a Christian one, and is losing it’s Christian aspect (much to the horror of many militant Christians). Still, it’s a vestige of a Christian bias in the US society that’s found its way into government (since federal offices are closed).
I think it’s amusing that we’re quibbling about “In God We Trust” et. al. Sure, there are subtle difference of opinion, but I bet we’d all agree on more than we disagree, for example:
I bet that when most monotheistic people read it, they fill in the blank with whatever their religious beliefs suggest. I also bet a number (but not the majority) of non-Christians do the opposite and get frosted that they’re forced to carry a reference to a false god in their wallets.
I doubt that many people converted to Christianity as a result of what’s written on their money. Of course, there’s no shortage of strange, so I’m sure there are some cases.
I’m annoyed by the “under God” in the Pledge. When everyone is reciting that, I just omit those words. Problem solved (for me personally, I mean). The amusing thing is that these words were added to fight Communism. I doubt they had any effect in that regard. Spending 10% of our economy on weaponry, where the USSR had to spend 50% of theirs to keep up, was probably a much bigger factor. (Don’t quote me on the figures!)
In regards to the Pledge of Allegiance, the interesting thing to me is that the phrase “under God” basically makes the word “indivisible” meaningless. How can a people be indivisible when not all believe that the one nation is, in fact, under God? I have never heard a satisfactory answer to this conundrum.
Actually, it is the opposite that is true. National symbology has a purpose, and that purpose is to put forth an idea. What the people as a whole think the symbol means to them defines the symbol.
Actually, that’s true in the US, too. While you do have to make a nominal nod to having a religion to win the presidential primaries, regardless of party, fundies who wear their religion on their sleeves, like Perry or Huckabee, aren’t ever going to do any better than win a few states in the bible belt. They stand no chance in the rest of the country. No fundie has ever done better than a distant third, overall, even in the Republican primaries. We can’t stand them either.
I came by to ask this question, and this thread seems relevant.
What the F is up with legislative prayer?
Currently winding its way to the Supreme Court’s docket is Town of Greece v Galloway. Said Town is mere miles from my own residence, so it’s of particular interest to me. Brief summary: the Town Board invited local residents to say a prayer before meetings. Since (virtually, if not completely) all of the religious institutions in the town are Christian, virtually all of the prayers given were also Christian. Residents sued, saying that by offering prayers that were overwhelmingly Christian, the Town government was endorsing Christianity above other religions.
The White House has weighed in with an amicus curae brief, as you can see at the above link to SOCTUSblog. In it, the White House extolls the “long history” of “legislative prayer” and states that it serves to “solemnize” the proceedings.
But what the heck does all that mean? First off, since when has “we’ve always done it that way” ever been justification for an abrogation of individual rights? And second, what connection is there between a sectarian prayer and the solemnity of the meeting?
No one has ever explained those that I’ve seen. Yet the Christian majority just pats the minorities on the head and says “it’s okay, just sit through it while we practice our religion before this government function”.
Personally, I’m sick and tired of Christians insisting on the right to insert their religion into every aspect of public life. You can do it anywhere you want, but NOT. IN. OUR. GOVERNMENT. Why does that seem to be so hard to understand?
Powers &8^]
It’s a bit more than ‘nominal’ in the USA. Any candidate for high office seems expected to make a continous and ostentatious show of their piety and in Obama’s case be judged on the words of the pastor of his chosen church.
Out of curiosity do schoolkids in America do the whole pledge of allegiance thing every day or just on certain days.
It varies a lot, and has varied a lot over the years. I suspect the peak was during the commie scare years of the 50’s.
As a kid in school in the 60’s and 70’s, I remember saying it, but don’t remember saying it a lot. I can’t remember, but I don’t think it was daily, but more often than annually. Often enough for it to be easy to remember but that’s about it.
What I do remember is that nobody took the trouble to explain it or make sure we said it correctly. In elementary school, most kids started off with “I Pledge of allegiance …”
I said it every day, I think, in elementary school growing up in NYC in the '70’s.
My kids say it every day in elementary and middle school in suburban NJ.
The only religious message one can take from “In God We Trust” or “One Nation Under God” is that there is one God, in whom trust should be placed.
I’m an athiest and I love me some Christmas, so it’s a secular holiday for at least one person.
I think the point that some are trying to make is that if America is secular why then is religion, any religion for that matter being referenced on the currency and pledge of allegiance.
