E Pluribus Unum?

[Rich Parsons]

Here is my point.

The First Amendment from the Bill of Rights states:

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.

Congress is the law making body or portion of the government.

And this from the Ninth Amendment:

The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.

And this from the Tenth Amendment:

The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

By the us of God on our money and in the Pledge of Allegiance, our government is in violation of the Bill of Rights, as they have no right to make a law respecting an establishment of religion. The word "god" is a generic term, yet when one uses the word "God" it is assumed to be Christian, maybe Jewish, or Islamic, if you are translating to English in a simple format. This is in violation of the First Amendment.

By teaching religion at our schools, which is funded by Taxation, which is done by the laws of the state, which are approved either through referendum ( The People ) or passed by Congress. The People have a say in how that money is used. If that money is being used to violate the First Amendment, then the act is unconstitutional.

The reference of the Ninth Amendment is very nice, and actually covers, many things. For example, many of The People" came to the colonies for religious freedom. i.e. the Puritans, the Quakers, the Shakers, and others. Even the creation of a religion was formed here with Mormons, and they are allowed to practice their beliefs, in private, including bigamy. As the laws require, someone involved to file the charges with the State. It is allowed in their religion, and the laws and the system do not prosecute them for this. They have Freedom as does everyone else to practice their religion. By allowing Religious practices to be taught in public schools, the government is in violation of not only the first Amendment they are also in violation of the Ninth Amendment, as the Ninth Amendment cannot take away rights responsibilities or restrictions of the First Amendment, unless explicitly stating such.

The Tenth Amendment is also very nice. Stating that all powers not delegated or prohibited by the U.S. Constitution, are reserved for the States and also for the People.

This allows the States and other local governments to make laws to address local concerns, yet they are not allowed to usurp the powers of the Federal or that of the U.S. Constitution, which are the People as well. There is no evidence in that I can find that would allow such an act to stand, if challenged.

Some one asked why Fight, because if you do not, your complacency is approval.

Sorry to cut this short, I got to run and get ready to teach.
:asian:

 

[heretic888]

Well said, Rich. Just one thing I wanted to address...

By the us of God on our money and in the Pledge of Allegiance, our government is in violation of the Bill of Rights, as they have no right to make a law respecting an establishment of religion. The word "god" is a generic term, yet when one uses the word "God" it is assumed to be Christian, maybe Jewish, or Islamic, if you are translating to English in a simple format. This is in violation of the First Amendment.

To be fair, Rich, the meaning of "God" mentioned on the Great Seal is extremely dubious. In the background, we see the All-Seeing Eye of Osiris --- an Egyptian symbol. Over to the left, we see an eagle holding some laurel leaves and arrows --- both a Greek and Hindu symbol (depending on which part you are emphasizing). Above the eagle, we see a 6-pointed star (a Pythagorean symbol) made up of several 5-pointed pentagrams (another Pythagorean symbol).

All of that, taken with the phrase "E Pluribus Unum", gives the "In God We Trust" part something of a different context.

If you are reall so dead-set against religious references, are you therefore suggesting the Pythagorean pentagrams on our flag be removed?? The eagle be removed (the eagle is an avatar of Zeus)?? The Eye of Osiris?? Do you think the Declaration of Independence should be revised??

 

[Rich Parsons]

Well said, Rich. Just one thing I wanted to address...



To be fair, Rich, the meaning of "God" mentioned on the Great Seal is extremely dubious. In the background, we see the All-Seeing Eye of Osiris --- an Egyptian symbol. Over to the left, we see an eagle holding some laurel leaves and arrows --- both a Greek and Hindu symbol (depending on which part you are emphasizing). Above the eagle, we see a 6-pointed star (a Pythagorean symbol) made up of several 5-pointed pentagrams (another Pythagorean symbol).

All of that, taken with the phrase "E Pluribus Unum", gives the "In God We Trust" part something of a different context.

If you are reall so dead-set against religious references, are you therefore suggesting the Pythagorean pentagrams on our flag be removed?? The eagle be removed (the eagle is an avatar of Zeus)?? The Eye of Osiris?? Do you think the Declaration of Independence should be revised??

To be fair Heretic, every tree is a symbol to a Druid. Every river, every bird, every thing is a symbol and you cannot get rid of the symbology of it. You can get rid of the written word, which helps to define for those who wish to take actions or hang their hats on. And, no I will not go down that path, or all must be destroyed to obtain a completely absense of religous symbols.


As to the Declaration of Indepenance, this document was used to declare the separation fo the colonies from the British Empire. Not to define current laws, rights, priviledges, and responsibilities. The U.S. Constitution does that, which replaced the working documents of the "Confederacy" the Colonies were run under during the war from 1776 to 1787. Even the U.S. Supreme Court has ruled that the Preamble to the U.S. Constituion is not a valid piece of paper for rights et al. Now specifically to the term "God" - from the first sentence of the Declaration of Independence:

When in the Course of human events it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.

I would say that this is just another piece or proof that the designers of these documents were looking to set themselves equal to that of the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God. Meaning that they are spearating themselves from the British Empire, and nothing can stop, be it Nature or God, they have the right to do so. ** Just as the British Church separated from the Church of Rome **

As to E Pluribus Unum - "Out of Many - One", this could be out of many gods we have chosen one. And therefore should also be removed, in its' religous sense then. Yet, you could also argue that Out of many Colonies / States / People we have formed one Country. In this case is should stay. As it will be hard to prove the religous intent of thsoe who coined the phrase ** pun intended **, I could not see argueing for its' removal. Yet, I stand by the early statement that the word "God" should be removed from out coinage and money. The Declaration of Independence, is history, and as I stated above, I do not seeing it as saying this country should be ruled by religons, or given them any powers, even if it was a binding document.

 

[heretic888]

To be fair Heretic, every tree is a symbol to a Druid. Every river, every bird, every thing is a symbol and you cannot get rid of the symbology of it. You can get rid of the written word, which helps to define for those who wish to take actions or hang their hats on. And, no I will not go down that path, or all must be destroyed to obtain a completely absense of religous symbols.

To be fair, Rich, words are symbols, too.

Besides, many of the symbols I named off are specifically religious in origin --- such as the pentagrams, 'Star of David' (originally an Egyptian symbol), and the Eye of Osiris. Just because they don't seem that way to many of us --- owing to our general ignorance of ancient Western religion --- doesn't mean they are any less religiously 'loaded' than a cross or a yin-yang circle.

Actually, since Pythagoras got his mathematical symbology from the religious mysteries of Egypt --- pretty much all the symbology on the Great Seal is Egyptian. Interesting, neh?

Besides, I think they have historical significance, if nothing else.

I would say that this is just another piece or proof that the designers of these documents were looking to set themselves equal to that of the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God. Meaning that they are spearating themselves from the British Empire, and nothing can stop, be it Nature or God, they have the right to do so. ** Just as the British Church separated from the Church of Rome **

That wasn't the impression I got out of the Preamble.

"The separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them" sounds to me like an evocation of Unitarian-Deist ideology (not surprising, since Franklin and Jefferson wrote the damn thing), in which the "Laws of Nature and Nature's God" are specifically stated as bestowing these political powers upon human beings.

It is interesting to note their reference to "Nature's God", however, which may indicate a differentiation between a specific cult-based deity. Again, very Deist --- along the same lines of the erstwhile "God of Reason".

As to E Pluribus Unum - "Out of Many - One", this could be out of many gods we have chosen one. And therefore should also be removed, in its' religous sense then. Yet, you could also argue that Out of many Colonies / States / People we have formed one Country. In this case is should stay. As it will be hard to prove the religous intent of thsoe who coined the phrase ** pun intended **, I could not see argueing for its' removal.

"E Pluribus Unum", like the other symbology, is a very, very old phrase --- also originating among Greco-Egyptian mystery formulations. It means a lot of different things, some religious and some political.

And, as a side note, it advocates less of an exclusive monotheistic deity and more of a universal 'pantheus' (all-god). This, again, was very common among the Mystery Schools of the ancient Mediterranean, who in many ways saw all of their godmen (Osiris, Mithras, Dionysus, Bacchus, Adonis, Jesus, etc.) as being representations of a universal principle.

So, again, what this still all boils down to is completely removing the Great Seal --- since its loaded with religious symbols to the fore.

Yet, I stand by the early statement that the word "God" should be removed from out coinage and money. The Declaration of Independence, is history, and as I stated above, I do not seeing it as saying this country should be ruled by religons, or given them any powers, even if it was a binding document.

The Great Seal is history, too, and only a few decades younger than the Declaration of Independence. Nor does it advocate being ruled by "religion", since the "god" in question was "Nature's God", "God of Reason", or "pantheus". Depending on your particular interpretation.

You just have to see the Seal in context. All of the symbols go together (even the number of stars used and the number of levels to the pyramid indicate a deep understanding of numerology).

 

[Makalakumu]

To be fair, Rich, the meaning of "God" mentioned on the Great Seal is extremely dubious. In the background, we see the All-Seeing Eye of Osiris --- an Egyptian symbol. Over to the left, we see an eagle holding some laurel leaves and arrows --- both a Greek and Hindu symbol (depending on which part you are emphasizing). Above the eagle, we see a 6-pointed star (a Pythagorean symbol) made up of several 5-pointed pentagrams (another Pythagorean symbol).

All of that, taken with the phrase "E Pluribus Unum", gives the "In God We Trust" part something of a different context.

If you are reall so dead-set against religious references, are you therefore suggesting the Pythagorean pentagrams on our flag be removed?? The eagle be removed (the eagle is an avatar of Zeus)?? The Eye of Osiris?? Do you think the Declaration of Independence should be revised??

Hey, I'm all for demolishing the Pentagon and dashing these symbols from our lives! Ah well, gotta love the fnords...

Perhaps the eagle is a phoenix...

In which god do we trust...Eris?

Isn't Osiris a black god????

Pardon me, I digress...

upnorthkyosa

 

[heretic888]

In which god do we trust...Eris?

"Nature's God", as Jefferson and Franklin put it. Also known as "Pantheus" (All-God) and the "God of Reason". Presumably, anyway.

Also, I believe you are referring to Iris. Who, technically, is a goddess.

Isn't Osiris a black god????

*shrugs* Egyptian, not that it matters.

 

[Rich Parsons]

To be fair, Rich, words are symbols, too.

Besides, many of the symbols I named off are specifically religious in origin --- such as the pentagrams, 'Star of David' (originally an Egyptian symbol), and the Eye of Osiris. Just because they don't seem that way to many of us --- owing to our general ignorance of ancient Western religion --- doesn't mean they are any less religiously 'loaded' than a cross or a yin-yang circle.

Actually, since Pythagoras got his mathematical symbology from the religious mysteries of Egypt --- pretty much all the symbology on the Great Seal is Egyptian. Interesting, neh?

Besides, I think they have historical significance, if nothing else.



That wasn't the impression I got out of the Preamble.

"The separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them" sounds to me like an evocation of Unitarian-Deist ideology (not surprising, since Franklin and Jefferson wrote the damn thing), in which the "Laws of Nature and Nature's God" are specifically stated as bestowing these political powers upon human beings.

It is interesting to note their reference to "Nature's God", however, which may indicate a differentiation between a specific cult-based deity. Again, very Deist --- along the same lines of the erstwhile "God of Reason".



"E Pluribus Unum", like the other symbology, is a very, very old phrase --- also originating among Greco-Egyptian mystery formulations. It means a lot of different things, some religious and some political.

And, as a side note, it advocates less of an exclusive monotheistic deity and more of a universal 'pantheus' (all-god). This, again, was very common among the Mystery Schools of the ancient Mediterranean, who in many ways saw all of their godmen (Osiris, Mithras, Dionysus, Bacchus, Adonis, Jesus, etc.) as being representations of a universal principle.

So, again, what this still all boils down to is completely removing the Great Seal --- since its loaded with religious symbols to the fore.



The Great Seal is history, too, and only a few decades younger than the Declaration of Independence. Nor does it advocate being ruled by "religion", since the "god" in question was "Nature's God", "God of Reason", or "pantheus". Depending on your particular interpretation.

You just have to see the Seal in context. All of the symbols go together (even the number of stars used and the number of levels to the pyramid indicate a deep understanding of numerology).

You Heretic you!

Of course it is a symbol. Like I Said if you go down that road you must destroy everything. Yet, you can try to limit the issues and damage.

Only Historians and Mathematicians will know anything about Pythagoras or Al'Ge-bra, or the number of steps or levels in the pyramid, or that an Eye, is for ... , .

Yet, all the uneducated, and the Fundamentalists will grasp a hold of the symbol or word "God" and insist that the creators of those documents and seals were Christians just like them. And thereby have the seem meaning that their local perish is teaching to them, or what the Evangelist on TV is telling them. They will deny that any of the those founding fathers et al were Deists, even when presented with supporting statements. As you see it was not in the message they received. I have no problems with them getting messages or those that differ from mine. Only that I should not be forced to listen to their same message, if I am on a different path.

So, I am willing to leave the deep level symbols there, as they will not be used against the general public as the general public will not know anything about them at all. The obvious symbol "God" does cause issues. For the argument of well if it is on the money it must be ok for the pledge. Well if it is ok for the pledge and our money then it should be ok for our schools.

How about this for the same argument. Algebra was from an Islamic Culture. Should we also teach Islam to our students to better understand our Mathematics. Maybe we should bring back the Greek and Egyptian pantheons to better under stand our culture of democracy and mathematics and philosophy, and ... , .


Now here is an example of over lap.

In the ten Commandments it says Thou shall not Kill (* or Murder *) as some have translated it.

So the religions say it is bad to kill. A religious Moral.

We do not want out family to be killed by others. We value them. So their life and continued existence is a Value to us.

Society realizes that killing people randomly is a problem. Good people we need to perform certain functions are no longer with us. So society determines it is unethical to kill someone. An issue of Ethics.

Now, once it has been determine to be unethical, society through laws creates a punishment for killing others as a deterrent for such an act.

Now I have just used logic and reason to show how a matter from religion is also a matter of ethics and laws should be made. Yet, our highest document authorizing our Rights and responsibilities states the government shall not make laws about religions. This could be a contradiction such as your symbology. Yet, it is not. as you have other explanations for this action just like you do for the symbology (* excluding the symbol "God" *). Now as "God" is a direct symbology of a religion then it shall not be allowed.

So those with strong religious beliefs are capable of arguing their points of view, and trying to see if a society is ready to detriment if something is a matter of ethics. If it is a matter of ethics then a law can be created accordingly. If it is only a matter of religion then no law shall be create.

 

[heretic888]

Of course it is a symbol. Like I Said if you go down that road you must destroy everything. Yet, you can try to limit the issues and damage.

The problem, Rich, is that the "limit" you are trying to establish is completely arbitrary. Pentagrams and Stars of David are no less religious in origin than the word "God". Some will find all of the above religiously invasive, and some will find none of the above religiously invasive.

Only Historians and Mathematicians will know anything about Pythagoras or Al'Ge-bra, or the number of steps or levels in the pyramid, or that an Eye, is for ... , .

I am neither a historian nor a mathematician, and I know all that stuff. So did Joseph Campbell. So does Dennis Kucinich. Neither of them are/were historians or mathematicians, either.

Yet, all the uneducated, and the Fundamentalists will grasp a hold of the symbol or word "God" and insist that the creators of those documents and seals were Christians just like them. And thereby have the seem meaning that their local perish is teaching to them, or what the Evangelist on TV is telling them. They will deny that any of the those founding fathers et al were Deists, even when presented with supporting statements. As you see it was not in the message they received. I have no problems with them getting messages or those that differ from mine. Only that I should not be forced to listen to their same message, if I am on a different path.

The problem here is that the "limit" you are proposing is based on what the uneducated will do to abuse these things. Going by that reasoning, I could say we should completely overturn freedom of speech, right to bear arms, non-abolition, and so on. Because, namely, the uneducated and the fanatical could do much worse with those than they ever could with the Great Seal.

I don't think we should legislate matters on the basis of whether they are helpful to our particular political agendas. I think we should legislate matters on the basis of whether they harm or hurt society as a whole. I don't see how the Great Seal is causing harm to anyone.

I personally don't think a significant part of our country's historical tradition should be lopped off because of the political ammunition it provides for a few crazies. Anyone with half a brain will tell you that, at even its most basic translation, the Great Seal symbolizes religious tolerance and diversity and not favoritism. That, I believe, is a message worth embracing.

So, I am willing to leave the deep level symbols there, as they will not be used against the general public as the general public will not know anything about them at all. The obvious symbol "God" does cause issues. For the argument of well if it is on the money it must be ok for the pledge. Well if it is ok for the pledge and our money then it should be ok for our schools.

Apples, oranges, and pears, I'm afraid.

First off, a pledge of allegiance is unconstitutional and should be removed anyway --- regardless of whether it mentions the G-word or not. Secondly, the interjection of "one nation under God" was specifically placed in for propaganda purposes to differentiate our nation from those "heathen" commies. Thirdly, the pledge line is not a rich and ingrained part of our nation's history. The Seal is.

In regards to "God in school", I have no problem with this --- provided it is instructed in the appropriate setting. Comparative religion, philosophy, theory of knowledge, cultural anthropology, and so on. Creationism in a biology classroom, or "required" public prayer (a "moment for quiet reflection" would be acceptable, though), I'm against.

Like I said, apples, oranges, and pears. Or, lions, tigers, and bears. If you prefer.

How about this for the same argument. Algebra was from an Islamic Culture. Should we also teach Islam to our students to better understand our Mathematics. Maybe we should bring back the Greek and Egyptian pantheons to better under stand our culture of democracy and mathematics and philosophy, and ... , .

Sounds like a good idea to me. Nothing wrong with a well-rounded education.

Now here is an example of over lap.

In the ten Commandments it says Thou shall not Kill (* or Murder *) as some have translated it.

So the religions say it is bad to kill. A religious Moral.

We do not want out family to be killed by others. We value them. So their life and continued existence is a Value to us.

Society realizes that killing people randomly is a problem. Good people we need to perform certain functions are no longer with us. So society determines it is unethical to kill someone. An issue of Ethics.

Now, once it has been determine to be unethical, society through laws creates a punishment for killing others as a deterrent for such an act.

Now I have just used logic and reason to show how a matter from religion is also a matter of ethics and laws should be made. Yet, our highest document authorizing our Rights and responsibilities states the government shall not make laws about religions. This could be a contradiction such as your symbology. Yet, it is not. as you have other explanations for this action just like you do for the symbology (* excluding the symbol "God" *). Now as "God" is a direct symbology of a religion then it shall not be allowed.

I'm afraid your analogy is quite artificial, Rich. The Ten Commandments placed within a courthouse assumes loyalty to a specific religious tradition. The mentioning of "God" on the Great Seal does not --- in fact, it actually adds to the overall message by pointing out the "god" being espoused is one that embraces religious tolerance and diversity. It has no favored tradition or church. That is something worth keeping, methinks.

And, to note, Pentagrams, Eyes of Osiris, Stars of David, and the laurel-and-arrow carrying Eagle are all direct symbologies of religion, too.

So those with strong religious beliefs are capable of arguing their points of view, and trying to see if a society is ready to detriment if something is a matter of ethics. If it is a matter of ethics then a law can be created accordingly. If it is only a matter of religion then no law shall be create.

That's groovy and all, but it has nothing to do with the Great Seal. As before, the Great Seal does not advocate any particular religious belief or system. In fact, it does just the opposite.

Laterz.

 

[MGM]

heretic888,

The flaw in your argument about "In God We Trust" on US money is that the country was founded on the principle that the Church and State shall be kept separate.

Money = State
God = Church

God on the money = interference of religion/Church with the government

It doesn't matter how you try to justify the kind of god that is referenced it is still offensive.I as an American Citizen should be able to live my life with the religion of my choice(or none at all) and should not fear the interference of the the state in that regard.

 

[heretic888]

heretic888,

The flaw in your argument about "In God We Trust" on US money is that the country was founded on the principle that the Church and State shall be kept separate.

Money = State
God = Church

God on the money = interference of religion/Church with the government

It doesn't matter how you try to justify the kind of god that is referenced it is still offensive.I as an American Citizen should be able to live my life with the religion of my choice(or none at all) and should not fear the interference of the the state in that regard.

By that reasoning, we should henceforth remove all five-pointed stars from our flags because they too are religious symbols (and are actually far more specific and exact in their meaning than the G-word). One could argue that they aren't as well-known as the word "god", but I don't consider widespread ignorance to be a justification for determining such matters.

While we're at it, we should just remove the six-pointed star on the Great Seal, remove all arrow-and-laurel eagles, and revise all subsequent copies of the Declaration of Independence.

The further problem with your critique, I'm afraid, is that the entire point of the symbology on the Great Seal is religious tolerance and diversity (although those unfamiliar with the symbols may not understand this). No religous tradition or church is favored. E pluribus unum. From many, one.

Also, last time I checked, a single word on dollar bills in no way has ever encroached on my personal life or my religious beliefs. But, your experiences might be different than mine.

 

[heretic888]

Personally, who cares if there's a jumble of "pagan," and "Christian," symbols on our money? Atheists--who some folks quite correctly believe have made their own leap of faith in declaring that there ain't no God--fussing over Masonic imagery would do better to sweat over, say, the un-Constitutional recitation of forced prayer at public meetings. Money's just representative of our history...why go back and scrub off all the bits ya don't like? You'll be left with precious little history.

Nicely said, Robert.

 

[heretic888]

The preamble to the Constitution cites Nature's God simply in order to postulate an origin for subsequently-discussed Rights. Why?

My guess is that the authors of the Declaration, Thomas Jefferson and Ben Franklin, were deists that believed in that sort of thing.

Why? One explanation: essentialist theories explain why there are, "certain inalienable rights;" constructivist theories explain, and allow people intellectual grounds for building as just a society as possible.

Is there a tension between them? Sure. Perfectly healthy for the Republic. Built in, in fact. Good.

The problem with religious nutcakes (including the Madalyn Murray O'hares of the world) is that they want the tension to go away. This a bad thing. See Iran. See Lysenko.

Hrmph. Once again, nicely said.

However, science also has an Authority that's outside human intervention: Nature, to which we pray (just kidding) by observation and/or experiment. By definition, science tables and/or brackets the whole question of is there a God, placing that outside the order of science.

That depends entirely on what one means by "science" and what one means by "God". Also, how one acquires knowledge of both.

Laterz all.

 

[MGM]

By that reasoning, we should henceforth remove all five-pointed stars from our flags because they too are religious symbols (and are actually far more specific and exact in their meaning than the G-word). One could argue that they aren't as well-known as the word "god", but I don't consider widespread ignorance to be a justification for determining such matters.

While we're at it, we should just remove the six-pointed star on the Great Seal, remove all arrow-and-laurel eagles, and revise all subsequent copies of the Declaration of Independence.

The further problem with your critique, I'm afraid, is that the entire point of the symbology on the Great Seal is religious tolerance and diversity (although those unfamiliar with the symbols may not understand this). No religous tradition or church is favored. E pluribus unum. From many, one.

Also, last time I checked, a single word on dollar bills in no way has ever encroached on my personal life or my religious beliefs. But, your experiences might be different than mine.

I find your reasoning concerning the founding fathers and the symbolism on US money very intriguing.

Symbols and words are very different monsters. I did not suggest removing the seal only the word God or changing it. Words can be defined to be absolute very few symbols are absolute in there meaning or singular origin. A cross to most people today would be a Christian symbol but its roots are older than that and multi cultural the Egyptians, Celts, Greeks and Native Americans have crosses and different meanings and uses. You can find that for most symbolism, god is undeniable. None of the other symbolism on US currency has been used to exclude people, to inject hatred and intolerance into society the word God has. Most of the other symbols can have multiple meanings, god only has one some kind of supreme being that Americans must trust in. Because they can't rely on themselves? I am curious to what you think is the only meaning for the 5 pointed star?


If the point is religious tolerance than that in itself is the problem, the government should be free from religion. All religions or none should be accepted but the reality is they are not. My husband is a atheist my cousins are Mi'kmag both find the the word god on US money highly offensive. It is a daily reminder that they are not respected and do not belong. Of course no one that worships one god can really grasp exactly how offensive others may find it. That has been Americas problem with religious diversity the reality is most are Christian so those of us who are not and have very different spiritual views are cast aside.

I don't think the phrase E Pluribus Unum needs to be addressed it in no way has a exclusive religious connotation, out of many nations one, out of many ideas one nation and so on.

 

[loki09789]

By that reasoning, we should henceforth remove all five-pointed stars from our flags because they too are religious symbols (and are actually far more specific and exact in their meaning than the G-word).

Also, last time I checked, a single word on dollar bills in no way has ever encroached on my personal life or my religious beliefs. But, your experiences might be different than mine.

I have yet to see someone so offended that they refused to accept or apply money because they felt that the religious connotations infringed on their civil liberties and were indicators of a 'state church.'

The history/tradition motif that McR and Herrie mentioned make sense (and they beat me to commenting on it ).

There are far bigger issues to focus on than those.

I remember when the Susan B. Silver was instituted in recognition of women's rights and it was a flop. There is the Sakojawia (sp?) coin as well, I don't feel that these are 'objectifications of women' or that the gov. is forcing a 'pagan value structure' down my throat. I do notice that for all the complaining about 'Christian' stuff in American institutional tradition any attempt to inject other historically inspired 'non-Christian' stuff doesn't even get out the gate very often, we have Black History month and Martin Luther King Jr. Day - does anyone see any commemoration for Mr. Douglas?

 

[Rich Parsons]

The problem, Rich, is that the "limit" you are trying to establish is completely arbitrary. Pentagrams and Stars of David are no less religious in origin than the word "God". Some will find all of the above religiously invasive, and some will find none of the above religiously invasive.

Arbitrary. Name one thing, in law, or in life that is not Arbitrary? You draw a line in the sand, and go from there. Even though that line is Arbitrary.

I am neither a historian nor a mathematician, and I know all that stuff. So did Joseph Campbell. So does Dennis Kucinich. Neither of them are/were historians or mathematicians, either.

You are both. I you have studied History, and you quote history from your readings. You are also a mathematician, for you use logic form time to time.

The problem here is that the "limit" you are proposing is based on what the uneducated will do to abuse these things. Going by that reasoning, I could say we should completely overturn freedom of speech, right to bear arms, non-abolition, and so on. Because, namely, the uneducated and the fanatical could do much worse with those than they ever could with the Great Seal.

We have limits on the amount of Alcohol people can have in theri system. We have an age limit, because when it was 18, the 18 year olds bought for the 14 to 17 year olds as well. Many of thsoe young people were uneducated in the fact of alcohol poisoning or the effects of their actions.

The Freedom of speach and the right to bear arms are protected by the Bill of Rights or the Second Admendment, where is that Congress shall make no law respecting an established religion is the first.

I don't think we should legislate matters on the basis of whether they are helpful to our particular political agendas. I think we should legislate matters on the basis of whether they harm or hurt society as a whole. I don't see how the Great Seal is causing harm to anyone.

Hmmm Harm our society as a whole. The use of what society deems to be ethical, not moral. Very good. Well I deem that religions are harmful to our society. I deem that teaching them in public schools is harmful. As you stated before look at our history.

I also stated, and the E pluribus unum, can and has been argued not to be religous. Why are you hung up on that point. I have already conceeded that point in a previous post. I have also stated previously, that inclusion of toher societies and cultures would then be required, and I have no problem with that either. I am confused, by this arguement.

I personally don't think a significant part of our country's historical tradition should be lopped off because of the political ammunition it provides for a few crazies. Anyone with half a brain will tell you that, at even its most basic translation, the Great Seal symbolizes religious tolerance and diversity and not favoritism. That, I believe, is a message worth embracing.

I never said get rid of history. For if you did that, then there will be people who say slavery never existed in the U.S.A. Just like some in Germany believe that they did right by not teaching about the political movements of the 30's that launched Hitler, and then the attacks on the Jews and others.

Like I already said, in previous posts, I agree that multi-cultural is fine, if it is done well. The word In God We Trust are not part of the Great Seal. I still think they should be removed.

Apples, oranges, and pears, I'm afraid.

First off, a pledge of allegiance is unconstitutional and should be removed anyway --- regardless of whether it mentions the G-word or not. Secondly, the interjection of "one nation under God" was specifically placed in for propaganda purposes to differentiate our nation from those "heathen" commies. Thirdly, the pledge line is not a rich and ingrained part of our nation's history. The Seal is.

Why are you afraid? I have not threatened you

As to apples, oranges, and pears, they are all fruit. Are you implying someting

Seriously, though, you can draw that line with anything. Pick something, and I will draw the same conclusion that you are comparing apples to oranges. If you break somethign down far enough, you can always find differences. Even identical twins. For their expereinces are never the same. One was on the right while the other was on the left. Apples to oranges. Always a difference. You cannot get the black and white you are trying to imply is poosible.

As to the pledge, I agree it is illegal. Yet, it is a part of our history, so I could see keeping it, being argued. Hence my arguement to remove the words "Under God", which was nto part of the original in the first place.

In regards to "God in school", I have no problem with this --- provided it is instructed in the appropriate setting. Comparative religion, philosophy, theory of knowledge, cultural anthropology, and so on. Creationism in a biology classroom, or "required" public prayer (a "moment for quiet reflection" would be acceptable, though), I'm against.

God or creator in school. I have no problem either if they also cover the major cultures for religions as well. In biology, I do not see it, unless you argue my point, which is that maybe jsut maybe the creator, was smart enough to start with a work in progress and modify things as opposed to starting all over again. Maybe that is why life is Carbon based upon this planet??? So, it is possible only I do not see it being probably, in our culture to have everyone or a over whelming majority agree.

As to a moment of reflaction this is fine by me. Yet, the Catholics do not like and would prefer to have no one reflect upon God with out official guidance. Or at least that is the experience I have had with the local regional Catholics.

Like I said, apples, oranges, and pears. Or, lions, tigers, and bears. If you prefer.

Now why did you have to bring in our sports teams of Detroit?

Seriously, like I Said, I can argue this with anything. I do not consider it a valid arguement of dismissal. Yet, if you are truly arguing Hand to Hand Tactics and then discuss Nuclear War tactics, there will be differences. Yet, there will be similarities as well.

Sounds like a good idea to me. Nothing wrong with a well-rounded education.

Hmm, multicultural and understanding of others without the closed mindedness and single opinion of religion. Hmmm Possible in a republic, where freedoms and choice are supposed to be the way of operations? I would hope, so, yet, I see that my opinion does not matter, and that the fundalmentalists, and the afraid public, just like those who were afraid of the Communists, will make their voices heard louder than mine. Mass Hysteria, Raining Cats and Dogs, and oh be afraid of the Lions and Tigers and Bears oh MY! for they are behind every bush ** Pun not intended **

I'm afraid your analogy is quite artificial, Rich. The Ten Commandments placed within a courthouse assumes loyalty to a specific religious tradition. The mentioning of "God" on the Great Seal does not --- in fact, it actually adds to the overall message by pointing out the "god" being espoused is one that embraces religious tolerance and diversity. It has no favored tradition or church. That is something worth keeping, methinks.

Heretic, you missed the point. I was arguing that you could use the Ten Commandments to start out as something Moral, deem it a personal Value, and then argue the ethics of the issue or questions at hand, and then determine if a law is requried.

Now, I disagree with the the Ten Commandments being an absolute loyalty to a specific religious tradition, as first multiple religous traditions use it. Oh wait I already said the aples to oranges is not a good dismissal. Ok how about, if I use your historical arguement, of when it is place as a historical document, with the Magna Charter, and the U.S. Constitution and other codes of ethics form different cultures. Then this shows a direct lineage of where our laws were derviced from over time or from history.

Now, I am begining to see where this Great Seal Argument is going. Do you know more Latin than I? I think you do. Maybe my translations are poor.

I have taken these from this Website:
** E Pluribus Unum - Out of many - One
I see no mention of the word "God"

** Annuit Coeptis - Providence has Favored Our Undertakings
I see no mention of the word "God" (* I also thought is meant "Luck favors our endeavors or actions" Yet it has been 16 years since my Latin Class, adn I agree that I am a poor student of Latin.

** Novus Ordo Seclorum - A New Order of the Ages
I see no mention of the word "God" (* I also thought this was "Our New order of the time period / Age"

I see no mention of the word "God" in any of these translations. And also if you follow the links from the site I quoted, you will that most of these "quotes" are from the First Century B.C. and from Rome one of the greatest Republics of history. So, I can easily see why the quotes where chosen, and the symbols, as they were also used by another republic.

Once again, I state it is the Phrase "In God We Trust" that I think should be removed. Not the great seal, as it does have historical purposes way beyond those minor religous references you brought up. Yet, I see nothing but religion in the phrase I am addressing.

And, to note, Pentagrams, Eyes of Osiris, Stars of David, and the laurel-and-arrow carrying Eagle are all direct symbologies of religion, too.

Yes, Pentagrams. Also the symbols for Devil worship. Also the symbols for lts of things, in history, such as something that is multipointed yet, can be drawn in a continuous fashion to show there is no end and no beginning. The Star of David shows symmetry and balance. The Eye, has been used by so many cultures to represent seeing the future and or seeing the past or seeing into a person to judge them. As to showing it on a pyramid, it show that it is elevated, and thereby of a higher power or standing. As to the Eagle and the Laurel and Arrow, they were also used to show Peace and Weapons in the breath. We search for Peace and are capable of defending our selves.

Yet, as I have not attacked the Great Seal, I see no reason to remove, as I do not think it is a religious context. Yes they are symbols that other republics and cultures of history used to represent an idea, not just a faith system, that the creators of the seal used to form.

Yet, I still do not find a reason to have the words "In God We Trust" on our money. Can you give me a godo arguement other than it is already there?

That's groovy and all, but it has nothing to do with the Great Seal. As before, the Great Seal does not advocate any particular religious belief or system. In fact, it does just the opposite.

Laterz.

And I would still like for you to point out where I have personally attacked the Great Seal. I said one could argue that our of many one is a religous stament, yet the next sentence was an arguement for it not to be.

:asian:

PS: Are you calling me a half brain celled person? I will have you know I have three, One says Breath to the lungs, the other says Pump to the heart, and the other one does everything else. Hence I am really glad that you and Paul and Robert all type real slow for me.

 

[heretic888]

I find your reasoning concerning the founding fathers and the symbolism on US money very intriguing.

It probably helps that I know what those symbols actually mean.

Symbols and words are very different monsters.

Last time I checked, words were symbols.

I did not suggest removing the seal only the word God or changing it.

I know you didn't. I was merely pointing out the logical hypocrisy of your position. A five-pointed star is as much a religious symbol as the word "God".

Words can be defined to be absolute very few symbols are absolute in there meaning or singular origin.

Once again, words are symbols.

Secondly, your logic as applied to the word "God" is horridly flawed. Do you actually think "God" has an exact and specific meaning?? Perhaps you should spend more time speaking to people of the theistic leanings.

And, yes, the five-pointed star comes from a particular place in the world (Egypt) and has a very specific meaning. Much more specific than "God".

You can find that for most symbolism, god is undeniable. None of the other symbolism on US currency has been used to exclude people, to inject hatred and intolerance into society the word God has. Most of the other symbols can have multiple meanings, god only has one some kind of supreme being that Americans must trust in.

And the sneaky, sneaky agenda finally shows its ugly face.

First off, your interpretation of "God" as having one-and-only interpretation for all time is rather silly. Anyone with even a cursory study of comparative religion could tell you that.

Secondly, your qualifiers as the word "God" being synonymous with "hatred", "intolerance", and "exclusion" denotes personal ideology at stake here. Not calm reasoning and inclusivity.

Thirdly, there is much bigger fish to fry if your so upset about the state and religion issue.

I am curious to what you think is the only meaning for the 5 pointed star?

Read something Pythagorean.

If the point is religious tolerance than that in itself is the problem, the government should be free from religion.

Ummm....a message of religious tolerance and diversity is a problem??

My husband is a atheist my cousins are Mi'kmag both find the the word god on US money highly offensive. It is a daily reminder that they are not respected and do not belong. Of course no one that worships one god can really grasp exactly how offensive others may find it. That has been Americas problem with religious diversity the reality is most are Christian so those of us who are not and have very different spiritual views are cast aside.

I do so love the implication that those that disagree with you apparently "worship one god" and "can't understand our pain".

Seriously, is a single word printed on slips of paper you use to buy skim milk and Twix bars really that offensive?? Does it really violate your ability to worship how you choose??

Kinda odd, yah ask me. I'm something of a Zen Buddhist (more or less), and I in no way feel offended anytime I buy something at the 7-11. But, again, maybe I'm just not "sensitive" enough. Guess I'm just ignorant of the fact that I'm being unconsciously excluded by all them biggoted Christians whenever I stockpile my Mountain Dew Code Reds.

I don't think the phrase E Pluribus Unum needs to be addressed it in no way has a exclusive religious connotation, out of many nations one, out of many ideas one nation and so on.

If you will note, my dear Watson, I never made the claim it only had one meaning. In fact, I said just the opposite. Remember, it is a very, very, very old term and a very, very, very old concept.

And one of those meanings, by the way, are religious in connotation.

Laterz.

 

[heretic888]

I have yet to see someone so offended that they refused to accept or apply money because they felt that the religious connotations infringed on their civil liberties and were indicators of a 'state church.'

The history/tradition motif that McR and Herrie mentioned make sense (and they beat me to commenting on it ).

There are far bigger issues to focus on than those.

I remember when the Susan B. Silver was instituted in recognition of women's rights and it was a flop. There is the Sakojawia (sp?) coin as well, I don't feel that these are 'objectifications of women' or that the gov. is forcing a 'pagan value structure' down my throat. I do notice that for all the complaining about 'Christian' stuff in American institutional tradition any attempt to inject other historically inspired 'non-Christian' stuff doesn't even get out the gate very often, we have Black History month and Martin Luther King Jr. Day - does anyone see any commemoration for Mr. Douglas?

Nicely put, loki.

 

[heretic888]

Arbitrary. Name one thing, in law, or in life that is not Arbitrary? You draw a line in the sand, and go from there. Even though that line is Arbitrary.

Some lines are formulated by reason. Some are not.

There is no actual reason to draw the line at "God" when the Eye of Osiris is winking at you.

You are both. I you have studied History, and you quote history from your readings. You are also a mathematician, for you use logic form time to time.

If you're going by that criteria, then everyone I know is a "historian" and "mathematician".

We have limits on the amount of Alcohol people can have in theri system. We have an age limit, because when it was 18, the 18 year olds bought for the 14 to 17 year olds as well. Many of thsoe young people were uneducated in the fact of alcohol poisoning or the effects of their actions.

The Freedom of speach and the right to bear arms are protected by the Bill of Rights or the Second Admendment, where is that Congress shall make no law respecting an established religion is the first.

Doesn't change the fact that crazies and fanatics could do some really nasty things with all of those. Again, that's not a sound reason to ban or deny something.

Hmmm Harm our society as a whole. The use of what society deems to be ethical, not moral. Very good. Well I deem that religions are harmful to our society. I deem that teaching them in public schools is harmful. As you stated before look at our history.

I deem ignorance is more harmful.

I also stated, and the E pluribus unum, can and has been argued not to be religous. Why are you hung up on that point.

The people that are arguing its "not religious" (although it has many meanings) clealry don't know where the term comes from. The same with the five-pointed stars.

As to the pledge, I agree it is illegal. Yet, it is a part of our history, so I could see keeping it, being argued. Hence my arguement to remove the words "Under God", which was nto part of the original in the first place.

A false analogy. A word on slips of papers used to buy screwdrivers and donuts does not impede people's rights. A forced pledge of allegiance does.

God or creator in school. I have no problem either if they also cover the major cultures for religions as well. In biology, I do not see it, unless you argue my point, which is that maybe jsut maybe the creator, was smart enough to start with a work in progress and modify things as opposed to starting all over again. Maybe that is why life is Carbon based upon this planet??? So, it is possible only I do not see it being probably, in our culture to have everyone or a over whelming majority agree.

I think you missed the point of what I was trying to say.

Seriously, like I Said, I can argue this with anything. I do not consider it a valid arguement of dismissal. Yet, if you are truly arguing Hand to Hand Tactics and then discuss Nuclear War tactics, there will be differences. Yet, there will be similarities as well.

The difference is there is gradation in lethality between hand-to-hand and nukes. There is no such difference with the word "God" and the Eye.

Now, I am begining to see where this Great Seal Argument is going. Do you know more Latin than I? I think you do. Maybe my translations are poor.

No, I just know where are these symbols and terms come from.

** E Pluribus Unum - Out of many - One

Old mystery school term.

** Annuit Coeptis - Providence has Favored Our Undertakings

You apparently don't know this, Rich, but "providence" means "heaven".

** Novus Ordo Seclorum - A New Order of the Ages

The New Age, huh?? Nope, not religious at all.

I see no mention of the word "God" in any of these translations. And also if you follow the links from the site I quoted, you will that most of these "quotes" are from the First Century B.C. and from Rome one of the greatest Republics of history. So, I can easily see why the quotes where chosen, and the symbols, as they were also used by another republic.

They're much older than that.

Once again, I state it is the Phrase "In God We Trust" that I think should be removed. Not the great seal, as it does have historical purposes way beyond those minor religous references you brought up. Yet, I see nothing but religion in the phrase I am addressing.

Explain to me how "In God We Trust" has any less historical significance than the Great Seal. Also explain to me how the Eye and the Pentagram and the two-faced Eagle are any less religious than "God".

Yes, Pentagrams. Also the symbols for Devil worship. Also the symbols for lts of things, in history, such as something that is multipointed yet, can be drawn in a continuous fashion to show there is no end and no beginning. The Star of David shows symmetry and balance. The Eye, has been used by so many cultures to represent seeing the future and or seeing the past or seeing into a person to judge them. As to showing it on a pyramid, it show that it is elevated, and thereby of a higher power or standing. As to the Eagle and the Laurel and Arrow, they were also used to show Peace and Weapons in the breath. We search for Peace and are capable of defending our selves.

Actually, those are all Egyptian and Pythagorean symbols. The association with "devil worship" owes to populist ignorance. I have yet to see the Eye of Osiris portrayed in any other culture but Egypt. The Star of David was adopted by the Hebrews from the Egyptians (along with the notion of monotheism). The Two-Faced Eagle is a combination of Greek, Egyptian, and Hindu symbols.

Most of these symbols are explained by Pythagoras' "sacred geometry". Nothing symmetrical about it.

Laterz.

 

[Makalakumu]

The first third party in the United States was an anti-freemasonic party. I believe this party was started by the second president of the US. Why did it start? If you look at the dollar bill, it is replete with occult symbolry.

Occult does not mean devil worship, it means hidden. Some confuse this. Yet, the hidden meaning of these symbols exists like a set of russian dolls. The deeper one goes, the more faces one uncovers.

The one thing that can be said for sure is that most Americans know very little about the meaning of those symbols...

upnorthkyosa

PS - This is now starting to become part of popular culture. See the movie "National Treasure" with Nicolas Cage.

http://disney.go.com/disneypictures/nationaltreasure/

 

[heretic888]

The first third party in the United States was an anti-freemasonic party. I believe this party was started by the second president of the US. Why did it start? If you look at the dollar bill, it is replete with occult symbolry.

Occult does not mean devil worship, it means hidden. Some confuse this. Yet, the hidden meaning of these symbols exists like a set of russian dolls. The deeper one goes, the more faces one uncovers.

The one thing that can be said for sure is that most Americans know very little about the meaning of those symbols...

upnorthkyosa

PS - This is now starting to become part of popular culture. See the movie "National Treasure" with Nicolas Cage.

http://disney.go.com/disneypictures/nationaltreasure/

Nicely put, upnorthkyosa.

It is true that the Masonic connection is where the Founding Fathers got most of this symbolism from. It should also be remembered that being a Mason then meant something wholly different than it does now.

Also, in case anyone is interested both the "cross of light" and the "Jesus fish" are originally Egypto-Pythagorean symbols, too.

Laterz.