# In God We Trust on U.S. currency



## Thorlifter (Aug 20, 2008)

Here's your chance to let the media know where the people stand on our faith in God, as a nation. NBC is taking a poll on "In God We Trust" to stay on our American currency. Please send this to everyone you know so they can vote on this important subject.
Please do it right away, before NBC takes this off the web page.
MSNBC poll is still open so you can vote.

Live Vote: Should â€˜In God We Trustâ€™ be yanked? - Life - MSNBC.com


----------



## wilbur1 (Aug 20, 2008)

Voted no 31% said yes, 69% said no


----------



## ccheese (Aug 20, 2008)

The tally is 30% yes, 70% no as of 1123 EDT today.

Charles


----------



## evangilder (Aug 20, 2008)

No vote for me also.


----------



## pbfoot (Aug 20, 2008)

It should be on your loot its part and parcel of US currency


----------



## Freebird (Aug 20, 2008)

Thorlifter said:


> Here's your chance to let the media know where the people stand...



I think the people have already let MSNBC know where we stand, by tuning out Kieth Oberman and his constant anti-Bush rants.

The best result would be if Oberman MSNBC put up a poll *AND NOBODY VOTED*!  

Cable News Nielsen TV Ratings for Tuesday, June 10, 2008

June 2008 Nielson ratings.

8PM - P2+ (25-54)
FOX The O’Reilly Factor- 2,592,000 viewers (582,000)
CNN Election Center– 712,000 viewers (227,000)
MSNBC Countdown w/ Olbermann – 1,192,000 viewers (368,000)
CNBC Your Money Your Vote- 300,000 viewers (65,000)

MSNBC + CNBC + CNN = less combined viewers than Fox


----------



## Erich (Aug 20, 2008)

can I yank NBC ?


----------



## ToughOmbre (Aug 20, 2008)

I'm sure MSNBC, the official Obama campaign headquarters, is rooting for "yes" votes, led by their resident left wing nut job Keith Olbermann. 

In a world where most of the American mainstream media slants to the left, the NBC network is off the charts. They are despicable!

TO


----------



## Freebird (Aug 20, 2008)

Erich said:


> can I yank NBC ?



It already has for me. The only radio show I used to listen to on NBC {MSNBC} was "Scarbourough Country", but the ratings for the network were so low on Satellite radio that the entire channel was dumped....


----------



## pbfoot (Aug 20, 2008)

Fox News is the equivilant of The Colbert report except Colbert knows he is a comedy show


----------



## Erich (Aug 20, 2008)

hmmmmmmmm I thought Colbert was running for pres as an independent ? or was it govenor of S.C. ?


----------



## ToughOmbre (Aug 20, 2008)

pbfoot said:


> Fox News is the equivilant of The Colbert report except Colbert knows he is a comedy show



Comedy show?  

Got to disagree pb. Fox does slant to the right, but at least there is some semblance of balance and fairness as compared to MSNBC.

Example:

O'Reilly will put left wing opposing views on his show all the time and fight it out. When did you ever see Olbermann put an opposing view on his dopey show?

TO


----------



## JugBR (Aug 20, 2008)

we could use something like that in "Real"(R$) :

"for god we pray"







help !


----------



## magnocain (Aug 20, 2008)

> hmmmmmmmm I thought Colbert was running for pres as an independent ? or was it govenor of S.C. ?


From Wiki.


> Under his fictional persona in The Colbert Report, Colbert dropped hints of a potential presidential run throughout 2007, with speculation intensifying following the release of his book, I Am America (And So Can You!), which he claimed was widely rumored to be a sign that he was indeed testing the waters for a future bid for the White House. On October 16, 2007, he announced his candidacy on his show, stating his intention to run both on the Republican and Democratic platforms, but only as a "favorite son" in his native South Carolina. He later abandoned plans to run as a Republican due to the $35,000 fee required to file for the South Carolina primary, however he continued to seek a place on the Democratic ballot and on October 28, 2007, campaigned in the South Carolina state capital of Columbia, where he was presented with the key to the city by Mayor Bob Coble.
> 
> On November 1, 2007, the South Carolina Democratic Party executive council voted 13–3 to refuse Colbert's application onto the ballot. “The general sense of the council was that he wasn’t a serious candidate and that was why he wasn’t selected to be on the ballot," stated John Werner, the party's director. In addition, he was declared "not viable," as he was only running in one state. Several days later he announced that he was dropping out of the race, saying that he did not wish to put the country through an agonizing Supreme Court battle. CNN has reported that Obama supporters pressured the South Carolina Democratic Executive Council to keep Colbert off the ballot. One anonymous member of the council told CNN that former State Superintendent of Education Inez Tenenbaum had placed pressure on them to refuse Colbert's application despite his steady rise in polls.


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Aug 20, 2008)

I just voted to keep it.

I personally do not really care if it is on there or not, I would however like it to stay for historical reasons.


----------



## RabidAlien (Aug 20, 2008)

I voted to keep it.


----------



## mkloby (Aug 20, 2008)

pbfoot said:


> Fox News is the equivilant of The Colbert report except Colbert knows he is a comedy show



Fox News is truly a great news channel. Look at how it wipes the floor with other news channels.


----------



## pbfoot (Aug 20, 2008)

mkloby said:


> Fox News is truly a great news channel. Look at how it wipes the floor with other news channels.


I'm sorry I don't consider it a reliable news source . To me its kind of like those Hollywood shows that give you all the gossip of Tom Cruise and Angelina Jolies baby except its cleverly disguised as news


----------



## Freebird (Aug 20, 2008)

pbfoot said:


> I'm sorry I don't consider it a reliable news source . To me its kind of like those Hollywood shows that give you all the gossip of Tom Cruise and Angelina Jolies baby except its cleverly disguised as news



What is the difference between Fox and the other US channels? {NBC, CBS etc}

Are you accusing Fox of broadcasting fake news? Is there some example of mis-reporting by Fox?

Tom Angelina? Fox broadcasts news about the wars in Georgia Iraq Afganistan, Hurricane Katrina, politics, the economy, world events, the olympics, the environment etc etc. Hardly the same as Hollywood news. 

Wouldn't that be like me watching 30 min of Canadian Air Farce on CBC and then judging the network to be only a comedy channel?


----------



## mkloby (Aug 20, 2008)

It's a news channel with a conservative leaning - although they do, more often than not, have opposing viewpoints when covering controversial issues.

If you watch the news channels, listen to the anchors and newsmen, you can see the difference in the reporting. A great example is Dan Rather slandering the president with his unbacked allegations several years back, which did ultimately cost him his job.


----------



## machine shop tom (Aug 20, 2008)

I voted to yank it.

tom


----------



## Lucky13 (Aug 21, 2008)

As a non American I have a wee question to you my Yankee and Redneck brothers.....is this another political correctness thing? That they don't want to offend other believes...?


----------



## ToughOmbre (Aug 21, 2008)

This particular poll is nothing more than a exercise that illustrates the left leaning mindset of MSNBC. 

Glad I switched to Verizon FIOS so I don't have to exposed to their garbage.

TO


----------



## timshatz (Aug 21, 2008)

Lucky13 said:


> As a non American I have a wee question to you my Yankee and Redneck brothers.....is this another political correctness thing? That they don't want to offend other believes...?



Probably not in this case. "In God We Trust" has been around almost as long as the country and definitely has it's basis in the founding fathers Christianity. Bringing in the Muslims, Buddhist, Taoist, ect just adds more to the pot. 

If it were PC (with a dash of seperation of Church and State), they'd get rid of it.


----------



## Lucky13 (Aug 21, 2008)

Personally, I'd vote to keep it....why would you want to get rid off something that's part of your heritage, history and so on?
I don't know what would be similar here on the Pound notes....


----------



## timshatz (Aug 21, 2008)

Agree with ya' Lucky.


----------



## ToughOmbre (Aug 21, 2008)

Heritage, history, tradition, Judeo-Christian beliefs and ideals.....

Not real important to the left. But I don't think there's much chance of those words being removed from our currency.

TO


----------



## Lucky13 (Aug 21, 2008)

What'll they try next, have you change your national hymn or become a kingdom!?


----------



## Erich (Aug 21, 2008)

what they will try is "In everything we believe"

that sounds too hoaky


----------



## JugBR (Aug 21, 2008)

how about:

"i´m loving it"

???


----------



## Bucksnort101 (Aug 21, 2008)

Maybe add an asterisk next to the quota and a disclaimer at the bottom of each bill stating to trust in the God of your choice, or of your an athiest to trust in yourself. Not sure what to say about the Satan worshippers, maybe just a simple go to He!!?
Maybe that will keep the un-washed hoards happy.


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Aug 21, 2008)

pbfoot said:


> I'm sorry I don't consider it a reliable news source . To me its kind of like those Hollywood shows that give you all the gossip of Tom Cruise and Angelina Jolies baby except its cleverly disguised as news



What do you consider a reliable news source? Examples please.


----------



## Lucky13 (Aug 21, 2008)

The Sun maybe?


----------



## ONE_HELLCAT (Aug 21, 2008)

I say keep it. I'm going to go out on a limb and say that the majority of people don't care what it says, but more of how valuable the dollar is. I think the whole, "In God We Trust" and "Under God" thing isn't as big of a deal as people make it out to be. I have an atheist friend and he simply doesn't say "Under God" when they say the pledge. My other friends simply didn't care when they say that line.

My point is that those words only have power if you give them power. The groups that want them removed are giving them more meaning than the average Joe does, I think.


----------



## Marcel (Aug 21, 2008)

We had the same text on the Dutch Guilder ("God zij met ons"). We managed to keep it on all Dutch made Euro coins.


----------



## magnocain (Aug 21, 2008)

Kinda off topic, but separation of church and state is a falsehood. What the_letter_ by Thomas Jefferson meant was a separation of state and church. 

The letter from wiki...


> "Believing with you that religion is a matter which lies solely between Man his God, that he owes account to none other for his faith or his worship, that the legitimate powers of government reach actions only, not opinions, I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should "make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof," thus building a wall of separation between Church State."



It means that the state cannot tell the church what to do, not the other way around. Like many things, it has been blown out of all proportion.


----------



## Freebird (Aug 21, 2008)

Lucky13 said:


> I have a wee question to you my Yankee and Redneck brothers.....



Hmmm, I'm not a Yankee, so I guess that makes me a....  



Lucky13 said:


> Personally, I'd vote to keep it....why would you want to get rid off something that's part of your heritage, history and so on?
> *I don't know what would be similar here on the Pound notes....[/*QUOTE]
> 
> Replace the Queen with Dame Edna perhaps....
> ...


----------



## Njaco (Aug 21, 2008)

as of 10pm EST its 24% yes 76% no.

So the 95% of the world's population that is religious should bow to the atheists of the world? I'd love to turn the tables on these wack jobs - sue them for violating my civil rights.


----------



## Thorlifter (Aug 21, 2008)

OH, but then you would be the kook who is opressing them Njaco. I mean really!!!! Haven't you learned better by now?


----------



## Erich (Aug 21, 2008)

I'm telling Obama Njaco ! ..............

and magno is quite correct about state/church


----------



## Bearcat (Aug 21, 2008)

Too many people mistake freedom _of_religion with freedom _from_ religion.... The current state of affairs in this country with regards to this issue makes me think of the 2nd Psalm.. v1-3.


----------



## RabidAlien (Aug 22, 2008)

Njaco said:


> as of 10pm EST its 24% yes 76% no.
> 
> So the 95% of the world's population that is religious should bow to the atheists of the world? I'd love to turn the tables on these wack jobs - sue them for violating my civil rights.



I'll have to go back and look again, but I thought the vote was to remove "in God we trust", meaning that the "no" votes do not want to _remove _it. IE, keep it. Usually when they try tricky wording like that, they're hoping that everyone will vote "YES", thinking its the same debate about whether to _keep _the wording.

Right now it stands at:
Yes. It's a violation of the principle of separation of church and state.
23% (remove it)

No. The motto has historical and patriotic significance and does nothing to establish a state religion.
77% (keep it)


----------



## Njaco (Aug 22, 2008)

> Kinda off topic, but separation of church and state is a falsehood. What theletter by Thomas Jefferson meant was a separation of state and church.



Thats in the Federalist Papers, correct? I agree with your conclusion, Magno.



> OH, but then you would be the kook who is opressing them Njaco. I mean really!!!! Haven't you learned better by now?



Can't we all just get along?


----------



## Freebird (Aug 22, 2008)

magnocain said:


> Kinda off topic, but separation of church and state is a falsehood. What the_letter_ by Thomas Jefferson meant was a separation of state and church.
> 
> The letter from wiki...
> 
> It means that the state cannot tell the church what to do, not the other way around. Like many things, it has been blown out of all proportion.



Not quite Magno, the "Establishment clause" as it's known means very simply: The US government will not *require* citizens to belong to any particular religion, nor will it *prevent* them from belonging to or worshiping any particular religion.




Njaco said:


> Thats in the Federalist Papers, correct? I agree with your conclusion, Magno.



The mis-interpretation of the "establishment clause" by activist courts to ban prayer in schools, ban Christmas dispays on public lands etc has now gone from silly to ridiculous .


----------



## Konigstiger205 (Aug 23, 2008)

Why should you get "In God we trust" off the money?...let me guess...the minorities felt offended...


----------



## magnocain (Aug 23, 2008)

> Why should you get "In God we trust" off the money?...let me guess...the minorities felt offended...


Yep. Heaven forbid if a small minority gets offended. If they take it off they will make the majority offended. No one cares about the majority.


----------



## ToughOmbre (Aug 23, 2008)

freebird said:


> Not quite Magno, the "Establishment clause" as it's known means very simply: The US government will not *require* citizens to belong to any particular religion, nor will it *prevent* them from belonging to or worshiping any particular religion.





freebird said:


> The mis-interpretation of the "establishment clause" by activist courts to ban prayer in schools, ban Christmas dispays on public lands etc has now gone from silly to ridiculous .



Absolutely correct freebird! And many times these issues never even get to court. The ACLU threatens court action against a municipality, the locals then decide the money and time to fight the suit is not worth it, and they cave to the ACLU extortionists. 

TO


----------



## Amsel (Aug 23, 2008)

It is all part of the insanity of the new state sponsored religion of the world....political correctness.

Nowadays if you are a white gun owning god fearing Christian you are a bad guy. If you are a homosexual, feminist, illegal alien, or a violent criminal who had a bad break , you are a good guy. Western civilization is teetering on the edge.


----------



## Freebird (Aug 23, 2008)

ToughOmbre said:


> Absolutely correct freebird! And many times these issues never even get to court. The ACLU threatens court action against a municipality, the locals then decide the money and time to fight the suit is not worth it, and they cave to the ACLU extortionists.
> 
> TO



Yes and even worse TO, every case wrongly decided becomes precedent.


Every time I heard Hannity shill for Guiliani "Vote for Guiliani and he'll appoint another Scalia", I just rolled my eyes...

OK everyone, the President DOES NOT APPOINT JUDGES - he *nominates* them. If another "Scalia" is nominated, he will probably end up just like Robert Bork - thumbs down in the Senate.

Sorry to rain on your parade folks, but a President McCain would be lucky to get another "O'Conner" or "Kennedy" past a majority liberal senate. You are likely to have many more of these flakey verdicts on Religion, Guns civil liberties cases


----------



## mkloby (Aug 23, 2008)

freebird said:


> Yes and even worse TO, every case wrongly decided becomes precedent.
> 
> 
> Every time I heard Hannity shill for Guiliani "Vote for Guiliani and he'll appoint another Scalia", I just rolled my eyes...
> ...



That is assuming that the democrats maintain their slim majority in Congress.


----------



## Njaco (Aug 24, 2008)

Congress has a poorer rating than the President right now and I hope voters remember in November.


----------



## Freebird (Aug 24, 2008)

mkloby said:


> That is assuming that the democrats maintain their slim majority in Congress.




It's only the Senate that counts of course {for Judges}

It would be some miracle if the Repub's gain control, considering the # of incumbent GOP Senators retiring, and the political wind seems to be blowing that way. Supposedly the "Generic ballot" has Republicans down by about 15%, but for some reason Obama is barely ahead of McCain.


----------

