God Bless America

[IVB]

While I have to admit I have not faced the same persecution as IVB - the danger with the no public mention of religion is that it impedes on the freedom of speech. I think that is why this topic can be so hard - you basically have two constitutionally given rights that tend to be contradictory in some settings.

Freedom of speech isn't a relevant comparison. That is for individuals. What i'm talking about is state-sanctioned speech. Currency, the pledge, and God Bless America at public and taxpayer subsidized stadiums are all examples of state-sanctioned speech.

If someone wants to personally recite scripture next to me at the ballpark, go f'ing nuts. When a song with God in it comes on and we are all expected to stand and sing and feel awkward if we don't, that crosses the line. When I am expected to pledge allegiance to a God i don't believe in, that crosses the line.

 

[WayneW]

Currency, the pledge, and God Bless America at public and taxpayer subsidized stadiums are all examples of state-sanctioned speech.

I think that starts a slippery slope as almost any business wanting to expand or re-locate is offered some sort of tax credit or incentive, making them taxpayer subsidized in some sense. Therefore, I could claim that almost any medium-to-large business or facility is taxpayer subsidized to some degree. And if that privately owned business wants to exercise their freedom of speech, does that become state-sanctioned? And how how long is a subsidized business considered state-sanctioned, (i.e. what is the statue of limitations for when they have free speech again)?

 

[123]

... any business wanting to expand or re-locate is offered some sort of tax credit or incentive, making them taxpayer subsidized ... Therefore, ... almost any medium-to-large business or facility is taxpayer subsidized to some degree. And if that privately owned business wants to exercise their freedom of speech, does that become state-sanctioned? And how how long is a subsidized business considered state-sanctioned, (i.e. what is the statue of limitations for when they have free speech again)?

A train leaves Chicago at 3:00 PM travelling east at 50 mph.

Another train leaves New York at the same time travelling west at 65 mph.

Quick, which one is federally subsidized?

B)

 

[samgreco]

That is true to this day. Well, maybe the Democrats among you don't, but god damn the redneck republican boys in those bars & restaurants certainly do.

Are you serious? I'm not sure if you've ever been to the southeast, but there are more democratic upper crust bigots and assholes than I can shake a stick at. Georgia had not had a Republican governor since ~1870 till the latest one, and it has alot of those redneck boys you mention. Democrat and Republican are meaningless labels currently. The current democratic congress was in power since 2002 and had strong hand in our current economic and geo-political woes. In my experience political affiliation is no indicator of the type of person someone is.

--Jamie

The Democrats did not gain control of congress, either house, until the 2006 elections. So they took control in January of 2007.

As for Democrat or Republicans? I have seen bigotry on both sides. My world is a bit skewed since I come from Chicago, where we have had a city council of 50 Democrats and no Republicans since, well, forever. And yet, I have seen some of the worst bigotry I have ever seen in Chicago.

Now, I am as left as they come (well not THAT far left) but we need to be careful in generalizing and stereotyping people.

And yes, they are meaningless labels these days.

IVB, I have friends of all stripes and have seen exactly what you are talking of too many times in my life. After 9/11 I saw people so many people that I knew, being treated like dirt because people THOUGHT they were Muslim. Which of course, is a flaw too. There are how many Muslims in the world now. Over a billion? And a handful of them are extremist morons. It's not Muslims that are the problem. It's morons. And they don't have a specific religion or nationality. They're everywhere.

 

[DeLicious]

Damn, away just a couple of days and look what happens! Let me try to catch up.

Seriously though, what type of response is the OP expecting? Approval? Berating? Argumentative?

I was expecting opinions on whether I deserve abuse for leaving my hat on, one way or the other... not a full fledged theological/idealogical discussion.

In the end, believe in yourself while still maintaining respect and tolerance for others that do this as well.

Wise words.

Hmm...based on this thread, there seems to be a high correlation between "atheist" and "home automation".

Yes, it's very difficult for us to convince our guests that God is turning on the lights for us.

Also, I too am amazed at the discourse here. I have seen these discussions on other fora get REALLY ugly. I think us HA-ers are a unique lot.

I whole-heartedly agree here. You guys have been very impressive so far.

Regardless of my feelings on religion, if our country was bourne on the premise of religion and "In God We Trust" was important to our founding fathers, my own feelings aren't that relevant. It's what this country was based on.

On the contrary, this is exactly what our country was NOT based on. The Framers wanted to avoid this situation like the plague. "In God We Trust" did not appear on US currency until 1864, during the Civil War, and did not become the official US motto until 1956. That can hardly be considered as stemming from the Framers.

I do think anyone who'd sue a state or church or school over an anthem or a pledge should be exiled to some 3rd world country - where rights don't exist. If religion is being forced down your throat and you don't agree, then you're right to protest - but to protest against others who practice their religion in your presence while accepting your differences - that just pisses me off (if you protest that the pledge of allegiance is read, even if they accept you sitting out - you're the problem, not them).

You say that if they accept me while I sit out, then I'm the problem. But even as a kid in elementary school, I left out "under God" from the pledge we were required to recite every day. How many times did I end up in the Principal's office? Who is the problem here?

What i'm talking about is state-sanctioned speech. Currency, the pledge, and God Bless America at public and taxpayer subsidized stadiums are all examples of state-sanctioned speech.

While I agree with much of IVB's thoughts about keeping things personal, and I sympathize with his position of minority, both at home (although it's easier to keep my minority status hidden) and abroad (not easy to blend in when I'm in Indonesia ), I can't agree here. There is a difference between taxpayer subsidized stadiums and state-owned stadiums. Here in Dallas is a good example. The new Cowboys stadium was certainly subsidized by the residents of Arlington, but is owned by Jerry Jones. The Ballpark in Arlington is actually owned by the City of Arlington. If Jerry wants to play religious stuff in a place he owns... fine. If the City of Arlington is shoving it down my throat, that's where I have a problem.

 

[DeLicious]

A train leaves Chicago at 3:00 PM travelling east at 50 mph.

Another train leaves New York at the same time travelling west at 65 mph.

Quick, which one is federally subsidized?

B)

Neither! The airline lobbyists have prevented federal subsidies for railroads!

 

[Kevin L]

A train leaves Chicago at 3:00 PM travelling east at 50 mph.

Another train leaves New York at the same time travelling west at 65 mph.

Quick, which one is federally subsidized?

B)

That's easy. Look who's in the White House. ACORN would make sure the Chicago train got the subsidy.

 

[123]

Bah-da bing!

Ah well. After eight years of kickbacks to the oil and defense offense industries, why not a new direction?

 

[IVB]

Currency, the pledge, and God Bless America at public and taxpayer subsidized stadiums are all examples of state-sanctioned speech.

I think that starts a slippery slope as almost any business wanting to expand or re-locate is offered some sort of tax credit or incentive, making them taxpayer subsidized in some sense. Therefore, I could claim that almost any medium-to-large business or facility is taxpayer subsidized to some degree. And if that privately owned business wants to exercise their freedom of speech, does that become state-sanctioned? And how how long is a subsidized business considered state-sanctioned, (i.e. what is the statue of limitations for when they have free speech again)?

Not sure that's a relevant question. The EEOC guidelines have religion as a protected class, but that also means that any use of "God" in that setting is already risky. Sure, small companies have pretty much zero risk of that, but a medium to large size company is clearly facing EEOC exposure if they publicly recite the pledge, or God Bless WallStreet, or ..., in a setting where it'll be awkward for people to not participate. And I have some experience here too. I was a company exec at a publicly traded financial institution, I was asked to stand in the front of the room at a department gathering while another department head led a 'moment of silence to pray for a colleague who's brother was shot'. I was positively livid internally at watching everyone else bow their head in the workforce in an offering to "God" and being forced to do the same since everyone was watching me. I didn't file a complaint and didn't even go on record despite HR's request, but about a half-dozen people did.

I ask again - what's the potential upside? What value is there to be gained by engaging in this behavior in public, taxpayer subsidized venues? The downside is blindingly obvious, given the ever increasing tension between Christianity, Islam, and every other religion/athiesm, I don't see why we shouldn't just yank it all immediately.

There's enough problems in this country & world that we need to focus on what unites us, and discard that which unecessarily divides us.

Seriously, are people that insecure in their religious beliefs that they feel that they must make the minority uncomfortable? What does this buy you? Why do you insist on continuing this?

 

[123]

I hear you, IVB. The intent was to demonstrate respect but it could've been accomplished without the requirement for prayer. For anyone who doesn't see the point, just escalate the requirement to "fasting" or "make a sacrifice" or something else your religion doesn't do in this situation.

A simple 'Moment of silence for John's departed brother' would've shown sufficient respect without the religious overtone.

PS
Come to think of it, that's what we normally say about Remembrance Day (Veteran's Day in the US). On the eleventh hour we show respect by silently reflecting on the fallen. Pray for them if that's how you choose to but don't compel others to follow a religious practice.

 

[tmbrown97]

Wow - the old expression of "never discuss religion or politics in polite company" comes to mind. I'm truly surprised that things I said could be called out and quoted in a negative sense. That said, I have no hard feelings - and will speak my mind - I hope we're all mature enough to do that on the same level.

I'm not religious - oddly enough... my father was atheist with a true belief in reincarnation; my mother was Mormon and talked me into being baptized mormon. For High School, I went to a catholic school and was forced to follow their practice. In the end, it was all so confusing, I chose a path: The Golden Rule. I will do unto others as I'd expect them to do unto me. I want to be the best person I can; I'm forgiving for just about anything; I want to see the best in everyone.

IVB - The topics you speak of are ones I don't want to touch on too much for political reasons - I have no problem with people from any culture - but I do have a problem with the spanish signs all over my town. I have a problem with the airport security I deal with because of "fairness" BS. They card everyone at the bar at the airport because they can't be accused of discrimination (80 yrs old? can't discriminate - must card)... That's stupid. I do unfortunately believe in racial profiling... or maybe not racial but appearance-based profiling. A white-trash white guy should be judged/inspected the same as a gangster-lookin' black guy or any other stereo-type you'd like to add.... it's not stereotyping - it's increasing odds of finding what you're looking for.

And you speak of Eldorado Hills... You're absolutely right - in this area, there's a large population of Indians in Folsom or Eldorado Hills - but a lot of rednecks live there too. I drove there in my brand new suburban and the locals talked shit about me and made a scene too - they're idiots and they're unavoidable. Like it or not (and I don't), that's part of this country.

The US is the most tolerant country in the world - to a fault. People express their problems, but the country allows immigration to run out of control. A point that'll make me a target and I don't want to get into too much - but I'm all for anyone who wants to come to the US to be a US citizen... but if you think you're going to change the US or your region to be the same as whatever country you came from - I have issue with that. If you want to be in the US and receive US benefits, put in the same thing that I did. Pay unemployment; Pay taxes.

I fear we're getting too personal... and IVB - I am the most tolerant/forgiving person I know - I have no issue with you or your family... And oddly enough, I'm not a real christian - but I do believe in the fact that the US was based on christianity and I respect that for them. If you came to this country and don't believe in what the country is based on - why'd you come? Were you intent on forcing our country to comply with your beliefs?

Again - not personal - I really don't want a battle here - just intellectual conversation. I want to learn more about different views.

 

[samgreco]

IVB - The topics you speak of are ones I don't want to touch on too much for political reasons - I have no problem with people from any culture - but I do have a problem with the spanish signs all over my town. I have a problem with the airport security I deal with because of "fairness" BS. They card everyone at the bar at the airport because they can't be accused of discrimination (80 yrs old? can't discriminate - must card)... That's stupid. I do unfortunately believe in racial profiling... or maybe not racial but appearance-based profiling. A white-trash white guy should be judged/inspected the same as a gangster-lookin' black guy or any other stereo-type you'd like to add.... it's not stereotyping - it's increasing odds of finding what you're looking for.

How many times have I heard "He doesn't look like a killer? Or some such. Whether you truly believe that everyone that looks a certain way should be suspected. The fact is is doesn't work. Most law enforcement types will tell you that it's behavior that tells the story. A recent example is Professor Henry Louis Gates of Harvard. A black man who was harassed by police while unlocking the door to his house. He was asked for his ID and he asked what his crime was. They grabbed him and hauled him off to jail. Why? You can't tell me that it was anything but because he was black. That was in Cambridge. Strike one for tolerance.

And as for Spanish signs, as I recall, the Spanish controlled California for a good while after they stole from the Native Americans. So maybe all of the signs should be in Hopi or whatever tribes controlled that territory. Or does the fact that we beat everyone to a pulp make us right?

The US is the most tolerant country in the world - to a fault. People express their problems, but the country allows immigration to run out of control. A point that'll make me a target and I don't want to get into too much - but I'm all for anyone who wants to come to the US to be a US citizen... but if you think you're going to change the US or your region to be the same as whatever country you came from - I have issue with that. If you want to be in the US and receive US benefits, put in the same thing that I did. Pay unemployment; Pay taxes.

The killer is, that many of the illegals that are here working DO pay taxes and unemployment under someone else SSN. They NEVER get any of that money. They can't. So all of the money they pay into the system STAYS there. Funny how no one ever talks about that.

As for tolerance, I cannot agree that we are the most tolerant. We just play at it. And we're not very good at it either.

I fear we're getting too personal... and IVB - I am the most tolerant/forgiving person I know - I have no issue with you or your family... And oddly enough, I'm not a real christian - but I do believe in the fact that the US was based on christianity and I respect that for them. If you came to this country and don't believe in what the country is based on - why'd you come? Were you intent on forcing our country to comply with your beliefs?

Again - not personal - I really don't want a battle here - just intellectual conversation. I want to learn more about different views.

Many came to this country precisely because it was NOT a Christian country. We were founded on separation of Church and State. Where one can practice whatever religion they please or none at all. A large chunk of them (the founding fathers) were Diests. Meaning that they believe in a creator, nothing more. Most of them believe that Christ existed, but was a man, not a god. Some were Christian, but understood the need for complete freedom of religion.

I have read both the Constitution and and the Declaration. I challenge anyone to find one reference to Christ in either document. There are only a couple of references to God. In fact, here is the opening paragraph from the Declaration:

"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."

Does Laws of Nature and of Nature's God sound like it's exclusively Christian to you?

Todd, I don't want to start a range war here, but this statement "If you came to this country and don't believe in what the country is based on - why'd you come? Were you intent on forcing our country to comply with your beliefs?" I find most intolerant.

If I read the founding documents of this country correctly, then this is the PERFECT country for ANYONE to want to live in.

It's too bad that we keep losing sight of that.

 

[IVB]

I am the most tolerant/forgiving person I know ...I do believe in the fact that the US was based on christianity and I respect that for them. If you came to this country and don't believe in what the country is based on - why'd you come? Were you intent on forcing our country to comply with your beliefs?

Hmmm. According to the U.S. constitution I learned in school, the US was founded on freedom of religion. Why did *your* family come here? Or are you a native american?

Here's what I see as the 1st Amendment, care to tell me what other portions were purely make believe?

Amendment 1 - Freedom of Religion, Press, Expression. Ratified 12/15/1791
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.

Are the people really allowed to have freedom of speech? Perhaps the press? Are we allowed to peaceably assemble?

I didn't realize the Bill of Rights or the 1st Amendment was a joke. Somebody better tell the jews, the muslims, the hindus, the reporters, the community organizers that by existing in this country, they're violating your view of the "Real America".

If you want to be in the US and receive US benefits, put in the same thing that I did. Pay unemployment; Pay taxes.

According to my last filing, I pay more taxes on an absolute $$ basis than 96.4% of the population (and I had more deductions this past year than ever before - the last 3 years really sucked). Assuming you're in that 96.4%, does that mean i'm better than you? Boy I hope you think so, because otherwise that's a pretty hypocritical statement.

 

[tmbrown97]

IVB - my rant wasn't about you in particular... in fact I have no issue whatsoever who came to this country the way you did - who pay their taxes, contribute effectively to society, etc. That part was specific to the people who come to this country to milk the social benefits and don't put their part in. Then again, I feel the same way about native americans who are fully able physically and mentally yet still choose to be a drain on society rather than a productive contributor. As far as the income thing - it's not about that... I'm also in the boat of paying ridiculous taxes, never getting the rebates or government assistance everyone else seems to get...

A lot of what I said is being taken to a whole other level guys... I believe in freedom of speech, freedom of religion, etc. I don't like people who tell me I'm going to hell because I'm not like them... but I welcome people to practice any religion or belief that suits them as long as it doesn't actively bring harm to others.

and samgreco - of course you can't catch everyone - there are those who don't seem to fit the mold... but if I were lookin' to buy drugs on the street, would I walk up to the business man in a suit or the long-haired surfer-dude (well maybe it depends on the drug)? I don't think we're really saying anything different - you can't judge or discriminate on someone purely because of race or religion (I don't believe in that either)... there are white guys who look like sharp businessmen and those who look like white trash. There are black guys that look like sharp businessmen and there are those who look like thugs. You can take that into any race/culture. That said, I guess what I should've more accurately said is that I don't believe in racial profiling, but appearance/behavior-based profiling. I don't care if you're white/black/muslim/chinese/etc - if you look like a problem I'm OK with you getting harassed to an extent... I dealt with a certain amount of that as a kid - the cops would pull me over and screw with me all the time because I looked like I was up to no good. Now I look like a normal responsible member of society and they treat me with respect.

Either way - my main principal in life is just "Live and Let Live". You (and that's not directed at anyone but just a general statement) do your thing, I'll do mine... as long as we're not affecting each other, it shouldn't matter. Regardless of my personal beliefs about religion, the "In God we Trust" on my money doesn't inspire or offend me. It was important to the people who put it there, and I respect that.

 

[IVB]

I have many thoughts about your post, mainly about how we are absolutely NOT in a Live and Let Live sociey (ie, public pressure for hindus and athiests to stand up while "God Bless America" is played in public venues, Mormons from out of CA spending boatloads to ban gay marriage in CA as if that somehow invalidates their own marriages), but before we get into all that, I still need to hear your clarification about what you meant by this:

If you came to this country and don't believe in what the country is based on - why'd you come? Were you intent on forcing our country to comply with your beliefs?

Why, pray tell, is this *your* country and not mine? Is your U.S. passport a different color than mine?

Aside from the Bay Area, most of what i've seen & heard has been "Let me live however I want to live according to my judeo-christian beliefs, and i'll let you live and maybe only racially harass you". Then again, after 9/11 that's not even always true.