God No Longer On Edge
To postulate that we all trust in God is perhaps just a tad bit presumptuous, don’t you think? I mean, many don’t even believe in, or are at best iffy about, the existence of a supreme entity in the first place, so I’m fairly certain that those folks would probably take issue. “We trust whom? Really?”
But, of course, being the godly nation that we are (I’m sure the Almighty is so very proud), it’s only fitting that mandatory emblazonment of In God We Trust be conferred upon all currency minted and printed in these United States of America. Infidels need to just suck it up.
And it must be most prominently displayed, of course, lest the religious right-wing looney tunes get their panties in a bunch! Apparently they are avid readers of coinage, and wish to not be required to squint when reading their daily affirmation.
So now they’ve gone ballistic about the unsatisfactory design of the latest U.S. Mint’s gold-colored dollar coins, in tribute to our dead presidents. Four coins are released per year. The first four, honoring George Washington, John Adams, Thomas Jefferson and James Madison, were issued last year.
More to come, stay tuned. Oh, the anticipation!
Anyway, under Congressional edict, the Mint was required to place the national mottos In God We Trust and E Pluribus Unum along the edge of the coins. The idea was to allow for more dramatic portraits and fancy artwork on the heads and tails.
Well, that was apparently most unacceptable! The Moral Majority of coin-reading Christians complained that the words were hard to read, and that they might wear off over time.
So Congress buckled, of course, recognizing the error of their ways. Live and learn. Now, they’ve tweaked the rules to better please the Lord and the lunatics, so that the phrase In God We Trust has greater prominence on the new presidential dollar coins.
They’ve passed legislation that the phrase be moved from the edge (where one might presumably rub God the wrong way) to the back or front of the coin.
God bless America.
President George W. Bush signed the measure into law last month after the Religious Right conservatives complained about the new coins, insisting that by relegating the phrase to the edge of the coin was some kind of malevolent plot to ditch the phrase altogether.
I really doubt that the good Lord would mind so much if we did just that.
presidential coins, u.s. mint, in god we trust, gold dollar coins, religious right, george bush
February 3rd, 2008 at 3:11 am
The question should be does God Trust Us?
The mint would probably burn to the ground.
God doesn’t carry coins around. Keep your God in your church or home. Don’t place GOD on dirty money used to pay hookers, buy SuperBowl beer, crack cocaine,gay sex toys, murderous bullets—what kind of God fearing people would WANT this?
February 3rd, 2008 at 3:16 am
“The question should be does God Trust Us?”
He ought not. Although, I’ll admit, I do intend to buy my Super Bowl beer tomorrow. And maybe a gay sex toy or two while I’m out and about. But other than that, YOU GO DJ!
February 3rd, 2008 at 6:14 am
These folks have always struck me as superstitious more than religious.
February 3rd, 2008 at 8:38 am
“To postulate that we all trust in God is perhaps just a tad bit presumptuous, don’t you think?”
No more presumptuous than postulating that we want most of that money ripped out of our paychecks every week to go towards supporting failed and nutty liberal ideas. You want to steal so much away from us to keep fighting your lost “war on poverty” and other liberal wealth redistribution schemes that the least you could do is not whine that some people like having “In God we Trust” on our cash.
February 3rd, 2008 at 8:41 am
This post has pissed ME THE FUCK OFF. I can’t wait for this Bush fuck to get out of office.
February 3rd, 2008 at 10:44 am
Language, language little navigator… But I would feel the same way- if Bush would be replaced by, say, Rush or Ann Coulter.
February 3rd, 2008 at 12:00 pm
FUCK Rush and Coulter
February 3rd, 2008 at 12:03 pm
Doug, your post got me all fiesty. It must be the Superbowl testerone building up.
February 3rd, 2008 at 1:19 pm
Loquacious - “the least you could do is not whine that some people like having ‘In God we Trust’ on our cash.”
Hardly whining here. Seems to me the whining is coming from the the far right in this case, because their national mantra just isn’t in it’s appropriate and apparently God-ordained location. Nobody’s suggesting doing away with it or replacing it something nefariously sacrilegious like Satan Rocks.
Little navigator - GO PATS!!!!!! FUCK!!!!!!
February 3rd, 2008 at 1:25 pm
But I want Satan Rocks! You take the fun out of everything, Doug.
February 3rd, 2008 at 2:13 pm
Prefer the socialist Clinton or Obama? How foolish.
February 3rd, 2008 at 2:21 pm
Fact- it does not matter one way or the other if our money has “In God we Trust” on it or not. I have no problem with it but I can’t imagine wasting time either defending or fighting it. My point is that I just don’t want government stealing out of my paycheck to pay for their programs. THAT is something that actually hurts families trying to get by- the high taxes they have to pay.
February 3rd, 2008 at 2:21 pm
Wouldn’t it be nice if the faux Christians got outraged about important issues like, poverty lack of health care, bigotry and war?
Real Christians are already outraged about those things, I guess that’s one way to tell them apart.
February 3rd, 2008 at 2:22 pm
The point, after thinking about this a bit longer, is simply this: fight for something that matters and actually impacts lives.
February 3rd, 2008 at 2:23 pm
faux Christians heart faux News
February 3rd, 2008 at 2:26 pm
“that money ripped out of our paychecks every week to go towards supporting failed and nutty liberal ideas. ”
Yeah ,wanting to provide for the less fortunate is a nutty idea, wanting to give health care to the poor is a nutty idea.
Your honor, I rest my damn case:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/Iraq/Story/0,,2008189,00.html
February 3rd, 2008 at 2:36 pm
The verdicit is in.
This court rules in favor of the weather — Rain.
February 3rd, 2008 at 2:37 pm
“The point, after thinking about this a bit longer, is simply this: fight for something that matters and actually impacts lives.”
I agree with you there, Loquacious. That was my point all along! By the way, welcome to the fray.
Rainlillie - Thanks for the link, too. Yeppers, kind of case-closed there.
February 3rd, 2008 at 2:39 pm
Doug, your point isn’t lost on everyone.
February 3rd, 2008 at 2:42 pm
“Doug, your point isn’t lost on everyone.”
I agree, it isn’t.
February 3rd, 2008 at 2:42 pm
Good - I was trusting God that it wouldn’t be.
February 3rd, 2008 at 2:46 pm
“Good - I was trusting God that it wouldn’t be.”
Doug sometimes I wish you were on my team because I would totally bed you.
February 3rd, 2008 at 2:51 pm
“Doug sometimes I wish you were on my team because I would totally bed you.”
ROTFLMAO!!
February 3rd, 2008 at 2:54 pm
Ditto ROTFLMAO, my little navigator. Been there, done that, doubt if I’ll do it again, but … never say never!
February 3rd, 2008 at 3:07 pm
Damn! And Valentine’s Day is just around the corner.
February 3rd, 2008 at 3:45 pm
Ok, to make it clear; helping the poor is not a nutty idea. Thinking government should do it - and can do it well - is the nutty idea.
February 3rd, 2008 at 3:53 pm
I love government cheese. Grew up on it. Yummy!
February 3rd, 2008 at 3:59 pm
I can tell…
February 3rd, 2008 at 4:02 pm
Wouldn’t have it any other way.
February 3rd, 2008 at 4:09 pm
“I love government cheese. Grew up on it. Yummy!”
LOL!
Thinking government should do it - and can do it well - is the nutty idea.
By your logic we should do away with the following agencies:
FAA
EPA
NHTSA
FDA
February 3rd, 2008 at 4:12 pm
“Ditto ROTFLMAO, my little navigator. Been there, done that, doubt if I’ll do it again, but … never say never”
LOL!
February 3rd, 2008 at 4:20 pm
“Don’t place GOD on dirty money used to pay hookers, buy SuperBowl beer, crack cocaine,gay sex toys, murderous bullets—what kind of God fearing people would WANT this?”
Great point!
February 3rd, 2008 at 4:28 pm
Too bad you fail to realize that it’s not government - its the people, the ones that work - that pay for that “cheese.”
And no, some government is useful. How many billions have we spent to win the war on poverty? Do we still have poverty? Of course. Clearly it is not government that lowers poverty- it is jobs that gets people out of poverty. Any answer to that? We’ve been fighting the “war on poverty” since LBJ. How much longer will it take to get you people to understand that it’s not working???
February 3rd, 2008 at 4:34 pm
Loquacious - I’ll let the billions spent for the failure that is the “war on terror” go for now, but just a question: If in your opinion, the war on poverty is not working, how would you propose to fix that? What are we doing wrong that should change, or what other option would you propose? (I’m not being facetious, it’s really an honest question!)
February 3rd, 2008 at 4:40 pm
I don’t fail to realize that the taxes I pay on my six figure salary is paying for government cheese. I have no problem with that.
February 3rd, 2008 at 4:43 pm
An honest answer- get government out of the way: deregulate to a reasonable level business, lower taxes, drill in the arctic preserve, offshore in the gulf, to name but a few things. This will create jobs. Those that won’t work can starve. Those that CAN’T work I’m happy to help; but said help should be turned over to local churches, local communities, and local organizations. With big government, there is no accountability. But local communities, churches, etc. can set standards with a hand up, not a never ending supply of hand outs. I’m sure this will generate more attacks against me but I don’t think it is too much to ask to expect people that can to be responsible. Again, I’m talking about won’t vs. can’t.
February 3rd, 2008 at 4:48 pm
I’m sure my defination of those who won’t vs. can’t differs from yours.
February 3rd, 2008 at 4:49 pm
Doug, see…I’m not a libertarian. No matter what that darn test said.
February 3rd, 2008 at 4:52 pm
Can’t are those that are disabled in some way and can’t work. Won’t are those that are fit enough to work but prefer to live off my labor.
February 3rd, 2008 at 4:55 pm
Life isn’t that cut and dry.
February 3rd, 2008 at 5:02 pm
Sure it is- you can’t work, you can’t work. You can, then you can. Seems pretty simple to me.
But there is no point in continuing to discuss this. You and your side will continue to steal out of my paycheck to fund your fantasy world.
I can’t stop you- much to my regret. Eventually you’ll get yours, though. The system you advocate cannot support itself forever and when all your “freebies” dry up you’ll learn. I honestly find that sad- because a lot of people will suffer when that happens. But go ahead- continue to think theft from people who work is the solution.
February 3rd, 2008 at 5:07 pm
Oh good, the discussion is over.
February 3rd, 2008 at 5:09 pm
When reason and facts don’t make a dent then why continue?
February 3rd, 2008 at 5:11 pm
Then we agree, the discussion is over.
February 3rd, 2008 at 5:12 pm
Loquacious - You and your side will continue to steal out of my paycheck to fund your fantasy world. I can’t stop you- much to my regret. Eventually you’ll get yours, though.
Oh wait, doh! Those were your words, I’m preaching to the choir. Never mind.
February 3rd, 2008 at 5:13 pm
Yes, reason and facts did not make an impression on you so the discussion is over. You can go back to bashing Bush now.
February 3rd, 2008 at 5:15 pm
Thanks.
Bush is a FUCK.
February 3rd, 2008 at 5:19 pm
“Don’t place GOD on dirty money used to pay hookers, buy SuperBowl beer, crack cocaine,gay sex toys, murderous bullets—what kind of God fearing people would WANT this?�
Diane, sounds like your life is much more exciting than mine.
February 3rd, 2008 at 5:20 pm
I feel sorry for you. I really do.
Good evening to all; it’s been, sadly, pointless.
February 3rd, 2008 at 5:21 pm
little navigator,
I agree, life isn’t that cut and dry. There are a lot of factors that haven’t been stated as to why some people can’t work.
Anyone who complains about programs to help the poor must be pro-choice. It would be very hypocritical for them to be anti-choice.
The anti- choice people, don’t want women to terminate their pregnancies, but some don’t believe in programs to help poor women out financially and with medical assistance.
If you’re going to be against abortion you should be in favor of programs to help care for the child once it’s born.
February 3rd, 2008 at 5:24 pm
“You can go back to bashing Bush now.”
As if he hasn’t left himself wide open for criticism.
February 3rd, 2008 at 5:24 pm
Don’t feel sorry for me. I drive a nice car while on welfare.
February 3rd, 2008 at 5:31 pm
Rain, everything you wrote is right on.
February 3rd, 2008 at 5:36 pm
Loquacious, No, it hasn’t been pointless at all. Just because I and others disagree with you, and you won’t in a million yrs change my mind any more than I would think I could possibly change yours, doesn’t make discussion pointless.
February 3rd, 2008 at 5:41 pm
Doug, discussions are pointless when someone enters them with the intention of changing minds, and a “my way is the right way” point of view.
As Rain has said before, we may not always agree but we’re family. She can say that with confidence because we respect each other’s opinion and don’t stomp our feet when other’s don’t agree.
Okay, I do stomp my feet, but you can’t see me when I do.
February 3rd, 2008 at 5:59 pm
“Doug, discussions are pointless when someone enters them with the intention of changing minds, and a “my way is the right wayâ€? point of view.”
You’ve read my mind, little navigator. This has been my theme song lately. To steal shamelessly from someone in “the other room,” the word spew comes to mind. I don’t mind other views (though I confess I am really getting sick of the word “view”). But if someone’s intention is to come onto a site and spoil the discussion by insulting and whining, I would call that a spew. I don’t have any patience for spewers….. I actually thought for a split second that it’d be possible to ask LD if he was confusing “government” for “bureaucracy” in #26 (”Ok, to make it clear; helping the poor is not a nutty idea. Thinking government should do it - and can do it well - is the nutty idea”)…. But then I read on and saw what his intention was in “commenting” here. I’d rather watch the SuperBowl (who’s playing again? i never remember).
February 3rd, 2008 at 9:30 pm
“I actually thought for a split second that it’d be possible to ask LD if he was confusing “governmentâ€? for “bureaucracyâ€?
I never thought about it that way. I like your point.
I also like LD’s name. It’s a great take on Silent Dogood. But I had to give him (her?) flip responses because LD isn’t as clever as Silent Dogood.
February 3rd, 2008 at 11:34 pm
Sybil and little navigator … I love you.
February 4th, 2008 at 9:10 am
Doug, stop playing with my heart.
February 9th, 2008 at 10:48 pm
Nah, I’m no player. I’d rub your edge any day.
February 10th, 2008 at 5:11 pm
Is it possible Loquacious Dogood has been outed, or is it just coincidence?
http://www.rightnewsandviews.com/fight-poverty-work/