Since Christians have said that the word God on the dollar bill isn't about religion, then certainly it would be ok to put In the Flying Spaghetti Monster we trust, since it wouldn't be a religious statement to put that either, right?
Also, in the pledge, since God isn't there as a religious establishment, neither would having it say "One nation, under His Noodly Appendage".
Your thoughts, and please remember, saying No it has to be God, isn't that "religious",
it might not be a seperation of church state issue, clearly not a violation of the first amendment in my view, so neither would replacing God with FSM, right?
2006-08-29
10:16:24
·
11 answers
·
asked by
Anonymous
in
Society & Culture
➔ Religion & Spirituality
Same as everything else that crosses the borders between church and state, even if just a little, some would march to try to stop it, and some wouldn't care.
I think it would be hilarious to have the FSM on money.
2006-08-30 01:28:51
·
answer #1
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
1⤋
Is that 'Flying Spaghetti Monster' you love to talk about a Jim Darwin eater? Yes? Oh boy, I can't wait!
Lamentations 4:3 (KJV)
Even the sea MONSTERS [my caps] draw out the breast, they give suck to their young ones: the daughter of my people is become cruel, like the ostriches in the wilderness.
Seriously, though-
I don't know which 'christians' told you that the God on our money wasn't God. All of the founding fathers believed in God in some way, so that couldn't be true, Jimmie Boy. This country was established primarily so [true] Christian liberty could be maintained, so you and your type are [historical] misfits!
2006-08-29 10:27:48
·
answer #2
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
0⤋
It does matter.
The whole point of using God, is to assert that there will be no earthly person or governing body that we will succumb to. Americans are subject to no one. It's like saying that in the hierarchy of the universe, only God reigns above America. If they weren't trying to be PC, then God would have been left out.
It's ok, because on this planet, the word God is just the universally accepted (English) expression of whatever your belief entails. It doesn't specifically imply christianity or even religion.
FSM cannot replace the word God because it has no meaning for 99.99999999999999999999999% of the population.
2006-08-29 12:17:08
·
answer #3
·
answered by limendoz 5
·
0⤊
1⤋
What could Christians do if God became out to be Allah or Krishna? despite the end result, somebody is going to be very much taken aback, disappointed or merely unaware. consequence a million. there is an afterlife desperate by one real religious perception. Then the overpowering majority would be very much taken aback and disappointed. consequence 2. there is an afterlife and spiritual perception is the least substantial ingredient that dictates your experience there. Then every physique would be very much taken aback. consequence 3. you merely quit to be. there is no longer something. you're none the wiser.
2016-12-11 17:28:26
·
answer #4
·
answered by ? 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
I think that sounds like a lovely proposal, Jim :)
When swearing in, in court, we can use the Gospel of the FSM and say 'Do you swear to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you Parmesan?' Or something to that effect...yes, very good idea :)
2006-08-29 10:24:40
·
answer #5
·
answered by ♥ Luveniar♫ 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
I like the Noodly Appendage. I'd spend more money if it said that.
2006-08-29 10:23:12
·
answer #6
·
answered by skippybuttknuckle 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
Gee,I'm not sure. Maybe when atheists and agnostics stop using the money because it says in God we trust, then maybe, but would we have a need to change it then?
2006-08-29 10:24:39
·
answer #7
·
answered by classyjazzcreations 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
I don't really understand your question tonight.
Could you send me a few hundred bills of each denomination so I can check them out for you?
2006-08-29 13:39:25
·
answer #8
·
answered by peppermint_paddy 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
God loves you.
that gentle tugging deep inside, give in.
2006-08-29 23:16:28
·
answer #9
·
answered by jbme 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
I think we should be able to customize our money to our own individual tastes. Think about it: "designer money." People could finally accessorize their cash with their clothes.
Seriously though, you're right, it doesn't matter.
2006-08-29 10:24:19
·
answer #10
·
answered by boukenger 4
·
0⤊
0⤋