Wisconsin Capitol Building's "Holiday Tree"

[sageofages]

Originally Posted by AlphaFrog

O



RLY?

Which god does this refer to?

Yours or Mine? Or my neighbors'?

Or My wiccan friends', my jewish friends', my hindu friends', my catholic friends', my methodist friends', my republican friends', my democratic friends', my libertarian friends'........

[KSig RC]

Originally Posted by sageofages

Which god does this refer to?

Yours or Mine? Or my neighbors'?

Or My wiccan friends', my jewish friends', my hindu friends', my catholic friends', my methodist friends', my republican friends', my democratic friends', my libertarian friends'........

Well, most of your Jewish friends aren't allowed to write the word "G-d" so your point, while well intentioned, is laughably short-sighted.

[skylark]

Originally Posted by KSig RC

Well, most of your Jewish friends aren't allowed to write the word "G-d" so your point, while well intentioned, is laughably short-sighted.

Not all jewish people believe that this applies to "god" in english. My own understanding was that most jewish people think it is fine, but that might be because the jewish people I know tend to be on the more non-orthodox side. Jews that believe writing "god" is okay believe that the rule about not writing "god" down only applies in the ancient hebrew text. http://www.aish.com/rabbi/ATR_browse...tqak&offset=10

[KSig RC]

Originally Posted by skylark

Not all jewish people believe that this applies to "god" in english. My own understanding was that most jewish people think it is fine, but that might be because the jewish people I know tend to be on the more non-orthodox side. Jews that believe writing "god" is okay believe that the rule about not writing "god" down only applies in the ancient hebrew text. http://www.aish.com/rabbi/ATR_browse...tqak&offset=10

I think you likely understand that my point stands as an example of why saying something as inane as "ALL RELIGIONS SAY GOD SO IT'S NOT CHRISTIAN!" absolutely is not correct, considering the founding of the nation and the fact that, indeed, other religions do not refer to God in that way. "Most" may have been an overstatement, though, I'll agree.

[skylark]

Originally Posted by KSig RC

I think you likely understand that my point stands as an example of why saying something as inane as "ALL RELIGIONS SAY GOD SO IT'S NOT CHRISTIAN!" absolutely is not correct, considering the founding of the nation and the fact that, indeed, other religions do not refer to God in that way. "Most" may have been an overstatement, though, I'll agree.

I think that maybe we're dealing with something that is not as black and white as saying "all religions say god so it's not christian" (which I don't think anyone said on this thread, but is your summary of either mine or sageoface's comments). I agree that while the statement "in god we trust" may have originally been referring to a christian god (and acknowledged such in my earlier post)... but the government making such a statement does not carry with it the overt christian symbolism as a christmas tree or nativity scene. I tend to think that the sentiments expressed in the phrase "in god we trust" are consistent with most other religions, since most acknowledge a higher power. In contrast, the sentiments expressed by say, mary holding a baby jesus, is not an idea that is interchangeable with other religions.

[sageofages]

Originally Posted by skylark

I think that maybe we're dealing with something that is not as black and white as saying "all religions say god so it's not christian" (which I don't think anyone said on this thread, but is your summary of either mine or sageoface's comments). I agree that while the statement "in god we trust" may have originally been referring to a christian god (and acknowledged such in my earlier post)... but the government making such a statement does not carry with it the overt christian symbolism as a christmas tree or nativity scene. I tend to think that the sentiments expressed in the phrase "in god we trust" are consistent with most other religions, since most acknowledge a higher power. In contrast, the sentiments expressed by say, mary holding a baby jesus, is not an idea that is interchangeable with other religions.

Actually I think the founding fathers were very insightful in acknowledging a higher power "god" but to not delineate a specific "god". Government must grow to meet the needs of the entire population to be effective.

Yes they all were "christian" but the range of denominational belief is great.

http://www.adherents.com/gov/Foundin..._Religion.html

Religious Affiliation
of U.S. Founding Fathers - # of Founding Fathers - % of Founding Fathers
Episcopalian/Anglican - 88 - 54.7%
Presbyterian - 30 - 18.6%
Congregationalist - 27 - 16.8%
Quaker - 7 - 4.3%
Dutch Reformed/
German Reformed - 6 - 3.7%
Lutheran - 5 - 3.1%
Catholic - 3 - 1.9%
Huguenot - 3 - 1.9%
Unitarian - 3 - 1.9%
Methodist - 2 - 1.2%
Calvinist - 1 - 0.6%
TOTAL 204

Founding Father defined as one or more of the following:
- signed the Declaration of Independence
- signed the Articles of Confederation
- attended the Constitutional Convention of 1787
- signed the Constitution of the United States of America
- served as Senators in the First Federal Congress (1789-1791)
- served as U.S. Representatives in the First Federal Congress

[KSig RC]

Originally Posted by sageofages

Actually I think the founding fathers were very insightful in acknowledging a higher power "god" but to not delineate a specific "god". Government must grow to meet the needs of the entire population to be effective.

Yes they all were "christian" but the range of denominational belief is great.

http://www.adherents.com/gov/Foundin..._Religion.html

Religious Affiliation
of U.S. Founding Fathers - # of Founding Fathers - % of Founding Fathers
Episcopalian/Anglican - 88 - 54.7%
Presbyterian - 30 - 18.6%
Congregationalist - 27 - 16.8%
Quaker - 7 - 4.3%
Dutch Reformed/
German Reformed - 6 - 3.7%
Lutheran - 5 - 3.1%
Catholic - 3 - 1.9%
Huguenot - 3 - 1.9%
Unitarian - 3 - 1.9%
Methodist - 2 - 1.2%
Calvinist - 1 - 0.6%
TOTAL 204

I don't disagree, but I think we lose something in translation in our efforts to fit the Founding Fathers into 2007 America - namely, that the language used is very Masonic, and likely was not intended to be open in the fashion that we consider it (although the basis of the founding of America would dictate openness to a certain degree, as well).

Here's the rub, though - the overwhelming majority, if not all (I'm not sure how we consider Calvinism nowadays to be honest) of those are indeed Christian, and the founding of the nation was intended to allow freedom to worship, but generally the freedom to worship whichever Christian God you choose. That's well and good, but it just doesn't apply to modern America - using the nation's founding as any sort of crutch on either side of this discussion seems difficult, if not impossible.

In God We Trust just really doesn't work for this particular argument, for that reason - if we're going to be "open" we can't rely on the word "God" to do our work for us. Many religions, including some practiced by hundreds of millions worldwide, don't fit the Christian ideal of "God" in that sense. I do apologize for being "snippy" before, but I think this may more accurately reflect my point here.