/* ------------------- begin IP Block script ------------------- Block IP address script Points to php script on blog.racetotheright.com IP addresses are within the script ---------- */ /* -------------------- end IP Block script ------------------- */

Tuesday, November 15, 2005

Damn Atheist

--posted by Tony Garcia on 11/15/2005

Michael Newdow is at it again. According to an interview on Cavuto's show Newdow cannot run for office within the country. And he does not have access to money. And having "In God we trust" on currency is worse than Jim Crow laws because at least the facilities then were equal.

Don't bitch at me, I'm only relaying his answers.

Anyway, he is the guy who sued to have "under God" removed from the Pledge of Allegiance on behalf of his daughter. Turned out that he did not have the legal standing to represent his daughter AND she had no problem with the Pledge.

Newdow is back and this time he is upset because somehow his rights are being trampled on because "in God we trust" is on the currency.
Michael Newdow, perhaps America's best known atheist, has a new target in his personal war against God in the public domain: "In God We Trust" on U.S. money.

"I am about to file to get 'In God We Trust' off the front of our currency," he told the Oklahoman. "I plan to do that this week."

Newdow, of Sacramento, Calif., made the remarks Saturday night shortly before addressing the American Civil Liberties Union of Oklahoma Foundation Bill of Rights Celebration.

"The key principle is that we're supposed to treat everybody equally especially in terms of religious belief," Newdow told KWTV in Oklahoma City. "Clearly it's not treating atheists equal with people who believe in God when you say 'In God We Trust' or we are a 'nation under God.'"

"People say, 'Are you an atheist activist?' And I'm not," he continued. "I couldn't care less what anyone believes. I just care that our government treats everybody equally."
Uh, "especially in terms of religious belief"?

How is he being TREATED differently? Is he being told that he cannot use the money? Is he being told that he must hide his atheism? What is the harm to him? Does this hypocrite take Christmas off or does he work his ass off during the whole month of December?

Keep in mind that the "athists" also are trying to get crosses removed from the official emblem of the city of Las Cruces, NM. I am guessing they will petition soon to have the city change its name...after all Las Cruces means the Crosses.

I'm wondering what is next for Newdow. Will he sue to have all of the previously minted currency destroyed because it bears a history of stating "in God we trust"? Will he be petitioning to have the Ten Commandments removed from the facade of the US Supreme Court?

I think there is a difference between what Newdow actually is and atheists. What Newdow (and his similar band of activists) really are is not atheists. They are anti-religion. They are not lacking (for want of a better word) of a belief they are militantly hostile to religion.

The thing is, other religions (yes, anti-religion is a religion) are not offended by crosses in county logos or the Ten Commandments on display. They understand something that the anti-religion zealots do not understand. A display does not diminish one's self-worth.

And, anyway, there is a thing called the majority. You can practice or not practice to your heart's content. But the majority get to design the emblems and currency. They get to build the building and monuments. The majority gets certain perks with that. These perks include being able to put phrases KEY TO OUR NATION'S HISTORY like "in God we truts."


Post a Comment

<< Home