Police cars in Jefferson County, Illinois will now say "In God We Trust".

[AmericanFirst1]

Time for a lawsuit. Once again mixing government and religion.

Who's the plaintiff?

The people, who pay for our secular government.

Then you better sue the president for saying god bless America on a government owned mic, in a government owned building while being guarded by government secret service

Yep

 

[AmericanFirst1]

Who's the plaintiff?

Whoever wants to file the lawsuit. This is a quite obvious case of violation of church and state.

You have no idea how this works. Who is being discriminated against? Who is aggrieved by this?

I already explained this to you. ANYONE that is not a christian is being discriminated against for starters. Secondly its against separation of church and state.

No such thing as separation of church and state. Why is it you idiots claim that when Christianity is proclaimed but if it said "in Allah we trust" you idiots would praise it?

Damn. You are stupid.

Damn, you are retarded.

 

[Preacher]

Time for a lawsuit. Once again mixing government and religion.

Who's the plaintiff?

Whoever wants to file the lawsuit. This is a quite obvious case of violation of church and state.

You have no idea how this works. Who is being discriminated against? Who is aggrieved by this?

I already explained this to you. ANYONE that is not a christian is being discriminated against for starters. Secondly its against separation of church and state.

No such thing as separation of church and state. Why is it you idiots claim that when Christianity is proclaimed but if it said "in Allah we trust" you idiots would praise it?

The constitution and the law disagrees with you. That's all that matters. Oh and no I would NOT be OK with ANY religious phrase on a government vehicle or anything else tied with government.

 

[saintmichaeldefendthem]

Time for a lawsuit. Once again mixing government and religion.

Who's the plaintiff?

Whoever wants to file the lawsuit. This is a quite obvious case of violation of church and state.

You have no idea how this works. Who is being discriminated against? Who is aggrieved by this?

I already explained this to you. ANYONE that is not a christian is being discriminated against for starters. Secondly its against separation of church and state.

How are they being discriminated against? The sign isn't even a Christian, it's a generic God. Who is getting less police service because of a sign? The questions I'm pestering you with are precisely why no lawyer is going to take this to court.

 

[saintmichaeldefendthem]

Who's the plaintiff?

Whoever wants to file the lawsuit. This is a quite obvious case of violation of church and state.

You have no idea how this works. Who is being discriminated against? Who is aggrieved by this?

I already explained this to you. ANYONE that is not a christian is being discriminated against for starters. Secondly its against separation of church and state.

No such thing as separation of church and state. Why is it you idiots claim that when Christianity is proclaimed but if it said "in Allah we trust" you idiots would praise it?

The constitution and the law disagrees with you. That's all that matters. Oh and no I would NOT be OK with ANY religious phrase on a government vehicle or anything else tied with government.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

Time for a lawsuit. Once again mixing government and religion.

Who's the plaintiff?

The people, who pay for our secular government.

Then you better sue the president for saying god bless America on a government owned mic, in a government owned building while being guarded by government secret service

If I could win and get him, and everyone else, to stop saying that, I would.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

Time for a lawsuit. Once again mixing government and religion.

Who's the plaintiff?

Whoever wants to file the lawsuit. This is a quite obvious case of violation of church and state.

You have no idea how this works. Who is being discriminated against? Who is aggrieved by this?

I already explained this to you. ANYONE that is not a christian is being discriminated against for starters. Secondly its against separation of church and state.

How are they being discriminated against? The sign isn't even a Christian, it's a generic God. Who is getting less police service because of a sign? The questions I'm pestering you with are precisely why no lawyer is going to take this to court.

You couldn't be more wrong. This is a cut and dried Establishment violation. The same as if the cops handed out Bibles with tickets.

Establishment clause overview First Amendment Center news commentary analysis on free speech press religion assembly petition

 

[JFish123]

In God We Trust? Good let them


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[PaintMyHouse]

Whoever wants to file the lawsuit. This is a quite obvious case of violation of church and state.

You have no idea how this works. Who is being discriminated against? Who is aggrieved by this?

I already explained this to you. ANYONE that is not a christian is being discriminated against for starters. Secondly its against separation of church and state.

No such thing as separation of church and state. Why is it you idiots claim that when Christianity is proclaimed but if it said "in Allah we trust" you idiots would praise it?

The constitution and the law disagrees with you. That's all that matters. Oh and no I would NOT be OK with ANY religious phrase on a government vehicle or anything else tied with government.

Teddy Roosevelt: ‘In God We Trust’ on Money is ‘Sacrilege’
February 12, 2012 by Hemant Mehta 21 Comments
When the phrase “In God We Trust” was going to be placed on the $20 gold coin in 1907, President Teddy Roosevelt was against it (PDF):

“My own feeling in the matter is due to my very firm conviction that to put such a motto on coins, or to use it in any kindred manner, not only does no good but does positive harm, and is in effect irreverence, which comes dangerously close to sacrilege…”

That, from a president who was a Christian, a Sunday school teacher, and a Republican… those days are long gone."
Teddy Roosevelt In God We Trust on Money is Sacrilege

ROOSEVELT DROPPED IN GOD WE TRUST - President Says Such a Motto on Coin Is Irreverence Close to Sacrilege. NO LAW COMMANDS ITS USE He Trusts Congress Will Not Direct Him to Replace the Exalted Phrase That Invited Constant Levity. - View Article - NYTimes.com

 

[saintmichaeldefendthem]

You have no idea how this works. Who is being discriminated against? Who is aggrieved by this?

I already explained this to you. ANYONE that is not a christian is being discriminated against for starters. Secondly its against separation of church and state.

No such thing as separation of church and state. Why is it you idiots claim that when Christianity is proclaimed but if it said "in Allah we trust" you idiots would praise it?

The constitution and the law disagrees with you. That's all that matters. Oh and no I would NOT be OK with ANY religious phrase on a government vehicle or anything else tied with government.

Teddy Roosevelt: ‘In God We Trust’ on Money is ‘Sacrilege’
February 12, 2012 by Hemant Mehta 21 Comments
When the phrase “In God We Trust” was going to be placed on the $20 gold coin in 1907, President Teddy Roosevelt was against it (PDF):

“My own feeling in the matter is due to my very firm conviction that to put such a motto on coins, or to use it in any kindred manner, not only does no good but does positive harm, and is in effect irreverence, which comes dangerously close to sacrilege…”

That, from a president who was a Christian, a Sunday school teacher, and a Republican… those days are long gone."
Teddy Roosevelt In God We Trust on Money is Sacrilege

ROOSEVELT DROPPED IN GOD WE TRUST - President Says Such a Motto on Coin Is Irreverence Close to Sacrilege. NO LAW COMMANDS ITS USE He Trusts Congress Will Not Direct Him to Replace the Exalted Phrase That Invited Constant Levity. - View Article - NYTimes.com

I guess he wasn't very persuasive.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

I already explained this to you. ANYONE that is not a christian is being discriminated against for starters. Secondly its against separation of church and state.

No such thing as separation of church and state. Why is it you idiots claim that when Christianity is proclaimed but if it said "in Allah we trust" you idiots would praise it?

The constitution and the law disagrees with you. That's all that matters. Oh and no I would NOT be OK with ANY religious phrase on a government vehicle or anything else tied with government.

Teddy Roosevelt: ‘In God We Trust’ on Money is ‘Sacrilege’
February 12, 2012 by Hemant Mehta 21 Comments
When the phrase “In God We Trust” was going to be placed on the $20 gold coin in 1907, President Teddy Roosevelt was against it (PDF):

“My own feeling in the matter is due to my very firm conviction that to put such a motto on coins, or to use it in any kindred manner, not only does no good but does positive harm, and is in effect irreverence, which comes dangerously close to sacrilege…”

That, from a president who was a Christian, a Sunday school teacher, and a Republican… those days are long gone."
Teddy Roosevelt In God We Trust on Money is Sacrilege

ROOSEVELT DROPPED IN GOD WE TRUST - President Says Such a Motto on Coin Is Irreverence Close to Sacrilege. NO LAW COMMANDS ITS USE He Trusts Congress Will Not Direct Him to Replace the Exalted Phrase That Invited Constant Levity. - View Article - NYTimes.com

I guess he wasn't very persuasive.

Oh but he was, that nonsense happened later under men who didn't respect God...

 

[saintmichaeldefendthem]

No such thing as separation of church and state. Why is it you idiots claim that when Christianity is proclaimed but if it said "in Allah we trust" you idiots would praise it?

The constitution and the law disagrees with you. That's all that matters. Oh and no I would NOT be OK with ANY religious phrase on a government vehicle or anything else tied with government.

Teddy Roosevelt: ‘In God We Trust’ on Money is ‘Sacrilege’
February 12, 2012 by Hemant Mehta 21 Comments
When the phrase “In God We Trust” was going to be placed on the $20 gold coin in 1907, President Teddy Roosevelt was against it (PDF):

“My own feeling in the matter is due to my very firm conviction that to put such a motto on coins, or to use it in any kindred manner, not only does no good but does positive harm, and is in effect irreverence, which comes dangerously close to sacrilege…”

That, from a president who was a Christian, a Sunday school teacher, and a Republican… those days are long gone."
Teddy Roosevelt In God We Trust on Money is Sacrilege

ROOSEVELT DROPPED IN GOD WE TRUST - President Says Such a Motto on Coin Is Irreverence Close to Sacrilege. NO LAW COMMANDS ITS USE He Trusts Congress Will Not Direct Him to Replace the Exalted Phrase That Invited Constant Levity. - View Article - NYTimes.com

I guess he wasn't very persuasive.

Oh but he was, that nonsense happened later under men who didn't respect God...

I don't think you're qualified to determine who does or doesn't respect God. The point which you missed entirely is that if those words can withstand a court challenge on our currency, then it can on police cars too, so your war on religion is thwarted at least in this instance.

 

[Papageorgio]

Time for a lawsuit. Once again mixing government and religion.

Who's the plaintiff?

Whoever wants to file the lawsuit. This is a quite obvious case of violation of church and state.

What specific religion is the state promoting?

 

[PaintMyHouse]

The constitution and the law disagrees with you. That's all that matters. Oh and no I would NOT be OK with ANY religious phrase on a government vehicle or anything else tied with government.

Teddy Roosevelt: ‘In God We Trust’ on Money is ‘Sacrilege’
February 12, 2012 by Hemant Mehta 21 Comments
When the phrase “In God We Trust” was going to be placed on the $20 gold coin in 1907, President Teddy Roosevelt was against it (PDF):

“My own feeling in the matter is due to my very firm conviction that to put such a motto on coins, or to use it in any kindred manner, not only does no good but does positive harm, and is in effect irreverence, which comes dangerously close to sacrilege…”

That, from a president who was a Christian, a Sunday school teacher, and a Republican… those days are long gone."
Teddy Roosevelt In God We Trust on Money is Sacrilege

ROOSEVELT DROPPED IN GOD WE TRUST - President Says Such a Motto on Coin Is Irreverence Close to Sacrilege. NO LAW COMMANDS ITS USE He Trusts Congress Will Not Direct Him to Replace the Exalted Phrase That Invited Constant Levity. - View Article - NYTimes.com

I guess he wasn't very persuasive.

Oh but he was, that nonsense happened later under men who didn't respect God...

I don't think you're qualified to determine who does or doesn't respect God. The point which you missed entirely is that if those words can withstand a court challenge on our currency, then it can on police cars too, so your war on religion is thwarted at least in this instance.

My war is the same as the founders of this nation, religious neutrality. That is why they founded a secular nation. If we didn't need God mentioned in the Constitution, we don't need it mentioned on police cars.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

Time for a lawsuit. Once again mixing government and religion.

Who's the plaintiff?

Whoever wants to file the lawsuit. This is a quite obvious case of violation of church and state.

What specific religion is the state promoting?

Judaism and Islam in this case. They have one God, the Christians have three.

 

[saintmichaeldefendthem]

Time for a lawsuit. Once again mixing government and religion.

Who's the plaintiff?

Whoever wants to file the lawsuit. This is a quite obvious case of violation of church and state.

What specific religion is the state promoting?

Judaism and Islam in this case. They have one God, the Christians have three.

You're an idiot.

 

[Papageorgio]

Time for a lawsuit. Once again mixing government and religion.

Who's the plaintiff?

Whoever wants to file the lawsuit. This is a quite obvious case of violation of church and state.

What specific religion is the state promoting?

Judaism and Islam in this case. They have one God, the Christians have three.

So it isn't supporting or elevation one religion over the other. Not seeing the issue.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

Time for a lawsuit. Once again mixing government and religion.

Who's the plaintiff?

Whoever wants to file the lawsuit. This is a quite obvious case of violation of church and state.

What specific religion is the state promoting?

Judaism and Islam in this case. They have one God, the Christians have three.

So it isn't supporting or elevation one religion over the other. Not seeing the issue.

It is promoting any religion that believes in God over any that doesn't or those with no faith at all. The police are supposed to be religiously neutral, like all other forms of our secular government.

Tell us, if they were handing out Bibles with traffic tickets, would you consider that over the line?

 

[Papageorgio]

Who's the plaintiff?

Whoever wants to file the lawsuit. This is a quite obvious case of violation of church and state.

What specific religion is the state promoting?

Judaism and Islam in this case. They have one God, the Christians have three.

So it isn't supporting or elevation one religion over the other. Not seeing the issue.

It is promoting any religion that believes in God over any that doesn't or those with no faith at all. The police are supposed to be religiously neutral, like all other forms of our secular government.

Tell us, if they were handing out Bibles with traffic tickets, would you consider that over the line?

You are equating handing out Bibles to having a bumper sticker?

 

[PaintMyHouse]

Whoever wants to file the lawsuit. This is a quite obvious case of violation of church and state.

What specific religion is the state promoting?

Judaism and Islam in this case. They have one God, the Christians have three.

So it isn't supporting or elevation one religion over the other. Not seeing the issue.

It is promoting any religion that believes in God over any that doesn't or those with no faith at all. The police are supposed to be religiously neutral, like all other forms of our secular government.

Tell us, if they were handing out Bibles with traffic tickets, would you consider that over the line?

You are equating handing out Bibles to having a bumper sticker?

Both promote religion, which you are not allowed to do here. So, answer the question?