Actually my pay check makes no reference to God and 99% of my transaction are completed by using a debit card. The last I checked a dollar bill was not telling me I had to beleive in your definition of God. When the president is sworn into office, he swears to represent all Americans in this great country of our, not just Christians. I guess I need to remind you that not just Christians died on September 11 and not all soldiers are Christians, HELLO! We are at war to free people that have been controlled by a religious state! Don't you think it would be hypocritical of us to say we don't allow religious freedom in our own country. Religious oppression and freedom do not go together and if you don't like it, I beleive there are plenty of flights heading to countries in which the government is controled by one religious group and I'll pay for your ticket!
[font size="1" color="#FF0000"]LAST EDITED ON 09-12-03 AT 09:01AM (CST)[/font][p]When did President Bush say you had to believe in his definition of God? All he did was quote the year, which as someone previously stated in latin means the year of our Lord. He did not say the Lord is (blank) and you must believe (blank). I am sick and tired of people who bash President Bush for what he has done. I have not seen him or heard him force religion down anyone's throat, he is not controlling the US with his beliefs. He is acting upon an injustice done to this country. I for one would rather have a president who believes in a higher power, be it God, Allah (insert deity here), then one who believes in nothing more than lies, adultery and deceit!
EDIT: and who said that just Christians died that day? I don't think anyone here needs a reminder that we lost thousands of PEOPLE, regardless of their race, religion etc.
Why does he even have to mention religion at all. I am also an American citizen and he did not mention Buddha. I am not slamming Bush for going to war. However I did think that it was deceitful for him to lead the American public to believe that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction and now hundreds of American soldiers have died as a result and at least when Clinton was decietful no one died. I am not a Clinton fan either, I am not a big fan of either party to be honest, I think most politicians lie. That is an entirely different thread and don't think the HR forum is the place for this discussion.
>Why does he even have to mention religion at all. I am also an >American citizen and he did not mention Buddha. I am not slamming >Bush for going to war. However I did think that it was deceitful for >him to lead the American public to believe that Iraq had weapons of >mass destruction and now hundreds of American soldiers have died as a >result and at least when Clinton was decietful no one died. I am not a >Clinton fan either, I am not a big fan of either party to be honest, I >think most politicians lie. That is an entirely different thread and >don't think the HR forum is the place for this discussion.
Obviously you don't remember the men who died in Somalia after Clinton sent our troops in for less than real reasons. What hole have you had your head in not to know Irag had these weapons - I guess your Buddha did not want to recognize the thousands of Kurdish Christians Saddam killed with nerve gas. Clinton let those people be slaughtered with his lies to the Kurds.
I had freinds of all religions during my military service in the seventies, as does my son, will most likely be in Iraq next year to put his on the line for the Iraq people and you and I. Our soldiers DO know what exists in the dark corners of the world, and train not to be killed by "it", but that is part of the bargain in putting on a uniform and taking an oath, "so help you God". He is 21 and just like his Cavalry buddies respect and will follow this Commander in Chief.
We do agree - all politicians lie. Elected politicians must sometimes lie as the truth in public forum is to dangerous. enough on the forum. Isn't freedom of expression grand. I sleep well at night knowing my Country and the God it flourished under, with all of our country's problems, protects us from the dark corners of the world.
I think when people hear someone say that maybe we should have taken a little more time before going to war with Iraq, they see it as a slam on the military. It is not, the military does what the commander in chief orders. I have and have had several family members in the military myself. What I think people are saying is that we as a nation need to question our leaders if something doesn't look right. I do not think that a president should be allowed to do whatever they want and not have anyone question them. Where is the freedom in that? I think history has shown us that this is not a good policy to follow. Look at Hitler, very few questioned his decisions and those that did were told to shut up or we will shut you up. Is this the type of leadership the country wants? I don't think so, this is America, not a dictatorship.
Do not even tell me that you are comparing what Hitler did to our current (past or future) presidents. There is a world of difference between the two and I for one am insulted that someone would insinuate that a leader of our nation is no better than some dictator who slaughtered innocent people, just because they didn't look the way, or have the background, he wanted them too.
[font size="1" color="#FF0000"]LAST EDITED ON 09-17-03 AT 09:44AM (CST)[/font][p]Scottorr - I agree with you. However, obviously, there has been a misinterpretation of what you wrote. So here is my take: The right to disagree and/or question the decisions our leaders are making is the right of every American citizen. Disagreeing with the president, or the legislature or the supreme court does not make someone unpatriotic. Fact of the matter, there has never been (nor will there ever be) a president, legislature or supreme court that agrees with all my views all of the time. The right to dissent is essential to our freedom. When in history people have blindly followed a leader (even when they knew he was wrong) (such as Hitler)the result is usually a dictator in the absolute worst sense of the word. The beauty of this country is that everyone is entitled to peacefully express their opinion without fear. The open discussion of any issue makes this a stronger nation.
One of the things that has made me uncomfortable with the current ( as I percieve it)political climate is that when I do disagree with the current president I am considered unpatriotic. George W should not be above criticism. When I do question his politics (and BOY do I!) I feel that I AM being patriotic.
I think one of the problems we have, and this part of this thread is an example, is comparing someone we disagree with to Hitler. Hyperbole. I don't think, or at least hope, that Scott is not comparing Bush to Hitler, but instead is using a little hyperbole to get across his point. I agree, we have the right to dissent and to express our opinions. But, I especially get perturbed when I read of foreign government officials, particularly from the middle east, equating our president with Hitler and the USA with WWII Germany. George Bush at his absolute worst doesn't even come close to Hitler at his best.
but instead is using a little hyperbole to >get across his point.
"Hyperbole"? DOes that mean when you bole really fast? I never seem to get a strike that way. Hey Ritaanz, I'm still trying! (This should not be construed as a tirade). x:D
HS, Whatever expressed what I was trying to say better than I did. What I was trying to say was that it is not good to follow a leader with blinders on and Hitler is an extreme example of that. I wasn't comparing our current president with Hitler, I intended to say any leader and/or President. There have been some who have suggested that the president should be allowed to do whatever he wants and have even condemned people for disagreeing with some of his policies. I was trying to say that Americans have the right to disagree with our leader's policies if we think there is something wrong with them. A good example was the Dixie Chicks. People slammed them and said they were unpatriotic for opposing the war. I just don't think it is unpatriotic to hold our leaders accountable or to question their policies. That is what makes us free.
Bottom line, he was voted into office by the people. For those that didn't vote, this should be a wake up call that each vote counts! Now I don't remember my government history too well, but I don't think the president has all the power. Would you rather we didn't go to war? Would you rather we lie back and take the assault upon our country?
I am not a big fan of war, but I'm not about to go spouting off that war is wrong, etc. Those in the military have sworn a duty to protect this country, and if protecting the country means going to war with a nation that assalts us unprovoked, then so be it. It's not like they were drafted this time around, they voluntarily joined. I know people who volunteered right after the event to protect this country from future attack. In my opinion, this is no different than when we fought back after Pearl Harbor. I don't have to like the lives that are lost in defending this country, I don't have to like the concept of war, but we didn't ask for this attack.
I think we just need to agree to disagree on this.
I also seldom post, but I can't help taking this opportunity. I spent the day doing small kindnesses. I directed an elderly couple to the local library and called ahead to make sure they got help. I gave quarters to a couple of kids in front of the sticker machines at the grocery store and called to find the date of the next blood drive. I called for a moment of reflection in our personnel meeting and pulled some weeds from the flower bed in front of city hall. I hope, somehow, my small good deeds can overshadow the great evil perpetrated on this country.
I am an Irish/German/French/Native American born in Michigan. I was baptised a Mormon and am a practicing Methodist. I have always taught my children that tolerance is the key to our way of life and that, perhaps, we are all right. Maybe the Christians and the Buddhists and the Muslims are all OK. Most religions are based on the premise that you must live a good life and be kind to others, be honest and helpful to your fellow man and some greater spirit in the universe will help you. Whether or not you believe in a greater spirit those are values that make the world a better place.
If I want to say a prayer for the victims lost on 9/11, I will. If you don't want to, don't. Just don't tell me I can't and I won't tell you that you have to. If I want to say "one nation, under God", I will. If you don't want to, don't, but shut up and let me do it. Your rights can be no greater and no less than mine.
So, at the risk of offending someone, God (and Allah and Buddha and the Great Spirit) Bless America.
I agree with you 100%. I also took a moment to remember the victims of September 11. I thought of human beings, I thought of the pain their families went through. I think we all should have the same rights and the right to express ourselves. We did not send out an e-mail anounceing that in the year of the lord please remember the victims. All the original poster had to say was in rememberance of the victims and their families please take a moment of silence. Why the reference to the lord needed to be included I do not understand. We let people do what they wished to do on their own. We some times seem to forget that we are here to make our ees feel comfortable and welcome. When we in HR sned out messages to our ees referring to one religion and not another, we imply that these other religions are not welcome or are not important. That was my point.
Actually the reference Bush made "year of our Lord"...as I understand was standard language interpretation from Latin that has been in use for such situations for hundreds of years.
I can't believe money does not ever cross your palm and when it does, there is the "In God We Trust" stamped on it. Take it or leave it!
For me, there is only one right way, however, I respect others and their right to believe as they wish and I like to think that earns me the same respect. There is room to share as you said, with respect to all.
What torks me is that more and more, Believers of God are being oppressed right here in America, the very basis of our country's founding. Unbelieveable!
This whole discussion was unnecessary if all Americans respect one another and allow each to believe and act on those beliefs in peace.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this fourth day of September, in the year of our Lord two thousand three, and of the Independence of the United States of America the two hundred and twenty-eighth."
This statement historically, has been the way proclamations have ended and I for one like this formalized ending whether it is currently politically correct or not and I pray (oops)that it continues to be used for another 228 years. .
Okay, I can't believe I've managed to stay out of the fray for as long as I have but I have to pipe in with my 2.5 cents' worth.
I have many certificates and documents that close with the phraseology including "in the year of our lord" and would suggest to those who have a problem with it that they pick their battles and ignore this one because it's a loser. That phrase, as neveradull so eloquently says, has been used in the United States, England (and probably Bora Bora for all I know) to close a proclamation for hundreds of years. It's more a matter of TRADITION than RELIGION. For those of you who don't worship a "Christian" god, I suggest you exercise a little mental propaganda: Whenever you see the the word "God," mentally substitute "Allah" or "Buddha" or "The Great Cosmic Muffin" in your mind. For those of you worshipping deities not referred to as God, simply reverse the process.
This discussion has been a microcosm of what is going on in America in the past few years. And I think it centers around two different concepts, freedom of religion and freedom from religion. They are different. America has been historically a so-called Christian nation - whatever that means. The whole concept of "christian" has many meanings. I believe our country was founded on the principle that we have freedom of religion, that the government will not dictate what we must do or believe from a religious standpoint. Some segments of society are trying to morph that principle into freedom from religion. That the public America will have no references whatsoever to any deity or even recognize the concept of a deity.
Therein lies the rub. Many of us believe we have the right to express our views publicly and to even proselytize (but not here on the forum). Others are offended by any public displays or references and would even go so far as to outlaw proselyzing.
I really do side with HS, and others who have expressed similar views, on this issue. But, I also understand my friend and colleage, Scottorr, when he expresses a dissenting opinion. Historically, people in minority groups, whether that be race, religion, or ethnic background, have been treated with prejudice and discrimination. Our colleage, Whatever, has publicly stated she is Jewish. Look at how the Jews have been treated down through history, including here in America - they have not always been tolerated, let alone accepted. Scott has publicly stated he is Buddhist. I imagine when acquaintenances learn that, they look at him kind of funny wondering what went wrong with him. It is natural for people in minority groups to be concerned and wary of religious talk based on past experiences. What I see happening is those of us in the historical majorities are now feeling some of what the minorites have experienced, in some cases, all their lives. Kind of a like a white family moving into an all black neighborhood. In the past majority opinions on religious expression ruled, now others are beginning to have a say - their opinions are starting to count. Us in the shrinking majority have not learned how to deal with this change.
We are on an interesting ride in this country. What is freedom of religion and religious expression? How far will we go to avoid confrontation and offence? Threads, such as this one, have generated interesting debate, but no real solutions. But, I have to admit they have gotten me to thinking about others who are different than me. So, I may have vastly different views than Scott, but he has helped me to better understand how to deal with people.
If you want to live in a society where it is not acceptable to EVER mention God then you need to get enough of you together and pass those types of laws. Until then, you live in a country where the expression of religion is still legal. President Bush was very outspoken about his belief in God prior to being elected. Why should we expect him to not have the right to his expression of his personal faith? In no way is he even coming close to creating a state religion or persecuting non-believers.
You have every right to dislike President Bush and his expressions of faith and you can express that in the next election. Until then, I think he has the same right to personal religious expression (short of coercion) that we all enjoy.
Ray and Paul, thank-you for putting into words so eloquently, what I could not. Parabeagle, thank-you also for your post. Once again, a point I was trying to make, in this case about the "in the year of our Lord", you stated more eloquently than I did.
I agree that it is more of a tradition, just as the tradition in the beginning of all Nascar races to have the National Anthem sung and an invocation from a religious individual before each race. No one there is stating that all who watch the race should be "christians", it is just a time honored tradition.
And as to the "deceit" by President Bush and the "weapons of mass destruction". Do you have hard cold proof that the president wasn't mislead into believing there were such weapons? Whose to say there aren't such weapons and that they haven't been relocated or destroyed? There is a lot more than meets the eye with the government, all I said was that it's refreshing to have someone leading this great country of ours who believes in a higher power vs believing in furthering his own agendas of personal gratification.
It is a fact that this country was founded by those who were Christian, that it was founded as "one nation, under God". There is alot of history that we could argue until doomsday about as to some of the conduct of our ancestors. Are there not other countries that were founded upon certain religions? Are there not countries where people in power believe in a deity? The United States of America was founded on freedom and justice for all, not freedom for the Christians.
I know that our laws were based on Christian beliefs however, our founding fathers also did not want state sanction religion. I am glad I live in a country in which all religions can feel free to practice as they may without fear of political or legal retribution. Ray is right in saying those of us from a minority religion have had to live with discrimination all our lives and luckily we have survived. So yes we are a little more sensitive than most others. So when an authority figure uses religious language, we shout back a little. I guess if you have never been the victim of discrimination you can not truly understand. I only hope that some day we will all be able to look past all of the surface stuff and see that we are all human beings regardless of our race, religion, national origin, sexual orientation or marital status. We should all just try to be good to each other and treat each other with respect, even if that means leaving out a word or two from an e-mail.
Wouldn't that be censorship though? It was a direct quote from our president about Patriot Day. I for one "look past all the surface stuff and see human beings" if I didn't, I shouldn't be in HR. There comes a time when enough is enough. We are all entitled to our opinions, we all have been through one form of discrimination or another (think back to your childhood), but enough is enough! This was not intended to be discriminatory, it is a proclamation and the quote is SOP for a proclamation. "A.D.", aka "the year of our Lord" is a common term used in that forum. It is not saying "believe in the Lord" or "pray to the Lord". Why is it that people always jump to the discrimination conclusion?
Why is it that people always jump to the >discrimination conclusion?
Point well-taken, HS. If I had to guess, I would attribute it to the fact that, since we are all HR professionals, we are more sensitive to inappropriate conduct and questionable behaviors and language simply by virtue of our training and education. Therefore, we may be among the first to rise up and yell discrimination when we perceive it, applying our own narrow interpretation of the evidence. I would go so far as to say that regardless of how open-minded we profess to be, our level of tolerance for what we believe are "injustices" is probably less than the average person.
I think in the workplace we need censorship for many reasons, not just for religion. I understand that this is more about tradition than religion and does not bother me personally, however, others may not understand that it is tradition and may feel up set or that this could lead to persecution down the road. There is not a single person here at work that knows what my faith is and I want to keep it that way. I think people jump to the discrimination conclusion based on history and lets face it, just about every religion has had some jaded history. I hope everyone has a great weekend.
Comments
EDIT: and who said that just Christians died that day? I don't think anyone here needs a reminder that we lost thousands of PEOPLE, regardless of their race, religion etc.
>American citizen and he did not mention Buddha. I am not slamming
>Bush for going to war. However I did think that it was deceitful for
>him to lead the American public to believe that Iraq had weapons of
>mass destruction and now hundreds of American soldiers have died as a
>result and at least when Clinton was decietful no one died. I am not a
>Clinton fan either, I am not a big fan of either party to be honest, I
>think most politicians lie. That is an entirely different thread and
>don't think the HR forum is the place for this discussion.
Obviously you don't remember the men who died in Somalia after Clinton sent our troops in for less than real reasons. What hole have you had your head in not to know Irag had these weapons - I guess your Buddha did not want to recognize the thousands of Kurdish Christians Saddam killed with nerve gas. Clinton let those people be slaughtered with his lies to the Kurds.
I had freinds of all religions during my military service in the seventies, as does my son, will most likely be in Iraq next year to put his on the line for the Iraq people and you and I. Our soldiers DO know what exists in the dark corners of the world, and train not to be killed by "it", but that is part of the bargain in putting on a uniform and taking an oath, "so help you God". He is 21 and just like his Cavalry buddies respect and will follow this Commander in Chief.
We do agree - all politicians lie. Elected politicians must sometimes lie as the truth in public forum is to dangerous. enough on the forum. Isn't freedom of expression grand. I sleep well at night knowing my Country and the God it flourished under, with all of our country's problems, protects us from the dark corners of the world.
The right to disagree and/or question the decisions our leaders are making is the right of every American citizen. Disagreeing with the president, or the legislature or the supreme court does not make someone unpatriotic. Fact of the matter, there has never been (nor will there ever be) a president, legislature or supreme court that agrees with all my views all of the time. The right to dissent is essential to our freedom. When in history people have blindly followed a leader (even when they knew he was wrong) (such as Hitler)the result is usually a dictator in the absolute worst sense of the word. The beauty of this country is that everyone is entitled to peacefully express their opinion without fear. The open discussion of any issue makes this a stronger nation.
>get across his point.
"Hyperbole"? DOes that mean when you bole really fast? I never seem to get a strike that way. Hey Ritaanz, I'm still trying! (This should not be construed as a tirade). x:D
I am not a big fan of war, but I'm not about to go spouting off that war is wrong, etc. Those in the military have sworn a duty to protect this country, and if protecting the country means going to war with a nation that assalts us unprovoked, then so be it. It's not like they were drafted this time around, they voluntarily joined. I know people who volunteered right after the event to protect this country from future attack. In my opinion, this is no different than when we fought back after Pearl Harbor. I don't have to like the lives that are lost in defending this country, I don't have to like the concept of war, but we didn't ask for this attack.
I think we just need to agree to disagree on this.
I also seldom post, but I can't help taking this opportunity. I spent the day doing small kindnesses. I directed an elderly couple to the local library and called ahead to make sure they got help. I gave quarters to a couple of kids in front of the sticker machines at the grocery store and called to find the date of the next blood drive. I called for a moment of reflection in our personnel meeting and pulled some weeds from the flower bed in front of city hall. I hope, somehow, my small good deeds can overshadow the great evil perpetrated on this country.
I am an Irish/German/French/Native American born in Michigan. I was baptised a Mormon and am a practicing Methodist. I have always taught my children that tolerance is the key to our way of life and that, perhaps, we are all right. Maybe the Christians and the Buddhists and the Muslims are all OK. Most religions are based on the premise that you must live a good life and be kind to others, be honest and helpful to your fellow man and some greater spirit in the universe will help you. Whether or not you believe in a greater spirit those are values that make the world a better place.
If I want to say a prayer for the victims lost on 9/11, I will. If you don't want to, don't. Just don't tell me I can't and I won't tell you that you have to. If I want to say "one nation, under God", I will. If you don't want to, don't, but shut up and let me do it. Your rights can be no greater and no less than mine.
So, at the risk of offending someone, God (and Allah and Buddha and the Great Spirit) Bless America.
Annie
I agree with you 100%. I also took a moment to remember the victims of September 11. I thought of human beings, I thought of the pain their families went through. I think we all should have the same rights and the right to express ourselves. We did not send out an e-mail anounceing that in the year of the lord please remember the victims. All the original poster had to say was in rememberance of the victims and their families please take a moment of silence. Why the reference to the lord needed to be included I do not understand. We let people do what they wished to do on their own. We some times seem to forget that we are here to make our ees feel comfortable and welcome. When we in HR sned out messages to our ees referring to one religion and not another, we imply that these other religions are not welcome or are not important. That was my point.
For me, there is only one right way, however, I respect others and their right to believe as they wish and I like to think that earns me the same respect. There is room to share as you said, with respect to all.
What torks me is that more and more, Believers of God are being oppressed right here in America, the very basis of our country's founding. Unbelieveable!
This whole discussion was unnecessary if all Americans respect one another and allow each to believe and act on those beliefs in peace.
Thank you for your response.
This statement historically, has been the way proclamations have ended and I for one like this formalized ending whether it is currently politically correct or not and I pray (oops)that it continues to be used for another 228 years. .
I have many certificates and documents that close with the phraseology including "in the year of our lord" and would suggest to those who have a problem with it that they pick their battles and ignore this one because it's a loser. That phrase, as neveradull so eloquently says, has been used in the United States, England (and probably Bora Bora for all I know) to close a proclamation for hundreds of years. It's more a matter of TRADITION than RELIGION. For those of you who don't worship a "Christian" god, I suggest you exercise a little mental propaganda: Whenever you see the the word "God," mentally substitute "Allah" or "Buddha" or "The Great Cosmic Muffin" in your mind. For those of you worshipping deities not referred to as God, simply reverse the process.
Therein lies the rub. Many of us believe we have the right to express our views publicly and to even proselytize (but not here on the forum). Others are offended by any public displays or references and would even go so far as to outlaw proselyzing.
I really do side with HS, and others who have expressed similar views, on this issue. But, I also understand my friend and colleage, Scottorr, when he expresses a dissenting opinion. Historically, people in minority groups, whether that be race, religion, or ethnic background, have been treated with prejudice and discrimination. Our colleage, Whatever, has publicly stated she is Jewish. Look at how the Jews have been treated down through history, including here in America - they have not always been tolerated, let alone accepted. Scott has publicly stated he is Buddhist. I imagine when acquaintenances learn that, they look at him kind of funny wondering what went wrong with him. It is natural for people in minority groups to be concerned and wary of religious talk based on past experiences. What I see happening is those of us in the historical majorities are now feeling some of what the minorites have experienced, in some cases, all their lives. Kind of a like a white family moving into an all black neighborhood. In the past majority opinions on religious expression ruled, now others are beginning to have a say - their opinions are starting to count. Us in the shrinking majority have not learned how to deal with this change.
We are on an interesting ride in this country. What is freedom of religion and religious expression? How far will we go to avoid confrontation and offence? Threads, such as this one, have generated interesting debate, but no real solutions. But, I have to admit they have gotten me to thinking about others who are different than me. So, I may have vastly different views than Scott, but he has helped me to better understand how to deal with people.
If you want to live in a society where it is not acceptable to EVER mention God then you need to get enough of you together and pass those types of laws. Until then, you live in a country where the expression of religion is still legal. President Bush was very outspoken about his belief in God prior to being elected. Why should we expect him to not have the right to his expression of his personal faith? In no way is he even coming close to creating a state religion or persecuting non-believers.
You have every right to dislike President Bush and his expressions of faith and you can express that in the next election. Until then, I think he has the same right to personal religious expression (short of coercion) that we all enjoy.
Paul in Cannon Beach
I agree that it is more of a tradition, just as the tradition in the beginning of all Nascar races to have the National Anthem sung and an invocation from a religious individual before each race. No one there is stating that all who watch the race should be "christians", it is just a time honored tradition.
And as to the "deceit" by President Bush and the "weapons of mass destruction". Do you have hard cold proof that the president wasn't mislead into believing there were such weapons? Whose to say there aren't such weapons and that they haven't been relocated or destroyed? There is a lot more than meets the eye with the government, all I said was that it's refreshing to have someone leading this great country of ours who believes in a higher power vs believing in furthering his own agendas of personal gratification.
It is a fact that this country was founded by those who were Christian, that it was founded as "one nation, under God". There is alot of history that we could argue until doomsday about as to some of the conduct of our ancestors. Are there not other countries that were founded upon certain religions? Are there not countries where people in power believe in a deity? The United States of America was founded on freedom and justice for all, not freedom for the Christians.
>discrimination conclusion?
Point well-taken, HS. If I had to guess, I would attribute it to the fact that, since we are all HR professionals, we are more sensitive to inappropriate conduct and questionable behaviors and language simply by virtue of our training and education. Therefore, we may be among the first to rise up and yell discrimination when we perceive it, applying our own narrow interpretation of the evidence. I would go so far as to say that regardless of how open-minded we profess to be, our level of tolerance for what we believe are "injustices" is probably less than the average person.