re: #10 Gus

Thanks. I was able to find the Theodore Roosevelt position while reading the “In God We Trust” section in Wiki. That adds and interesting dynamic to the debate by adding a religious opposition to the inclusion of God in money as being “sacrilegious.” While not being religious myself I think logically it stands to reason that it would be sacrilegious. Or “what would Jesus say” about putting God on money? There are the obvious secular arguments against it and neutral positions.

Well it is interesting. The pledge of allegiance only added God in 1954 (wiki just told me), so it really is a new phenomenon. Saw some statistic about the number of time “god” was mentioned in RNC and DNC convention papers. Again, a modern phenomenon.

I don’t really know where that comes from, the need to be so literal, but it certainly seems a new idea.

Also, I thought about Hicks comment on Jesus and the cross. Would he really think that is an appropriate symbol for him?
You don’t think he would be slightly freaked out by another cross?

Not sure what I am saying there, but nevermind.