America. One nation, under God?

[Bos]

Originally posted by RyanR
You should really come visit .

Already got that covered! I've been in America for several years

I've never met anyone in my life that believed in creationism. And what is on the money is just plain outdated, and not an indicator.

Yes, most of the people I know in America do not believe fully in creationalism; but many people believe in some form of creationalism mixed with some form of evolution. Then again, there must be someone out there with the power to lobby schools to stop teaching evolution.

As for what is on the money, haven't several Presidents attempted removing "In God We Trust" from the currency? I seem to recall Franklin Roosevelt as having attempted such.

[Datajack Franit]

How can a real italian have quotes written with such a crappy grammar?

[Bos]

Speak in your own tongue, and few can understand.
Speak in simple terms, and the point gets through to all.

Most people should be able to read my quotes and understand the meaning, regardless of the languages they are in. Write in a regional dialect, and oftentimes only a handful of people will understand.

[bobbo008]

Come ON! If America is religious, then so is every civilization that has ever been on Earth. Sure we have spiritual people, but religion in the culture itself is no where close to a "religious" civ like the Aztecs. The U.S. even has seperation of church and state, not even Europe (which is less religious on the whole) has that.

On a side note, I'm proud to say that Norway has the highest percentage of atheists on Earth

[sabrewolf]

bobbo: officially church and state are separated (also so in iraq, former soviet union, turkey and most modern countries).

but still you could _never_ imagine having a non-christian president. i don't even think that any member of the house or the senate isn't a strong believer. god is mentioned on every piece of money. god is used in very many speaches of the president (btw: clinton also liked using that). crosses in schools and other public buildings are still mandatory in many states. god is even mentioned in the constitution.

religion might not be that extreme as it was a few centuries ago (like the aztecs), but for modern days, the USA is very religious.

btw: i envy you scandinavians for many things, not just atheist percentage

[One_Brow]

Originally posted by sabrewolf
bobbo: officially church and state are separated (also so in iraq, former soviet union, turkey and most modern countries).

but still you could _never_ imagine having a non-christian president.

They used to say that about "non-Protestant", until JFK.

i don't even think that any member of the house or the senate isn't a strong believer.

Out of the 565, I'm pretty sure we have at least 5 that are minimally, if at all, believers, and a few more that are non-Christian believers.

god is mentioned on every piece of money. god is used in very many speaches of the president (btw: clinton also liked using that).

All true.

crosses in schools and other public buildings are still mandatory in many states.

It's probably true that many of the existing crosses have achieved the equivalent of landmark status and will not be taken down, but it is illegal to to put a cross on public property unless it is part of a multi-religious "cultural grouping".

god is even mentioned in the constitution.

Yes, and a number of signees were non-Christian Deists. They did not see the Constitution as promoting Christianity.

religion might not be that extreme as it was a few centuries ago (like the aztecs), but for modern days, the USA is very religious.

btw: i envy you scandinavians for many things, not just atheist percentage

[Amesjustin]

Commercial and expansionist would be the best traits. I don't think I need to explain the Commercial. While I agree that we are no longer an expansionist country, we were formed by expansion - making this a very important part of how we came to be.

If you wanted to make it more like Modern America, then the secondary trait could be Scientific or Industrious, I am leaning towards Scientific.

I don't see making a case for Religious. Yes there are religious references everywhere. Yes religion influences the laws we have. The seperation of church and state may not be complete, but they are more seperate than combined. No religion absolutely reigns in the government. The purpose of that statement within the constitution was to have a government that wasn't ruled outright by the church - and for the MOST part it has worked. I would agree that having Bush as president and Ashcroft also in power is a BIG step backwards for us, but that applies to so many other things not covered in this thread as well.

And I think most if not all countries governments are influenced to some degree by the main religion within that country. That does not make it a religious country.

[joncnunn]

Hum, Scientific not listed as a choice? Not that I would have picked it, but to be the only one not listed and I can make a better point for being Scientific than one of the choices that is listed.

Anyway I vote for Industrious + Expansionist. ... Wait that's how they already are.

Expansionism runs in Americas blood; we expanded from 13 colonies along the Atlantic shore to the lower 48 states, sometimes thru shrewd diplomacy, sometimes via war.

And no sooner did the US Census Bureu declare the frontier no longer exists, than did we start explaining overseas, first to Hawii, and then in the Spanish American War taking countries in the South Pacific.

Currently we are the leading country in space reserach and primary contributer to the international space station.

The 2nd most prevalent traight we've had is Industry. The best examples of this in the Hoover Dam and the speed at which we got our railroad network built across the west in the 1870s and 1880s.

America isn't Religious in the sense that Civ III seems to use the term looking at the offical Religious civs. Our federal govt has never named one denomination as the favorite religious denomination with tax funds all going in support of it, while at one time the English govt directly supported the Angelean church.

3rd would be Commerical.
4th would be Military.
5th would be Scientific. (Inventors like Thomas Edison)

[Yanghead]

This is a tough one.

Industrious for sure. They just produce so much crap. WWII wasn't won by superior military minds, its was won by mountains of material.

Second either: Religious or Scientific, not because US is particularily religious or scientific, but rather because of cheap culture buildings.

Its all about gameplay and not the reality of life.

Expansionist: Sure the US expanded a lot during its infancy, but does getting better goodie huts = crushing less developed civs(ie Iroquois).

Militaristic: Yes they were at times rather Militant, but not overly successful at it. (Feinian Raids, war of 1812[feel free to PM me about this one you American Scholars])

Comercial: primary (gameplay) bonus of reduced corruption. Ummm.... Savings and Loans?, Hollywood?, Mayors smoking Crack?. So commercial is out besides the rest of the world agrees Amreica is decadent and corrupt, just ask any communist hardliner.

Ok now for why I choose culture buildings.

Religious: ok not one state religion, but man they have some serious fanatics. Remember the "Send me 5 million dollars or God is going to call me back"?. Or just take a look at tours of New England churches, I mean I grew up on the west coast of Canada, and I know about New England Churches.

Scientific: Edison(sp?) and Newton, 'nuff said.

The other aspect of culture and the pervasiveness of US "culture" Mcdonalds in Moscow, in the 90s. Headline: Cold War ends, Moscow culture flips!

These gameplay related issues (culture, pruduction), is why I say Scientific & Industrious, or Religious & Industious.

[Underseer]

Originally posted by gsmoove23
Got into this completely OT discussion in another thread so I'm bringing it here and assuming I can get this poll to work it might be interesting to see.

Are the American civ traits appropriate and most importantly could America be considered a religious civ.

It would be cool if Firaxis used a poll like this for every civ. That way if someone complains they can't be blaimed.

A religious civ? Are you nuts? That "one nation under God" stuff is revisionist crap religious fanatics added well after the fact. This nation was founded in the self-named "Age of Enlightenment." Many of our founding fathers took scientific deification to a degree even I find ludicrous, and I'm a dyed-in-the-wool atheist with scientic training.

If religion were as central to this nation's founding as certain zealots mistakenly believe, we would not have freedom of religion; we would have an official state-sponsored religion.

[Underseer]

Hey! Why isn't science one of the available choices?

I'll be the first to admit that relative to population and resources we're a little bit weak on contributions to theoretical or "pure" science, but on the applied side we've made huge contributions. I don't need to babble off the list because I'm sure everyone's familiar with it, and I already sound like too much of a jingoist.

Heck, four of the scientific wonders in the game (Apollo Program, The Internet, SETI Program, Manhattan Project) were originally American. (I am not going to count SDI on that list because we don't have one that works yet. )

[joncnunn]

Religion was important to most of the Country's founders. The reason we've never had a state sponsered religion is because the founders had DIFFERENT favorate religiious denominations; most of the protestant denominations in existance at the time + Catholism + Deism were represented in our County's founding fathers.

But compare with the Civs that are listed in Civ III as PTW, and you find that the population of that civ during the era it's representing the most were virtually all praticing the same religion with the possible exception of India.

[joncnunn]

Of the US based Great Wonders:

Hoover Dam is listed as an Industrious wonder.

SETI is listed as an Expansionist wonder.

Manhattan is listed as an Industrious & Military wonder.

UN is listed as a Commerical wonder.

The Intenet is listed as an all trights wonder.

[sabrewolf]

Originally posted by Underseer
Heck, four of the scientific wonders in the game (Apollo Program, The Internet, SETI Program, Manhattan Project) were originally American. (I am not going to count SDI on that list because we don't have one that works yet. )

ok, but consider this:
- SETI project isn't really that important. search for extraterrestial life? i hope there is something like that, but until now: no sign of it (except some crop signs and crazy farmers)
- the internet was developed by the department of defence and was used a decade as ARPAnet. but the breakthrough (away from militaristic and academic use) came only, when the WWW got developed.... and that was at the CERN in geneva. however the basics of the internet (TCP/IP) was developed by an american. this wonder only counts half.
- the hoover dam is big and impressive, but nothing really special about it. it wasn't the first water powerstation, it wasn't the most powerful, it wasn't the most effective.
- manhattan project & apollo program: yes, both definetly american contributions.
- UN: allthough initiated by president wilson, it is an international accomplishment. it just needed the patronate of a powerful and influencial person.

[sabrewolf]

speaking of american influence on the game:
there should be a tech called "modern warfare", which allows better cruise missiles, no-danger bombarding, and so on.

this may even be the biggest unique contribution of modern day USA to the world (most other things were partly or fully developed by foreigners)

[Underseer]

Originally posted by joncnunn
The reason we've never had a state sponsered religion is because the founders had DIFFERENT favorate religiious denominations;

This is a fallacious argument. Anyone with even passing familiarity with religious folk knows that it is simply not in their nature to tolerate other religious views.

If, as you claim, all the founding fathers were the same kind of religious zealots that insisted on adding "one nation under God" in the 1950s, then whichever religion was the most populous would have dominated the others and made themselves the official religion in the aftermath of the revolution.

Furthermore, they would not have insisted on separation of church and state. Even if you accept the bad argument that religious believers would willingly accept other people practicing a different faith, they would not have insisted on keeping religion out of the government. Even in this modern and supposedly enlightened era most religious folk (regardless of which faith) are offended by the very idea of a government that is not controlled or at least guided by faith. Their faith. That sentiment is the same here, in India, the Middle East, etc., etc.

Like it or not, it was the presence and prominence of so many "heathen infidel unbelievers" that made this country the ultimate safe haven for religion. Otherwise, we would probably have a fundamentalist government, à la Iran, complete with public executions for feminine infidelity.

[Underseer]

Originally posted by sabrewolf


ok, but consider this:
- SETI project isn't really that important. search for extraterrestial life? i hope there is something like that, but until now: no sign of it (except some crop signs and crazy farmers)
- the internet was developed by the department of defence and was used a decade as ARPAnet. but the breakthrough (away from militaristic and academic use) came only, when the WWW got developed.... and that was at the CERN in geneva. however the basics of the internet (TCP/IP) was developed by an american. this wonder only counts half.
- the hoover dam is big and impressive, but nothing really special about it. it wasn't the first water powerstation, it wasn't the most powerful, it wasn't the most effective.
- manhattan project & apollo program: yes, both definetly american contributions.
- UN: allthough initiated by president wilson, it is an international accomplishment. it just needed the patronate of a powerful and influencial person.

Maybe I was wrong to bring up the wonders.

Sure, SETI isn't exactly a contribution. Heck, I consider it to be right up there with the Shirley McClane crowd (mood crystals, et. al.). But for whatever reason, the game designers presumed it important enough to include in the game. Probably because any civilization with resources to throw away on something so silly must have a lot of resources devoted to research. *shrug*

There's a reason the wonder is called the Internet and not the WWW. I'm not downplaying the significance or importance of the WWW and its impact on the world's population, mind you, but if I were to use the same logic I would claim that America "half invented" the computer, when correct attribution would go to the Germans and English. Without the Internet connecting so many universities and research facilities, the WWW would never have come into being. (Aside: if the wonder were the WWW instead of the Internet, its effects wouldn't be limited to one continent and it would influence more than just research.)

I didn't bring up Hoover Dam. That other guy did. I agree that it doesn't belong in a discussion about scientific wonders, no matter how big it was or wasn't.

Neither did I bring up the U.N. That's neither uniquely American, nor particularly scientific. We just happen to be the poor sorry saps that have to put up with huge waves of diplomats ignoring traffic laws.

We're all getting way off track from my original point though. Do you think America warrants being listed as a scientific civ based on contributions to applied science? Or are only contributions to theoretical science applicable. If that's the case, I may argue with a few civs currently listed as "scientific" in the game.

[Wycoff]

Commercial and Expansionist... McDonald's and Manifest Destiny...

[Stuie]

Commercial and Militaristic. We are the modern day Roman Empire, after all, so our traits should mirror theirs.

[joncnunn]

And some non-Religous people are intolerant of all relgiions.

Originally posted by Underseer

This is a fallacious argument. Anyone with even passing familiarity with religious folk knows that it is simply not in their nature to tolerate other religious views.

[sabrewolf]

yes, because atheism is also a kind of religion.
we "believe" there is no god.
and we can't prove there is no god, just as little as you can prove there is one.

but i think it's a fact that there are more tolerant and much fewer radical atheists than there are god-believers.

[sabrewolf]

stuie,

Commercial and Militaristic. We are the modern day Roman Empire, after all, so our traits should mirror theirs.

i agree with your choice of traits (commercial is imho absolutely indisputable), but i wound't call the US the roman empire of today.

rome was a great empire, one of the greatest in history and covered a big part of the known civilized world. imho only the chinese and the british empire can compete with rome.

the US is big, influential and powerful and the clear #1 in most aspects (good and bad) today. but it still is nothing compared to rome.

[Underseer]

Originally posted by sabrewolf
stuie,

the US is big, influential and powerful and the clear #1 in most aspects (good and bad) today. but it still is nothing compared to rome.

And we won't, either. Rome lasted 1000 years and I seriously doubt our time in the sun will last that long. In this modern age, everything changes faster (ironically, because of some of our own innovations), so even if we were as "great" as Rome, we wouldn't last as long, so history would see us as less.

Considering some of the things Rome did to conquered peoples, I'd just as soon not be as "great" as they were.

[Beren]

Well, if you compare original Roman politics with contemperary countries, the country that comes most close to it is USA.
(With all backing up by lobbies (Roman=patronus and clientela))
I agree that there are a lot of differences, but my point is: no country comes closer to it.
Oh and about the issue on topic: Commercial and Universal
On a thread about Romans I already gave them Military and Universal. Universal means you can easier integrate non-Americans to Americans (certainly true) and non-Americans are less likely to resist your rule (less true).

[sabrewolf]

hey, that's an interesting idea for a new trait!

quicker adaption and integration of foreigners.
you keep getting foreign citizens leaving their native towns and joining yours.
higher chance of flipping.
higher chance of successful propaganda.
less resistance during and after wars.

not bad

[Panag]

hi ,

indus and expa are great traits , but if the nuber of traits where to double the some some civs should get more then just two , in that case commercial should be added , ... maybe scientific also , .....

have a nice day

[Sava]

As much as I think the US government is infected with religion, I don't think its enough to justify America being a religious Civ. America has only been around a few hundred years. Who knows what an "American" will be in two hundred more years. For all we know, white people might not even be the majority. The history of America definitely justifies Expansionist and Industrious. A close third would be militaristic, then commercial. Religious would definitely be the least applicable trait for America.

[Generalissimo]

I think that industry is the most "American" trait around America had and still has a huge amount of resources and not like other countries (a.k.a Zaire and other African countries) America used and still using those resources.
Besides when looking at all the major wars that America was involved in. it’s the industry that won and not the boys from west point.
Crushing the south, unfreezing the WWI fronts, bombing the sh*t out of the axis.
Everything was achieved with the might of the American industry.

Commercial should be second. Obvious isn’t it

As far as militaristic in the beginning of the 20th century America was anything but a militaristic. The government zealously avoided war.
And as far as their militaristic foreign policy, what did you expect they do. They’re the only superpower around they can pretty much do what ever they like. And its their duty to make sure that their interests will come before others if they’re interests wont come before other nations they can forget about being a superpower.

[Dauphin]

Originally posted by Generalissimo
Commercial should be second. Obvious isn’t it

Industrial and Commercial? Give the US the same traits as the French? Sacrébleu!!

[Yahweh Sabaoth]

I would have to concur that America could easily be "militaristic and commercial"... our principles of government are, after all, taken almost directly from Rome.

Which is too bad, because "great" as Rome might have been, it's formative days were based on slaves, and the greater part of its history was not spent in "greatness"... it was spent rotting.

I'm not saying that this is not true of most other cultures that lasted a long time. I just feel that Rome is often credited with being the greatest civ of all time, when in fact, if you look at it, the duration of "empire," most of which was wretched and ineffective, was much longer than that of "republic".

The same could be true of this country (America). Too bad none of us can live 1,000 years to see what happens!