Newgrounds.com — Everything, By Everyone.

Now, this is the story all about how
My life got flipped-turned upside down
And I'd like to take a minute
Just sit right there
I'll tell you how I became the prince of a town called Bel Air

In west Philadelphia born and raised
On the playground was where I spent most of my days
Chillin' out maxin' relaxin' all cool
And all shootin some b-ball outside of school
When a couple of guys
Who were up to no good
Startin making trouble in my neighborhood
I got in one little fight and my mom got scared
She said 'You're movin' with your auntie and uncle in Bel Air'

I begged and pleaded with her day after day
But she packed my suite case and sent me on my way
She gave me a kiss and then she gave me my ticket.
I put my walkman on and said, 'I might as well kick it'.

First class, yo this is bad
Drinking orange juice out of a champagne glass.
Is this what the people of Bel-Air living like?
Hmmmmm this might be alright.

But wait, I hear the prissy, booze, whine, all that
Is this the type of place that they should send this cool cat?
I don't think so
I'll see when I get there
I hope they're prepared for the prince of Bel-Air

Well uh, the plane landed and when I came out
There was a dude who looked like a cop standing there with my name out
I ain't trying to get arrested yet.
I just got here!
I sprang with the quickness, like lightening disappeared

I whistled for a cab and when it came near
The license plate said fresh and it had dice in the mirror
If anything I can say is that this cab was rare
But I thought 'Man forget it' - 'Yo home to Bel Air'

I pulled up to the house about seven or eight
And I yelled to the cabbie 'Yo homes smell ya later'
I looked to my kingdom
I was finally there
To sit on my throne as the Prince of Bel Air

At 10/7/11 07:45 PM, Retrochique wrote: Expressions
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
I 'am a tool, a tool whitout a purpose.

I am fulfilling my use, to be useless.

Living my life up to expectations.

Always unable to find words and speak my mind,
Therefore writing this rhyme.

I still hope to find whatever I seek, but past failures blinded me with hate. For example religion I find madness but I still luster faith.

Faith that one day, I may and will find my purpose and use.

You might think, this seems a rhyme without reason,
like a body without a soul. But it expresses my mind and that is its goal.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Tell me what you think.

Fixed the grammar. I liked it, just fixed the mistakes. They didn't bug me, but I figured I would fix it for you.

At this point i'm just trying to make this postable.

At 10/4/11 03:27 AM, RandomRoarness wrote: Levii started out his criminal career the moment when kimberly became mute. Assaulted by a rapist who had abused kimberly phyically and mentally ended up slitting her thoat with a knife at Levii's apartment. Levii arrives back home to stubble upon a unknown man raping bloody up kimberly who lost conscious. Levii in a burst of annoyance and mild anger kills the man....somehow

Mild anger and annoyance? Yep, that's characteristic of a man who kills for that mild anger and annoyance then resorts to a life of crime for the person he saved through that. He needs to be emotional in this. Also, i'll give you some reasons killing him off would be satisfying for many.

1) EVERY story like this has a happy ending of sorts, make this one end with death and despair.
2) It won't be expected if you do it right
3) It will kill off chances for a sequel right? Wrong. Let Kimberly live, and make a sequel with her and her living with the pain, but of course have similair things happen.

At 10/2/11 12:35 PM, Squishy69 wrote: I have something to add:

My Little Pony
I'm now a brony...
I say: Goddamn these ponies;
They drive me to drink.

Your little pony
Gave you a massive bony
and now your dick shrinks?

At 10/2/11 10:31 PM, LocoJoe wrote: It's like having skin on your dick.

Not sure what the fuck is wrong with you, but I still have skin on my dick, just not as much since I was circumsized.

At 10/2/11 11:45 AM, Wardragonkai wrote: Literary Masterpiece, you took a concept so cliched. Common, and turned it into something that is almost indescribable. Thank you for submitting your work here ^^

Thank you, that truly does mean a lot. I like cliche concepts, they tend to have so much potential but so often are done poorly. I'm glad that people enjoy my song writing, I have written several songs that I hate however so I get rid of them

Shadow in the mirror

You feel,
abandoned.
So pissed off,
and hated.
Just leave us,
and go away.

We don't want you,
and don't need you.
Now stop bitching about your life,
then ignoring all advice.
(from us)

You always feel alone,
though surrounded by those you know,
you drove them off and now it's true,
who knew?

We don't want you,
didn't hate you,
you drove us to this point.
Ohhoh

Now just go away,
we don't want you to stay,
shut up and do something,
you're turning into a ringing,
in my ear.

We enjoyed you,
but now hate you.
You just always only cared,
about yourself.

I've got problems like you,
but you don't hear me,
complaining.

Just leave us and go away,
we still don't want you stay,
shut up and kill yourself,
if it's that bad.

You know I don't condone suicide,
but you just seem to hate your life,
so either choose to live or want to die,
it's up to you.

It's up to you.

Nobody but you.

Only you.

My friend was talking about how my ex girlfriend was constantly bitching then yelling when they gave her advice, so I wrote this.

I'll post more in replies below

Do it all

I see,
all the infintesimal,
unmistakable breaks.
And I can feel,
the way you've fallen,
to me you reveal,
and death is now calling to me.

Don't let me slip away

With bending sticks,
and burning bones,
destroyed dreams,
and broken homes.
I can't do it all.

Go away,
to find yourself,
but then you die,
for someone else.
Don't try to do it all.

(not at all)

I look into darkness
and see.
The gift of madness,
given to me.
Everybody has it,
but most treat it as disease.
I'll let it fester in me,
now

Bending sticks,
and burning bones.
Destroyed dreams,
and broken homes.
I can't do it all.

Now go away,
to find yourself.
But then you die,
for someone else.
Don't try to do it all.
Don't let me do it all.
We can't do it,
you can't do it,
I can't do it all.

We look at death,
as we pass life.
It never just goes by,
it waits as we walk on.

As death keeps moving close,
and we walk alone,
but we can't do it,
I can't do it all.

At 10/1/11 11:40 AM, BlackMist75 wrote: How about a Mother 3 style engine? when you do a normal attack you can do timed combos!! Like when using a basic fist attack, press Z key to link another punch and maybe X key to kick. You can also receive recoil damage.

Well he's going for a game that is turn based, so I don't see how that would work so well.

At 10/1/11 12:44 PM, JebbaL wrote:

At 10/1/11 09:49 AM, TheSixthCell wrote:

I respect your honesty! Now that I think about it, maybe it was a mistake to post an excerpt from the beginning. You're right, there is a good amount of description, a lot of it being of things that don't seem to have any relevance to anything. All I can say is that I was trying to plant some ideas and themes into the reader's head that would be showing up throughout the story. And I'm not just talking about the whole section about the moon. Like you said, though: Without being able to read more, this doesn't really build up to anything. I see what you're saying.

Maybe I'll post something else from a little farther in once I've looked over and proofread, but who knows. Thanks for taking time to read!

Alright, thanks for being able to take constructive criticism without getting defensive. I meant everything I said in the best possible way. I will be checking back for more of the story and posting comments as they come, I look forward to helping you. And here's a tip, don't try to redo the entire thing, just tone down the description in parts and the parts you leave have some relevance. Such as with the glow of the bulb, tone that down but don't get rid of it completely, then have it come in later where the bulb ends up revealing something. But to put any other suggestions i'd need to know what you're going for here, mystery, romance, comedy, horror, what?

How about a turn based strategy game where it takes you out of the perspective of an average strategy game, and you play outside of the battle but in the battle in a way.

I'll put this simple, you can choose between playing as good or evil, and then there are battles which you observe. However, you can interfere with the battle. Such as for good your starting moves could be something like this:

Holy bolt- clears the battlefield and then both sides start over, but with decreased health
Angelic glow- Summons one angel (at first) to help the battle of one side

Evil:

Trance- Puts everybody within a certain area to sleep for three turns
Summoning ritual- Summons one (at first) demon hound to attack everything

So they both start out with only two moves. But they also can counter, but only some moves have the ability to counter. You need to choose between moves or countering, and if their move can't be countered when you choose counter it's a wasted turn. I'll give an example:

Holy bolt counter would be, say, rewinding time so that they are back where they happened.
Trance counter would be to have a guardian angel standing by each of them to defend them, the guardian angel can be killed

Each move can also be upgraded, so the angelic glow could be upgraded so that there are more angels summoned, same thing for the summoning ritual.

Every battle won gets a certain number of points (call these what you wish) for you. Each battle lost loses you points. The enemy has a set rate of upgrading as to not make it so you could win every battle and they get no upgrades. You can spend these points on starting bonuses, but these would be expensive because they would obviously be quite an advantage. You could also upgrade moves with them (see above). Or you could buy new moves.

Every time you interfere with a battle, it affects your gameplay at a later date, usually depending on the move you choose to use and how it affects it. It could make one side more loyal and the other side closer to evil/good, it could make both of them evil/good because they think that nobody helped them and it was all them. Everything you do could get you a side to help you, or lose you a side.

It all ends up in a direct battle between good and evil where everybody loyal to good is on one side and everybody loyal to evil is on the other. You can even hinder your own side if you choose to, but if you do that too much then people start to defect. This final battle is the only losable one, every battle you do before this was just building up.

I'll leave the amount of time for everything untouched. Hope this helps, and sorry if I got too specific with the details these are all only suggestions to help you.

I didn't really enjoy that. There is such a thing as too descriptive, and you definetly crossed that line. Going overboard in describing miniscule things that have no real importance to the story tends to lose readers faster than if it's not that well written and has too little build up, which in all honesty I have to say you didn't build up enough on it and the dialogue was very poor. I can't accurately judge this without reading more, so this is just based on what i've read.

Allow it, let them bitch. Won't lose them any face, since what little respect they have is from people who jerk off to that sort of stuff mostly. The rest of the respect they have is from those who are indifferent.

At 9/29/11 04:45 PM, The-universe wrote:

At 9/29/11 03:44 PM, TheSixthCell wrote: I worded that very poorly.

Or to put it another way, your position is very poor.

Hm, you could at least show respect when attempting to get into a debate.

Never heard of Abiogenesis then? Oh come on, it's not like you haven't heard of this before.

That pretty much makes the reference to the miller experiment null and void.

With how intricate a cell is alone and with millions of miniscule complex and intricate things within that all working for life itself, how could that have happened by chance with absolutely no design?

But let's entertain your idea for a minute. Let's say we were designed. Who said it had to be a god? Or a better one yet, your god? We could've been the result of an intergalactic fart from a hyper race of aliens and evolution still wouldn't need supernatural intervention.

http://whiteman0o0.wordpress.com/2008/01 /11/millerurey-experiment-fact-or-fraud/

I never said it had to be my God, I simply stated any diety, and the need for one wasn't even based on Evolution if you would read my post. Now then, this is getting far off topic.

This is starting to become an awful lot like the Atheism/Theism topic though, I feel as if we're straying from the original points you started on about areas where science and religion could possibly be compatible.

You are right, lets stay on topic in how they could be compatible in cases. I prefer not to stray into topics I wasn't originally adressing, which is why I attempt to not put anything regarding religion due to the fact that even if it's not an "Atheism vs Theism" thread it becomes one eventually. I much enjoyed that discussion, Good job. I look forward to any future debates we may have. Good luck in any debates you may get into.

At 9/29/11 04:12 PM, Famas wrote:

At 9/29/11 03:44 PM, TheSixthCell wrote: I worded that very poorly. If you use a creator who used evolution as a tool to expand species in a more explainable way as to not overly confuse humans or for whatever reason the diety would have then it explains the origins and the intense intricacy of how Evolution happened. Look at how complex a cell is, and even how complex a neutron is. There are also more and more miniscule bits incorperated into matter, and into lifeforms itself that look almost designed with how perfectly they are fit for life. Scientists have tried recreating the atmosphere millions of times, and have tried various things that could have caused life, not a single one came close to working. With how intricate a cell is alone and with millions of miniscule complex and intricate things within that all working for life itself, how could that have happened by chance with absolutely no design?

This entire paragraph is essentially the god of the gaps reasoning I mentioned above. Simply put, current holes in scientific understanding about processes that surround us do not validate your beliefs even remotely. Think of all the instances in the past where people did this: people used to believe celestial objects were giant spheres that god himself moved across the skies like a person turning a crank in order to....give a pretty light show to humans I guess (I honestly don't know why they thought a Deity would be bored enough to do this). They insisted that this must be correct because nobody at the time could compile enough evidence to formulate a proper working theory to explain what they were seeing. When heliocentrism and the concept of planetary orbits was later developed and confirmed, this completely shattered their 'proof', as the entire basis for their argument was gone.

People do this everyday, and I can understand why. However it's still a logical fallacy, something to be avoided when you are in pursuit of the truth.

I apologize for posting in reply to the same text, but I felt the need to point this out, saying "There is nothing to provide another reasonable explanation, but one will eventually be found" Is just as faulty as saying "God made it because I said so and you have no proof otherwise". It's pure faith to believe that scientific evidence of another explanation will come up in the future until one does.

At 9/29/11 04:12 PM, Famas wrote:

At 9/29/11 03:44 PM, TheSixthCell wrote: I worded that very poorly. If you use a creator who used evolution as a tool to expand species in a more explainable way as to not overly confuse humans or for whatever reason the diety would have then it explains the origins and the intense intricacy of how Evolution happened. Look at how complex a cell is, and even how complex a neutron is. There are also more and more miniscule bits incorperated into matter, and into lifeforms itself that look almost designed with how perfectly they are fit for life. Scientists have tried recreating the atmosphere millions of times, and have tried various things that could have caused life, not a single one came close to working. With how intricate a cell is alone and with millions of miniscule complex and intricate things within that all working for life itself, how could that have happened by chance with absolutely no design?

This entire paragraph is essentially the god of the gaps reasoning I mentioned above. Simply put, current holes in scientific understanding about processes that surround us do not validate your beliefs even remotely. Think of all the instances in the past where people did this: people used to believe celestial objects were giant spheres that god himself moved across the skies like a person turning a crank in order to....give a pretty light show to humans I guess (I honestly don't know why they thought a Deity would be bored enough to do this). They insisted that this must be correct because nobody at the time could compile enough evidence to formulate a proper working theory to explain what they were seeing. When heliocentrism and the concept of planetary orbits was later developed and confirmed, this completely shattered their 'proof', as the entire basis for their argument was gone.

People do this everyday, and I can understand why. However it's still a logical fallacy, something to be avoided when you are in pursuit of the truth.

I simply use a deity to explain it because there is absolutely no proof he does not exist, and the world looks designed in itself. I realize it may be seen as a logical fallacy, but with no proof of another cause and the very laws of nature preventing spontanious creation within the natural realm, logic leads me to believe that the cause is a creator. Going to a metaphysical conclusion for a primary reason of no proof otherwise isn't a logical fallacy, but simply the only available logical answer I can think of.

At 9/29/11 03:46 PM, SteveGuzzi wrote: 'hard' sciences and religion don't really gel while 'soft' sciences and religion can overlap a lot. i don't consider science and spirituality as being enemies, they just deal with different things.

hard science is about the world regardless of our personal relation to it. religion/spirituality is directly concerned with the human experience and what our relationship is to each other and the rest of the universe.

I didn't deal with that there. There are certainly areas where religion shouldn't be in, and areas where science shouldn't be in, there's no denying that. Such as it would be irrational to say a rock was made out of God material or some other metaphysical explanation, and equally irrational to try to use science to define morals. Like it or not religion deals with morals though personal non-religious beliefs do as well while science does not, and I don't see any religion that deals with what a rock is made of.

At 9/29/11 09:13 AM, Famas wrote:

At 9/29/11 08:59 AM, Korriken wrote: I did. get over yourself.

Those in glass houses.

Shouldn't throw stones. I had to finish that. But good job in your post.

At 9/29/11 08:58 AM, Famas wrote: Science is the study and theorization of natural phenomena. Religion is a belief in the supernatural. So really, I don't see any point where the two should ever interact, as science gives zero regard to the supernatural. The conflicts come into play when religious people attempt to use 'science' in order to support supernatural beliefs such as creation myths (such as the creation 'science' museum), and conversely when they attempt to use supernatural explanations for natural phenomena (i.e disease is caused by god being angry, god caused X to happen, etc etc.).

By very definition, the two should have really nothing to do with each other.

Ruling out anything other than naturalistic explanation in a scientific study as a result limits the study of science. They are both two very different ways of explaining the universe, one uses metaphysical explanation and one uses observation. I see no reason why when looking into a subject scientifically one can't have a metaphysical explanation as a result, or a naturalistic explanation. Both should be equally open.

At 9/28/11 05:51 PM, TheSixthCell wrote: 1) The Cambrian Explosion
For any who don't know, the Cambrian Explosion is a time in history that fossils who came from that time period which are vastly more advance than fossils found from time periods before it.

No it isn't, that's an incredibly vague and only half correct definition. It's a period of biological history that had an extreme growth in the diversification of organisms. The sheer number of species exploded after a few billion years of relatively scarce development of life on Earth.

I realize, I was very tired and distracted when posting this, I apologize. I should have used different points besides the Cambrian Explosion.

If you bring a creator into the picture who used evolutionary processes yet simply put in more advanced species into the picture, then it gets explained.

No it doesn't. You basically just said "God did it". That has never explained anything in the history ever. That does not explain the mechanisms involved in the event, what caused it to actually occur. If a god did it, then HOW did they do it? Without actually answering that, saying a deity was involved is just useless filler.

I worded that very poorly. If you use a creator who used evolution as a tool to expand species in a more explainable way as to not overly confuse humans or for whatever reason the diety would have then it explains the origins and the intense intricacy of how Evolution happened. Look at how complex a cell is, and even how complex a neutron is. There are also more and more miniscule bits incorperated into matter, and into lifeforms itself that look almost designed with how perfectly they are fit for life. Scientists have tried recreating the atmosphere millions of times, and have tried various things that could have caused life, not a single one came close to working. With how intricate a cell is alone and with millions of miniscule complex and intricate things within that all working for life itself, how could that have happened by chance with absolutely no design?

At 9/29/11 03:01 PM, thedo12 wrote:

At 9/29/11 02:49 PM, TheSixthCell wrote:
Do you still remember the moves you learned? I'm curious to that. I took karate... for a month when I was six. All I learned was combat rolls and one block. Surprisingly enough, just that has saved my ass in a fight before. Such as combat rolling to duck a punch while kicking out their knee mid-roll. You have no idea how useful that is.

I still remember basic throws , but not anything specific. I also remember grappling, how to fall safely, how to do a flying arm bar(they never taught me the flying part I learned that by myself, lol) and the basic choke. I've never had to use it yet thankfully , but it's good just to develop what I would call physical literacy (basic movements and hand eye coordination ect:) . This is something people who get picked on the most usually lack and hence can't even compete if you discount skill and experience which bullies have in spades most of the time.

I basically learned how to punch correctly, kick correctly, roll, and a basic block. I then learned the rest from fights and experience. It's all fun to use. Thankfully i've only had to actually try to hurt somebody badly once. The rest of the times I badly hurt somebody it was just me trying to defend myself, somebody else, or they pissed me off way too much.

At 9/28/11 10:58 PM, Warforger wrote:

At 9/27/11 11:46 PM, orangebomb wrote: 1.} Were you either bullied as a kid, was a bully, or neither?

Both at times. Not sure how that is never mentioned.

2.} Do you think that this issue is sensationalized by the media?

Sort of? Most bullies just go away if you ignore them since they're basically trolls.

3.} Should the schools deal with this problem, and/or does the government have to get involved at any level?

No. Bullies already operate under the guise of bad boy, just telling them to stop it isn't going to do anything. To begin with if in High School you take normal classes the idiots and the bullies also do, so get smarter and take harder classes, in there the nice, smart and all around good people are there. I found this out when taking AP classes and noticed how much I enjoyed them over how much I enjoyed other classes, while the AP classes I looked forward to everyday all the other classes were payback for enjoying school too much aside from a few exceptions as they were filled with such obnoxious people who are oblivious to how obnoxious they are since they have friends who enjoy it.

4.} If this was such a big issue now, why did no one bring this up 10, 20, 30 years ago?

Because of school shootings.

5.} Is this just a product of our society going soft, or is there an underlying issue that we don't know about bullying?

No. It's just normal human nature, we were brutish barbarians at one point.

We still are, but as small children parents school and the media works together to slowly kill every last bit of killer primal instinct that actually does help to survive even in todays society. Though at least my parents not only let me keep some of it, they somewhat taught me basics of fighting. Problem is a lot of people don't, and try to teach their kids that fighting no matter what is wrong.

At 9/29/11 02:42 PM, thedo12 wrote: Actually the high school I went to did something like this and it worked out great , instead of just "self defense" we learned judo ,and we actually did chokes/armbars in addition to all the throws we did it in a safe way . There was also some judo philosophy that was nice.

It worked out great, the bullies at school will already know how to fight , they get plenty of first hand experience with it. The people your mostly teaching are those who aren't going start anything and will defend yourself. Nerds/dorks/weirdos and average people.

I still have my yellow belt , lol . The only thing bad that came out of it was how awkward it was changing into your gi front of a whole class of gals/guys (we didn't have change rooms lol , only thing we had was a tiny japenesse wall thing for girls to change in)

I also hate the idea when people say PE is useless and this is coming from the biggest lib you will find. physical activity is important for both your mind and body , it can help with depression and a lot of things you wouldn't think about. The only problem with PE is how competitive it is so awkward/less active kids are left out , which happens to be the exact opposite of what you want to happen.

You had some points there I hadn't thought of, such as the bullies already knowing how to fight. I can't believe I missed that, I must have been tired or distracted or something. Do you still remember the moves you learned? I'm curious to that. I took karate... for a month when I was six. All I learned was combat rolls and one block. Surprisingly enough, just that has saved my ass in a fight before. Such as combat rolling to duck a punch while kicking out their knee mid-roll. You have no idea how useful that is.

At 9/29/11 01:45 PM, Hybridization wrote: Isn't there a thread exactly like this?

Anyway, I choose both science and religion.

Not sure if there is

At 9/29/11 01:47 PM, Hybridization wrote:

At 9/28/11 10:51 PM, Camarohusky wrote: Great. Let's teach a bunch of immature and anger prone students who are likely to fight, HOW to fight...

Seconded.

It's teaching how to defend, not how to start and finish fights. You know, defend so you don't get your ass handed to you until a teacher inevitably breaks it up? Learning to start and finish fights is up to the students.

At 9/28/11 10:15 PM, majormelthesackboy wrote:

At 9/28/11 09:20 PM, TheSixthCell wrote:

You don't go to a church like that anymore right? I would leave if I was the only one who believed in the validity of both.:

yes,I usually go there in the summer time.I guess its because if they feel like they question their religion they might sin?

It's not questioning it, and even in the bible it's considered good to question it.

They don't mention them. They also don't mention squids. I'm pretty sure squids do and have exist(ed)

Yea I feel the bible's characters are metaphors,but then again,if my family heard me say this,they might resent me....

I think that is the case in some parts, but not in most

They aren't necessarily strangers. However, any scientific study that ends in any result other than strictly naturalistic is seen as untrue, therefore leaving the possibility of a creator out results in limiting scientific research.

I'm a bit confused,but I got the gist of what you mean.BUT I have seen one wonder god has done(and its quite a weird one indeed) .but yes,its obvious why they leave out a creator.If I COMPLETELY MISSED THE POINT,then please explain what yiou said in laymans terms.

Ok, in laymans terms that means that in science, if they instantly rule out anything other than purely naturalistic answers from the start, it actually restricts scientific research.

At 9/28/11 10:26 PM, Warforger wrote: P.E. is the most pointless class ever. No one gives a shit about the class and its taking the place of what could be more class options for those who want to get ahead. It wastes money and time and doesn't even improve anything.

Well it makes sure that kids aren't all lazy asses. That's about it. If they taught self defense as part of the curriculum at least it would pose some use.

Do you think there should be incorperated into Phys Ed from seventh grade on a unit on self defense, and a self defense class? Not teaching how to ram your fist down somebodies throat or break their arm or shit like that, just very basic stuff like rolling out of falls, throwing, blocking hits, throwing a decent punch, stance, taking them to the ground, very basic stuff like that? I personally would teach my kid from a very early age, because they need to know this. I don't see this happening in the near future, but how would you react if it did, and do you think it should happen?

At 9/28/11 09:28 PM, Camarohusky wrote:

At 9/28/11 09:25 PM, TheSixthCell wrote: Founding fathers=Theists
In God we trust=Theist, not actually religious
A belief in a creator isn't religious. Saying hey, a guy made all of us, doesn't make a religion.

But that may promote monotheism over polytheism, atheism, and agnosticim (and any other isms that qualify)

Would you rather have it be- "In God, Gods, nothing, and indecision we trust?"
Personally I think that sounds strange. We could have the motto be "All for one and one for all" or "Beam me up Scotty" but those may lead to lawsuits. Or we could have "Parilitas est infinitio" which is "Equality is eternity" in Latin, I would actually support that. I don't think that any argument about it being unconstitutional should be made until a suitable replacement is found and agreed upon. Though I agree it might, but that's just splitting hairs.

Founding fathers=Theists
In God we trust=Theist, not actually religious
A belief in a creator isn't religious. Saying hey, a guy made all of us, doesn't make a religion.