Poll: "In God We Trust" on coins?

Can we agree to clarify the motto then? How about "In A Mono-Theistic Higher Power This Secular Nation Places its Trust." It would fit if we put it back on the rim!

With regard to the big three having the same God, I didn't mean to say that they didn't, just that if we want to be secular on the world stage, perhaps we shouldn't invoke the name of any deity.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

True... but it's a worthy topic, so let's re-focus on the civics side of things. The first-class handling by every poster so far is a point of pride for this board, so perhaps a few more ideas are useful.

Here is the complete text of George Washington's first inaugural address.

http://www.bartleby.com/124/pres13.html

In it, he uses phrases such as :

• "Almighty Being who rules over the universe"
• "that His benediction may consecrate to the liberties and happiness of the people"
• "In tendering this homage to the Great Author of every public and private good"
• "No people can be bound to acknowledge and adore the Invisible Hand which conducts the affairs of men more than those of the United States."

There are many more references in other writings, but you can read them yourself.

He was sworn in with his right hand on a Holy Bible.

The question is this : given those facts, why would such a man be opposed to "In God We Trust" on our coins ?

 

This is the complete text of John Adam's inaugural address :

http://www.bartleby.com/124/pres15.html

In it, we find these quotes :

• "...if a love of science and letters and a wish to patronize every rational effort to encourage schools, colleges, universities, academies, and every institution for propagating knowledge, virtue, and religion among all classes of the people, not only for their benign influence on the happiness of life in all its stages and classes, and of society in all its forms, but as the only means of preserving our Constitution from its natural enemies"

• "...if elevated ideas of the high destinies of this country and of my own duties toward it, founded on a knowledge of the moral principles and intellectual improvements of the people deeply engraven on my mind in early life, and not obscured but exalted by experience and age; and, with humble reverence, I feel it to be my duty to add, if a veneration for the religion of a people who profess and call themselves Christians, and a fixed resolution to consider a decent respect for Christianity among the best recommendations for the public service"

• "...may that Being who is supreme over all, the Patron of Order, the Fountain of Justice, and the Protector in all ages of the world of virtuous liberty, continue His blessing upon this nation and its Government and give it all possible success and duration consistent with the ends of His providence"

Why would someone speak in such a manner under such circumstances and oppose "In God We Trust" on our coins ?

These were the men who wrote the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. How could they say such things on the public dime and have later generations conclude they intended referring to religion in the public sphere to be unconstitutional ?

 

I think it's convenient that our Christian God and everyone else's God go by the same name. It's like Mankind refers to Man and Woman. You'd have to be a woman to have a problem with that! (I'm just kidding! No one has a problem with that. It's just the random, unbiased nature of the way language is formed that is responsible.)

 

Here is the complete text of Thomas Jefferson's first inaugural address :

http://www.bartleby.com/124/pres16.html

In it we find :

"...acknowledging and adoring an overruling Providence, which by all its dispensations proves that it delights in the happiness of man here and his greater happiness hereafter..."
​

Why would he make such a statement under such circumstances while intending "In God We Trust" to be an unconstitutional Establishment of a State Religion ?

We could go on, but the conclusion is clear.

The Founding Fathers, by both their words and deeds, intended NO prohibition on mentioning the Deity in public affairs.

There is a prohibition of an establishment of a State Religion (Thank God). Courts have upheld time and again "In God We Trust" on coins as falling well short of establishment of a State Religion...

...as proven by the fact that it has been there for 146 years and we have no established State Religion.

 

Linguistically the word "God" in most western languages originates in "pouring a libation", "shining forth", or "opening the mouth". Why this should be is elusive to linguists at this time.

One of the steps in mummification used by the Egyptians was to open the mouth of the corpse and they used natron as a libation in offering to the Gods. There's a great deal in the hermetic texts about "shining forth" and the light of God.

People probably misunderstand the ancient Egyptians. Their's was probably not a true pagan religion and it's quite likely that their Gods were merely aspects of The God.

I still disagree that there is only one God and that each religion has its own. Even if it were true that all people and all religions worshipped the same God with the same properties I would still have a right to invent my own God with different properties in my pursuit of happiness. All Americans have this right. It is a God given right.

 

GDJMSP
I read back over our convo and I see where we digressed! I think I was trying to talk about different "Religious Traditions" rather than a different "God" per se. All of which obfuscated what I thought was just a little point; the idea that appearances can matter whether they are based in facts or not. You do agree with my AA/ Lord's Prayer opinion don't you?

 

I had to vote yes.

 

I myself have cast aside religion in the belief that religion is the cause of these problems pitting nation against nation, neighbor against neighbor because your method of teaching is different than ours so you must be wrong or you worship another God thus forth you shall burn in hell. Exodus 20:3 states God speaking to Moses-"Thou shalt have no other Gods before me." I cannot say weather or not this implies the exsistance of other Gods or if it is in regards to creating and worshipping your own. In my own belief and IMO, It is not a "God given right" to invent and worship your own god God.

 

Sounds like you were forced! ...Did God make you do it?

 

I would object to IGWT if~

I would object to IGWT if~
It included the rev of my Avatar.

But it does not.

Majority may rule and KEEP~

"Give US today our daily Bread", tho:whistle:

 

Most people have no understanding of the original mind of our founders. They stated quite clearly that men have rights bestowed from either God or Nature and are natural rights which no government may give or take.

They then protect these rights and recognize additional rights of the States which are not to be messed with by the Federal Government.

Modern ideology is the antithesis of this and presumes we only have those rights which the Government grants us. This is what Tyrants want us to think.

 

Some interesting tidbits:

• George Washington believed he was protected "by the all-powerful dispensations of Providence" as a young officer in the French and Indian War in 1755. Later an Indian Chief informed him of that battle that he had his warriors aim at him but "Twas all in vain; a power mightier far than we shielded him from harm. He cannot die in battle....The Great Spirit protects that man." Ref: "George Washington--The Christian" by William J. Johnson, 1919, pp 41-2
• In Valley Forge, Washington prayed. On May 5, 1778, he issued an order stating in part, "It having pleased the Almighty Ruler of the universe to defend the cause of the United American States...to establish our liberty and independence...."
• In 1781, a suprise storm held back Cornwallis at Yorktown. Washington worte to Thomas McKean, President of the Continental Congress: "I take particular pleasure in acknowledging that the interposing Hand of Heaven...has been most conspicuous and remarkable."
• John Adams wrote in his diary in 1756 about the Bible and spoke about reverence "toward Almighty God." Shortly after declaring independence, Congress ordered 20,000 Bibles from Europe.
• On 10/4/1982, Reagan signed Public Law 97-280 which states in part: WHEREAS the Bible, the Word of God, has made a unique contribution in shaping the United States as a distinctive and blessed nation and people; WHEREAS deeply held religion convictions spring form the Holy Scriptures led to the early settlement of our Nation...WHEREAS many of our great national leaders--among them Presidents Washington, Jackson, Lincoln, and Wilson--paid tribute to the surpassing influence of the Bile in our country's development....WHEREAS that renewing our knowledge of and fiath in God through Holy Scripture can strengthen us as a nation and a people; NOW THEREFORE, be it Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives...That the President is authroized and requested to designate 1983 as a national 'Year of the Bible' in recognition of both the formative influence the Bible has been for our Nation, and our national need to study and apply the teachings of the Holy Scriptures."

Seems like "In God We Trust" on our coinage and paper money is very appropriate to me.

 

A. You did say it was a Constitutional issue and the only way to change it is through a Constitutional Amendment. See in red above. Did I misunderstand what you were saying?

B. The part that is unconstitutional is the seperation of church and state which is a constitutional issue. The part that is not a constitutional issue is whether or not the motto takes a Supreme Court ruling to change.

C. If you look at how a small group in devout Christians were able to have the motto inserted on our coins in the first place, you would think that a few people with a concern for the seperation od church and state could do the same thing to remove the motto from our money.

D. Finally, polls should never dictate right and wrong on issues of import such as this. There is no way to accurately conduct a poll without inserting researcher bias while actually achieving a representative sample of the population. Polls may indeed agree with your position but who conducted those polls and for which side do they lobby?

Since we've talked this topic into the ground, maybe we can just agree to disagree and leave it at that. I understand your position and hopefully you understand mine by now.

Take care Doug!

 

Amendment 1 to United States Constitution - Freedom of the press, religion and expression. ratified 12/15/1791

Article 1 - Congress shall pass no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; abridging the freedom of speech...

There it is, Doug. It's in the Constitution.

What I think people miss is that this is NOT an establishment of religion by the government as it makes no reference to which God. It is MHO however, that this use of the word "God" by the government is not as all-inclusive as you have posited.

There are still poly-theistic religions, there are pagan religions, and people with a lack of all religion and they all reside within the American spectrum.

I personally think that the word "God" is in and of itself a religious reference and so being is something that is best left alone by the government. That said, there are tons of references to God in our government besides this such as the oath of almost any public office, how a witness is sworn in for testimony, etc.

This (IGWT) is always the issue that gets people lathered up on its own, but if you're going to be intellectually honest and call for its removal from our money, have it removed from everything else governmental as well. It's not as easy as you may think.

 

minor point:
at the time of this amendment, there existed a number of existing (already established) religions (e.g., Christianity, Moslem, Judaism, Hindu). I doubt that one argue that this referred to the establishment of a new religion, but you never know with lawyers....

Often the official proceedings of the first Congress is given judicial notice in determining the intent of the framers. What written discussions of the first congress exist that are relevant to the establishment clause?
Private letters of members of congress or cabinet members don't count (even if they closed with a reference to God as I understand Jefferson's "separation" letter did).