Poll: "In God We Trust" on coins?

Perhaps also an arguement for removing E Pluribus Unum and Liberty as well.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

The reasons I think it doesn't belong there have nothing to do with faith or belief or anything like that. I feel the less clutter from writing the better the coin design could be. Put United States of America and the denomination on and thats all we need word-wise. It shouldn't be a billboard to advertise our beliefs or conceived notion of unity or constitutional will. The way it's going, why not just do away with any art on coins and currency and instead fill the space with useless and meaningless slogans?
Guy~

 

I think it makes adequate statement to our roots as a judeo-christian society, and it is not an endorsement of any particular religion simply a statement of beleif in God as our Forefathers had. Now if you are athiest or of a different religion I see no reason why you should take offense at the statement of faith made by the people that founded our country and their beleifs. It may not be what someone beleives, but that is not the point of it to begin with.

 

As far as I can tell there has been no response to my idea that we should avoid the appearance of a being a non-secular state. I teach high school and I always leave the door open when a student is in the room. I have no doubt for myself that my behavior would remain appropriate if the door was closed but I want to avoid the appearance of impropriety. While we're trying to export our secular ideals to Iraq, wouldn't it help to not appear to be hypocritical? Or we could try a different tact. Perhaps the currency we make for use in the Middle East could say "In Allah we Trust" since we want people to believe it could be the same, "non-religious/non-denominational" God that we mean.

As for the beliefs of the majority, most people seem to be saying that most Americans "believe in God." Wouldn't it be more accurate to ask if most Americans "Trust in God?" I would think we'd loose a few!

 

I once had a fortune cookie that said " In God We Trust: everyone else must pay cash"

 

My Bad! I had it switched! Here is the way it should have read!:

"As far as I can tell there has been no response to my idea that we should avoid the appearance of a being a non-secular state. I teach high school and I always leave the door open when a student is in the room. I have no doubt for myself that my behavior would remain appropriate if the door was closed but I want to avoid the appearance of impropriety. While we're trying to export our secular ideals to Iraq, wouldn't it help to not appear to be hypocritical? Or we could try a different tact. Perhaps the currency we make for use in the Middle East could say "In Allah we Trust" since we want people to believe it could be the same, "non-religious/non-denominational" God that we mean."

Now what do we think?

 

Regarding appearances; people who live elsewhere might be suspicious if you followed your unequivocal statement above with, "so help us God." I think even I would raise an eyebrow...and I know you are absolutely correct!

 

excellent point

 

Neverthless it does suggest that there is only one god, out of 25000 or so that are recorded. Also, by looking up religion of those bright guys that came up with this idea you can figure out which god they have thought about

 

So we can change the motto to "In Allah we Trust" with no problem. There is no way that that could be construed as anything but a secular reference to a higher power...

 

And here is my point. Just because you and I know that we are a secular state and we can even prove it in a court of law, should we not concern ourselves with how others might see us? Like in my AA analogy; do you think it is a good idea to end a secular meeting with the lord's prayer? I think it sends a mixed message. In general I would agree with you that we shouldn't care about how others see us, save for the fact that we're proselytizing secular democracy with the blood of our troops. In that case I am very concerned with the possibility of our motives being misunderstood.

 

I may have missed your AA analogy, but wasn't one of the key tenants of AA that there is a higher power?

 

But conversely, although Muslims refer to God as Allah, they should know that when we say In God We Trust, We are also referring to their God? I'm not sure they would trust us on that one, even though our courts have proven it so.

FMI- What would be a non-secular way to refer to the Christian God? One of the test's for how something might be taken is to consider if the opposite was true. Let's say we were a non-secular, Christian nation. Would we need to change our motto to reflect our State Religion?

My AA analogy was that although AA purports to be Higher Power based (as opposed to an affiliation with any Sect, Denomination, or Religion; not unlike how we want In God We Trust to be taken) but that that reality is undermined when people close the meetings with the Lord's Prayer. There are some staunch defenders of closing with the Lord's Prayer because of similar reasons as the pro-mottos; tradition, the sentiment is meant to be taken outside the context of the Religion it comes from, the fact that AA is not affiliated so people making that connection are simply factually wrong, etc. Even though I know AA is unaffiliated with any one Religion I think it gives the wrong impression to a newcomer. I also rarely see people with yarmulkes "join us in our nice way to close."
​

Like how Jews know Christians worship the same God but they don't believe Jesus was a prophet. OK.

Hey, shouldn't the Koran come with the Old and New testaments attached, like how Christians use the Old Testament?