Should "In God We Trust" be on our currency?

[usregimechange]

Poll question: Should "In God We Trust" be on our currency?

It is there now, should it stay?

[Spider Jerusalem]

1. Oughtn't to have been put on to begin with...

and the only reason it was (originally) is because Salmon Chase, Secretary of the Treasury during the Civil War, was a religious fanatic.

[usregimechange]

2. Well some congressmen must have voted for it, right?

[Eric J in MN]

26. Right. It passed Congress during the Civil War (nt)

nt

[elare]

3. In God We Trust

All Others Pay Cash

[CindyDale]

7. Good suggestion

[signmike]

4. As I understand it...Eisenhower did it for fundie votes

Is it on earlier U.S. money ?

[usregimechange]

5. I think it was on earlier money but became official then

[Eric J in MN]

23. No, the first coins with "In God We Trust" are from 1864.

Eisenhower signed the addition of "under God" to the pledge of allegiance."

[charlie]

24. Actually, he's half right

Eisenhower signed the bill adding the motto to paper currency. It was the result of an iniative by a pious Matthew Rothert.

[Eric J in MN]

25. Ok. (nt)

nt

[Catch22Dem]

6. Use "In Snuffleupagus we trust" It's the same fucking thing

Why does one imaginary friend get top billing over the others?

[Llewlladdwr]

38. Yay!

I love the non-stop religion-bashing that is DU!

[Behind the Aegis]

49. Out of curiosity

How is the above poster "religion-bashing?" Non-stop religion-bashing on DU is non-existent. There is some "bashing," but I hardly would call it non-stop.

[Catch22Dem]

56. You wanna give me a break puh-leeeeeze

Look, you believe in god, I don't. Perhaps I believe in Snuffleupagus. There's just as much solid proof of the existence of one as there is the other. So tell me, why does your god end up on our currency? That's not bashing, my friend, that's pointing out the sickening reality that is the fundamentalist movement.

Now, I also admit, bashing religion is something I LOVE to do, but I rarely, if ever, do it here. However, should I decide to do it here, there will be no ambiguity about it. You'll know. The above post was a little dig at best, not bashing.

[oldfogey]

8. Are you

an atheist? If you believe in A god and trust that god to see you through the trying times in your life what is wrong. Sure it's church and state, but this is an argument I have only seen taken up by atheists, which I have nothing against. It will not change the govt. as a whole and that is where our focus should be.

[Modem Butterfly]

9. Why cheapen a god by invoking it on money?

Doesn't that seem quite disrespectful?

[oldfogey]

10. Back in the day

we focused on other things. This never really became an issue back then but I get your point.

[Modem Butterfly]

28. Well, clearly you did

After all, the phrase wasn't put on money consistantly until the late 1950's.

[usregimechange]

12. Taking his name in vain?

[fujiyama]

35. I have a fundie friend

that said the same thing. He didn't like the idea of having talk of God on money.

[Clark2008]

52. Correct.

Matthew 21:12-13
And Jesus went into the temple of God, and cast out all them that sold and bought in the temple, and overthrew the tables of the moneychangers, and the seats of them that sold doves,
And said unto them, It is written, My house shall be called the house of prayer; but ye have made it a den of thieves.

[oldfogey]

53. I am

not very religious so I guess I never thought about it much. I agree it's not good in principal just never saw a need to fight it.

[MisterP]

41. I'm not an atheist at all and I oppose "in God we trust" being slathered

everywhere on public thingies

[Catch22Dem]

57. I believe in MYSELF to get me through the trying times in my life

Anyone who thinks some supreme being got them through their tough times is denying themselves the credit they deserve.

[Deja Q]

11. Counter question: Should Reagan's filthy face be put on the $50 bill?

FUCK, NO.

[usregimechange]

13. I love the W graphic, is it on a product yet? You ought to

cafepress it and get it out there.

[No Exit]

14. I'm in favor of it IF,

IF we add one more line to what is written on our currency. That would be: "God is not ever a member of any political party."

I don't have a problem with people believing in a higher power, but I do have a problem with people presuming to speak for said higher power.

[Quixote1818]

15. It's generic enough that it does not bother me.

We have bigger fish to fry.

[PurityOfEssence]

16. Of course not, but it's definitely not an issue to raise right now

It's like gay marriage: this is not the time to right certain major wrongs, this is a time to wrest control from the hands of the reactionaries.

No, I don't believe in "moving to the right" or anything of the sort, I believe in fighting class warfare and calling them out for the abusive, world conquering haters that they are and taking this party back to the left a bit with no apologies. I posted a joking thread a while back about retorting to "third-wayers" when they suggest "moving toward the center": I said the response should be "you mean move left?" Personally, that's what I want and think will be successful, but the joke was that the party is already to the right of center.

When the company's failing and laying off people, you don't ask for a raise. Sadly, the tide of history was what swept gay marriage into the public forum at a dangerous time, and nobody's to blame.

This is not the time to raise divisive religious issues like this nor is it time to talk about gun control. A bit of practicality and discipline go a long way.

[Eric J in MN]

22. I'm not going to ask any Democratic elected officials to

do anything about it, and they wouldn't anyway.

But I think it's good for liberals to speak out in favor of church and state.

That includes by saying that the word "God" doesn't belong on currency.

[gottaB]

34. I agree with you, but think Purity of Essence has a good point

It's vitally important for liberals to lay out an agenda and a set of arguments in favor of secularism. Opposition to "In God we trust" should be included in that agenda, but way down the list. Liberals should be willing to consider a heavily qualified opposition (e.g., acknowledging the divisiveness of the issue) for the sake of advancing the agenda as a whole, which will require building alliances between disparate communities of belief, including Christian and other monotheistic activists. Under present circumstances, anything that fosters solidarity with a wide variety of religious minorities should be placed at the top of the agenda. Items which create tensions should be downplayed or placed on the back burner.

The goal, as I see it, should not be to insist on being right or to prove the rightness of this point, but rather to create the kind of political environment in which the rightness of this point becomes obvious to a large segment of the electorate, not necessarily an outright majority, but a segment large enough to neutralize resistance from the Christian conservatives. We are not at the present moment anywhere near reaching that goal.

[Sympleesmshn]

17. It should stay

It was put there because our found fathers put their faith in God to form a new government, and the settlers put their faith in God to find a new land. While I see your opinions, I have to say that we were a country founded on Christian values and morals, and we lose something if that goes away.... While i believe in tolerance, I feel we have to have a belief set we can give away...

[Stop_the_War]

18. It wasn't put there by the Founding Fathers, it was put there in 1950s n/t

[Eric J in MN]

21. Neither. "IN GOD WE TRUST first appeared on the 1864 two-cent coin."

According the the treasury website.

The addition of the phrase "under God" to the "Pledge of Allegiance" is from the 1950s.

[Stop_the_War]

27. oh i guess that was what i meant thanks

[Sympleesmshn]

46. I know it wasn't put there by the founding fathers

I was saying that the idea is one that has resounded since them.

[Darranar]

47. Not really...

Christianity does not have a monopoly on morals, nor can it even claim originality for the vast majority of what it teaches.

[Sympleesmshn]

51. I know

But it is the system this country was set up on... I am not saying it is the best, or you have to believe it, but our nation embodies it's ideas...

[Eric J in MN]

19. Why let the people who want to merge religion and state have

all the momentum.

We need to push for more separation of church and state,
not just play defense.

[NorthSideCubsFan]

30. In theory I agree with you

But let me ask: how many potential progressive voters do you think are sitting on the sideline, waiting for an issue like getting rid of "In God We Trust" as a reason to finally vote Democratic??

[Telly Savalas]

54. Good point.

[Dr Ron]

20. Shouldn't be there, but the wrong battle to fight

In principle it shouldn't be there, but it's not doing any harm, and any it would be poltical suicide for politicians to support removing it.

At least it is a very general comment and does not support any set government policy positions as the religious right is attempting to connect to religion.

[usregimechange]

29. Except that atheists are sub-American

[Dr Ron]

32. Hopefully most don't put that much meaning into the line

Those who already think this about atheists are going to think so regardless of whether it is on money. I don't think that those who don't think this are going to have their opinions changed against athiests due to reading this line on their money.

[usregimechange]

39. legitimizing prejudice against nontheists

Recently, it was reported by the Associated Press that an 11 year old girl who refused to say the Pledge in class, was told by her teacher that she had no right to live in America. How does that effect a person socially?

[NoPasaran]

31. I could do without it

But it's way down my list of things to be upset about.

[DU GrovelBot]

33. ## PLEASE DONATE TO DEMOCRATIC UNDERGROUND! ##

==================
GROVELBOT.EXE v3.0
==================



This week is our first quarter 2005 fund drive. Democratic
Underground is a completely independent website. We depend almost entirely
on donations from our members to cover our costs. Thank you so much for
your support.

[leftyandproud]

36. NO...and we should be fighting to remove it.

Take a principled stand and fight the fundie fascists. What do we have to lose?

[NYC Liberal]

37. How about replacing it with "E Pluribus Unum"?

What's the problem with that?

[usregimechange]

43. Or un-changing it.

[porphyrian]

40. The problem, as I see it:

As a country embracing freedom of religion as a right of its citizenry, I feel, as many do, that having the government endorse, or even appear to endorse any religion to be wrong. However, I have a hard time getting upset about the quote on our cash due to the irony of it - we are a capitalist country obsessed with consumerism, and we pledge our trust to God on our fucking currency! I have a hard time not laughing every time I pull a bill out (...body of Christ...). No, I get way more upset over the "under God" added to the Pledge by the fucking fundies in the Fifties than I do about the "In God We Trust" on cash.

[Behind the Aegis]

42. Get rid of it

It is not a big deal at this point, but should the opportunity present itself, we should have it removed. All traces of religion should be removed. This means swearing in court on the Bible, people's entrance into office, money, anything associated with the federal or state government should BE religion-free.

[More Than A Feeling]

44. The Bible says you cannot worship God and money

I find it so blasphemous that the name of God is on the actual money.

Many of things that certain Christian fundamentalists love are cruel parodies of Christianity.

They want prayer in public schools. What did Jesus say about prayer on the street corners and in the Synagogues? He condemned it because the ones doing it were not being sincere. Forcing children to sin by causing them call on God if they do not believe is a sin in and of itself. We know what happens to such people who cause others to sin. It would be better for them that they had a millstone tied around their necks and be thrown into the sea.

They want public funding to go straight to religious organizations, in some cases directly to proselytization. Jesus never asked Pontius Pilate for faith-based funding.

They want God in the pledge, which is wrong for the same reason official prayer in public schools is wrong.

They lust for the endtimes, even though no man is supposed to know the hour, not even Jesus Himself knew when that was supposed to happen.

This isn't even to mention supporting war in the name of the man who even healed the Roman soldier whose ear was chopped off by Peter, who had come to arrest Him and take Him to His death.

It also doesn't bring up voting for a man who supports the wealthy, who will find it harder to get into heaven than a camel through the eye of a needle.

Truly, a perverse generation.

[usregimechange]

45. Good point!

[Darranar]

48. Certainly not. n/t

[Clark2008]

50. Why are we worried about this?

Like anyone looks or anyone cares.

Fry the big fish, turn this one off the hook.

[The Straight Story]

59. I agree

We have war, poverty, crime, environment, and other things - and yes one can work on more than one thing at a time but making a big issue out of something that has been around 100 years or so and not done harm seems a tad trivial.

What would we as a party gain? How would the average american benefit from this? It would seem at first glance that we would lose much more then we gained - one of those things we would potentially lose would be votes - which means we lose more power.

Furthermore - what would be the cost of doing this? Add to that the fact that old money with this on it would still be circulating for many years (and thus terrorizing many I suppose) so the end effect would be that we would have money with and without it and no one would pay any attention anyway.

One way that some could fix it - go to a cashless society (which I don't favor, but it would make the whole debate moot).

We have changed the look of the bills and coins of late, changing them yet again seems silly simply to remove something some people don't like. Hell I don't like latin on the bills as I cannot understand what it says :) but I really don't spend my time reading them and stressing over how it will affect my life.

What is on the bills does not affect me (nor would I let it) - having a lack of them to pay for things is something I would worry about a whole lot more.

[JVS]

55. If anyone doesn't want the currency that says "In God We Trust"...

send it to me, I'll be happy to give it a good home

[Siyahamba]

58. I'm a Christian, and no it shouldn't.

If you trust in God, you know it in your heart. It doesn't need to be on your currency. Not to mention the rest of the people who use that currency who trust Allah, or Buddha, or their self, for example.