Atheist Plans Lawsuit Challenging Motto on U.S. Currency

[Quiddity]

Would someone please answer s2a's question as to why one would want the government to presume endorsement by God of its currency? Don't any Christians, Muslims, or Jews out there view the slogan on US money as sacreligious?

I hardly look at the statement and it would do nothing to me personally if it was taken away. I'm just trying to understand what it does to you and others.

~Victor

 

[Mr Spinkles]

I hardly look at the statement and it would do nothing to me personally if it was taken away. I'm just trying to understand what it does to you and others.

It doesn't do anything to me other than what it would do to you if it said "In Goddess We Trust" or "In Gods We Trust" or "In No Gods We Trust". This country was founded on the ideal that, unlike the theocracies of the past, our government represents everyone--not just Christians or (more generally) monotheists. I have little doubt that you and most of the other Christian posters here would be against putting "In Jesus We Trust" on our money for these very same reasons....the problem is that you think "God" is a general term that applies to everyone. Sorry, but it doesn't, not everyone believes in a god, and it's not just atheists either (it's Buddhists and many others).

If it really doesn't "do anything" to you, and if it discriminates against a sizable number of minority groups, why not simply discontinue the practice of putting that slogan on our money?

 

[Quiddity]

It doesn't do anything to me other than what it would do to you if it said "In Goddess We Trust" or "In Gods We Trust" or "In No Gods We Trust". This country was founded on the ideal that, unlike the theocracies of the past, our government represents everyone--not just Christians or (more generally) monotheists. I have little doubt that you and most of the other Christian posters here would be against putting "In Jesus We Trust" on our money for these very same reasons....the problem is that you think "God" is a general term that applies to everyone.

I do?

Sorry, but it doesn't, not everyone believes in a god, and it's not just atheists either (it's Buddhists and many others).

If it really doesn't "do anything" to you, and if it discriminates against a sizable number of minority groups, why not simply discontinue the practice of putting that slogan on our money?

Discontinue it. I would rather ask someone who feels violated though. You can careless either way.

~Victor

 

[michel]

It doesn't do anything to me other than what it would do to you if it said "In Goddess We Trust" or "In Gods We Trust" or "In No Gods We Trust". This country was founded on the ideal that, unlike the theocracies of the past, our government represents everyone--not just Christians or (more generally) monotheists. I have little doubt that you and most of the other Christian posters here would be against putting "In Jesus We Trust" on our money for these very same reasons....the problem is that you think "God" is a general term that applies to everyone. Sorry, but it doesn't, not everyone believes in a god, and it's not just atheists either (it's Buddhists and many others).

If it really doesn't "do anything" to you, and if it discriminates against a sizable number of minority groups, why not simply discontinue the practice of putting that slogan on our money?

If that's the way you feel about it, then why not ?........it does sound a little bit 'picky' though. Would you be offended if I said 'Bless you' When you sneeze ? - because I was brought up to say it......it's almost a subconscious reaction now..........

 

[jonny]

If it really doesn't "do anything" to you, and if it discriminates against a sizable number of minority groups, why not simply discontinue the practice of putting that slogan on our money?

How does it discriminate against a sizable number of minority groups? Are they so offended by the statement that they cannot hold currency? Have people refused to give them change because of their beliefs? Do their religious beliefs force them not to use money because of the phrase? It's obviously not 100% inclusionary (did I make that word up? ), but it is far from discriminatory.

 

[The Conspirator]

At one time, Conspirator, there was no "evidence" that the earth was round. The vast majority of mankind was certain that it was flat. That was, after all, what the available evidence for centuries seemed to imply. When were the first dinosaur remains discovered? I'm not actually sure of the date, but I do know that dinosaurs were a reality long before anyone proved their existence. Absence of evidence is not necessarily evidence of absence. I personally find your attitude very condescending.

The evidence has always been there, you just have to look to see it, most people were too busy trying to survive to look.

Allot of the ideas we now know are true have been around for thousands of years, there was even a ancient Greek philosopher who had the idea that the earth revolves around the sun and that that the stars were other suns that could have other worlds and other civilisations. Its not a hard concept to come up with, if you study the moons movements you would easily see that the moon revolves around the earth, from that its not so far fetched to say that the earth revolves around the sun or some other thing.

 

[Faint]

How does it discriminate against a sizable number of minority groups? Are they so offended by the statement that they cannot hold currency? Have people refused to give them change because of their beliefs? Do their religious beliefs force them not to use money because of the phrase? It's obviously not 100% inclusionary (did I make that word up? ), but it is far from discriminatory.

I'm curious, if the money said "In Satan We Trust" would you feel differently? Annoyed or offended that something you were against is a motto on our national currency?

 

[jonny]

I'm curious, if the money said "In Satan We Trust" would you feel differently? Annoyed or offended that something you were against is a motto on our national currency?

Would I feel that it is discriminatory? No.

 

[Quiddity]

I'm curious, if the money said "In Satan We Trust" would you feel differently? Annoyed or offended that something you were against is a motto on our national currency?

For someone who believes in him, I'm sure it would. But why it would bother someone who sees it no different then Zeus or the FSM is beyond me. Unless of course they have some negative neuro-association toward religion or Christianity [more specific]. But I suspect we don't have people like that in this forum..

~Victor

 

[SoyLeche]

I'm curious, if the money said "In Satan We Trust" would you feel differently? Annoyed or offended that something you were against is a motto on our national currency?

I'd probably use cash less, which would be hard to do. I already only use it in places where cards aren't accepted.

 

[Mr Spinkles]

[/color]

I do?

My apologies Victor...nowadays I study so much that my posts have become hurried and not as well thought out.

Discontinue it. I would rather ask someone who feels violated though. You can careless either way.

~Victor

In some sense, yes, I could care less either way. But it's the principle of the matter, darn it!

"It is proper to take alarm at the first experiment on our liberties.
We hold this prudent jealousy to be the first duty of citizens,
and one of the noblest characteristics of the late Revolution.
The freeman of America did not wait till usurped power had strengthened
itself by exercise, and entangled the question in precedents.
They saw all the consequences in the principle, and they avoided
the consequences by denying the principle."
James Madison (from http://home.att.net/~midnightflyer/madison.html )

If that's the way you feel about it, then why not ?........it does sound a little bit 'picky' though.

It is precisely no more and no less picky than if I wanted "In Jesus We Trust" removed from our currency. Neither "In God We Trust" nor "In Jesus We Trust" is an equal representation of everyone's religious views, nor is it the government's job to espouse any sort of religious beliefs in the first place. Like I said, even if 95% of Americans were atheists, even if all the founding fathers were atheists, even if the Declaration of Independence mentioned something about a godless universe, I would still oppose putting "In No God We Trust" on our money, because that too would constitute discrimination.

What makes our government so special (especially in light of governments of the past) is that it is for everyone: not just Christians, not even just monotheists; but Buddhists and atheists and Wiccans as well. We're all Americans and our government should reflect the fact that none of us are preferred under the law simply for our religious beliefs. That means that no matter who attains a majority--whether it's Muslims or Christians or atheists--we're all equal under the law.

Would you be offended if I said 'Bless you' When you sneeze ? - because I was brought up to say it......it's almost a subconscious reaction now.......

Of course not.

How does it discriminate against a sizable number of minority groups?

Discriminate, as per dictionary.com :

" To make distinctions on the basis of class or category without regard to individual merit; show preference or prejudice"
​

Our currency says "In God We Trust" but there are many Buddhists, atheists, agnostics, Wiccans, Pagans, Taoists, and other people of various religious groups who do not believe in God. Thus, the phrase distinguishes between the monotheistic religions and all the others, and it gives preference to the monotheistic religions. But under the law, a person's religion is not supposed to matter....everyone is equal under the law. By putting "In God We Trust" on our money the government is saying that, under the law, monotheism is somehow "special" or "better" than all the other religious beliefs.

Are they so offended by the statement that they cannot hold currency? Have people refused to give them change because of their beliefs? Do their religious beliefs force them not to use money because of the phrase? It's obviously not 100% inclusionary (did I make that word up?

), but it is far from discriminatory.

Let me answer by asking a counter-question: would you support having the phrase "In Jesus We Trust" on our currency? Why or why not?

 

[Mr Spinkles]

For someone who believes in him, I'm sure it would. But why it would bother someone who sees it no different then Zeus or the FSM is beyond me. Unless of course they have some negative neuro-association toward religion or Christianity [more specific]. But I suspect we don't have people like that in this forum..

It's not about giving special favor to a deity which I do not believe in, it's about giving special favor to a group of people who believe in that deity. And yes, I do have a negative neuro-association with the idea of our government sponsoring certain religious views over others.

 

[Quiddity]

It's not about giving special favor to a deity which I do not believe in, it's about giving special favor to a group of people who believe in that deity. And yes, I do have a negative neuro-association with the idea of our government sponsoring certain religious views over others.

If that was a decision what was made now, I could see what you mean. I don't think it carries much weight anymore.

Would it be more accurate if I changed your "...sponsoring certain religious views..." to:

Sponsoring views that aren't in line with mine. Religious or non-religious.

Or do you isolate it to religious?

~Victor

 

[Mr Spinkles]

Would it be more accurate if I changed your "...sponsoring certain religious views..." to:

Sponsoring views that aren't in line with mine. Religious or non-religious.

Or do you isolate it to religious?

I neither isolate it to religious, nor is it about "views that aren't in line with mine". As I've said, even if it said "In No God We Trust" (which would be "in line" with my views) I would still be against it. Even if it said "In Wal-Mart We Trust" I would still be against it.

 

[Faint]

For someone who believes in him, I'm sure it would. But why it would bother someone who sees it no different then Zeus or the FSM is beyond me. Unless of course they have some negative neuro-association toward religion or Christianity [more specific]. But I suspect we don't have people like that in this forum..

~Victor

Let me clarify since I may not have made my point very obvious...the fact that a reference to a character as realistic as "Zeus or the FSM" is on our money at all is what bothers me, and the fact that I pay taxes and live in this country with such a ridiculous motto on our currency also bothers me because I think it is time that the U.S. moved on from such outdated ways of thinking. I don't care if it says "God, Satan, Allah, Goddess, Odin, etc." To me they all read the same, "IN SUPERSTITION WE TRUST". And as a rational person, that annoys me.

Besides, if you Biblarians "trust" in God, what do you really trust to him? National security? Road and highway maintenance? Law enforcement? Anything political? No. You don't (and if you do, we need to talk--see me after class). Money, like our government, should remain independent of religion.

 

[Quiddity]

I neither isolate it to religious, nor is it about "views that aren't in line with mine". As I've said, even if it said "In No God We Trust" (which would be "in line" with my views) I would still be against it. Even if it said "In Wal-Mart We Trust" I would still be against it.

Good to hear. Thanks.

~Victor

 

[Quiddity]

Let me clarify since I may not have made my point very obvious...the fact that a reference to a character as realistic as "Zeus or the FSM" is on our money at all is what bothers me, and the fact that I pay taxes and live in this country with such a ridiculous motto on our currency also bothers me because I think it is time that the U.S. moved on from such outdated ways of thinking. I don't care if it says "God, Satan, Allah, Goddess, Odin, etc." To me they all read the same, "IN SUPERSTITION WE TRUST". And as a rational person, that annoys me.

There is a reason for that annoyance. Which you have not stated. Try again.
Isn't there enough things around to give you pleasure to keep you busy?

~Victor

 

[Faint]

There is a reason for that annoyance. Which you have not stated. Try again.

Not sure what you mean by this...did you not understand my previous explanation of why I'm annoyed?

Isn't there enough things around to give you pleasure to keep you busy?

:clap True, but while I'm getting paid by the hour to sit at this computer for eight hours a day, five days a week, this site and it's topics provide a certain amount of amusement. And shouldn't you be praying or something?

 

[Quiddity]

Not sure what you mean by this...did you not understand my previous explanation of why I'm annoyed?

Superstition and myth annoy you? Is that it?

:clap True, but while I'm getting paid by the hour to sit at this computer for eight hours a day, five days a week, this site and it's topics provide a certain amount of amusement.

Another sportsmen.

And shouldn't you be praying or something?

Good idea. Thanks..:jam:

~Victor

 

[Faint]

Superstition and myth annoy you? Is that it?

When they are endorsed by my goverment, yes.

Another sportsmen.

Sometimes, yes indeed. But you already knew that. What else do you hope to accomplish by debating here? Everything you do comes down to the happiness you're getting from it (or pain you're trying to avoid).