God on our Money
Good God We Trust 031311
The Supreme Court has just denied a request by Michael Newdow to ban “In God We Trust” from money. The plaintiff claimed that using money with IGWT forces him to carry a religious message.
The Supreme Court twice prevented Newdow from challenging “God” in national contexts; he also challenged “One nation under God” in the pledge of allegiance.
The various courts have determined that the references to God are historic, ceremonial, or a recognition that our liberties come to us not from the state, but from whatever power created us. It does not have a specifically religious meaning.
There are all kinds of ways to be “God Fearing” and one that’s popular is to be afraid of other people’s gods. Americans have become so Islamaphobic that Sikhs, people of a non-Muslim religion of India (notably, the Punjab) that requires men to wear headgear, are being killed as Muslims.
A Sikh is not a Muslim! You will not
get credit for murdering a Muslim
if you murder a Sikh!
Founder of Sikh Guru Nanek Dev Ji
Newdow is not paranoid to be concerned about the power of religion in the state. That’s a problem in the world right now, and it’s a problem in the U.S. every so often.
We’ve had God on our money since about 1864; it went on all bucks in during our “Thank God We Won WWII” phase in the middle 1950s.
What is the problem, really?
The problem really is that we don’t have to believe in God in the U.S. if we don’t want to. It serves no one very well to say “’God’ is only ceremonial” because it pleases no one. It doesn’t serve hard core Christians who believe they represent the “Founders” (simply not true) and who want “God” to mean “God”, their God, the noble God drawn by that Eyetalian feller.
(God by Michelangelo)
It also doesn’t please those who believe in nothing, no intelligence, no intention, no awareness. No God means no gods at all.
Agnostic God and Atheist God Not nearly as picturesque.
All religious views are legal under the Constitution, provided they don’t infringe on other people’s religious views.
Where does the Prospect stand on this important issue of God on our Money? Frankly, given how obsessed with wealth Americans are, and how necessary for life money is, I’ve always assumed the phrase referred to the dollar itself.
The Supreme Court has just denied a request by Michael Newdow to ban “In God We Trust” from money. The plaintiff claimed that using money with IGWT forces him to carry a religious message.
The Supreme Court twice prevented Newdow from challenging “God” in national contexts; he also challenged “One nation under God” in the pledge of allegiance.
The various courts have determined that the references to God are historic, ceremonial, or a recognition that our liberties come to us not from the state, but from whatever power created us. It does not have a specifically religious meaning.
There are all kinds of ways to be “God Fearing” and one that’s popular is to be afraid of other people’s gods. Americans have become so Islamaphobic that Sikhs, people of a non-Muslim religion of India (notably, the Punjab) that requires men to wear headgear, are being killed as Muslims.
A Sikh is not a Muslim! You will not
get credit for murdering a Muslim
if you murder a Sikh!
Founder of Sikh Guru Nanek Dev Ji
Newdow is not paranoid to be concerned about the power of religion in the state. That’s a problem in the world right now, and it’s a problem in the U.S. every so often.
We’ve had God on our money since about 1864; it went on all bucks in during our “Thank God We Won WWII” phase in the middle 1950s.
What is the problem, really?
The problem really is that we don’t have to believe in God in the U.S. if we don’t want to. It serves no one very well to say “’God’ is only ceremonial” because it pleases no one. It doesn’t serve hard core Christians who believe they represent the “Founders” (simply not true) and who want “God” to mean “God”, their God, the noble God drawn by that Eyetalian feller.
(God by Michelangelo)
It also doesn’t please those who believe in nothing, no intelligence, no intention, no awareness. No God means no gods at all.
Agnostic God and Atheist God Not nearly as picturesque.
All religious views are legal under the Constitution, provided they don’t infringe on other people’s religious views.
Where does the Prospect stand on this important issue of God on our Money? Frankly, given how obsessed with wealth Americans are, and how necessary for life money is, I’ve always assumed the phrase referred to the dollar itself.
