Worthy Christian News » US News » Court Cases » Treasury Sued to Remove 'God' from Currency

Treasury Sued to Remove 'God' from Currency

Sunday, March 24, 2013 | Tag Cloud

By Joseph DeCaro, Worthy News Correspondent

american-christianityWASHINGTON, DC (Worthy News)-- The Freedom From Religion Foundation is suing the U.S. Treasury Department to remove  "In God We Trust" from all its currency.

A nonprofit organization that represents atheists and agnostics, the FFRF claims the motto is "offensive" to the nonreligious.

In February, the FFRF and 19 plaintiffs filed a civil suit in New York claiming the motto violates the First and Fifth Amendments of the Constitution; they also claim it forces atheists, agnostics and secular skeptics to impart a religious message they all decry whenever using  U.S. currency, resulting in a false declaration of their own religious views.

Dan Barker, co-president of the Wisconsin-based FFRF, also believes the motto sends a religious message to everyone who uses U.S. currency.

"[In God We Trust] is indeed considered to be a religious phrase," Barker told The Christian Post. "The message belongs in churches, private institutions and can be shared by missionaries, but who is the 'we' representing, if not all of us trust in a God?"

Barker said the purpose of the motto, first proposed in the 1950s, was to proselytize Christianity whenever Americans exchange currency overseas.

"The idea was that 'as our money goes around the world, we are sharing our Christianity.'"

Barker told the Post that the plaintiffs are not advocating the motto be replaced, just removed.

"We are not suggesting that the motto should be changed to 'There Is No God,' or 'We Don't Believe In God,' because that would be offensive and the government should be neutral, and shouldn't promote, or attack either side."

Three previous attempts to legally remove "In God We Trust" from American currency have proved unsuccessful.

Copyright 1999-2017 Worthy News. All rights reserved.
Fair Use Notice:This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.

Worthy Christian News » US News » Court Cases » Treasury Sued to Remove 'God' from Currency

27 thoughts on “Treasury Sued to Remove 'God' from Currency

  1. Incredible, that a religion (Christianity) that hurts no one, promotes morality and ethical responsibility, makes parents better parents, employees better employees, and young people better-behaved youth is so offensive to these people.

    It's even more interesting that either Islam isn't offensive to them, or they're to chicken to speak out against THAT.

    • Religion is not offensive when it is practiced privately. If or when practitioners of Islam or any other religion attempt to impose their religious beliefs, icons, symbols, etc. on publicly owned property or in public policy effecting all U.S. citizens, there will be protest by those of us who understand the dangers of religious subjugation.

    • You are missing the point. The issue is government preference of monotheism over polytheism and nontheism. There are many law abiding, productive polytheists and nontheists in this country. Why do we have to promote monotheism via our currency? Would you like it if the national motto was In No God WeTrust or In Many Gods We Trust?

  2. Wow. We have had God in our country, in our currency since the beginning. That's why the pilgrims came- to have freedom to worship GOD. Isn't it strange that Christians are the only religion being persecuted for our beliefs? NOT! And God is with us through it all. Thank you Lord!!

    • The issue is government entanglement with religion. The only mention of religion in our Constitution and BillI of Rights is exclusionary. No one is persecuting Christians, they are simply asking the government not to show preference for one religion over another or religion over nonreligion. This comment as a national motto shows government endorsement of/preference for monotheism over polytheism and nontheism. This is something the founders, specifically, feared and tried to prevent by keeping religion out of government while trying to maintain religious freedom in nongovernmental settings. And no one is trying to infringe on your rights as a private citizen.

  3. Great Work, here's hoping for a success! The government should indeed be neutral. I support this effort 100%

    • No, we are offended that our government, founded as a secular / non theocratic government, is showing preference for monotheism over polytheism and nontheism.

      • If our government was founded as a secular, non-theocratic government the phrase "In God We Trust" would have never made it on to any of the money.

      • What you have said here gives nothing to back your phrase "our government, founded as a secular / non theocratic government". You just said some guy sued because he didn't like that it was NOT a government founded as a secular/non theocratic government, in which case that bloke should have just packed up his luggage and gotten on the next boat to China or Russia instead of wasting his time.

        So therefore in your cases I extend the same sentiment. If you don't
        like that we are "One nation under God" and that in God we
        trust...please leave. :)

        Constitutional statements like "One nation under God" did not come out of nowhere. They were there from the beginning. And don't you find it ironic that this very same theocratic country you live in is the same country with the greatest freedoms in the world? You don't go to a place like Saudi Arabia and start arguing that Allah be taking out of anything. You will get stoned (the projectile) or skinned alive....or something :)

        But yet here you are in America, currently one nation under God... having your freedoms "repressed" enough to talk about it without fear of harm :).

        Humans start thinking this way when the entirety of their problems revolve around "Oh Noezzz! there are so many smartphones and I can't figure out which one to buy!" or at the very least "Hey I didn't work this month. I'll just head on down to the foodbank and get me some free food the government paid for!!! :D"....

      • So, the first issue - our Constitution established a secular nontheocratic government - the only mention of religion in our Constitution and Bill of Rights is entirely exclusionary.
        The rest of your commentary avoids the relevant issues at hand and are almost nonsensical (and reveal the true nature of many Christians as ignorant of history and intolerant of non-Christians).

      • "So, the first issue - our Constitution established a secular
        nontheocratic government - the only mention of religion in our
        Constitution and Bill of Rights is entirely exclusionary." .....but very firmly mentioned and instituted....so what's your point?
        The rest of my commentary is a fairly point blanc and simple solution to the issue. I repeat, If you don't like that the country is "One nation under God", then move to another country that has no such epitaph.

        I think it's awfully ridiculous that a group of people are so avoidant of relevant issues that they feel the need to sue because of what their money looks like. Sounds like the group is just struggling for relevancy.

      • Well, I guess you monotheists are glad this is supposedly one nation under an imaginary being. But if all us non-Christians left, America would become quite an oppressive place (and you'd lose a significant proportion of scientists, engineers, computer programmers, doctors, entertainers, etc. I'd imagine it might only take 10 years to become another Somalia).

      • I'm a computer programmer so I'm sure we'll do just fine :)
        That aside, it would be sad to see y'all go, but if it comes to that then so be it.

      • You probably wouldn't have a job for very long with the inevitable intellectual decline. Good luck with that.

      • Meh. Actually it will free up the job market a little. Win-win for everyone.

        For some reason you seem to have this feeling that atheists have a monopoly on intelligence. If that were true, you wouldn't be enjoying several things you seem to take for granted today...like electricity, and GPS.

        ...So trust me, we'll do just fine without y'all :)

  4. I can't say the country is going to the dogs, that would be a despicable thing to say. But it is going to the atheists and gays.

    • The country is going to the dogs?

      How's this:

      High Religiosity and Societal Dysfunction in the United States during the First Decade of the Twenty-First Century
      R. Georges Delamontagne, Greenville, South Carolina, USA.

      This study provides independent empirical evidence that bears upon the truth or falsity of recently formulated hypotheses regarding reciprocal relationships between levels of religiosity and societal dysfunction. Gregory S. Paul’s findings, published in the Journal of Religion and Society (2005), Free Inquiry (2008), and Evolutionary Psychology (2009), have demonstrated that high degrees of theism are associated with high degrees of societal dysfunction among the prosperous democracies. Whereas his research employs numerous scatter diagrams and bivariate correlations involving measures of religiosity and societal dysfunction pertaining to 17 nation states, the current study’s units of analysis are the 50 states and the District of Columbia. Additionally, the utilization of multiple regression analysis allows the detection of the effects of other potentially relevant explanatory variables, such as educational attainment, income level, and race. The findings are only minimally supportive of Paul’s hypotheses regarding the contributions of high religiosity to societal dysfunction and to the effects of societal dysfunction upon religiosity. Simultaneously, the results of correlational and regression analyses attest to the more substantial explanatory power of the social inequality variables of education, income, and race. Accordingly, it is argued that "American Exceptionalism," when understood as referring to a society manifesting the coexistence of high levels of theism and high levels of societal dysfunction, is best explained by the United States’ high degree of social inequality, compared with other modern industrialized democracies.


      The Chronic Dependence of Popular Religiosity upon Dysfunctional
      Psychosociological Conditions
      Gregory Paul, 3109 N. Calvert St., Baltimore MD 21218 USA

      Better understanding the nature, origin and popularity of varying levels of popular religion versus secularism, and their impact upon socioeconomic conditions and vice versa, requires a cross national comparison of the competing factors in populations where opinions are freely chosen. Utilizing 25 indicators, the uniquely extensive Successful Societies Scale reveals that population diversity and immigration correlate weakly with 1st world socioeconomic conditions, and high levels of income disparity, popular religiosity as measured by differing levels of belief and activity, and rejection of evolutionary science correlate strongly negatively with improving conditions. The historically unprecedented socioeconomic security that results from low levels of progressive government policies appear to suppress popular religiosity and creationist opinion, conservative religious ideology apparently contributes to societal dysfunction, and religious prosociality and charity are less effective at improving societal conditions than are secular government programs. The antagonistic relationship between better socioeconomic conditions and intense popular faith may prevent the existence of nations that combine the two factors. The nonuniversality of strong religious devotion, and the ease with which large populations abandon serious theism when conditions are sufficiently benign, refute hypotheses that religious belief and practice are the normal, deeply set human mental state, whether they are superficial or natural in nature. Instead popular religion is usually a superficial and flexible psychological mechanism for coping with the high levels of stress and anxiety produced by sufficiently dysfunctional social and especially economic environments. Popular nontheism is a similarly casual response to superior conditions.

      So, it seems we actually need to question whether religion is actually making things worse for America and the rest of the modern world. It may have been somewhat useful when we were more separate and there were fewer people on the planet, but as we become larger as a population and become more connected, it seems to be more and more apparent that religion is more divisive and a source of conflict than it is helpful (at least on a societal/global scale).

    • These are separate issues. The current issue is our government showing preference of monotheism over polytheism and nontheism and forcing polytheists and nontheists to promote monotheism via currency. How would you like it if our money said "In No God We Trust?" You see, those of us who are non-Christian are not trying to implement such a motto and have it put on our money. Why? Because it is not our government's place to make such commentary or to show such preference. But apparently Christians want to force their monotheism on everyone else via governmental media - the history of this is clear.

  5. It will fail. It is sufficiently "neutral" in that it does not elevate any one religion over another. They are such losers.

    • But it does endorse/promote monotheism over polytheism and nontheism. The government is out of line by making laws establishing monotheism as preferred theology.

  6. The reason that the multitude of Christian sects are able to practice each of their versions of Christianity is government neutrality as required by the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment. The First Amendment is what allows religious diversity in the U.S.; it would seem that many Christians do not understand that a state/national religion would deprive them of that privilege.

  7. Down with government establishments of monotheism, theism, polytheism, and atheism. Governments should serve all citzens equally. Governments institutions are not platforms for religious majorities to promote their beliefs.

  8. If they truly didn't believe there was a God, it wouldn't matter to them, only make them chuckle at the absurdity. Because they know there is a God, it serves as a reminder that they have to keep turning away from Him. Just use your plastic, you won't have to see anything on those.

  9. Haven't they noticed that since the first day they started with this nonsense, like fighting to remove prayer from schools and pulling down the 10 commandments....that that is when these "unexplainable/insensible" school shooting and killing sprees began?

    Now the same they want to do with their currency. As if it's hard to guess what will happen after that, what do you think will happen if you succeed in doing this? Let me tell you, it is because your fathers reverenced God enough to involve him corporately in their matters that they were successful enough to lay the foundations of being the best and most blessed country on earth, the fruits of which you are reaping today! But like spoiled sons and daughters, having never lacked any good thing, spoilt rotten, you turn your fat bellies to the north and curse God and say he is not needed.

    You already forced Him to take his hands off your schools and social gatherings (and seen the results).
    Are you really sure you want God to take His hands off your economy too?
    Think about it! Even come global economic strife, the american dollar is still the world's central economic reference. Don't let the blessings you have been blessed with turn to foolish pride because then you will seriously tick off the One who made it so for your benefit. Of what benefit to you would it be to bite the hand that has fed you fat all these years? You ignorant people, do you think it was by your own power this was so? Impossible! because a good 3/4 are so ignorant that you think all of Africa is a starving land mass. XD

Leave a Comment

Worthy Christian News » US News » Court Cases » Treasury Sued to Remove 'God' from Currency