In 1956, Congress passed a resolution declaring “IN GOD WE TRUST” as the national motto of the United States. President Eisenhower signed the law and the motto was added to paper money beginning in 1957. Opponents argue that the motto violates the U.S. Constitution since it is a clear violation of the separation of church and state. Proponents argue that it does not prefer one religious denomination over another.
@ISIDEWITH11yrs11Y
Yes
The first amendment guarantees all people the right to set their ow course in life. the freedom of speech, religion, press, assembly, and the ability to be heard by the government.
@9G2CYCP7mos7MO
The first amendment allows citizens to have rights such as the freedom of religion, assembly, petition, press, and speech.
@9FVL63V8mos8MO
"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion," - Amendment I of the Unites States Constitution.
@ISIDEWITH11yrs11Y
No
@9F8733Q8mos8MO
does it really matter, others have the right to practice their chosen religion so removing "God" from the dollar bill or any currency is just a dumb question
@ISIDEWITH11yrs11Y
No, religion is an important aspect of our country’s history
@3NL3N7Q 6mos6MO
Separation of church and state has always been a part of our nation's history. Many of the original colonists fled religious persecution and felt strongly about ensuring the government and religion were kept separate.
@9FVL63V8mos8MO
Religion throughout history has shown itself to be a greatly destabilizing influence sewing and being used to justify conflicts and atrocities and more recently been used as a cudgel against various minorities. The US has been and will be a diverse country in many ways so to give credence or reverence to any religious belief would lead the US down the path of folly many other states have. So, it is for those reasons and more that any reference to God on any iconography of the US should be duly stricken.
@9L39HBT2mos2MO
While religion is an important part of our history, the Founding Fathers intended the U.S. to be free from religious influence in the government. This also helps keep the government diverse in opinion and thought.
@9HVSYTXLibertarian 6 days6D
Thomas Jefferson explained that the First Amendment's religion clauses reflected the view of the American people to build a wall between church and State.
@ISIDEWITH10yrs10Y
@ISIDEWITH11yrs11Y
Yes, it creates a bias against religions that do not believe in God
@9874RJMRepublican1yr1Y
As a Pagan I dont support the US to identify with a specific religion. Not to mention Christianity as caused and still does harm to fellow pagans. I personally don't feel comfortable and see it unconstitutional for the US government to favor any religion let alone Christianity.
@97NBJHW1yr1Y
It would be unconstitutional to remove it, there is nothing saying that the government is siding with Christianity; freedom of religion is the reason America was founded, so it would be idiodic to remove the symbol that founded the nation.
@9FDSY4M8mos8MO
I personally don't understand why the government should stop "supporting churches and references to God". If America is a free country, why can't we have the freedom of religion as well? It's the same with the LGBTQ+ community or other parties that religious people don't support whatsoever like how other people don't support religious people. So how is religion any different from other parties?
@ISIDEWITH11yrs11Y
No, as long as it does not reference a specific religion
The bill says "One nation under God" which is referring to a specific religion. Not every Religion believes in a God so if you have the word one nation under God, why just god? Other religions don't believe in God, have someone else such as Allah, believe in several gods and they also live in the United States.
@93GDF232yrs2Y
No but tax religous temples
@JonBSimConstitution2yrs2Y
“but tax religous temples”
That violates the separation that Jefferson was talking about.
@9MGNFXJ5 days5D
I'd rather see the government piss up a rope than tax a church
@9C377CN12mos12MO
No but tax religious temples
@4PSDH2X4yrs4Y
Our rights are God-given. George Washington would have considered such a proposal to be very destructive: "Of all the dispositions and habits which lead to political prosperity, religion and morality are indispensable supports. In vain would that man claim the tribute of patriotism, who should labor to subvert these great pillars of human happiness, these firmest props of the duties of men and citizens...."
@9CB5RHC12mos12MO
No, but a dharmic religious perspective should become an important aspect of our country's history.
@4PYRMNQ4yrs4Y
If you're going to nit pick division of church and state then say out of the bible when denying gays the right to marriage; women the right to an abortion or birth control - you can't pick and choose.
@9874RJMRepublican1yr1Y
I do support gay marriage, but not abortion. My values doesnt come from the Bible as im not Christian even though I identify as Republican.
@5CTPHXM4yrs4Y
@937HGK42yrs2Y
No and tax religous temples
@99JM6WP1yr1Y
No but tax mega religious temples
@FJFaithful4yrs4Y
No, America should make Fat Jesus the replacement of Christianity and the church should run the state.
@4YYVX244yrs4Y
No, total removal would be a large cost for a generally low value goal.
@4X8J7BX4yrs4Y
The first amendment is about protecting citizens from government interference in their religious practices, not about removing the influence of religion from the public arena, including government activities. I fail to see how references to God on money and monuments equate to the establishment of religion. Removing references to God, just as surely, arguably support the establishment of secular humanism as a religion. These things were done at a time in history when religion took a more central role in our culture and in government affairs. No, don't remove such historic religious references. It's a waste of time and money and represents "sanitation" of the history of our nation. It's important that we, as a nation, remember the past from which we came.
@4PZYQ6X4yrs4Y
Much of the "cryptic" symbols & references on our US American currency came about during our struggles to become a "new nation" during the past 400+ years. People from other countries (with their OWN cryptic symbols & religious references) should not come to the US & attempt to force us to change OUR history/historical belief references just because THEY don't agree with US. This includes Americans who chose to be atheist, agnostic, or of any obscure religion -or none at all. You work here (or collect welfare/unemployment, etc.) & receive US funds & are happy to try every means possible to acquire those funds to spend on the lifestyle you feel you deserve; THEN you want to admonish the majority of citizens for have references you don't like on that same currency!
@9CCMTLL11mos11MO
No, our country was founded on Judeo-Christian values
@4PYV8844yrs4Y
Yes, from this point forward. However, history is history and this is an unnecessary expense. It shows us where we have been and how we evolve.
@9D84HDR9mos9MO
Yes, but do not waste money removing existing references and hell dose not exist and is a hateful concept
@8YLTW5V2yrs2Y
@94Q4BHQ2yrs2Y
No, as long as it does not reference a specific religion and tax religous temples
@936LWGN2yrs2Y
@9DVWND29mos9MO
Referencing God on money and monuments, doesn’t affect the separation of church and state, God shouldn’t be referenced in laws
@9DRRZJZ9mos9MO
God should be referenced in laws because He is the only reason for our civil society's existence. After all He gave us our natural rights and we form government to protect them. Don't like God? Move to China
@9CJ6CB68mos8MO
The majority of people on this earth would disagree with that entirely, god is not the sole driver for policy, nor should he be. That is the guy that committed multiple genocides, the same guy that commanded adulters to be slaughtered and to not heed any other viewpoint than Christianity. His book is not a staple of government power, and governments should not operate off of favor to one religion.
@DoveBrooklyn9mos9MO
While it's true that the reference to God on money and monuments doesn't directly influence the formulation of laws, one could argue that it symbolically endorses a specific religious perspective, potentially undermining the principle of religious neutrality that the state should uphold. For instance, an atheist or someone from a non-monotheistic religion might feel alienated or less represented. How would you propose ensuring the feeling of inclusivity and representation for all citizens in these public symbols?
@9LJJCZK1mo1MO
The United States should be secular but it should not remove references to God on money, federal buildings, and National monuments.
@9HKRSQP 5mos5MO
Yes, all religions should work together and play a role in the government to run the country. I am okay with Christianity playing a bigger role since Christianity is part of America's history. However, Christians shouldn't force other people part of different religions to convert, unless persuasive. All religions should work together to make Satanism illegal and make atheism be a misdemeanor crime. We should make atheists be part of a religion and have all religions, including Hinduism, send missionaries to convert atheists and pagans. I know Hinduism is not a missionary religion but it should be. Also, we should bring back prayers in public schools.
@8WC27BRIndependent3yrs3Y
No but keep religión out of laws
The historical activity of users engaging with this question.
Loading data...
Loading chart...
Loading the political themes of users that engaged with this discussion
Loading data...