Dismiss Notice
Join Physics Forums Today!
The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

News In God we Trust

  1. Jul 5, 2003 #1
    "In God we Trust"

    I'm sure that this topic came up before, but i cou;detn find it in the search so...

    I was just talking to a freind and some how we got on the topic of seperation of church and state. We both agreed that it is not seprate and the way poloticians who representg our country and the way the goverment buildings throw around the words god bless or in god we trust it is clear that they are setting an example of a monotheistic relgion.

    While some may argue that the term "god" refers to any god. It is clear that it dose not represnet Atheists Agnostics Buddists or other nongod relgions or philiosphys. It is almost cetian that it is monothesitic. And mostly interrupted as christian.

    I dont feel that all relgions should be represent. I feel no religion should be represented because not only is it violating the frame work our country holds so saccriad but it will never be able to cover all of the religions. People could easily place there belifes in but i dont feel that the goverment should place them in themselves, for you.


    What are your feelings on sepreation of Church and State? Are they beign violated or not?
  2. jcsd
  3. Jul 5, 2003 #2
    There is no innate rights or "shoulds".

    So it is wonderful of you to ask our "feelings".

    I am atheist - I recognize the truth that religion is merely a part of history for the human race. It had a beginning - and will have an end.

    I rarely share feelings - and this is no exception. So let me say something related.

    In the past year I have seen the USSC do some nice things. Some things which have - because the U.S. is such an impressionable country - pushed humans towards forgetting about religion.

    I have no doubt more of these will come in my lifetime.

    The "under god" one is at bay right now, and because of the USSC decisions lately it would not particularly suprise me either way - they seem like they could remove it or say it's politically not a good idea.

    If the "in god we trust" issue is ever brought to the supreme court in my lifetime - which I think it will...

    ...it will be nice to see it brought up - even if it is not changed. To be honest, I think that is the most difficult church.state issue we have to overcome - because it is permenantly printed on our most valuable asset. To remove that ability we would have to retransfer new "god free" money - and that would truly be amazing.


    Heh - in other words, I will like to see this issue brought up, and the day this is struck out of our country will be a major step in the history of the (rise, and now the) fall of religion from human history.

    I think my feelings are aparent from that anyhow!
  4. Jul 6, 2003 #3


    User Avatar

    Staff: Mentor

    Separation of church and state is pretty absolute and the USSC has ruled in favor of just about every challenge to religion in government. Clearly though, the founding fathers put more religion into government than they stated should be there.
  5. Jul 6, 2003 #4

    Not really.
    First off - the founding fathers didn't put religious monuments on our buildings, and didn't put it in the anthem.

    Seperation from church and state is NOT seperation from theology and state.

    Saying in god we trust is a theological statement - except it excludes polytheistic theology. Which is not very popular anyways.
  6. Jul 28, 2003 #5
    Under the United States Constitution we have freedom of speech and freedom of religion. So if the USSC says that saying the pleadge is unconstitutional, they themselves are doing something unconstitutional-taking away the freedom of speech and religion. Therefore, I think we should just leave it alone.
  7. Jul 28, 2003 #6
    You don't understand either freedom of speech or religion, at least not the way I do, and teh Supreme Court does. Individuals have freedoms, and they have them in part because the government is restricted. Teachers in public schools are government employees, and for them to lead children in any sort of religious speach is a de facto government endorsement. Further, including religion in the Pledge is placing a religious test on citizenship. That is a violation of freedom.
  8. Jul 28, 2003 #7


    User Avatar

    Staff: Mentor

    For once I agree with Zero.
  9. Jul 28, 2003 #8
    Re: "In God we Trust"

    I don't think they are being violated unless a specific belief is being FORCED on the nation. What is says on the dollar bill won't affect anyone directly.
  10. Jul 29, 2003 #9
    The Pleadge is not being forced on anyone and therefore, it is not violating anyones freedom. I dont see how you see it as a violation of freedom.
  11. Jul 29, 2003 #10
    Of course you don't. Now, imagine if you were required to stand and place your hand over your heart and recite a statement that included 'one nation under Satan'. Or, as another choice, you have to show everyone you are different by walking out while it is being said. Sounds fun, doesn't it?
  12. Jul 29, 2003 #11
    Walk out? Why would you have to walk out. You could simply not say it. Is that too easy?
  13. Jul 29, 2003 #12
    Why should some people have to compromise their principles at all? Isn't it more fair by far to remove religion from government-supported speech?
  14. Jul 30, 2003 #13
    So what, now the government doesnt have the right to express it's freedom? If the government wants to, they have the right to do that. Or are you saying rights dont apply to the government?
  15. Jul 30, 2003 #14
    Actually, I stated it quite explicitly earlier in the thread, I think. Does the government have religious freedom, do you think?
  16. Jul 30, 2003 #15


    User Avatar

    Staff: Mentor

    The government doesn't have rights. Rights are an INDIVIDUAL thing. Individual people in government have rights.

    There is a huge difference there.
  17. Jul 30, 2003 #16
    Yes, I do. If we have a government that stands for freedom of speech and religion, I think that they should excercise those rights too. Freedom of speech, freedom of religion and a chance for a new begining are the main reasons immigrants came here and I'd like to add we wouldn't have those things if the government didn't allow it.
  18. Jul 31, 2003 #17
    Uh huh...for a government to have freedom of religion, it would have to HAVE a religion, don't you think? Do you claim that the American government as a religion which it can exercise?
  19. Jul 31, 2003 #18
    In fact the US Constitution does not provide for “freedom of religion”. The 1st amendment begins; “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof…” The keywords are “Congress shall make no law…” The Constitution therefore passes that responsibility to the states via the 10th amendment; “The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people.”

    Massachusetts sponsored a state religion until about 1840, if I remember, and its citizens had to pay taxes to the church. It is the individual state constitutions that provide for religious freedom. I believe all have some such provision.
  20. Jul 31, 2003 #19
    So, by this standard, 'In God We Trust' is illegal, isn't it? That is, if you allow that a federal law exists, voted on by Congress, that establishes 'God' as part of American law? Isn't that an establishment of religion?
  21. Jul 31, 2003 #20
    I agree but I am not aware of the law you speak of. Can you give a citation?
Share this great discussion with others via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook