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.
Narrow down which types of responses you would like to see.
Narrow down the conversation to these participants:
Voting for candidate:
@ISIDEWITH12yrs12Y
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.
@9G2CYCP2yrs2Y
The first amendment allows citizens to have rights such as the freedom of religion, assembly, petition, press, and speech.
@9FVL63V2yrs2Y
"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion," - Amendment I of the Unites States Constitution.
@B4QSS8BRepublican3mos3MO
prohibits the government from censoring, discriminating against, or applying rules inconsistently to private speech based on its content or viewpoint, a principle known as "viewpoint neutrality"
@B4QJCWZ3mos3MO
the first amendment grants freedom of religion, if Christianity is over represented over the either, than how are we respecting the first amendment?
@ISIDEWITH12yrs12Y
No
@9F8733Q2yrs2Y
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
@ISIDEWITH12yrs12Y
No, religion is an important aspect of our country’s history
@3NL3N7Q 2yrs2Y
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.
@9FVL63V2yrs2Y
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.
@9L39HBT1yr1Y
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.
@B4QSS8BRepublican3mos3MO
the First Amendment, specifically the Establishment Clause, is designed to prevent the government from favoring one religion over another, or from establishing a state religion, protecting the religious diversity of the nation.
@ISIDEWITH12yrs12Y
Yes, but do not waste money removing existing references
Even though it is controversial, we have lived with it on our currency for years. If you are concerned about the climate then you should know how much paper is being wasted.
@74TXV99Independent 1mo1MO
Trying to remove existing references on money would not be worth the expense, especially if old money would be destroyed to replace it with new ones in circulation. For national monuments, it could erase the historical details that goes with it. Federal buildings are the only ones that I would like to see remove existing references
@ISIDEWITH12yrs12Y
Yes, it creates a bias against religions that do not believe in God
@9874RJMRepublican3yrs3Y
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.
@9VKY2HN9mos9MO
as a fellow pagan, I agree that the government shouldn't support Christianity or any other religion since then we would be a theocracy which is entirely what the founding fathers wanted to avoid in the first place.
@97NBJHW2yrs2Y
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.
@9TBGMNC 2mos2MO
It DOES create a bias against all non-Abrahamic religions. I think that the way the religious right has turned into a really spoilt, entitled mob, should be plenty of evidence.
@9ZB9CHPLibertarian8mos8MO
Countering bias for or against religions is explicitly stated in the Establishment Clause in the First Amendment.
@9FDSY4M2yrs2Y
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?
@ISIDEWITH12yrs12Y
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.
@B3B7LZX4mos4MO
all religions should be considered, no matter what history they may or may not have with the country
@93GDF233yrs3Y
No but tax religous temples
@JonBSimConstitution3yrs3Y
“but tax religous temples”
That violates the separation that Jefferson was talking about.
@theermer255mos5MO
What the heck?? It is Freedom of Religion, not No Religion... I do not know what this person is thinking...
@9MGNFXJ1yr1Y
I'd rather see the government piss up a rope than tax a church
@9C377CN2yrs2Y
No but tax religious temples
@4PSDH2X5yrs5Y
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..."
@5CTPHXM5yrs5Y
@9CB5RHC2yrs2Y
No, but a dharmic religious perspective should become an important aspect of our country's history.
@4PYRMNQ5yrs5Y
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.
@9874RJMRepublican3yrs3Y
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.
@4X8J7BX5yrs5Y
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.
@9D84HDR2yrs2Y
Yes, but do not waste money removing existing references and hell dose not exist and is a hateful concept
@937HGK43yrs3Y
No and tax religous temples
@4YYVX245yrs5Y
No, total removal would be a large cost for a generally low value goal.
@FJFaithful5yrs5Y
No, America should make Fat Jesus the replacement of Christianity and the church should run the state.
@4PYV8845yrs5Y
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.
@9CCMTLL2yrs2Y
No, our country was founded on Judeo-Christian values
@99JM6WP2yrs2Y
No but tax mega religious temples
@4PZYQ6X5yrs5Y
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!
@9HKRSQP 2yrs2Y
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.
@TheHillbillyLordRepublican3mos3MO
So you want to force people to be religious? That's even worse than keeping references of god in government
@8YLTW5V3yrs3Y
@9ZDFDSN8mos8MO
No, Christianity is part of our national identity as Americans, this country was founded on Christian values and we should continue to uphold those values today
@9LJJCZK1yr1Y
The United States should be secular but it should not remove references to God on money, federal buildings, and National monuments.
@9DVWND22yrs2Y
Referencing God on money and monuments, doesn’t affect the separation of church and state, God shouldn’t be referenced in laws
@9DRRZJZ2yrs2Y
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
@9CJ6CB62yrs2Y
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.
@DoveBrooklyn2yrs2Y
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?
@Zoods3mos3MO
Yes, but do not waste money removing existing references, since it shows the religious history of the country
@9XPRF7L8mos8MO
No, a waste of time and money. Prohibit it in the future though. Government policies should reflect that separation ultimately.
@B4NWD423mos3MO
No, as hate speech incentivizes violence against individual people and collective groups of minorities
@TheHillbillyLordRepublican3mos3MO
You might be answering the wrong question lol
@B4GL4ZH 3mos3MO
Yes, USA does reference christian things but USA doesnt have an official religion that it was built off of and avoids establishing any official religion.
@9SV9J3J10mos10MO
It has been that way since forever and does not point out any single religion or such, it just exists. We should leave it be.
No, provided it doesn’t reference a specific religion or force anyone to believe in said religion. In the future, however, the government should create laws that better respect the separation between religion and state
@9DFMQ56 2yrs2Y
No, religion in the public sphere is important to the common good.
@9G3DHMG2yrs2Y
No, because the statement (In God We Trust) implies that the logos, symbols and items in which the statement appears are a deity / deities upon themselves, as it should be.
@9G9BN5W2yrs2Y
No, separation of church and state means the government is not allowed to require adherence to a religion, not that religion isn’t allowed.
@VulcanMan6 2yrs2Y
How exactly are references to a specific God on money, federal buildings, national monuments, etc. not an adherence to a specific religion?
@8ZYNSRM3yrs3Y
No, because it does not matter
@92LBCLDRepublican3yrs3Y
No, religion is an important aspect of our country’s history. In fact, I want the feds to require all Christian and nonreligious elementary and high schools to post all 10 Biblical Commandments in every classroom and make passing a mandatory, full Bible study course(including watching and being quized on the movies “The Case for Christ” and “God is Not Dead”) a high school graduation requirement for all nonreligious and Christian students
@93DG2SL3yrs3Y
The First amendment grants freedom of religion, so posting this in non religious public schools violates that. If I choose to have my child not follow the toxic churches I was brought up in, that's my choice. Doing that in a public school directly violates that. If I changed Christian to Muslim you would be throwing a fit, where there is an assumption that we are a Christian nation, we have no national religion. The same "Christians" hated Catholics, Irish, Italians, Germans, Japanese, literally anyone that wasn't an Episcopal Anglo-Saxon. So those views weren't very christian like in the first place.
@94Q4BHQ3yrs3Y
No, as long as it does not reference a specific religion and tax religous temples
@99MFTPG2yrs2Y
Yes, the government should support American nationalism instead
@97T7R8M3yrs3Y
Personally Is Irrelevant.
@936LWGN3yrs3Y
@93GMY7P3yrs3Y
Yes, and pass a resolution declaring “E PLURIBUS UNUM” as the national motto
I believe there’s needs to be a separation so that laws aren’t written and passed based solely on religious motivation. Or anti-religious motivation.
@B5YDH2G5 days5D
Although I support the decision of the USA being a Secular Federal Republic, I would still like the references to God (The Father from Christianity) to be kept and not removed for historical purposes as I do not like the idea of history being erased.
@B5Y6RZZIndependent6 days6D
Taxpayer dollars should not be put towards the removal of references to God, but the government should limit future additions of references to God on new monuments, coins, etc...
@B5XVJR41wk1W
Yes, and anyone running on religious justifications should be taken out back and beaten with hammers
@B5WDD242wks2W
Perhaps in the future, but as long as there’s no direct references to God, there’s no need to waste money removing existing references.
@B5VJ35J3wks3W
I agree with the first part but I don't think removing references to God in our money, buildings, monuments, etc is the way to do it. Regardless of what you view religion, it has played a key role in our history and trying to alter the event or the creator's original beliefs would make us unwise and create hostility towards religion as something dangerous.
@B5SH7YZ 4wks4W
Yes, but do not waste money removing existing references; it creates a bias against religions that do not believe in God.
@B5HQV67Republican2mos2MO
church and state should be separate but you dont have to go around removing all references to religion
@B5GBJS32mos2MO
I don't really mind it, as someone who isn't religious it doesn't affect me that much. So just keep it the same.
@B5F65GT2mos2MO
As long as religion is not interfering with functions and as long as there is no discrimination or bias for religion.
@B5DN8WF2mos2MO
No, but only references which our historically relevant to the founding and early development of our democracy should be allowed
@B5CV8YC2mos2MO
Yes. The government shouldn't remove Christian references and should increase them, as Christianity is an important element of the America and the Western world.
@B5C2XC42mos2MO
Yes, the U.S. does not operate under one singular religion, in fact the United States does not operate under the church but under the people. Freedom of religious practice, that is why our country doesn't have an official religion.
No, the United States is a Baptist / Protestant Christian Country. I support banning all non-Christian cults.
@B596P282mos2MO
No, it doesn't affect anyone physically, and either way keeping it can be unfair to some, same as getting rid of it.
@B57RWF22mos2MO
No. The separation of Church and State is not to protect the government from the Church, irs to protect the Church from the government getting its grubby little fingers all over it.
@B55LWJC2mos2MO
I believe the current separation of church and state we have now is fine. References to religions is alright in public spaces like parks or plazas, but government buildings, offices, and agencies like schools should not be allowed to display religious references.
@B55BSTKAmerican Solidarity2mos2MO
I believe the Catholic Church should have a dedicated place in the legislature where they can appoint representatives and senators as they see fit.
@B4Z59YV2mos2MO
I don't believe this is a direct violation of the Establishment Clause in the First Amendment, as it is not mandatory to participate in the religion
@B4VCZD42mos2MO
I think religions should be able to worship freely but I don't think religion and government need to be connected.
@B4THKLS3mos3MO
Yes, government should work to remove all references to religion on federal buildings and national monuments as that violates the Establishment Clause
@B4T62J5Libertarian3mos3MO
When it comes to systematic things then there should be a separation unless everything is treated equally across the board to make the federal government seem impartial. When it comes to monuments and memorials however, if there is a mention of religion, then it should stay since it is part of that person's legacy/history and should be recorded as accurately as possible.
@B4T3LPB3mos3MO
It's an important part of our history, but if it's excessive, then I think it should be reduced. Also no specific mensions of one religion over another or any indication of bias
No, as long as it doesn't give the wrong impression of the government having a strong focus on a specific religion
@B4RKL8N3mos3MO
the state and church should most definitely be separated, but only in the aspect of making laws and voting
Loading the political themes of users that engaged with this discussion
Loading data...
Join in on more popular conversations.
