U.S. Supreme Court Won't Hear Challenge to 'In God We Trust'

[Cato]

Because I'm sure "In Nothing We Trust" certainly sounds better.

http://cnsnews.com/news/article/us-s...-challenge-god

[Joe McCarthy]

Given the current state of the culture, 'In Nothing We Trust' is probably more accurate, especially as 'nothing' is old English slang for female unmentionables...

[Cato]

If I recall, the term was first put into use in the 1950s as a way to remind America of the One it owes for its existence.

[Joe McCarthy]

My assumption is that within twenty years of atheist complainers getting 'In God We Trust' removed, we'd see Muslim complainers making a major push demanding that Ramadan be a federally recognized paid holiday.

[Cato]

My assumption is that within twenty years of atheist complainers getting 'In God We Trust' removed, we'd see Muslim complainers making a major push demanding that Ramadan be a federally recognized paid holiday.

Traditional belief in God is in danger and has been for a couple of generations. A return to normalcy is required and, at the very least, some form of civil religion or ceremonial deism should be supported.

[Psychonaut]

Shame on the Supreme Court for this. "In God we Trust" and the inclusion of "under God" in the pledge were just bits of anti-Communist propaganda that Ike gave us. They've got dick to do with any kind of pre-1950s traditional American anything and are an affront to Paine and Jefferson's notion of the separation of church and state. It's not as if there's any great history behind the inclusion of these phrases. They were propaganda tools, pure and simple. Toss 'em out!

[Cato]

Traditional belief in God is in danger and has been for a couple of generations. A return to normalcy is required and, at the very least, some form of civil religion or ceremonial deism should be supported.

The atheist rabble-rousers love to cite the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment, loving the first part:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion...

But convieniently forgetting the second part:

...or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.

[Cato]

Shame on the Supreme Court for this. "In God we Trust" and the inclusion of "under God" in the pledge were just bits of anti-Communist propaganda that Ike gave us. They've got dick to do with any kind of pre-1950s traditional American anything and are an affront to Paine and Jefferson's notion of the separation of church and state. It's not as if there's any great history behind the inclusion of these phrases. They were propaganda tools, pure and simple. Toss 'em out!

Are you referring to the so-called "wall of separation?"

[Psychonaut]

Are you referring to the so-called "wall of separation?"

Yes:

Believing with you that religion is a matter which lies solely between Man & his God, that he owes account to none other for his faith or his worship, that the legitimate powers of government reach actions only, & not opinions, I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should "make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof", thus building a wall of separation between Church & State.

[Cato]

Yes:

Since when does a letter Jefferson wrote, as President, on a legal matter, have the force of Constitutional law? As I understand the matter, he was addressing a national, rather than local or state, issue. The federal government, as the letter goes, shouldn't meddle in the establishment of religion. That is all.

Jefferson also ends the letter:

I reciprocate your kind prayers for the protection & blessing of the common father and creator of man, and tender you for yourselves & your religious association assurances of my high respect & esteem.

Who might that common father and creator of man be? The Odinic triad? The Olympians? Marduk? The Baba-Yaga?

http://www.usconstitution.net/jeffwall.html