add-memberalign-toparrow-leftarrow-rightbellblockcalendarcamerachatchevron-leftchevron-rightchevron-small-downchevron-upcircle-with-crosscomposecrossfacebookflagfolderglobegoogleimagesinstagramkeylocation-pinmedalmoremuplabelShape 3 + Rectangle 1pagepersonpluspollsImported LayersImported LayersImported LayersshieldstartwitterwinbackClosewinbackCompletewinbackDiscountyahoo

Sacramento Freethinkers Atheists & Nonbelievers (FAN) Message Board › Sac Bee article: Sacramento atheist files another challene to 'In God We Trust'

Sac Bee article: Sacramento atheist files another challene to 'In God We Trust'

Sacramento, CA
Post #: 23
The Sac Bee published an article on Wednesday about Mike Newdow's filing of a legal action in regard to the motto "In God We Trust" on our currency. Check-out the article, Bee poll, and the over 300 comments that readers submitted in response to the article.
Sacramento atheist files another challenge to 'In God We Trust'
Sac Bee article on "In God We Trust"­
A former member
Post #: 44
334 people have voted on whether "god we trust" violates separation of church and state. 102 Yes but 232 No's.
Linda B.
Sacramento, CA
Post #: 2
The references to God on our money, the insertion of "under God" in the Pledge of Allegiance, & the presidential declaration that "In God We Trust" is our national motto all happened in the 1950's as a political statement against the atheism of Russia during the Cold War. I remember. I was in grammar school at the time. (You have no idea how hard it was to stick in "under God" between "one nation" and "indivisible" while relearning the Pledge as a 5th grader.)
BTW, my parents who were active in our local Presbyterian Church were against all the God references by the government. They believed thoroughly in the separation of church and state and feared this would lead our country down the road to endorsing religion.
Additionally, our Founding Fathers, those figures revered by the Christian right today, had already declared the motto of the United States to be "E Pluribus Unum, Latin for "out of many, one."

I strongly support the contention that all governmental references to God is a violation of the separation of church and state guaranteed by the 1st Amendment.

Vote: YES
Jamie W.
user 10540195
Shingle Springs, CA
Post #: 3
One of the repliers to the article wrote this and I thought it was funny enough to repeat it here...

"If I were a God-fearing man I might wonder why our country was so invincible prior to stamping 'God' on our money and after (Korean War, Vietnam War, Afghanistan, Iraq) so many of our conflicts wound up as quagmires. I would wonder if God was trying to tell us something about how he feels about us messing with a Constitution that presumably was written according to his plan."

Anyse J.
Sacramento, CA
Post #: 73
Linda as well as all others,

I was raised as a Jehovah's Witness and, you may well and correctly assume, they did not like this at all! Well, I never really believed in all of this stuff, even at the tender age of 5 or 6 or so and beyond. However, I learned NOT to salute the flag or to say the pledge. I just stood during the pledge and kept my hands to my sides and said nothing at all. I believe that the slippery slope, using "In God We Trust" and "under God" in the pledge, was set back in the 50's as well. Well, that is not entirely true! Actually the first coinage with "In God We Trust" was on the one and two-cent coins in 1864. This was done at the behest of a minister who said that we should acknowledge that, without God, this country could not be so great and "blessed," as it were. It was in 1956 that "In God We Trust" was put on paper money! Before that, many coins were already minted with this motto on them! Here is a URL so that you can read it. It has a wierd form of certification and my may get a warning from your browser. However, it is a "safe" site. Here is the site:­

There should NOT be ANY reference to God at all. I feel, and I am sure correctly so, that part of the belief of people that the US is a "christian" nation is due to the use of this "motto" on US coins and paper money. There should be absolutely NO reference to God anywhere in government at all. Even the "prayers" before sessions and the oath of alliegance to the US should not have "so help me God" in it either. Look at the craziness that religion brings to government by viewing the case of the Alabama governor's recent gaffe that clearly illuminates this insanity. [From here I am adding another post to this that I wrote elsewhere that also includes part of what our speaker said last night.]


What the man said, and I am quoting this so that there is no doubt about what I am going to say is true.

"Anybody here today who has not accepted Jesus Christ as their savior, I'm telling you, you're not my brother and you're not my sister, and I want to be your brother."

Basically, when he says "I want to be your brother," it is conditional that anyone who has not accepted Jesus Christ as one's saviour is NOT his brother or sister and one must do this in order to be his "brother or sister." This is a governor who should know better: he has excluded Jews, Buddhists, Hindi's, Muslims, Taoists, Confucianists and any other people who are NOT what he says that they should be! So, I am not really offended as an atheists, as many groups would condemn me for having no faith in their god/gods. However, I am more offended that he used Christianity as the total dividing line between those "worthy" of being his brothers or sisters and those who are not "worthy." [ADDED: Would this equinamity also be part of the decisions as to who will get what when it comes to legislation and the law of Alabama as well? It certainly can be if he does not separate his biases based upon religion from the "overall" needs of the people of Alabama.]

Arrogance is an ugly thing! This man is arrogant to the core as he, Governor Bently, said, "I will never deny being a born-again Christian. I do have core beliefs and I will die with those core beliefs."

Well, is there really room for rehabilitation? Yes, there is, if he is willing to modify his perspective of people into something more than Christian/non-Christian! However, he is in his sixties and I am reminded by his statement of Charleton Heston when he said of his gun that "They would have to pry this from my dead hands," or something like that. So, in all honesty, I don't really believe that he will change anything! He is, after all, a Republican as well and, I learned yesterday, 75% of all Republicans believe in Creationism, which, I am sure, he does as well. Backward, yes! Arrogant, yes! Intolerant, extremely so!

If there is going to be a facist state here in the US, it will be lead by Republicans and we will return to the day that the "right" catechism, when said aloud upon daily examination, will keep one alive, as it did during the Protestant Reformation. Sick, sick, sick!

This article is located at:­


I am a very positive person. Sometimes, though, I feel positive that the learned and well-educated can not succeed in guiding a nation that persists in the devout spirit that being ignorant beyond the Bible is the way one SHOULD be. Yet, I still cling to the notion that, eventually, people will see the need for those who sought greater knowledge beyond the Bible as they have discovered as well as invented new things that have helped civilization to grow and to become more healthy. [I know that the opposite can be well-argued here; however, let me have a bit of the positive for a while, OK? LOL!]

Thank you for reading and I hope it was informative for you.
Powered by mvnForum

People in this
Meetup are also in:

Sign up

Meetup members, Log in

By clicking "Sign up" or "Sign up using Facebook", you confirm that you accept our Terms of Service & Privacy Policy