SCOTUS has dutifully avoided the issue of making an official ruling as to whether having "In God We Trust" as the national motto (since 1956) and on our money is constitutional. There have been three lower court rulings that all affirmed the motto.
Personally, I think it's pretty clear that both are a violation of the establishment clause in the 1st amendment:
Quote:
|
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.
|
Changing the national motto to "In God We Trust" and adding that phrase to our money was a result of . . . an act of Congress. Ok, so the law part can't be disputed. So, does is this law "respecting an establishment of religion"? I don't see how it can't be. It's clearly an endorsement of the monotheistic God of the Judeo/Christian/Muslim religious tradition, and leaves out alternate religions that are polytheistic or nature based or endorse no supreme being whatsoever, or the religious beliefs of those who deny the existence of a supreme being.
Now this might seem to indicate that I'm in strong opposition to having "In God We Trust" on our money. Not so. I think it's unconstitutional, but I don't really care very much, as it's essentially harmless.
Having it as our national motto? That pisses me off, not because it's religious, but because it's so banal, and it replaced the most kick-ass perfect national motto ever concieved. E pluribus unum: Out of many, one. There, in three Latin words, the ideal that drove the fomation of the United States. That's not just good, it's
perfect, it's both an ode to our past, or origins, and a noble goal for us to strive for as a people, and it's descriptive of the US as a country and as a people in a way a generic "God is on
our side" statement isn't.
Does the presense of God in US rhetoric represent a melding of religion and government? For some it's lip service, necessary to be able to get elected, without really guiding political policy. For others, it seems to be a big part of what guides their political beliefs, and I find that disturbing.
I think religion should be left to the churches and individuals who choose to attend them. Government should be neutral.
Gilda