Wednesday, 22 July 2009
-
Does the Phrase "In God We Trust" Really Affect America?
Recently, I did a post about having “In God We Trust” on license plates. It seems this “In God We Trust” debate is one that is going to be continuing for a while. In an article I read online, I learned that a group called Freedom From Religion Foundation (an association of atheists and agnostics) has filed a federal lawsuit to stop the engraving of “In God We Trust” and the Pledge of Allegiance at the Capitol Visitor Center in Washington. The group is claiming that the engraving “will give actual and apparent government endorsement and advancement of religion," while excluding nonreligious Americans.” Those who are in favor of the engraving are saying that the engravings are there to be historical references to America’s Christian Heritage. Now I can understand both sides of this debate. I really am not sure what side I would pick if I had to choose between the two. I don’t even know if this debate is really worth it. In the long run of things, this debate isn’t going to be a life-changing matter. The thing that bugs me is that both sides are making such a big deal about a few words. As we all know, actions speak louder then words. The phrase “In God We Trust” means nothing to anyone unless there is an action behind it. I don’t look at the money in my wallet and think “Oh, that’s right. I trust in God.” I don’t take bills out and stare at them seeing what's on them. I know most people just look to see if it’s a one dollar bill, five dollar bill, etc.
The other thing that is starting to bother me is people making a big deal out of America’s Christian heritage. Yes, it’s a good thing we had it, but the America we started out as is not what we are today. Frankly, I’m not sure how I feel anymore about having America being labeled “a Christian nation.” While we have the background, it isn’t necessarily what we are today. People judge Christians based on what they do. Well, people are prone to mistakes and Christians will make just as many as anyone else. I’m not sure if I can look around at what our nation does and say it is “Christian.” We may call it one but that isn’t always what others are going to see it as. The word Christian and the phrase “In God We Trust” are just labels and words. They mean nothing without someone or something that believes. I think we need to spend less time concentrating on these and more on how we live our lives. I know I need to.
How much does having or not having this phrase really affect America?
RecommendRelated Posts
Post a Comment
- Back to revelife's Revelife Site!
- Note: your comment will appear in revelife's local time zone: GMT -05:00 (Eastern Standard - US, Canada)
About the Author
-
- From: mr_twenty_something
- Name: Tim
Stats: This Week All Time Posts: 0 31 Views: 0 23395 Comments: 0 1291 View all posts by mr_twenty_something
Comments (454)
Why can't it just be religiously neutral so that it doesn't offend anyone?
it does affect america, and we would be better without it.
"The word Christian and the phrase “In God We Trust” are just labels and
words. They mean nothing without someone or something that believes."
How pertinent, because our currency wouldn't be worth anything if we didn't believe in its value.
Obviously it offends someone. This country was founded by slave owners. We don't claim history when people try to get the N word engraved. I don't see why we should make an exception for the G word either.
All that any group like this wants is to achieve religious neutrality in the government, which would be a truer representation of our history than anything else. Personal beliefs are all well and good, but I have to agree that it's inappropriate to represent the entire nation and its diversity of beliefs with as biased a statement as "In God We Trust".
You're saying that it doesn't matter, but it sort of does. Slippery slopes etc.
America as a nation doesn't sincerely put it's trust in G-D. It seems silly to keep to that slogan when it has become obsolete. As a whole, the statement doesn't have a huge affect on the United States. Though, I can see how it possibly gives people a shallow and incorrect view of G-D that makes him appear like a lofty idea as opposed to a specific being. It also associates G-D dangerously close to the U.S. and could give others the idea that he favors the States more than other lands.
I don't care if people find G-D offensive. I do care about people misrepresenting him and using his name for ungodly purposes.
The irony of that statement on money is that when you look at money and read the slogan you can't help but be reminded how unnecessary the money is and how necessary G-D is.
"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness." ~The Declaration of Independence
That God is a fact and that we acknowledge him as the source of our most basic human rights and that we express trust in him, is not religion, it's the American way.
To know that there is God, that he is the Creator is self-evident. This small bit of wisdom is being forgotten. Understanding simple, vital wisdom is not religion it's virtue.
@TheGreatBout@xanga - The irony of that statement on money is that when you look at money and read the slogan you can't help but be reminded how unnecessary the money is and how necessary G-D is.
Money is necessary and important.
The computer you used to write your Revelife comment was bought with money. The networks that allow Revelife to connect with billions of people were created by people using humongous amounts of money. The food you eat, the clothes you wear, the roof over your head, were all purchased with money.
Jesus used money in some of his parables. Proper use and understanding of money is an expression of wisdom.
Money allows for the elevation of living standards and the quality of life. A prosperous society allows its citizens leisure time. It is with leisure time that we are able to contemplate and perfect our humanity and love for God in freedom. Putting "In God We Trust" on money is therefore completely appropriate.
Being strapped to the yoke of bone grinding poverty reduces us to stupid, short lived beasts of burden. In poverty women are reduced to breeders and kitchen slaves. Even a beggar is dependent on money, though it be the money of others.
I agree with the comments about the religious neutrality.
Our government might have people of faith or no faith but that doesn't matter. What they believe religiously or not is not their job. Their job is to represent their people. ALL people, all religions and non religious.
Our government is By the people For the people. Not by the church and for the church.
In this particular case of the engraving and its location, that is sending a message to every nation around the world. To ever tourist that walk into that building or reads the wall. That is just as good as saying we are a Christian nation (considering the argument here of our American Christian Heritage) when we are not one.
In a world like it is now our government NEEDS to become religiously neutral.
There are parts of the world that do not see Christianity in a good light (or any alternative religion than their own). When our country is trying to repair and salvage it's foreign policies and remove the stigma that we are trying to convert everyone to Christianity. (I am sure people remember the Crusade reference with Bush) By having our law makers pushing so fervently to put something that may be seen as the opposite makes me question how much they are basing it on their beliefs rather than the good of the country.
@pheorbs@xanga - I agree with the comments about the religious neutrality.
There is no such thing as neutrality in politics and religion. In the real world neutrality is like a vacuum. Nature abhors it. Likewise in human society.
Neutrality is just a euphemism for "anti". Religious neutrality is really anti-religion. As you read the comments this will become clear. The people working to get "In God We Trust" wiped off our money hate religion and hate God.
They are anything but neutral.
i never really paid attention to those words and what it really stands for. so i'm pretty neutral. it can stay on there or be taken off, but i'm not going to have a fit over it.
how about the eye? doesn't it stand for the illuminati or something related to a cult? what if people want a different president on the bill? or the significance of the pyramid -- why is an egyptian structure on the bill? what if i want the grand canyon on there? how about all of those lines, special paper, & watermarks? why can't they print on regular paper with a regular copy machine and regular ink? why not fight over that? hahah...
@LoBornlite@xanga -
A person in government is not neutral this is true. They will have their own stances and beliefs. But personal religious beliefs are just that, personal. They do not belong in making policy. That is why we have checks and balances in place. I never talked about the money in my comment I was addressing the engraving.
And just because someone disagrees with having In God We Trust engraved on a wall (at just under a 100k bill) or have it appear on our currency does not make them anti-religious or that they hate God.
@pheorbs@xanga - But personal religious beliefs are just that, personal. They do not belong in making policy.
Everyone bases their policy making on personal beliefs. Why exclude religion? That is anti-religious bias.
@LoBornlite@xanga - Yes I do agree policy that is written up and voted on is based on personal beliefs (that would include religion) however that single person cannot turn around and create a law without it going through all the checks and balances. In the end, even if it is the exact same or slightly different than how it was originally wrote it is no longer a single persons beliefs that make the policy. It is a policy that has passed through the majority and been scrutinized.
(hopefully thought doubtful the public has paid attention and let their reps know what their stance is)
Creating a law and saying I am creating this law because it goes against the Bible, Quran or any other holy text would be a violation of several things within our governments law. Especially when you cannot prove that doing whatever action is harmful in any way.
Removing In God We Trust is not a harmful thing to another human or creature of the world. It does not physically affect them. It would not harm faith because it is not something that can be harmed.
Religion and God have become a platform that people use to gain
votes in politics, that should say enough there. We see in the news all
the time these people that were voted in based on strong Christian
values slapping the people that voted for them on that basis in the
face.
Which is more detrimental to our nation?
People that claim values to get elected and win majority then obviously disregard them
or
People running on their own merit and explaining their policies without invoking God's name for such a selfish gain?
-I am sorry if this tends to jump around a bit I had to get up and deal with a few things in the middle of posting and lost my place a couple of times.-
Freedom OF religion and freedom FROM religion are two very different things.
I find myself concerned that Xanga is promoting this as a Christian 'ISH' site with authors who have such low regard for Christian heritage and dedication to God.
@pheorbs@xanga - Removing In God We Trust is not a harmful thing to another human or creature of the world.
I believe that it is harmful. Removing a statement of wisdom from our money is foolish and serves no purpose. Wisdom must always be proclaimed loudly and publically.
In God We Trust is the American way.
@pheorbs@xanga - People that claim values to get elected and win majority then obviously disregard them or People running on their own merit and explaining their policies without invoking God's name for such a selfish gain?
That is a false dichotomy that indicates your anti-religious bias. Why is someone who proclaims values bad and someone who does not always meritorious?
The fact is that every politician should be looked on a capo in an organized crime synicate. They are up to no good and their power to do no good should be limited to the max.
That is the real issue, the real trouble in government, not religion.
@LoBornlite@xanga - Ah but I did NOT claim someone that claims morals as a bad thing. I said ones that claim them, then knowingly disregard them. Difference. I said someone using religion to Gain power. Someone who is running on their own merits (voting history, past policies, future policies and so on) already shows their morals without the need of pulling religion into it. That doesn't mean at all if we looked at that as person A and B that person B is any less religious. It only means that they do not use their religion to reach their position.
You see it in ever election that happens, people say they will vote for the person that follows their religious beliefs over someone else. That is without looking at their voting history, the policies they have put forth and so on. They will blindly follow a candidate based on a religious background. This is a dangerous practice.
And I completely agree with the checks and balance to try and keep the corruption down.
you are right religion is NOT the issue, the government is. Part of the government issue is though religion being brought into it. That is not the fault of the religion, that is the fault of the people running, the people voting and the government allowing it.
God (Christian or otherwise) is a belief. Some will tell you of His holy powers and how real He really is, but the fact remains that He is a belief. To place a belief on our currency (and for it to be our nation's motto!) is a slap in a face to those who don't believe in it. Let's lower case the G and make it plural, hmm? Or replace God with the Flying Spagetti Monster. Or the boogie man. Or some other belief and you'll see just how much it may matter to those who don't believe.
And this isn't just about those who don't believe. Why can't we have a slogan that deals with plain old American culture and history? Why does it need to be Christian/religiously based?
@methodElevated@xanga - Ha. Nice!
It does effect people. IT absolutely does. It's like free advertising for the idea of God. Every single impression does effect people even if it's just a tiny little barely measurable bit.
The historical argument is a non-starter. Historical relics belong in museums.
Even so, I think it's about 200 years too soon in the development of humanity for anyone to care. Seriously. There are a lot better things to argue about than whether the word God appears on license plates, in the pledge, or on our money. People are building creationist museums and atheists are worried about words on license plates? That seems like a miss use of time and resources.
@pheorbs@xanga - I said someone using religion to Gain power. Someone who is running on their own merits (voting history, past policies, future policies and so on) already shows their morals without the need of pulling religion into it.
A crook is a crook. Using government handouts to buy votes under the guise of self righteously helping the poor is the exact same thing.
To you, the religious crook is the bad guy and the poverty pimp is the good guy.
Besides, where do you think morals come from? They come from religion. The worst mass murders in history have been done by athiests. Check out the Communists and the NAZIs from the last century; over 100,000,000 innocents wantonly slaughtered.
@LoBornlite@xanga -
..Yes I can see how you would get that when I said based on past policies, voting history and future policies (obviously those discussed). Since showing past deeds is really not a way to judge a candidate it seems..
Every politician offers promises, some are carried through with, some not. Some in the way it was put forth, others not.
There is no question in that.
But to use your religion as a clutch to help win an election, while in most cases already breaking those morals you are spouting, should call people to pause and really think about why they are electing a person.
Is it because you agree with their political stance which is what will be helping run the country, or their religious one?
and yes a crook is a crook in any disguise. Isn't it the job of those voting to find out what is behind the disguise or are we just supposed to do everything at face value and call it good?
However the debate has seemed to veer off the original context, which I probably helped along quite a bit -.-
@LoBornlite@xanga - "To you, the religious crook is the bad guy and the poverty pimp is the good guy."
"Besides, where do you think morals come from? They come from religion."
So, where in the Bible does it say it's ok to just make stuff up? She said nothing about specific policies. I despair for the faith if a liar like you is an exemplar of religious "morals."
@LoBornlite@xanga -
Besides, where do you think morals
come from? They come from religion. The worst mass murders in history
have been done by athiests. Check out the Communists and the NAZIs
from the last century; over 100,000,000 innocents wantonly slaughtered.
I wouldn't try to refute the deaths of innocents. However don't try and pin mass slaughters on people that hold no religious belief. The church has blood on it's hands as well and for a longer period of history.
Morals come for several roads, religion happens to be one of them not the only one.
In public, Hitler often praised Christian heritage, German Christian culture, and professed a belief in an Aryan Jesus Christ, a Jesus who fought against the Jews.
[277]In his speeches and publications Hitler spoke of his interpretation of
Christianity as a central motivation for his antisemitism, stating that
"As a Christian I have no duty to allow myself to be cheated, but I
have the duty to be a fighter for truth and justice."-wiki link-
Does that mean Hitler was a Christian? No it does not, that is something he said in public for public opinion. He most likely said it for public sway, showing that even he knew how powerful claiming faith can be when talking to the masses.