Is having "In God We Trust" on money, buildings, etc. constitutional?
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
March 28, 2024, 05:25:21 PM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  General Discussion
  Constitution and Law (Moderator: World politics is up Schmitt creek)
  Is having "In God We Trust" on money, buildings, etc. constitutional?
« previous next »
Pages: [1] 2 3 4
Poll
Question: See above
#1
Yes (D)
 
#2
No (D)
 
#3
Yes (R)
 
#4
No (R)
 
#5
Yes (I/O)
 
#6
No (I/O)
 
Show Pie Chart
Partisan results

Total Voters: 84

Author Topic: Is having "In God We Trust" on money, buildings, etc. constitutional?  (Read 24490 times)
Kaine for Senate '18
benconstine
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 30,329
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« on: June 17, 2009, 04:38:15 PM »

Yes (D)
Logged
Rowan
RowanBrandon
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 6,692


Political Matrix
E: 1.94, S: 4.70

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1 on: June 17, 2009, 05:16:28 PM »

If it's not it ought to be.
Logged
Franzl
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 22,254
Germany


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #2 on: June 17, 2009, 05:21:22 PM »
« Edited: June 17, 2009, 05:26:54 PM by Senator Franzl »

I dunno, I'd lean no.

Personally, I think it violates the Establishment Clause of the 1st Amendment...but the Supreme Court has ruled differently.

Logged
memphis
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 15,959


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #3 on: June 17, 2009, 05:26:27 PM »

Don't care. Biggest non-issue ever.
Logged
Rowan
RowanBrandon
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 6,692


Political Matrix
E: 1.94, S: 4.70

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #4 on: June 17, 2009, 05:28:33 PM »

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;"

No religion is being established and no one is stopped from exercising their religion. It's constitutional.
Logged
pogo stick
JewishConservative
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 3,429
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #5 on: June 17, 2009, 05:39:13 PM »

It's legal. And if it wasn't it should've been.
Logged
Franzl
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 22,254
Germany


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #6 on: June 17, 2009, 05:41:42 PM »

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;"

No religion is being established and no one is stopped from exercising their religion. It's constitutional.

It's still a claim that a God exists....whatever God that might be. I think the establishment of any such being violates that clause.
Logged
Rowan
RowanBrandon
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 6,692


Political Matrix
E: 1.94, S: 4.70

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #7 on: June 17, 2009, 05:44:30 PM »

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;"

No religion is being established and no one is stopped from exercising their religion. It's constitutional.

It's still a claim that a God exists....whatever God that might be. I think the establishment of any such being violates that clause.

But it doesn't say what specific God, so it's not preferencing one religion over the other. It's kind of a generic thing. But then again, I'm no constitutional scholar.
Logged
Franzl
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 22,254
Germany


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #8 on: June 17, 2009, 05:52:50 PM »

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;"

No religion is being established and no one is stopped from exercising their religion. It's constitutional.

It's still a claim that a God exists....whatever God that might be. I think the establishment of any such being violates that clause.

But it doesn't say what specific God, so it's not preferencing one religion over the other. It's kind of a generic thing. But then again, I'm no constitutional scholar.

I'm no constituoinal scholar either, of course Wink

My problem there is that freedom of religion also means freedom from religion, in my opinion. The notion that a higher being (= God) exists seems to me to mean that the state recognizes that religion (whichever religion that may be) must be true in some form.
Logged
Earth
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,548


Political Matrix
E: -9.61, S: -9.83

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #9 on: June 17, 2009, 05:54:52 PM »

My problem there is that freedom of religion also means freedom from religion, in my opinion. The notion that a higher being (= God) exists seems to me to mean that the state recognizes that religion (whichever religion that may be) must be true in some form.

I see it very much the same way. For a non-issue, this is one I find interesting after all these years.
Logged
True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)
Ernest
Moderators
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 42,157
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #10 on: June 17, 2009, 07:37:43 PM »

Potentially sacrilegious to be profaning God by implying that God can be wielded as a talisman to back up our money.  What our money needs is a copy editor, so that it reads: "In Gold We Trust". Grin
Logged
Mechaman
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 13,791
Jamaica
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #11 on: June 18, 2009, 05:43:17 AM »

My problem there is that freedom of religion also means freedom from religion, in my opinion. The notion that a higher being (= God) exists seems to me to mean that the state recognizes that religion (whichever religion that may be) must be true in some form.

I see it very much the same way. For a non-issue, this is one I find interesting after all these years.
Logged
dead0man
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 46,080
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #12 on: June 18, 2009, 07:00:11 AM »

Don't care. Biggest non-issue ever.
Exactly.  Who cares?  As long as the money spends I don't care if it says "In Big Foot We Trust".
Logged
opebo
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 47,010


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #13 on: June 18, 2009, 11:49:45 AM »

Obviously as the court now stands it is 'constitutional', but with a different balance it might be 'unconstitutional'.  Certainly I would vote to 'interpret' this as unconstitutional.
Logged
RIP Robert H Bork
officepark
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 9,030
Czech Republic


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #14 on: June 18, 2009, 02:33:32 PM »

Absolutely.
Logged
Rob
Bob
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 6,277
United States
Political Matrix
E: -6.32, S: -9.39

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #15 on: June 18, 2009, 04:32:22 PM »


This would still be your answer if the motto was "In Allah We Trust"... right? Because otherwise, you'd be a hypocrite.
Logged
Kaine for Senate '18
benconstine
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 30,329
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #16 on: June 18, 2009, 04:33:44 PM »


This would still be your answer if the motto was "In Allah We Trust"... right? Because otherwise, you'd be a hypocrite.

No, because Allah is a specific Deity, while "God" is a far more general term.
Logged
Marokai Backbeat
Marokai Blue
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 17,477
United States


Political Matrix
E: -7.42, S: -7.39

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #17 on: June 18, 2009, 04:34:30 PM »

My problem there is that freedom of religion also means freedom from religion, in my opinion. The notion that a higher being (= God) exists seems to me to mean that the state recognizes that religion (whichever religion that may be) must be true in some form.
Logged
Magic 8-Ball
mrk
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 3,674
Czech Republic


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #18 on: June 18, 2009, 05:37:01 PM »

Don't care. Biggest non-issue ever.
Exactly.  Who cares?  As long as the money spends I don't care if it says "In Big Foot We Trust".

Even as an agnostic, I don't see why this matters.  I care more about whether teaching creationism in biology classes is constitutional or not.
Logged
Franzl
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 22,254
Germany


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #19 on: June 18, 2009, 05:58:31 PM »

I don't like these "Who cares?" responses. It may not be extremely important whether it's declared unconstitutional or not....but this question should be seriously debated on its merits, and not simply pushed to the side because of a lack of relevance.
Logged
Rob
Bob
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 6,277
United States
Political Matrix
E: -6.32, S: -9.39

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #20 on: June 18, 2009, 09:08:34 PM »


This would still be your answer if the motto was "In Allah We Trust"... right? Because otherwise, you'd be a hypocrite.

No, because Allah is a specific Deity, while "God" is a far more general term.

Really?

While the term is best known in the West for its use by Muslims as a reference to God, it is used by Arabic-speakers of all Abrahamic faiths, including Christians and Jews, in reference to "God".
Logged
Kaine for Senate '18
benconstine
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 30,329
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #21 on: June 18, 2009, 09:14:45 PM »

While the term is best known in the West for its use by Muslims as a reference to God, it is used by Arabic-speakers of all Abrahamic faiths, including Christians and Jews, in reference to "God".

However, because Allah is associated with just one faith, then it would be seen differently.
Logged
Rob
Bob
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 6,277
United States
Political Matrix
E: -6.32, S: -9.39

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #22 on: June 18, 2009, 09:29:40 PM »
« Edited: June 18, 2009, 09:32:01 PM by Rob »

... by people who don't know what they're talking about

anyway, this line of discussion is pointless, because you're seemingly unaware of the existence of atheists, agnostics, polytheists, and so on who don't subscribe to the existence of a Supreme Being.

I'm sure you don't care, anyway, but that just highlights your hypocrisy. Majority rule does not "constitutional" make.
Logged
A18
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 23,794
Political Matrix
E: 9.23, S: -6.35

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #23 on: June 19, 2009, 07:01:52 AM »

In the English-speaking United States, the term "Allah" is undeniably entangled with Islam. (Of course, you could always put the entire phrase in Arabic.)

Not sure what you mean by "hypocrisy." Did he claim to be categorically against government sloganeering that's inconsistent with any person's beliefs?

To answer the poll question, yes, it's constitutional. It's a bad idea, though.
Logged
JSojourner
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 11,510
United States


Political Matrix
E: -8.65, S: -6.94

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #24 on: June 24, 2009, 09:17:13 AM »

No (D)
Logged
Pages: [1] 2 3 4  
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.062 seconds with 13 queries.