General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsShould we remove "In God We Trust" from currency?
I know there are far more important things to take care which is why it isn't something I particularly care about. For the sake of argument, say we solved all of the problems out there then what would you want? Leave it or remove it?
It is just something I thought about after looking at the back of a dollar.
Sarah Ibarruri
(21,043 posts)TheWraith
(24,331 posts)Around the same time that "under God" was added to the pledge of allegiance, as a response to the rising influence of godless Commies.
Sarah Ibarruri
(21,043 posts)Snotcicles
(9,089 posts)Lets sell advertising space on the dollar bill to fund social programs.
We will all be passing around pocket billboards. The only down side is the actual size of the notes would get bigger because of demand.
Lets brainstorm this one.
Snotcicles
(9,089 posts)Snotcicles
(9,089 posts)Sarah Ibarruri
(21,043 posts)mwooldri
(10,291 posts)Just look at the Euro bank notes and see the opportunities there.
One side will have the information showing the denomination of the bank notes ($5, $10, etc) and have other national symbols - we can choose different dead Presidents, or even no Presidents at all. The other side has 3/4 of it reserved for "advertising". A side effect of this would be that the banknotes themselves would become more secure as each note has a serial number on it and the advertising can be keyed to a serial number.
However doing this would actually devalue the US dollar. One of the reasons why the US dollar is the worlds' reserve currency is because it doesn't change that much design-wise over time. Design changes are incremental. A 1920's $20 bill would be recognizable today because it is relatively similar to today's design.
Nuclear Unicorn
(19,497 posts)That'll show 'em.
Sarah Ibarruri
(21,043 posts)RebelOne
(30,947 posts)As long as it is spendable, it is OK with me.
Logical
(22,457 posts)Larry Ogg
(1,474 posts)Logical
(22,457 posts)alphafemale
(18,497 posts)I could not care less what it says on the money.
The dollar bill has lots of pagan woowoo symbolism on it.
Could not care less about that either.
I rarely carry folding money or pocket rocks anymore. And my plastic card has no mention of imaginary, easily insulted beings
RebelOne
(30,947 posts)Fumesucker
(45,851 posts)Exactly the sort of issue that the M$M would party till they puke with...
Some things folks should just leave alone. Its a piece of Americana, as a Christian I respect others religious views or non-religious views, but this is the last thing Americans are concerned about.
Fumesucker
(45,851 posts)JoePhilly
(27,787 posts)Its this kind of nonsense that distracts us from important issues.
Fumesucker
(45,851 posts)Assume the money said "There is no God", how do you think theists would react to that?
Just stay quiet about it?
Also see my post #4 on this thread..
JoePhilly
(27,787 posts)Marr
(20,317 posts)'If all else was accomplished, would you want to see the statement removed'?
I would say yes. It shouldn't be there, and if theist are fighting to hold ground like that, they aren't fighting to gain new ground.
HarveyDarkey
(9,077 posts)There is no "godless" soviet union anymore. get rid of it.
Art_from_Ark
(27,247 posts)It first appeared on silver certificates of Series 1935G (1955), and then on all Federal Reserve Notes from Series year 1963 to date. However, it first appeared on US coins (2-cent pieces) in 1864, and then was required by law in 1866 to appear on all US coins larger in denomination than 10 cents.
And a variation of it can be traced back to at least as early as 1814, when Francis Scott Key wrote, in a long-forgotten verse of The Star Spangled Banner, "And this be our motto: In God is our Trust"
So it's been part of Americana since at least 1814.
treestar
(82,383 posts)Must have been part of the fear of godless commies.
Art_from_Ark
(27,247 posts)In the 1860s, it was a very vocal Northern preacher who started the ball rolling to get the motto "In God We Trust" put on coins. His rationale was essentially "We aren't winning the war, and it's because we are neglecting the Deity". So the motto was added in 1864 to the new 2-cent piece, and the war was over the next year. So that must have done the trick. Or so some people thought. So the motto was mandated for all coins above 10 cents the year after the war ended (with exceptions made for the $1, $2.50 and $3 gold pieces).
Later, in 1907, new designs were prepared for the $10 and $20 gold pieces. President Theodore Roosevelt objected to the use of the motto on coins-- not for separation of Church and State reasons, but because of the bad press that money got in the Bible, and the fact that money was used for gambling and other immoral purposes. So he mandated that the motto be left off of the new coins. However, this created an uproar in Congress, and they passed a law in 1908 restoring the motto to all gold coins. The motto was added to the penny the next year (that is, 1909, when the Lincoln cent was introduced), and to the dime in 1916, when the Winged Liberty ("Mercury" dime was introduced. Interestingly, the motto had been used on the 5-cent nickel coin starting in 1866, but when it was left off of the Buffalo/Indian Head nickel in 1913, no one seemed to care, and the nickel was the only US coin made during the period 1913 to 1938 that did not carry the motto.
Plucketeer
(12,882 posts)I don't trust in ANY imaginary higher power. Why should I be forced to pretend I do? Didn't the pilgrims come here JUST TO ESCAPE SUCH UNWANTED RELIGIOUS INFLUENCES??? To hear the RIGHTeous-wing version of history, our forefathers must've come to their senses in the late 18th century, and founded a Christian nation.
Union Scribe
(7,099 posts)SUCH UNWANTED RELIGIOUS INFLUENCES??"
No. They were fundies, and came here to escape European intolerance for their brand of religion.
annabanana
(52,791 posts)fredamae
(4,458 posts)Mariana
(14,830 posts)it's good enough for me.
no_hypocrisy
(45,625 posts)yortsed snacilbuper
(7,939 posts)You shouldn't trust in something that doesn't exist!
stevedeshazer
(21,653 posts)We're not the only ones.
MineralMan
(146,116 posts)So, I spend whatever money I come by without really worrying about what's written on it, other than the denomination. As an atheist, I'm surrounded every day with people who believe in stuff I can't believe in. Oddly enough, I interact with them just fine. Same with the money printed by this country. What it says on it is meaningless. What matters is that I can exchange it for the goods I need.
It's such a minor issue that it doesn't even deserve discussing, since there is no chance it will be changed.
JonLP24
(29,322 posts)I know my question is a total fantasy and I largely agree. I don't worry about it, I just saw it and thought it would make for an interesting conversation. I didn't realize it was something that didn't even deserve to be discussed so I apologize for that. I also interact with folks with differing views just fine and I agree, what matters is I can purchase stuff with this money.
MineralMan
(146,116 posts)Nothing wrong with that. But, it's one of those things that is not going to get changed. Since it has no real effect, other problems are of more interest to me. No apology is necessary. I just stated my opinion of the issue. Some people feel very strongly about it, but it just doesn't appeal to me as an issue.
Where I live, you can't go two blocks without seeing a church. It's a reminder that we atheists are a tiny minority. If some people are able to believe in a deity that somehow helps them cope with their lives, I don't care. As long as they don't come to my house to burn it down because I don't believe such stuff, they're welcome to their beliefs.
When they persecute others, then it's of concern to me. If their deity appears on my money, I just pass that money on in exchange for stuff that doesn't have that on it. No harm, no foul, really.
It's wrong that our money says, "In God we trust" on it. Since we have many in this country who believe in deities with other names than "God," they're left out, as well. But, it's all silliness, anyhow. If there were a deity, it wouldn't care what was printed on money, anyhow.
JonLP24
(29,322 posts)I realize religious stuff like ten commandments, prayer in schools, etc gets discussed but I was curious about this particular issue.
I know it is not going to get changed hence the other stuff I said in my OP. Stuff that isn't going to get changed gets discussed here all the time though like intelligence tests for voting or cannabis legalization(if it does, it will be a long time before it happens).
I appreciate your opinion but some of what you said felt like a criticism of me like "oddly enough" & other things about how well you can handle religious people. I wasn't sure why you said those things so I thought you may be thinking I was the opposite of what you said about yourself. I apologize if I misunderstood.
Like I said. This is total fantasy. I wouldn't seriously advocate in the real world for the removal of that phrase but I also wouldn't oppose it.
There is way too much currency in circulation for this to be remotely practical.
cynatnite
(31,011 posts)cleanhippie
(19,705 posts)As well as taken out. It would only take not adding the phrase to the new money. Not practical? It's very practical.
Shrek
(3,969 posts)Because it means omitting the phrase from newly printed currency.
However, the OP speaks of removing the phrase, presumably by physically altering the currency already in circulation. I don't think that is practical or even worthwhile.
JonLP24
(29,322 posts)I was just thinking of just stop printing "In God We Trust". I didn't mean to remove it from currency that is already there, that seems like it would be a difficult process because I'm sure it would be more advanced than applying white-out.
Sorry for the misunderstanding.
Humanist_Activist
(7,670 posts)generally anywhere from 5 to 10 years, the federal reserve destroys a lot of it, but also simply from being handled too much and falling apart.
Coins last much longer.
Replaced with "In the 1% we trust"
ibegurpard
(16,685 posts)why give the fundies a reason to rally over something so obscure and unimportant?
liberalmuse
(18,670 posts)anyone who believes in god should be insulted that he's advertised on our "mammon". WTF does a noble, higher being and money have to do with anything? I guess I need to disclose that I've been giving away stuff on craigslist for the past couple of days and I've not met nicer people in a long, long time. I want to live this way all the time - in a world where people barter and trade for goods and services, and no money whatsoever is exchanged.
RainDog
(28,784 posts)I also wish we could go back to the original pledge without the witch hunt commie scare b.s. that inserted god into the pledge.
but I'm not going to work to remove it.
I will, however, work to undermine the bullshit that was behind the placement and work to stop such bullshit from further infecting the American public space.
I would much rather spend my energy removing creationists from office, and removing creationism and other religious-based fairy tales from subjects where they do not belong.
TheCowsCameHome
(40,159 posts)Tierra_y_Libertad
(50,414 posts)GoCubsGo
(32,053 posts)After all, said God on the money commanded that his followers NOT worship money. Yet, his most ardent followers insist that his name be on money. People are nuts. Some more than others.
jp11
(2,104 posts)And put "In Humanity We Trust" until we meet space aliens.
JFN1
(2,033 posts)Sorry, couldn't resist...!
But yes, such does not belong on official government paraphenalia.
Gore1FL
(20,993 posts)Ultimately I am not going to get worked up if it is there or not. If I had to make a choice I would get rid of it just to see people freak out.
treestar
(82,383 posts)I haven't seen it on foreign currencies I've handled. Yet those countries survive.
It is unnecessary but trying to remove it will bring out nut cases convinced they are being "persecuted."
DearAbby
(12,461 posts)The GOD is in context. They worship money, they worship those who have it, they are blessed by this GOD, with this GOD, only for this GOD.
madrchsod
(58,162 posts)i can remember when there was`t any of that god crap and when kids celebrated the pagan fertility festival on may first.....
FarCenter
(19,429 posts)Happydayz
(112 posts)Plucketeer
14. No - it bothers me.
I don't trust in ANY imaginary higher power. Why should I be forced to pretend I do? Didn't the pilgrims come here JUST TO ESCAPE SUCH UNWANTED RELIGIOUS INFLUENCES??? To hear the RIGHTeous-wing version of history, our forefathers must've come to their senses in the late 18th century, and founded a Christian nation
____________________________________________________
I'm pretty new here, but it was my understanding of the rules, that its not ok to attack or belittle someones religion or non-believers. Calling someones religion imaginary is an insult, you do realize that there are Christian, Agnostic, Islamic, Hindu etc Democrats who believe in a higher power right? We all pretty much agree as far as politics here, so why can't we coexist, why attack someones religion? That very arrogance in your post is why a lot of moderate, conservative and reagan democrats are heading for the hills out of the democratic party. Anywho, back to the subject at hand, obviously as a Christian I want the In God We Trust statement to stay. But its not like that statement is hateful or hurts anyone, imo I think it should stay.
Fumesucker
(45,851 posts)I hope you enjoy your stay.
It seems to me that Christians would be the last ones that would want God on their money..
After all, Luke 16:13 does tell Christians that they cannot serve both God and mammon as does Matthew 6:24.
Happydayz
(112 posts)I believe you may have misunderstood the scripture you quoted. One can serve God and still make a living, bring home a pay check to take care of themselves and or family. Making a living for yourself, doesn't constitute worshiping money. Mittens, would be prime example of someone who worships money, the scripture you quoted would certainly apply to him. But then again he isn't a Christian so maybe not.
Fumesucker
(45,851 posts)One of the nicest people you could hope to meet, she certainly considered herself a Christian as did her parents and siblings.
And if you think it's only Mormons who worship money in the USA you're sadly mistaken, all you have to do is watch someone like Creflo A Dollar or Pat Robertson or Bishop Eddie Long for that matter, the list of Christian hucksters in America is a long and sordid one.
You might be surprised to learn that a lot of atheists such as myself became what we are because we take or took religion and scripture seriously, that's the reason that atheists/agnostics are the most knowledgeable group about religion in the US. Many of us find it really odd that the most cutthroat capitalist nation on the planet has "In God We Trust" on its money and find it even more odd that a large number of Christians think that's a great idea.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/39397251/ns/us_news-life/t/survey-americans-dont-know-much-about-religion/
Forty-five percent of Roman Catholics who participated in the study didn't know that, according to church teaching, the bread and wine used in Holy Communion is not just a symbol, but becomes the body and blood of Christ.
Atheists and agnostics scored highest, with an average of 21 correct answers, while Jews and Mormons followed with about 20 accurate responses. Protestants overall averaged 16 correct answers, while Catholics followed with a score of about 15.
cynatnite
(31,011 posts)Um...no. Agnostics means they do not know if there is a higher power,gawd or whatever.
IMO, the statement imprinted on money is a violation of church and state. It's offensive to me as an American.
I'm also an atheist and I think religion is the biggest waste of time, money, and human life that exists on the planet. We've got better things that need done.
Now, if that offends your sensibilities here, you better get used to it. DU may not be the place for you. Think about it.
Happydayz
(112 posts)who believe there is a God, or some type of higher power, but not necessarily in the Bible context. Let me ask you a fair question. Are there any atheist missionaries, do atheist give to the less fortunate, or go over seas to Africa etc to help with education, sickness and disease like Christian Missionaries do? Oh, whats that you say, its not fair to attack your beliefs, but you can go ape shit crazy against mine. Or are you suggesting that Democrats are only liberals atheist and those democrats who don't fit in your shiny box of atheist should hit the road because DU is a pro- atheist/anti-Christian site? It certainly doesn't say that any where in the rules. Surely, there are other Christians, Hindus etc on this site. At this juncture, the democratic party needs every democratic vote they can get. I'd suggest not trying to push those who don't agree with you in regards to religion, out of the party. Because all of us, regardless of our beliefs will be much needed in November. As far as being a member here, there is nothing to think about. I like it here at DU and will not be bullied out by some militant atheist. If you intend to attack my religion and beliefs, expect yours to be attacked as well. Or we could simply co-exist as most mature adults prefer to do, the choice is yours.
cynatnite
(31,011 posts)Agnostics don't know if there is a god. They believe there may or may not be a god, but don't come down on one side or the other.
No, there are not atheist missionaires. That's because atheists are not out to do any converting and need to send out "missionaries". Of course, just like normal people, atheists do donate money and time to good causes. I prefer donating to food banks because I feel that is where it will do the most good.
I don't care if you attack atheism. It doesn't bother me one bit. There is no evidence a god exists and "attacks" on that doesn't change the lack of evidence. I actually find your attempts to attack atheism pretty funny.
What I love about being a Democrat is that the party is a big tent party. There is plenty of room for atheists, agnostics, Christians, Hindus or whatever religion one wants to claim as their own. My personal opinions are not going to sway their beliefs one bit and I'm not out to change that. It's their right and their personal business.
LOL. Being called a militant atheist is just too funny. All that means is that I'm not the sit down and shut up kind of person. I put out my opinions and you're offended that I have the audacity to say that I think religion has about as much credibility as Santa Claus or the Tooth Fairy.
This is DU and challenging religion and how it's used is the norm around here. The more specific forum is religion where it gets rather over the top with the differing opinions.
Like I said...it doesn't bother me if you want to attack atheism. It means nothing more than no god exists. I think you're the one that's got the bigger problem with your vast amount of misconceptions about atheists.
Happydayz
(112 posts)The thing is, I never attacked atheism. Unlike you, I don't hate atheist they way you hate Christians, I pray for atheist. A co-worker and friend of mine who happens to be an atheist, asked myself and other Christians at work to pray for his sick child. Which we thought was really strange since he didn't believe in Christianity, but we still prayed for his sick child. But I digress, I asked a fair question, on whether atheist are philanthropist or not, because I had never heard of any. It was you who attacked Christianity, I guess that makes you feel better or sleep well at night.
I never said I was offended by your insults against Christianity. I merely called out the insults thrown at Christianity, because it seems to go against DU rules. The same as I would call out insults thrown at Blacks, Muslims, Asians and Women etc on DU or any forum I'm a member of. What you say you love about the democratic party, isn't jiving with your post. What I love about the democratic party, is that we have a diverse bunch. You can be a conservative democrat(like myself) a liberal democrat, Reagan democrat, moderate democrat, Christian, Muslim etc and we can all co-exist.
There are fringe extremist in every group, but they in no way speak for the majority. I find it mighty telling that many atheist attack Christianity, but refuse to look in their own back yards and keep their mouths zipped locked in regards to white nationalism. You never hear atheist call out white nationalist, which is a huge wing of the atheist movement. I will call out any so called Christian or non-Christian behaving badly. I guess co-existing with us evil religious democrats is to much to ask of some extremist atheist , oh well.
cynatnite
(31,011 posts)I have no idea where you got the idea that I hate christians. I've got plenty of family and friends that choose christianity for themselves. Why would I hate them?
I tell people who want to pray for me, loved ones or whatever the case may be, to go right ahead if it makes them feel better. Prayer is more for the one doing the praying than the one being prayed for. It has no bearing on anything.
You've had numerous people answer your question about charitable giving. Plenty of atheists and secular organizations do charity work and have for a very long time. I'm not sure why you would rather ignore these facts.
You do seem rather defensive when it comes to your religion, but that's okay. It's tough to deal with when you're not accustomed to having to defend your religion. Sometimes, it might be better to just let people say what they will and not worry about it. It shouldn't affect your faith.
I said it was a big party tent. Not sure how you came up with the notion that I did not say that. I never said that conserv dems, Reagan dems or Dems of other stripes were not welcome. I was focused on the different religions which is where you began your argument in the first place.
Your last paragraph is so full of misconceptions that it's hard to know where to begin. We're atheists. Of course, we're going to come down on religion. You think christianity is the only one we dispute? It's all the same...a Santa Claus fantasy without merit.
Can you provide proof that "white nationalist" is a part of the "atheist movement"? I'm talking real evidence. Not someone's biased opinion.
Here's some real education for you. An atheist is a person who has a disbelief in a god. Period. Atheists have differing opinions about politics and various other matters. All they have in common is a disbelief in a god. That's it. It's not militant, extremist or whatever other words you use to attack us with. We have no belief in a god. Period.
Your problem is that our existence is offensive to your own sensibilities. You use words like extremist and militant because we will challenge your beliefs. Call it insulting or whatever you like. Also, this is DU. Get used to having everything you think challenged here. If you can't back up your assertions, you'll get dismissed and not taken seriously. Like I said earlier...you will be challenged regularly by people who are not nearly as nice as I am.
Happydayz
(112 posts)like I stated in my last post, my co-worker and friend is an atheist. Militant, may have been to strong a word, it was a need jerk reaction to calling someones beliefs make believe etc. Maybe drama queen/king is a more accurate word to describe some atheist. We can set our beliefs aside and co-exist as mature adults. The only misconception I had about atheism, was whether or not they are philanthropist. And yes, I have read the post of those who responded to me and am glad they were able to clarify that misconception. I don't want to get into a debate regarding religion, been there done that, its counter productive. I didn't sign up to DU with the intention to debate religion, I signed up because of my politics and supporting Obama in Nov. There is no way atheists and Christians can have a meaningful dialogue when the basis for both beliefs are polar opposites. Its equivalent to debating an anti-semite, polar opposites worldviews and beliefs and is a waste of time because we will never ever agree with one another. Atheists believe you need physical evidence to verify the existence of something. The main tenet of Christianity is faith and spirituality and to rely on what cannot be verified scientifically. It is impossible for an atheist to truly understand some of the concepts that Christianity teaches. Denial of self, faith in what you cannot physically touch etc. I think most atheists are also humanists, which is a philosophy that contrasts Christianity. So there is nothing to debate, at least imo. You can't disprove the existence of a God no more than I can disprove the validity of the Big Bang Theory. Personally, I don't think God and science have to be constantly pitted against each other. They can coexist.
JonLP24
(29,322 posts)I wonder what that is?
Anyways I speak out against racists all the time though I'm more agnostic than atheist.
Heddi
(18,312 posts)Do you think before you type?
<img src=>
dmallind
(10,437 posts)dmallind
(10,437 posts)KKK? Christian group.
Christian Identity? Obviously another.
Where is the "atheist Identity" white nationalist group? You're lying obviously.
daaron
(763 posts)it's patently offensive. One does not choose one's race, etc: it's genetic. What religion is genetic?
Oh yeah, none of them.
cleanhippie
(19,705 posts)Here, try THIS atheist organization...
http://www.redcross.org/
They do more than any religious group.
bahrbearian
(13,466 posts)dmallind
(10,437 posts)One Jewish, one recluse who says sweet FA on this and any other issue, but has an education and career that is heavily correlated with atheism. No Christians by the way.
The largest most successful charitable event in history was conceived, launched and driven by an atheist to raise over a quarter billion over 25 years ago to help in Africa.
As for going apeshit crazy as you put it - that's more your province than mine.
I have no religious beliefs to attack.
So over all a bit of a waste of a rant really.
If no avowed Christians voted in November, it would be a Dem landslide as never seen before in history.
On Edit to get back on topic. Yes of course we should. Divisive sectarian and exclusionary slogans do not belong on official ephemera of a supposedly inclusionary and supposedly secular government.
Warpy
(110,746 posts)Seems like the good Christians are relatively stingy.
And if you believe in a god, you are a theist, not an agnostic. Agnostics allow there might be one but don't know.
Curmudgeoness
(18,219 posts)you might be able to say that "atheists" do not scour the globe looking for people to convert by doing good deeds. But there are more nonsecular organizations doing good deeds and helping people in need than there are missionaries, and all of this is done for no other purpose than to help. There is no underlying mission. Not so with the Christian missionaries who have conversion on their minds.
Fumesucker
(45,851 posts)Please make note of this for any future rants you might wish to post.
Oh, and welcome to DU, I hope you enjoy your stay!
skepticscott
(13,029 posts)once they sensed genuine and fact-based opposition to their ranting. They'll fit right in with the other intellects here among religionistas and apologists.
mr blur
(7,753 posts)what you're talking about.
Please provide evidence of the campaign to force religious believers out of the Democratic party.
You seem like some militant christian to me (to use your rather hysterical adjective). You seem angry at something. Did someone take your toys away?
You're a christian; your belief in the supernatural does not give you the right to not be offended.
I'm an atheist; you can't attack my beliefs, because you have no idea what they are.
Heddi
(18,312 posts)re there any atheist missionaries, do atheist give to the less fortunate, or go over seas to Africa etc to help with education, sickness and disease like Christian Missionaries do?
Yes. I am an RN, and I have participated in non-religous based medical-missions in several different countries. Google "medical mission" and you'll find HUNDREDS of secular medical groups who send MD's, RN's, RT's and other medical professionals to various countries on 6 continents to do medical work, open & staff clinics, give vaccinations, build roads, etc.
And I'm sure you've heard of the Peace Corps, Medicine Sans Frontiers (doctors without borders), etc? Those are all secular establishments founded for the betterment of 2nd and 3rd world countries.
An exceptionally large number of the medical professionals I've worked with on medical missions are atheists or agnostics. We're not going to the middle of the peruvian jungle because we're hoping for eternal salvation, we're doing it because it's the right thing to do.
Of course you know that your question was a dishonest one when you posed it, and I get the feeling you're not interested in facts or logic. But I still post it here to prove to others that your assumption that non-believers don't give to charity, don't help the poor, and don't do "mission" work (a phrase I hate when applied to secular activities) is bigoted and wrong. But you probably knew that already.
awoke_in_2003
(34,582 posts)that is the most obtuse post I have read in a long time.
Mariana
(14,830 posts)you want the In God We Trust statement to stay?
You should speak for yourself, please. Lots of Christians don't believe the government should be promoting religion.
MrModerate
(9,753 posts)Or perhaps you have a different interpretation of "attack" or "belittle."
The questions was "should we remove 'In God We Trust' from currency" and Plucketeer opined yes, because the phrase was 1) based on an imaginary being and 2) an unwanted religious influence that a Jeffersonian interpretation of the Constitution (and it doesn't get much better than that) discourages. (Admittedly I'm putting words in Pluck's mouth. My bad.)
However, to call religion 'imaginary' is identical to calling it 'real,' and doesn't constitute an insult in my book.
And beliefs are not sacrosanct at DU. Those who believe that it's OK for the rich to oppress the poor, or to steal elections, or make policy based on unique attributes of their religious faith, etc., etc., are in for serious criticism, as they should be.
Don't be so sensitive, would be my advice to you.
Like annabanana said in post 6: replace it with E Pluribus Unum
Warren DeMontague
(80,708 posts)Start with putting robert williams in charge of the ten spot, and go from there.
sarcasmo
(23,968 posts)Douglas Carpenter
(20,226 posts)political capital on fighting about this. For real universal healthcare, for ending America's imperial wars in the Middle East, for creating a genuinely democratic society, for making conditions in the workplace less authoritarian, more pleasant and more democratic - For making education completely free an d available to everyone - for eradicating the sting of poverty from America forever - For guaranteeing every single elderly American and disabled American who cannot work a comfortable and secure retirement - I would fight to the last drop of blood and I will fight that fight as long as I have an ounce of life left in me. But, I wouldn't waist the life of a fly fighting over mere words. Its not worth it.
Honeycombe8
(37,648 posts)hobbit709
(41,694 posts)99Forever
(14,524 posts)... even a little, whether every other problem is solved or not. Bills and coinage are mediums of exchange to me, nothing more, nothing less.
The "If you are an Atheist you shouldn't use money because it has it on there." meme, is perhaps one of the stupidest things I have ever heard in my entire life, as are the people who say it.
Romulox
(25,960 posts)GoCubsGo
(32,053 posts)God says "Don't worship money", so they insist on putting his name on money.
Egalitarian Thug
(12,448 posts)hack89
(39,171 posts)it is a trivial matter in the grand scheme of things.
RedCappedBandit
(5,514 posts)cynatnite
(31,011 posts)Of course, it will likely never be removed. At this point in our history, we do have more important things to worry about than what's printed on our money.
Wolf Frankula
(3,595 posts)'In God We Trust, All Others Pay Cash."
Wolf Frankula
roamer65
(36,738 posts)Get rid of it. It was put on the new 2 cent coin in 1864 to improve Union morale.
Paper money didn't get it until the 1950's. \
Teddy Roosevelt tried to keep it off the Saint Gaudens $10 and $20 gold pieces in the 1900's, as he thought it was trivializing the deity. He lost that battle to Congress.
ScreamingMeemie
(68,918 posts)TroglodyteScholar
(5,477 posts)...I definitely feel alienated by it.
But I feel certain there are bigger fish to fry.
dinopipie
(84 posts)0rganism
(23,819 posts)Your premise posits, "say we solved all of the problems out there". Well, one sure way to recreate about half our current problems on the spot would be to piss off simultaneously all the nation's religious zealots by taking their precious logo off the money. Frankly, it would probably be preferable to do this before we solved all our other problems, so we don't bust up a really good thing.
It may happen someday, but not someday soon, probably not in my lifetime. Removing "In God We Trust" from the money or the UnderGod from the pledge is simply politically unfeasible.
raccoon
(31,083 posts)quaker bill
(8,222 posts)Quakers are not fond of such things.
However, as a matter of politics, I would ignore it.
madokie
(51,076 posts)When I die I'm going to the Doggie heaven where the master race goes.
I've been ripped off, lied to and seen more atrocities committed by so called religious nuts as all the rest put together
mwooldri
(10,291 posts)Certainly not in the Eurozone, and not in the British Isles.
I'd rather see Andrew Jackson removed from the $20 bill first. To me, that's more repugnant than "In God We Trust".
MNBrewer
(8,462 posts)backscatter712
(26,355 posts)What's wrong with E Pluribus Unum?
KamaAina
(78,249 posts)Al others pay cash.
ManiacJoe
(10,136 posts)Arugula Latte
(50,566 posts)nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)Jamaal510
(10,893 posts)but I agree that "In God We Trust" should be taken off of our currency. Not everyone in the U.S. of A believes in the same deity (or even believe in one at all). Non-Christians and Atheists are taxpayers, too, and are fellow Americans. Therefore, it is only ethical that the government respects the views of them as well.
DirkGently
(12,151 posts)Quantess
(27,630 posts)But, like you said, it's #99,999th on my list of 100,000 things to do.