Federal Lawsuit Seeks To Remove ‘In God We Trust’ From U.S. Currency (1 Viewer)

[CowboysFromHell]

http://www.patheos.com/blogs/progressivesecularhumanist/2016/01/federal-lawsuit-seeks-to-remove-in-god-we-trust-from-u-s-currency/

The right thing to do, but I doubt the courts will agree: there will be too much public backlash if this starts to get any traction (Trump will lose his mind), and the cost of replacing all of our currency would likely be prohibitive.

 

[Righetti]

Can they get rid of it in the pledge of allegiance, too?

 

[Ramsay Hunt Experience]

Can they get rid of it in the pledge of allegiance, too?

The plaintiff already tried that. He got all the way to the Supreme Court but they punted on standing.

Without reading the actual complaint, this seems like a clever and creative argument to use the RFRA and piggy-back on the Hobby Lobby ruling.

 

[joffer]

Can they get rid of it in the pledge of allegiance, too?

The plaintiff already tried that. He got all the way to the Supreme Court but they punted on standing.

Without reading the actual complaint, this seems like a clever and creative argument to use the RFRA and piggy-back on the Hobby Lobby ruling.

thats exactly what it's doing. doubt it works though. we're not there yet.

 

[Tom Servo]

http://www.patheos.com/blogs/progressivesecularhumanist/2016/01/federal-lawsuit-seeks-to-remove-in-god-we-trust-from-u-s-currency/

The right thing to do, but I doubt the courts will agree: there will be too much public backlash if this starts to get any traction (Trump will lose his mind), and the cost of replacing all of our currency would likely be prohibitive.

You mean like the other six times it was tried?

 

[Ditkaless Wonders]

Not going to impact me one way or the other.

 

[CowboysFromHell]

Can they get rid of it in the pledge of allegiance, too?

Or, just change it back to it's original form.

 

[Ditkaless Wonders]

Can they get rid of it in the pledge of allegiance, too?

Or, just change it back to it's original form.

I always found it strange that we had school children back in the day, and maybe still today, I don't know, pledging their allegiance to a changeable piece of clothe long before they reached the age of reason.

 

[Ramsay Hunt Experience]

http://www.patheos.com/blogs/progressivesecularhumanist/2016/01/federal-lawsuit-seeks-to-remove-in-god-we-trust-from-u-s-currency/

The right thing to do, but I doubt the courts will agree: there will be too much public backlash if this starts to get any traction (Trump will lose his mind), and the cost of replacing all of our currency would likely be prohibitive.

You mean like the other six times it was tried?

That's why he's not making a First Amendment claim. For better or worse, Hobby Lobby greatly expanded federal religious accommodation rights under the RFRA. If the Supreme Court rules for the Little Sisters of the Poor in the follow-up case, I think it would become very, very hard to distinguish Newdow's complaint.

 

[Statorama]

Can we just put Allahu Akbar on the currency and get this over with?

/Trump

 

[Ramsay Hunt Experience]

Can they get rid of it in the pledge of allegiance, too?

Or, just change it back to it's original form.

I always found it strange that we had school children back in the day, and maybe still today, I don't know, pledging their allegiance to a changeable piece of clothe long before they reached the age of reason.

The pledge is "voluntary", although I know that it wasn't voluntary for teachers to lead it as recently as the 90s. I don't know if that's changed.

I've always thought it was more problematic on Free Speech grounds than Establishment Clause grounds. It doesn't get less creepy to me if they remove "Under God."

 

[shadyridr]

Before looking this sounds like something that would appear on snopes

 

[The Commish]

What if "God" referred to the money itself....we'd be good then, right?

 

[CowboysFromHell]

What if "God" referred to the money itself....we'd be good then, right?

Change it to a lower case "g" then replace George Washington's face with the Flying Spaghetti Monster, and you've got a deal.

 

[The Commish]

What if "God" referred to the money itself....we'd be good then, right?

Change it to a lower case "g" then replace George Washington's face with the Flying Spaghetti Monster, and you've got a deal.

All semantics to me...I don't know why people get bent out of shape over this one way or the other

 

[Ditkaless Wonders]

What if "God" referred to the money itself....we'd be good then, right?

Change it to a lower case "g" then replace George Washington's face with the Flying Spaghetti Monster, and you've got a deal.

So just on one dollar bills then? You sir have a deal. Now, what about Lincoln's visage on the five dollar bill, Horis maybe?

 

[CowboysFromHell]

What if "God" referred to the money itself....we'd be good then, right?

Change it to a lower case "g" then replace George Washington's face with the Flying Spaghetti Monster, and you've got a deal.

So just on one dollar bills then? You sir have a deal. Now, what about Lincoln's visage on the five dollar bill, Horis maybe?

Works for me.

This is easy. What's next? Gun control, abortion, Syrian refugees. Let's make a deal!

 

[Koya]

What if "God" referred to the money itself....we'd be good then, right?

Change it to a lower case "g" then replace George Washington's face with the Flying Spaghetti Monster, and you've got a deal.

So just on one dollar bills then? You sir have a deal. Now, what about Lincoln's visage on the five dollar bill, Horis maybe?

Works for me.

This is easy. What's next? Gun control, abortion, Syrian refugees. Let's make a deal!

I thought this was all taken care of.

Abortions for some, little american flags for all!

 

[jabarony]

If it disappears tomorrow just because of a standard currency redesign, I have no issues with that. If they remove it just to cater to someone being a pain in the ###, then I'm against it.

 

[[icon]]

I think we should be able to do custom dollars.. upload any JPG and get paid in your own personalized currency within the federal template.

I'd want ShukeBux™

 

[Ditkaless Wonders]

What if "God" referred to the money itself....we'd be good then, right?

Change it to a lower case "g" then replace George Washington's face with the Flying Spaghetti Monster, and you've got a deal.

So just on one dollar bills then? You sir have a deal. Now, what about Lincoln's visage on the five dollar bill, Horis maybe?

Works for me.

This is easy. What's next? Gun control, abortion, Syrian refugees. Let's make a deal!

I thought this was all taken care of.

Abortions for some, little american flags for all!

Well alright then.

 

[Ditkaless Wonders]

I think we should be able to do custom dollars.. upload any JPG and get paid in your own personalized currency within the federal template.

I'd want ShukeBux™

My GM dollars would eat your Shuke bucks just as surely as GM himself eats all the poop.

 

[The Commish]

I think we should be able to do custom dollars.. upload any JPG and get paid in your own personalized currency within the federal template.

I'd want ShukeBux™

Any JPG of Shuke or any JPG at all? I'd be ok limiting it to just JPG of Shuke personally.

 

[Ramsay Hunt Experience]

Of course it isn't a big deal. But asking an employer to pay for health insurance that covers contraception isn't a big deal. Nobody is forcing the employer to use contraception. Or to say that contraception is good. But we apparently take microaggressions against Theists seriously now. Now, I think that's silly, but if we're going to take that seriously, then we should take into account the fact that every time an atheist uses cash to pay for his Big Gulp, he's passing along a message that explicitly endorses theism.

 

[whoknew]

Can they get rid of it in the pledge of allegiance, too?

How about we just get rid of the pledge of allegiance?

 

[dparker713]

http://www.patheos.com/blogs/progressivesecularhumanist/2016/01/federal-lawsuit-seeks-to-remove-in-god-we-trust-from-u-s-currency/

The right thing to do, but I doubt the courts will agree: there will be too much public backlash if this starts to get any traction (Trump will lose his mind), and the cost of replacing all of our currency would likely be prohibitive.

You mean like the other six times it was tried?

That's why he's not making a First Amendment claim. For better or worse, Hobby Lobby greatly expanded federal religious accommodation rights under the RFRA. If the Supreme Court rules for the Little Sisters of the Poor in the follow-up case, I think it would become very, very hard to distinguish Newdow's complaint.

I have the utmost faith that the Justices can craft an opinion to fit their views on any particular subject.

 

[The Commish]

Of course it isn't a big deal. But asking an employer to pay for health insurance that covers contraception isn't a big deal. Nobody is forcing the employer to use contraception. Or to say that contraception is good. But we apparently take microaggressions against Theists seriously now. Now, I think that's silly, but if we're going to take that seriously, then we should take into account the fact that every time an atheist uses cash to pay for his Big Gulp, he's passing along a message that explicitly endorses theism.

I'm not sure what your comparison really has to do with what's printed on currency. From the perspective you use here, I tend to agree. From my perspective, I don't see them all that similar though.

 

[dparker713]

Of course it isn't a big deal. But asking an employer to pay for health insurance that covers contraception isn't a big deal. Nobody is forcing the employer to use contraception. Or to say that contraception is good. But we apparently take microaggressions against Theists seriously now. Now, I think that's silly, but if we're going to take that seriously, then we should take into account the fact that every time an atheist uses cash to pay for his Big Gulp, he's passing along a message that explicitly endorses theism.

Well, he does have alternatives in most cases.

 

[Ramsay Hunt Experience]

Of course it isn't a big deal. But asking an employer to pay for health insurance that covers contraception isn't a big deal. Nobody is forcing the employer to use contraception. Or to say that contraception is good. But we apparently take microaggressions against Theists seriously now. Now, I think that's silly, but if we're going to take that seriously, then we should take into account the fact that every time an atheist uses cash to pay for his Big Gulp, he's passing along a message that explicitly endorses theism.

Well, he does have alternatives in most cases.

I think that's an easy argument to counter. Maybe I don't want to open myself up to identity theft every time I buy a taco.

 

[dparker713]

Of course it isn't a big deal. But asking an employer to pay for health insurance that covers contraception isn't a big deal. Nobody is forcing the employer to use contraception. Or to say that contraception is good. But we apparently take microaggressions against Theists seriously now. Now, I think that's silly, but if we're going to take that seriously, then we should take into account the fact that every time an atheist uses cash to pay for his Big Gulp, he's passing along a message that explicitly endorses theism.

Well, he does have alternatives in most cases.

I think that's an easy argument to counter. Maybe I don't want to open myself up to identity theft every time I buy a taco.

I think if they take the case, they'll just go back to the pledge and ten commandments arguments. I can't see them outlawing "In God We Trust" and I certainly can't see a court order requiring the immediate replacement of all the bills we currently have in circulation.

 

[CowboysFromHell]

If we were designing new currency right now, today, in America, would we put any religious reference on it? Pretty sure the answer to that is no. So, it is the "right" thing to do to remove it. It just might not be all that practical, and half of the country's heads would explode, which is why it won't actually happen.

 

[dparker713]

If we were designing new currency right now, today, in America, would we put any religious reference on it? Pretty sure the answer to that is no. So, it is the "right" thing to do to remove it. It just might not be all that practical, and half of the country's heads would explode, which is why it won't actually happen.

I'm pretty sure we would actually. Christians are quite populace and also quite loud. Besides, the Supreme Court has already stated that the longevity of a practice matters regarding religious iconography used by the federal government.

 

[JuniorNB]

I am not a believer in God and I think it's ridiculous that those words being on currency bother anyone. So dumb. Who cares? I also bow my head at a wedding or funeral when asked to. Not hurting me one bit. People just want something to complain about.

 

[Ramsay Hunt Experience]

Of course it isn't a big deal. But asking an employer to pay for health insurance that covers contraception isn't a big deal. Nobody is forcing the employer to use contraception. Or to say that contraception is good. But we apparently take microaggressions against Theists seriously now. Now, I think that's silly, but if we're going to take that seriously, then we should take into account the fact that every time an atheist uses cash to pay for his Big Gulp, he's passing along a message that explicitly endorses theism.

Well, he does have alternatives in most cases.

I think that's an easy argument to counter. Maybe I don't want to open myself up to identity theft every time I buy a taco.

I think if they take the case, they'll just go back to the pledge and ten commandments arguments. I can't see them outlawing "In God We Trust" and I certainly can't see a court order requiring the immediate replacement of all the bills we currently have in circulation.

There isn't really a pledge argument. They kicked out the last case because as a non-custodial parent, Newdow lacked standing. As for the 10 Commandments cases, I'm not sure the Lemon test really applies. Again, this isn't even a First Amendment case.

I'm not making any prediction about what SCOTUS would do, or even what the 9th Circuit would do. Most judges are outcome oriented. I'm too old to be bothered by that. I'm just saying that this new line of RFRA cases makes it very difficult to essentially decide that a violation is de minimus (courts never come out and say that, but its generally the subtext in these types of cases). Particularly, as I mentioned, if the Little Sisters case expands on Hobby Lobby. I don't see a principled way to distinguish those cases. Obviously courts aren't restricted to principled reasoning.

 

[satch]

If this happens, shouldn't be long before the new bills being circulated are found to have "In God We Trust" scribbled on them.

 

[Ditkaless Wonders]

If we were designing new currency right now, today, in America, would we put any religious reference on it? Pretty sure the answer to that is no. So, it is the "right" thing to do to remove it. It just might not be all that practical, and half of the country's heads would explode, which is why it won't actually happen.

What if all he desired was that all newly minted or printed currency not employ the phrase. Faze it out over time.

 

[Amused to Death]

Of course it isn't a big deal. But asking an employer to pay for health insurance that covers contraception isn't a big deal. Nobody is forcing the employer to use contraception. Or to say that contraception is good. But we apparently take microaggressions against Theists seriously now. Now, I think that's silly, but if we're going to take that seriously, then we should take into account the fact that every time an atheist uses cash to pay for his Big Gulp, he's passing along a message that explicitly endorses theism.

Well, he does have alternatives in most cases.

I think that's an easy argument to counter. Maybe I don't want to open myself up to identity theft every time I buy a taco.

I think if they take the case, they'll just go back to the pledge and ten commandments arguments. I can't see them outlawing "In God We Trust" and I certainly can't see a court order requiring the immediate replacement of all the bills we currently have in circulation.

I wouldn't be in favor of replacing currency in circulation, but removing it going forward seems logical.

 

[Amused to Death]

I am not a believer in God and I think it's ridiculous that those words being on currency bother anyone. So dumb. Who cares? I also bow my head at a wedding or funeral when asked to. Not hurting me one bit. People just want something to complain about.

I'm not bothered by it at all, but I think the inclusion of it is unnecessary.

 

[tonydead]

http://www.patheos.com/blogs/progressivesecularhumanist/2016/01/federal-lawsuit-seeks-to-remove-in-god-we-trust-from-u-s-currency/

The right thing to do, but I doubt the courts will agree: there will be too much public backlash if this starts to get any traction (Trump will lose his mind), and the cost of replacing all of our currency would likely be prohibitive.

We continually replace old currency anyway, doesn't have to be overnight.

I don't know if the word god will ever be dropped, but, the definition of god will eventually evolve so that it becomes mute anyway.

 

[Ditkaless Wonders]

After this can we get Roger Goodell's name removed from footballs?

 

[CowboysFromHell]

If we were designing new currency right now, today, in America, would we put any religious reference on it? Pretty sure the answer to that is no. So, it is the "right" thing to do to remove it. It just might not be all that practical, and half of the country's heads would explode, which is why it won't actually happen.

I'm pretty sure we would actually. Christians are quite populace and also quite loud. Besides, the Supreme Court has already stated that the longevity of a practice matters regarding religious iconography used by the federal government.

Theocracies suck. Ask Saudi Arabia. The Founding Fathers understood that. Many "loud Christians" in America these days do not.

 

[tonydead]

I am not a believer in God and I think it's ridiculous that those words being on currency bother anyone. So dumb. Who cares? I also bow my head at a wedding or funeral when asked to. Not hurting me one bit. People just want something to complain about.

There is a pretty good argument that the negatives of religion out weigh the positives. That causes some people to take a stance against religion and having religion take a part in government is a pretty big deal if that's what you believe.

 

[CowboysFromHell]

If this happens, shouldn't be long before the new bills being circulated are found to have "In God We Trust" scribbled on them.

And on lots of Starbucks cups.

 

[JuniorNB]

I am not a believer in God and I think it's ridiculous that those words being on currency bother anyone. So dumb. Who cares? I also bow my head at a wedding or funeral when asked to. Not hurting me one bit. People just want something to complain about.

There is a pretty good argument that the negatives of religion out weigh the positives. That causes some people to take a stance against religion and having religion take a part in government is a pretty big deal if that's what you believe.

It's nonsense. It's been there all along and does no harm. Just people looking for something to b!tch about. Same reason we aren't supposed to say Merry Christmas anymore. Just ridiculous. And this is coming from an atheist.

 

[lakerstan]

Or we just abandon physical currency altogether and use debit cards....

 

[Ditkaless Wonders]

I am not a believer in God and I think it's ridiculous that those words being on currency bother anyone. So dumb. Who cares? I also bow my head at a wedding or funeral when asked to. Not hurting me one bit. People just want something to complain about.

There is a pretty good argument that the negatives of religion out weigh the positives. That causes some people to take a stance against religion and having religion take a part in government is a pretty big deal if that's what you believe.

It's nonsense. It's been there all along and does no harm. Just people looking for something to ##### about. Same reason we aren't supposed to say Merry Christmas anymore. Just ridiculous. And this is coming from an atheist.

An Atheist sure, but one with a heart of gold, surrounded by creamy nugget, and coated in chewy caramel, all topped off with swirls of milk chocolate.

 

[JuniorNB]

I am not a believer in God and I think it's ridiculous that those words being on currency bother anyone. So dumb. Who cares? I also bow my head at a wedding or funeral when asked to. Not hurting me one bit. People just want something to complain about.

There is a pretty good argument that the negatives of religion out weigh the positives. That causes some people to take a stance against religion and having religion take a part in government is a pretty big deal if that's what you believe.

It's nonsense. It's been there all along and does no harm. Just people looking for something to ##### about. Same reason we aren't supposed to say Merry Christmas anymore. Just ridiculous. And this is coming from an atheist.

An Atheist sure, but one with a heart of gold, surrounded by creamy nugget, and coated in chewy caramel, all topped off with swirls of milk chocolate.

Quit flirting

 

[CowboysFromHell]

Or we just abandon physical currency altogether and use debit cards....

At least get rid of pennies.

 

[Politician Spock]

They should just change it from "In God We Trust" to "We're So Gullible". They both say the same thing.

 

[Ramsay Hunt Experience]

Again, it's funny how the "it's no big deal" argument only applies to atheists. To a not insubstantial segment of the country, its apparently a big deal if an employer is even tangentially associated with its employee receiving birth control. Its a big deal for a pharmacist to have to sell condoms if he or she has a religious objection to birth control. Its a big deal that Kim Davis has to have her signature on a license for gay people to marry. These are religious objections, after all, so they can't be trivial. But they are trivial. There is no intrusion into the core of religious freedom, which is the freedom of conscience and worship.