# "In God We Trust" back in the news **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [July 15, 2000, 6:43am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/in-god-we-trust-back-in-the-news/25650 "2000-07-15T06:43:22Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![tracer](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/tracer/32/20578_2.png) [@tracer](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tracer)\ **Post date:** [July 15, 2000, 6:43am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/in-god-we-trust-back-in-the-news/25650/1 "2000-07-15T06:43:22Z")
Recently, the Colorado Board of Education in Denver considered displaying the motto “In God We Trust” in public schools. Unlike the Ten Commandments or prayers after a football game, “In God We Trust” has the political force behind it of being the _official_ U.S. motto. This makes it much tougher for a Federal court to declare its display in a school as Unconstitutional, without implicating its display on U.S. currency as also being Unconstitutional. This may be just the test-case we need for “In God We Trust”. This will force the Federal courts, once and for all, to look the religious nature of this motto _straight_ in the face, and finally get the Supreme Court to stop denying Certiorari to cases involving “In God We Trust.” (The Supreme Court has denied every appeal of previous suits to get “In God We Trust” off U.S. money.) ---
**Author:** ![Joe\_Cool](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/ecb155/32.png) [@Joe\_Cool](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Joe_Cool)\ **Post date:** [July 15, 2000, 9:03am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/in-god-we-trust-back-in-the-news/25650/2 "2000-07-15T09:03:57Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by tracer \* > **…Unlike the Ten Commandments or prayers after a football game, “In God We Trust” has the political force behind it of being the _official_ U.S. motto…** I could be mistaken, but I believe “E pluribus unum” (translates as “One, From many”, indicating a single nation composed of several states) is the official motto of the U.S., not “In God we trust”. I’m sure a dozen people will rush to correct me if I’m wrong. ---
**Author:** ![DSYoungEsq](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/c6cbf5/32.png) [@DSYoungEsq](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DSYoungEsq)\ **Post date:** [July 15, 2000, 2:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/in-god-we-trust-back-in-the-news/25650/3 "2000-07-15T14:21:52Z")
It might be noted that the 6th Circuit Court of Appeals has granted the request of the State of Ohio for a review by the whole court of the ruling that the State’s motto (“In God All Things Are Possible”) is unconstitutional. ---
**Author:** ![tracer](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/tracer/32/20578_2.png) [@tracer](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tracer)\ **Post date:** [July 15, 2000, 5:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/in-god-we-trust-back-in-the-news/25650/4 "2000-07-15T17:10:28Z")
Joe\_Cool wrote: > [@](#): > > I could be mistaken, but I believe “E pluribus unum” (translates as “One, From many”, indicating a single nation composed of several states) is the official motto of the U.S., not “In God we trust”. > > I’m sure a dozen people will rush to correct me if I’m wrong. 36 USC 302: “’‘In God we trust’’ is the national motto.” ---
**Author:** ![zero](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/z/a88e57/32.png) [@zero](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/zero)\ **Post date:** [July 15, 2000, 6:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/in-god-we-trust-back-in-the-news/25650/5 "2000-07-15T18:25:30Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by tracer \* > \*\*Joe\_Cool wrote: > > > [@](#): > > > > I could be mistaken, but I believe “E pluribus unum” (translates as “One, From many”, indicating a single nation composed of several states) is the official motto of the U.S., not “In God we trust”. > > > > I’m sure a dozen people will rush to correct me if I’m wrong. > > 36 USC 302: “’‘In God we trust’’ is the national motto.” > > \*\* Keep in mind that it became the national motto only about 40 years ago during the height of the cold war. I believe it used to be “E pluribus unum” previously. [http://www.ustreas.gov/opc/opc0011.html](http://www.ustreas.gov/opc/opc0011.html) ---
**Author:** ![dixiechiq](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/57b2e6/32.png) [@dixiechiq](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/dixiechiq)\ **Post date:** [July 15, 2000, 6:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/in-god-we-trust-back-in-the-news/25650/6 "2000-07-15T18:39:35Z")
according to the world almanac and book of facts congress designated “in god we trust” as the u.s. national motto in 1956. previously, in 1955, congress had ordered it placed on all paper money and all coins. could it pass constitutional muster?? doesn’t seem likely. it would be nice if the supreme court would give it it’s day in court though. ---
**Author:** ![heyjoe](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/a587f6/32.png) [@heyjoe](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/heyjoe)\ **Post date:** [July 15, 2000, 7:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/in-god-we-trust-back-in-the-news/25650/7 "2000-07-15T19:03:53Z")
Here’s the catch: the school board only made a SUGGESTION that the words be posted in schools, and left it up to individual schools whether or not to post it. Because it isn’t an actual rule, it can’t really be challenged on constitutional grounds above the level of individual schools. chris ---
**Author:** ![tracer](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/tracer/32/20578_2.png) [@tracer](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tracer)\ **Post date:** [July 15, 2000, 7:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/in-god-we-trust-back-in-the-news/25650/8 "2000-07-15T19:35:24Z")
True, the Colorado schools are not required to display the motto. However, the moment one of them _does_ display the motto, the ACLU is going to file suit to get it declared unconstitutional. So we’ll have to wait a little while before we get our Test Case. Incidentally, one news clip I watched mentioned that pinning a dollar bill up to a school bulletin board face-down, so that “IN GOD WE TRUST” is showing, would be sufficient to test the Consitutionality of the motto. ---
**Author:** ![Jello](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/f05b48/32.png) [@Jello](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jello)\ **Post date:** [July 21, 2000, 7:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/in-god-we-trust-back-in-the-news/25650/9 "2000-07-21T19:08:05Z")
In the Atlanta Journal-Constitution, columnist Tom Teepen wrote a column about this, saying it was wrong and stuff. The next day some Christian supremacist wrote the paper saying that “Colorado put God above Godless laws” and that Teepen should “be run out of the country” as a threat to the security of our nation. Well now…looks like _somebody_ forgot to take their Prozac and read their Constitution…but anyway. “In God We Trust” was first put on the money by Treasury Secretary Salmon Portland Chase in 1864. What I’m wondering is, what is the constitutionality of that and why has it never been challenged? ---
**Author:** ![jmullaney](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/85e7bf/32.png) [@jmullaney](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jmullaney)\ **Post date:** [July 21, 2000, 7:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/in-god-we-trust-back-in-the-news/25650/10 "2000-07-21T19:29:53Z")
You know, since money is the root of all even, I don’t think real Christians would want it on money… Kind of gives others the wrong idea. But, oh, the posers… ---
**Author:** ![jmullaney](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/85e7bf/32.png) [@jmullaney](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jmullaney)\ **Post date:** [July 21, 2000, 7:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/in-god-we-trust-back-in-the-news/25650/11 "2000-07-21T19:31:00Z")
even? Er, I meant evil! ---
**Author:** ![Gaudere](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/e495f1/32.png) [@Gaudere](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gaudere)\ **Post date:** [July 21, 2000, 7:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/in-god-we-trust-back-in-the-news/25650/12 "2000-07-21T19:39:28Z")
The _love_ of money is the root of all evil, jmullaney–at least according to the Bible. ---
**Author:** ![Jodi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/7feea3/32.png) [@Jodi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jodi)\ **Post date:** [July 21, 2000, 7:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/in-god-we-trust-back-in-the-news/25650/13 "2000-07-21T19:47:59Z")
We already did a pretty thorough discussion of “In God We Trust;” I’m sure you could find it in the archives. “In God We Trust” was placed on coins during the civil war. It was placed on folding money in the 1950s. Many of the numerous legal cases dealing with it on money were cited in the previous thread. Suffice it to say that several courts have looked at the issue, and none (to my knowledge) have found it unconstitutional. I’m fairly certain that the reasoning for why it isn’t unconstitutional in the context of money would transfer, so that for the same reasons it would not be unconstitutional if posted in or on a school. Of course, if you aren’t convinced by the rationale in the former case (and several posters were not), you probably won’t be convinced of it in the latter case. Anyway, all the cites are in the earlier thread. Oh, and the Supreme Court can and does tacitly “rule” on issues by refusing to look at them. That’s what’s happened in the context of IGWT. It’s not that they haven’t had the opportunity to review such a case, it’s that they have refused to, which might indicate that, in their eyes at least, IGWT is pretty clearly constitutional. ---
**Author:** ![Esprix](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/esprix/32/7899_2.png) [@Esprix](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Esprix)\ **Post date:** [July 21, 2000, 8:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/in-god-we-trust-back-in-the-news/25650/14 "2000-07-21T20:11:55Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by jmullaney \* > > You know, since money is the root of all {evil}… Actually, that’s a popular misquote - it’s the love of money that is the root of all evil. Esprix ---
**Author:** ![jmullaney](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/85e7bf/32.png) [@jmullaney](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jmullaney)\ **Post date:** [July 21, 2000, 8:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/in-god-we-trust-back-in-the-news/25650/15 "2000-07-21T20:18:14Z")
Yes, yes. But without man’s love for it, money is only stone (and/or paper). It is the love of these round, flat stones which give them the intrinsic value we call money. ---
**Author:** ![Gaudere](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/e495f1/32.png) [@Gaudere](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gaudere)\ **Post date:** [July 21, 2000, 8:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/in-god-we-trust-back-in-the-news/25650/16 "2000-07-21T20:44:38Z")
'Sprix, you’re too late…I already brought that up. 😉 Good to see my GDer’s are swift as ever to correct misquotes and factual errors, though. jmullaney, I don’t think anyone “loves” money (well, I _really_ like the new Sackie–but we’re just friends. 😉 ), although they may love what money represents: power, security, luxury, etc. Money has no intrinsic value; it is only a representation of the value of other things. That’s like saying “you love house deeds” because you love the idea of having a home of your own. And you wouldn’t claim that it is the love of the deeds that gives the house deeds their value–it is the fact that (almost) all have agreed that that scrap of paper represents a house. (BTW, money is _not_ stones unless you are talking about certain islanders! It is made of metal and paper and concepts and trust! I know you are using a little artistic license here, but it’s starting to drive me nuts to hear money called “round, flat stones.”) ---
**Author:** ![Unauthorized\_Cinnamon](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/bc8723/32.png) [@Unauthorized\_Cinnamon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Unauthorized_Cinnamon)\ **Post date:** [July 21, 2000, 8:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/in-god-we-trust-back-in-the-news/25650/17 "2000-07-21T20:50:52Z")
People for the American Way recently set out the precedents on this type of religious speech in an open letter to the Lumpkin County School Board in Georgia. The whole letter is here: [http://www.pfaw.org/news/press//show.cgi?article=963861980](http://www.pfaw.org/news/press//show.cgi?article=963861980) In relevant part: > [@](#): > > . . . it would also be unconstitutional for the school district to post the “In God We Trust” poster in its classrooms and other areas. When these words are directed at young school children in their schools, by their schools, they send an impermissible message of government endorsement of religion. The Supreme Court has long distinguished between speech in general public settings and religious speech directed at public school students. Government-endorsed religious speech is constitutionally problematic in any setting, but it creates particular First Amendment concerns in primary and secondary schools because “[s]tudents in such institutions are impressionable and their attendance is involuntary.” Edwards v. Aguillard, 482 U.S. 578, 584 (1987). Accord, Lee v. Weisman, 505 U.S. 577, 592 (1992). Just last month, in Doe v. Santa Fe Independent School District, 2000 US LEXIS 4154 (June 19, 2000), the Court reaffirmed the principle that public schools cannot promote or endorse religion, or place students in the position of being captive audiences to religious expression. > > In addition, the courts have long distinguished what has come to be called “ceremonial deism” – such as the use of “In God We Trust” on currency – from government speech that is intended to have, or that will inevitably have, the effect of promoting religion, particularly given the context in which it occurs. See, e.g., ACLU of Ohio v. Capitol Square Review and Advisory Board, 210 F.3d 703, 719-23 (6th Cir. 2000). As several courts have recognized, the appearance of “In God We Trust” on a dollar bill has “lost through rote repetition any significant religious content.” Lynch v. Donnelly, 465 U.S. 688, 716 (1984) (Brennan, J., dissenting). This is very different from the school district’s proposed posters, particularly when the intent is to display them daily to young children in their classrooms as part of teaching “respect for the creator.” So, it appears the courts could disallow the posting in a school, but allow it to remain on currency. Funny, I still find the word “God” to have significant religious content, but I’m just an atheist, and I shouldn’t even be considered a citizen, so what does my opinion mean? ---
**Author:** ![jmullaney](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/85e7bf/32.png) [@jmullaney](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jmullaney)\ **Post date:** [July 21, 2000, 9:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/in-god-we-trust-back-in-the-news/25650/18 "2000-07-21T21:09:31Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Gaudere \* > **jmullaney, I don’t think anyone “loves” money …although they may love what money represents: power, security, luxury, etc.** Hey, great. Can I trade you this shiny new nickle for your dull old quarter? People love money because it is worth something. It is only worth something because other people love it also. I think it is fairly simple. > [@](#): > > That’s like saying “you love house deeds” because you love the idea of having a home of your own. Deeds are different. They are merely a legal representation of owner ship of something you would already own. Money has no intrinsic value. > [@](#): > > (BTW, money is _not_ stones unless you are talking about certain islanders! It is made of metal and paper and concepts and trust! Metal isn’t a type of stone? “a concretion of earthy or mineral matter” per Websters? Mineral, meaning ore, which in fact comes from the word for copper or bronze (old high german). ---
**Author:** ![Gaudere](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/e495f1/32.png) [@Gaudere](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gaudere)\ **Post date:** [July 21, 2000, 9:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/in-god-we-trust-back-in-the-news/25650/19 "2000-07-21T21:25:34Z")
> [@](#): > > Hey, great. Can I trade you this shiny new nickle for your dull old quarter? No, because the quarter represents 5 times the value as the nickle, therefore I can get 5 times as much “things” with it–because other people think so too. If people truly loved _money_, wouldn’t they prefer the shiny nickle? > [@](#): > > It is only worth something because other people love it also. It is worth something because other people think it can be exchanged for something they want. Just like an IOU, or a check, or a winning lottery ticket. Do people love the ticket? Or do they love what it represents? Do they love the paper and metal of money? Or do they love what it represents? > [@](#): > > Metal isn’t a type of stone? “a concretion of earthy or mineral matter” per Websters? Oh all right, but _yeesh_ is that ever counterintuitive. You don’t say “I want a stone knife” unless you want one made our of granite; you say “I want a metal knife.” I submit that one does not generally call refined metals, sulfur, mercury, etc., “stone”. And once again we’ve managed a major hijack, so I’m going to leave this alone from now on. ---
**Author:** ![tracer](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/tracer/32/20578_2.png) [@tracer](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tracer)\ **Post date:** [July 21, 2000, 9:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/in-god-we-trust-back-in-the-news/25650/20 "2000-07-21T21:40:27Z")
Gaudere wrote: > [@](#): > > If people truly loved _money_, wouldn’t they prefer the shiny nickle? They would if they were coin collectors. Really, the “love” of money will take on a whole new meaning for you when you see a bunch of neumismatists drooling over a Proof condition $4 Gold Stella from the 1860s. Heck, I get all misty-eyed looking at my common, circulated-quality antebellum Seated Liberty quarters. And not just because they don’t say “In God We Trust”, either. (Heh, I knew I could get this thread back on topic!) > [@](#): > > You don’t say “I want a stone knife” unless you want one made our of granite; you say “I want a metal knife.” I submit that one does not generally call refined metals, sulfur, mercury, etc., “stone”. I don’t generally call sulfur a “metal,” either, unless I’m discussing an electrically-conductive high-pressure allotrope of sulfur, or astrophysics (astrophysicists refer to anything in a star that isn’t hydrogen or helium as “metals”). [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/in-god-we-trust-back-in-the-news/25650.md?page=2)