Would you rather have the actual intolerance go away, or just a symbol of it? I don’t think most people view it as intolerance even if it doesn’t express their own belief. I understand you don’t like it, but is the symbol really the important thing? There’s a whole bunch of symbolism on money, I don’t think it turns us all into warmongering Masons.
Most people don’t care, but the people who do care, care a lot.
That is why it’s on the money after all, as a slap at atheists.
What part of “The symbols reinforce the actual intolerance” are you failing to understand?
Product idea: Make a little self-inking stamp that says “All others pay cash” in a font size to fit nicely between the IGWT on paper currency and the bottom edge. I’d buy that.
Now, coming up with a way to add the same text to a coin is going to be a little more difficult. 
If the American people democratically expressed their will to have it removed, then I’d have no objection. On the other hand, if special interest groups used the courts or unelected bureaucrats to remove it against the will of the people then I’d object for the obvious reasons that such a removal would be undemocratic and could be used as a precedent to justify further attacks on democracy.
And here I always thought it was because the majority of Americans are Christian/theists. 
Personally, I’ve never fretted about it, despite the fact that I’m an agnostic/atheist. Nor have I ever felt particularly persecuted, despite the fact that my family and most of my neighbors when I grew up were pretty fervent Catholics.
I don’t agree that the symbols reinforce the intolerance. The intolerant are grasping at straws when they use it for support.
People don’t care because you aren’t trying to remove it.
You try and remove it and you’ll have a whole host of folks who do care.
Why is it always thus with the “requiring change” of whatever it is you are trying to change?
No one mentions needing this thing, you know this thing that I now want changed.
Why don’t you either acknowledge you want it changed and then explain why you’d like it changed, or leave it be?
Christians, who despise atheists.
Is that how civil rights work now?
In YOUR mind. Like Americans are all rabid butchers bent on conquest, this reality exists mainly in your own little universe and has little to do with reality.
Very well, if you can prove to me that having “In God We Trust” on our money is an actual example of intolerance which has actually caused measurable harm to any person, then I’ll support removing it.
Nonsense. All the polls show atheists as being one of the most disliked categories in the country.
Well, feel free to provide those cites. I’ve lived in this country over 50 years and can’t say I’ve ever detected this vast dislike or persecution.
No, but civil rights are not involved in the question of what the government puts on its money. You have a civil right to speak freely, but you do not have a civil right to silence the government or any part of it.
Atheists, who are arrogant.
I think the animosity of US Christians toward Muslims is probably an order of magnitude greater than that of Christians toward atheists. A very sizeable segment of the public thinks that the First Amendment does not apply to Muslims but I don’t know of anyone who doesn’t believe that you should be free to be an atheist.
Because removing it would violate 31 U.S.C. §§ 5112(d)(1) and 5114(b).
If I were a legislator, I would not vote in favor of changing the law, because I see no particular reason to do so. As a national motto, the phrase has “spiritual and psychological value” as well as an “inspirational quality.” It being valuable as is, I see no reason to change it.
But since we live in a representative democracy, I’d absolutely agree to a change favored by the majority.
I used to think it was too much trouble to remove it, but ever since they’ve been minting those state quarters and issuing new, anti-counterfeit bills, I’ve dropped that reasoning. There’s no reason god should be mentioned anywhere on our money