On the back of US currency, it says “In God We Trust”. This is a nation which has separation of church and state written into its constitution. Yet “God” is written on our money? With respect to what is written on the back of our money, is “God” meant to be something that each of us are free to define?
if memory serves me right, that was placed on bills around 1954 or so. it is a relativly
late addition. It would never occur to earlier generations to put that on the all-mighty dollar.
It was done during the cold war and another example of useless beseching of the lord
to help smite our enemies. God is only good enough to slaughter our enemies, not
actually worth believing in.
Kropotkin
It first appeared on coins in 1864 and on paper money in 1957.
treasury.gov/about/education … trust.aspx
That explains why it was put there. But it does little to explain what the US Treasury’s official definition of “God” is in “In God we Trust”.
That does a good job explaining the history behind it. But it does little to explain the US Treasury’s official position as to the definition of “God” in “In God we Trust”.
it has nothing, absolutly nothing to do with the treasury dept. offical
defination of “god”. it is a political statement, written for political reasons.
Kropotkin
And is so obviously contrary to the spirit of the American constitution.
But sadly the people who print the money are not part of the democratic process.
I doubt if the US Treasury cares at all about the definition. It’s a word in the dictionary. It’s the official motto of the US. The elected government enacted laws which say it has to be on money.
The way that money works is not changed by use of the word, or the definition of the word.
It’s been challenged in court and the ruling makes perfect sense.
It means nothing. It says nothing. It is a hollow slogan, the only purpose of which is to swipe at atheism and atheist institutions.
It doesn’t constitute promotion of any particular religion, but it’s unquestionably a promotion of religious faith by the state. At the same time, it’s basically a relic of a different era of political correctness, when it was essentially treason not to believe in God since not believing in God meant you were a Communist. Nowadays it’s not like that so much, but we still haven’t quite progressed to the point where it could be a politically viable idea to remove the slogan from our currency. Political correctness still precludes that much.
Sadly true. British coins still have DG REG FD on the head. At least it does not say IND IMP anymore, at least someone had the decency to remove that!
But I remain puzzled what there is left to defend in this context.
PS
Info for the hard of thinking.
DG REG FD
Dei Gratia Regina Fidei Defensor - By the Grace of God Queen Defender of the Faith.
IND IMP
Imperator India. Emperor of India.
Perhaps it was kind of a deterrent against the enemies of the nation. 
In other words, we trust in god so god has our back so you bad guys had better watch out. As if any so-called creator of the universe would only find americans to be special. If there is a god, it must surely look on the entire universe as self-belonging. it is not a god of the u.s. it is a god of the universe.
There was a time when people were told that priests and sisters nuns whoever - belonged to god and they were protected by god - in order that they would be kept safely away from violence. It was just a cowardly deterrent. As if a god would think more of them then any of the rest of us…the mother, the father, the teacher, the poet, the garbage man…are they less special in the eyes of this god?
We don’t talk enough about the Trojan horse of ceremonial deism.
So what the fuck is left to believe in? What the fuck is left to teach our kids?
The next generation of indoctrinated slaves will be the first generation raised with the idea that everything is
just a game of power for the sake of power.
As long as man believes, that there is something out there, somewhere, that rewards
good and punishes bad deeds, something to which we have to pay attention and keep
our guard up and on edge, we can curb some of that.
Man is, therefore, not naturally bad; it is not that his nature is bad, though it is
proud and haughty and full of self-confidence. But, on the contrary, his
conscience awakens and admonishes him; there is a voice within him that chides
him:
“You are
the worst of all; this is the way you treat your fellows and fellow-citizens! You
take advantage of them, you deceive them, you rob them; what an infamous,
insolent being you are!”
For most people, the only thing you can do with this knowledge of your impotence and your
injustice, is to hide it from yourself and from others. The more you
do this, the more you succeed in living a lie; the
more you pretend not to know what you know.
But some people have a courage
of the mind and a natural courage which is rooted in the heart. They say
to themselves:
I am guilty. I know I am guilty. But what can I do about it?
They therefore rise up against themselves and try to correct their faults,
and they seek for what they do not know, and they call for what they already
have. This is the true courage and bravery of the human soul.
The human soul, on the other hand, thinks that it can change the universe and
that in changing itself it is changing all that is external to it. Its
mistake is quite understandable, because
everywhere around us we see the world in motion. In general, everything in motion
has an active force within it. Every motion, if left to its own natural tendencies,
tends to increase and accelerate itself. Everything in motion becomes
impenetrable, and this is precisely what our human soul, the self, our “I” does when
not curbed by the conscience: it becomes a world of its own, impenetrable,
self-imprisoning.