Posted on Dec 16, 2015
Atheist Marine against "In God We Trust" on our Currency?
40.2K
327
278
12
10
2
Anonymous Minnesota "Marine" and atheist commences lawsuit to remove "In God We Trust" from our currency. Lawsuit commenced December 15, 2015. What do you think? Lawsuit is here: https://drive.google.com/file/d/0BwVkb6p7OhGicXg3Ym1JY3hfM3c/view
Posted in these groups: 
Marine Corps
Marine Corps
Posted 10 y ago
Responses: 70
16
16
0
Way to go Marine!!!! In god we trust was added to our money by 1956 congress to fight the godless commies!!!! If you take the time to do some research you will find out that US wasn't founded on christianity but on freedom of religion which covers from religion as well. If you want to read about your god do it in your church!
(16)
(0)
CPT Pedro Meza
MCPO (Join to see) - So where do you stand with the Syrian Refugee? Do you have Compassion or fear.
(0)
(0)
TSgt Kerry Hardy
Both! I have compassion for their plight but Pairs proves that a fefugee can be a terrorist....
(0)
(0)
MCPO (Join to see)
Let's see... Middle Eastern refugees looking for room at the inn...
Yeah, even as a damned atheist, I have compassion. I have more fear of Americans in suits than refugees in thobes.
Yeah, even as a damned atheist, I have compassion. I have more fear of Americans in suits than refugees in thobes.
(1)
(0)
MSgt Earl King
TSgt Kerry Hardy - Ok, I get you comment about fefuggee's but what is your opinion on refugees?
(0)
(0)
15
13
2
If he doesn't want currency with the motto on it I will be glad to take it off of his hands. No one is forcing him to take it or to read what it says on it. People who file lawsuits like this are mostly assholes and idiots.
(15)
(2)
LCpl Donald Hall
Yes Sgt. and this country has to many;each county in the
usa should have gallows, then this crap would stop!!!
Love it or LEAVE
usa should have gallows, then this crap would stop!!!
Love it or LEAVE
(0)
(1)
2LT (Join to see)
Would you want the New York State flag or old glory flying above the 911 Memorial to say "Allah Akbar" on it? Same thing. Or doesn't belong there.
(0)
(0)
Maj John Bell
2LT (Join to see) - I don't give a rip if "In God we trust" is on the currency or not. But no, a flag with "Allah Akbar" on it fling over the September 11, memorials is not the same thing.
(0)
(0)
16
13
3
I think the problem many have with the First Amendment is that it provides for "Freedom OF religion" not "Freedom FROM religion." That is what the liberals have a difficult time understanding. They view the 1st as "prohibiting" speech about religion (or at least Christianity), and allowing any other speech, no matter how offensive. Thus, we have schools prohibiting christians, or other religions, from using their facilities, while any other groups, including atheists, are allowed to. Any political speech is allowed, UNLESS it is about GOD!!! In which case it is prohibited. That is NOT what the First Amendment is about, or what it was intended as. The First was not about LIMITING religious speech, it was about preserving it.
(16)
(3)
CPT Pedro Meza
Just remember that Jesus was Jewish and the bible was written at the request of the last Roman emperor 385 AD. Interesting that I see many Atheist practicing the lesson of the Jewish Man named Jesus yet those that claim religion hide behind the bible.
(0)
(0)
12
12
0
Considering that the phrase wasn't added to currency until the mid 1950s, it really only makes sense to take it off and replace it with our country's original motto: E Pluribus Unum: Out of Many, One.
(12)
(0)
Cpl Benjamin Long
I agree.... This Religious BS is unnecessary and was never there in the first place...
(6)
(0)
Cpl Jason Stone
Yep. We can even use mirror arguments to the original change!
The switch was done in the 50s as a fear response to the "Godless Communist Menace (tm)".
Now we can make the more rational response and change it to show Daesh et al that religion is a faulty foundation for a nation-state and building a equal plurality from all peoples is the real base of our Constitution and nation.
The switch was done in the 50s as a fear response to the "Godless Communist Menace (tm)".
Now we can make the more rational response and change it to show Daesh et al that religion is a faulty foundation for a nation-state and building a equal plurality from all peoples is the real base of our Constitution and nation.
(1)
(0)
11
10
1
"Marine Doe" should be ashamed of himself Sgt Mathew Meyer. If he doesn't like what's printed on money he doesn't have to read it. He would actually violate the right to free speech/free press to require the United States, which is primarily a Christian nation, to forcibly remove printed language just because the minority chooses not to believe in Christianity. What if my religion does believe in the number 10, or 20? should I sue to have those number removed from all currency also? This is a frivolous suit, and it will not succeed.
(11)
(1)
PVT Robert Gresham
Cpl Benjamin Long - I think that you are comparing apples and oranges. Having words printed on money does not force anyone to read the money, or to agree with what is printed on it. This is still a country that allows each person to worship as they see fit, and Christians certainly do not worship the dollar....(okay maybe some do..). The printed words are a motto, and only that. Money is not blessed, prayed over, or used in communion. It's getting late.... more next time. Thanks for the discussion !!
(0)
(0)
Cpl Benjamin Long
PVT Robert Gresham - I think you are missing the point of ritualism which is a key concept of religion... why don't Jews eat pork...because pf Levitical laws.. can't even touch it... you are asking people to perform a ritual ie.. mark of the beast from revelations....
(0)
(0)
1SG Ken Quire
SGT Robert Gresham, your comment was not out of line. Many would like you to think they are; however, you have rights as well. I contend all people can believe what they want to believe, but the political correctness movement desires for opinions that offend others to be silenced. If those on the other side of the coin can voice their opinions and attempt to make the rights of others appear to be an infringement of their rights, then comments that are benign that have the potential to be less-than-gladly-heard must be made. I believe I will file a lawsuit to remove the number 55 from highways, as 66 is two of the three numbers listed as the mark of the beast. 55 becomes offensive when one subtracts 11 of the 12 days of Christmas from the number 66. Loose connections and the desire to impose one's will on others can go as far as allowed. Good post.
(0)
(0)
PVT Robert Gresham
@SSgt Randy Saulsberry, not even a persuasive argument from you? Just throw up a down vote?.......Care to share the reason?? You've been on RP long enough to know how it works. That is really bush league.
(0)
(0)
8
8
0
These people are loons. It is so simple yet you are stoned for saying it. We are guaranteed the freedom of religion, not the freedom from religion. Every time the Government mentions God in anyway shape or form we get this again...What these losers need to understand is that if you don't believe in a God then you are free to ignore the words that you think offend you. For me I always think "God , what ever you believe him or her to be".
(8)
(0)
SFC Everett Oliver
SSG Matthew Adkins - Show me where in the Constitution where it says you are guaranteed freedom from religion. And since when can someone in the government not mention God? You are now telling me that if you are connected with the government you have to give up your 1St Amendment rights. And that also means that we have to do away with the entire Chaplin Corps. You don't want to hear someone mention God, sorry for you, but every American has the right to say it and to proclaim their own religion. You do have the right to not listen to it. But you can't make anyone not talk about it....
(0)
(0)
SFC Everett Oliver
SSG Matthew Adkins -
The Government is the people. But let's call the government a separate entity. Not one time can I come up with that the government made any law that even came close to establishing any religion. Respecting religion yes, establishing, no. And if there is such a case I'm certain it's been taken care of.
The Government is the people. But let's call the government a separate entity. Not one time can I come up with that the government made any law that even came close to establishing any religion. Respecting religion yes, establishing, no. And if there is such a case I'm certain it's been taken care of.
(0)
(0)
SFC Everett Oliver
SSG Matthew Adkins - There is no one forced to have a school prayer. Fact is it seems to me that prayer has been chased out of the classroom and even has cost sports coaches their jobs. "So help me God". I wonder is there not an alternate oath offered? Seems to me there is.... Fact remains that our government has not established any religion. SO therefore you have not had religion forced upon you by our government. You are however still free to worship as you please.
(0)
(0)
6
6
0
6
6
0
1SG Ken Quire
LCpl Jesse Foust - LCpl Jesse Foust, good job researching; however, it goes back a bit further. https://www.treasury.gov/about/education/Pages/in-god-we-trust.aspx
view auctions. find a form. get tax information at IRS.gov. see interest rate data. switch to electronic benefits. find currency and coin information. report a suspicious email or suspected fraud view budget, performance, and financial reports. have a lost or expired check reissued
(0)
(0)
SSgt Thomas L.
1LT A. Uribe - Wikipedia has consistently shown to have more factual information about current events, history and science than many school text books. Yes, anyone can edit most articles, but there is an army of Wikipedian fact checkers who police the site, removing vandalism, correcting errors and updating it.
(1)
(0)
LCpl Jesse Foust
1SG Ken Quire - I was referring specifically to the "National motto" claim, not the phrase itself.
1LT A. Uribe - While I wouldn't use it for a scholarly article, I think it's sufficient for our uses here. You're welcome to show me the inaccuracies in that particular piece.
1LT A. Uribe - While I wouldn't use it for a scholarly article, I think it's sufficient for our uses here. You're welcome to show me the inaccuracies in that particular piece.
(0)
(0)
4
4
0
this is a valid point - as mentioned else where in this thread the motto on US currency, as well as the phrase relating to God in the Pledge of Allegiance where added in the 20th century during the Cold War.
For those who have been fed the idea that the "founding fathers' where god fearing christian men, I hate to disabuse you of that, but the historical record does not support that idea.
Madison, Adams and others had very little use for organized religion, Madison in particular, in his writings called religion one of the worst things to afflict people. His original draft of the 1st amendment was quite clear in that government should have NOTHING to do with religion in any shape or form.
While I was serving I had to deal with officers and senior NCOs who had issues with my agnostic views - at one point I had to deal with a Gunnery Sergeant who showed favoritism to Marines who went to his particular Christian church - that didn't end well for him
I don't care what your personal beliefs are - but keep them personal, they have no place secular government.
For those who have been fed the idea that the "founding fathers' where god fearing christian men, I hate to disabuse you of that, but the historical record does not support that idea.
Madison, Adams and others had very little use for organized religion, Madison in particular, in his writings called religion one of the worst things to afflict people. His original draft of the 1st amendment was quite clear in that government should have NOTHING to do with religion in any shape or form.
While I was serving I had to deal with officers and senior NCOs who had issues with my agnostic views - at one point I had to deal with a Gunnery Sergeant who showed favoritism to Marines who went to his particular Christian church - that didn't end well for him
I don't care what your personal beliefs are - but keep them personal, they have no place secular government.
(4)
(0)
4
4
0
I'm with the Marine. What was so wrong with E Pluribus Unum, In many one. I know what was wrong in the 50's during the Red Scare they changed it to make it "Objectionable" to Communist. Which is about stupid and silly in my book. I find it Objectionable and flies in the face of our Separation of Church and State. Also as a Christian I find it Objectionable Matt 22:21 Give unto Caesar what is Caesar's, Give unto God what is God's.
(4)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google