What would we think if, like the U. S. Mint did with the different states on our quarters, we had different issues of coins and currency where the motto was altered to accommodate the various denominations we have in our country? Let's see we could have
In Allah We Trust
In Jesus We Trust
In Jahveh We Trust
In G_d We Trust
In Jehovah We Trust
In Elohim, Jehovah, and the Holy Ghost We Trust
just to name a few. Do any of these offend you or make you feel uncomfortable?
Years ago, when I attempted to start religious discussions with people in Germany, the second most often response was "We all believe in the same God." Yet seldom did my discussion partner describe the same God that I did. And mine varied depending on whether I described the God of the Old Testament or the New. So when we write "In God We Trust" which God do we mean? And if we can't answer that, why stamp it on our coins and print it on our currency?
To distinguish ourselves from godless communism of course.
ReplyDeleteWell, that was historical reason or at least some claim so. But maybe a less sarcastic look.
"The Lord God giveth and the Lord God taketh away. Blessed be the name of the Lord."
I don't hear this phrase much anymore, but you hear it a lot in Pioneer literature and many other religious works. It is often used when a child suffers an untimely death. I bring it up because it encapsulates the mixture of doubt and faith that is perhaps the hallmark and best fruit of religion.
We put "In God We Trust" on our money to remind us of something beyond ourselves. Just what that something is is open to personal interpretation. That fact is clear from the Supreme Court ruling that said it did not refer to a specific personal god and therefore did not constitute the establishment of a religion.
I think the belief that there is something more than just the physical world, personal desire, the will of the majority is strongly advocated in our country.
Consider:
The declaration of independence refers to the Laws of Nature and Nature's God. It makes no characterization of this god and indeed Jefferson's beliefs were hardly standard Christian one. It also refers to certain truths being self evident including the rights to life liberty and the pursuit of happiness. We believe the general but (deliberately) vague principles of the constitution must guide our laws and even overrule the democratic will. All of these suggest that even in this secular, multicultural country a belief in something, be it nature, God, god, liberty, principles, kindness, is greater than our individual and collective will.
Is it really against these fundamental ruling principles for us to state such a belief on our money. Certainly, it should not institute any specific figure such as Jesus, Jahveh, Buddah or Allah if the text is in English (since in arabic it simply means God). But if we can't generically say God, then what is sufficiently bland as to encorporate all beliefs about that which is higher than us but still maintain the faith that there is something? There is a reason to act in terms of principles greater than our personal and collective will?
I enjoyed your comment up to the last paragraph. It sounds like you start out stating that we shouldn't put the motto on our money and then say we should. That paragraph confuses me. Atheists would certainly question (1) whether there is anything greater than mankind in which we should have faith and (2) why we should put such a vague concept on money in any case.
ReplyDeleteAnother thought I had is in reference to Jesus' holding the coin up and asking his disciples whose image was on the coin. Then he uttered words to the effect to render unto Caesar that which is Caesar's and to God that which is God. By placing the motto on our money Jesus could hold it up and ask whose NAME is on the money and give quite a different meaning to his teaching.
I didn't see the original part as being against putting it on our money, and for myself I'm fairly ambivalent. My basic points are.
ReplyDelete1. Faith in something, ranging from a personal god to principles of right and wrong, is a fairly constant part of our country, culture, and government.
2. Both the right to free expression of that faith and the right to choose not to express that faith are codified in our constitution. That is they are themselves a part of our faith system.
3. We believe in majority rule except where it interferes with those basic concepts of faith which are codified. For example, majority will which curtails freedom of personal expression.
4. It is not clear that the motto violates that principle. It can be read as a very general statement of belief. To some, God is Javeh. To others Allah. Others kindness, nature, forgiveness, freedom, justice, etc.
It is not clear to me at least, that such a broad definition violates anyones freedom to or from religion sufficiently to overrule majority will. And at the same time I can see a clear reason why many would want some general affirmation of belief that has sustained us.