DiscussMormonism.com

I posted this at MAD, but I'd be interested in your opinions here.

My mom sent me this e-mail and I'm not quite sure how I feel about this issue.

Do you believe that the word God should stay in American culture?

NBC this morning had a poll on this question. They had the highest Number of responses that they have ever had for one of their polls, and the Percentage was the same as this:

86% to keep the words, IN God We Trust and God in the Pledge of Allegiance. 14% against

That is a pretty 'commanding' public response. Now it is your turn. It is said that 86% of Americans believe the word God should stay.

Therefore, I have a very hard time understanding why there is such a mess about having 'In God We Trust' on our money and having God in the Pledge of Allegiance.

Why is the world catering to this 14%?
AMEN!

Now, first, I'm not sure of the accuracy of the e-mail. I have no idea if 86% really responded yes, but it's a pretty safe bet that a large percentage would say yes. Lets assume it was 86%.

With that said, I'm not sure that I'm comfortable letting a single dominant religious God set the rules of a country that is all about freedom of religion.

On the other hand, I can also see how this nation was founded on Christian principles and they have been pervasive in our country since it's conception. Is it fair to remove God now after He has been so prevalent in our culture for 200+ years? We're not asking that you worship the Christian God, simply that you allow the majority to acknowledge His hand in the prosperity of our nation.

What are your opinions on this?

I couldn't care less about that phrase.

It's a religious institution being supported by our government, so I'm not in favor of it.

That said, it's such a minuscule matter that appears to be so important to Christians, and there are so many bigger fish to fry. Whatever.

I agree that there are bigger fish to fry. That said, it is, ultimately, wrong for our government to privelege belief in a particular sort of divine entity, ie: a monotheistic "God". Monotheism, in the history of the entire human species, is a relative Johnny come lately, and there are plenty of polytheists in the world whose beliefs are not co-equally represented under the generic term "God".

Likewise, saying "In God We Trust" implies that the entire nation believes and trusts in God. A significant and growing percentage of the country do not, however, actually trust in God. Whether it's "wrong" for this motto to be perpetuated or not, it's certainly inaccurate.

As I thought about this more, there are PLENTY of government documents that don't say the word God on them at all. The Christians aren't clamoring to add God to any of these. They don't think that somehow God is going to remove His protective hand if we don't add them, so why is it all doom and gloom if we remove the phrase from these documents??

Also, doesn't it seem that taking an oath on the Bible, or swearing in on the Bible is too archaic for our society? As an atheist, what additional power does swearing on a Bible hold over me?

Hey Scottie,

First of all, an NBC online poll is hardly a scientific study. The way those polls work is that they ask the question on the air and then ask people to go to their website to respond to the poll. Obviously, the people who go to the website are going to be those with strong feelings on the subject. And those with strong feelings are, by and large, going to be evangelical Christians.

All that said, I have mixed feelings about this, too. Obviously the monotheistic language of our nation's civil religion does not leave much room for participation by polytheists. But in truth, there aren't really that many true polytheists out there. Even Buddhist and Hindu groups, who worship many deities, tend to see them as expressions of a single deity. Atheists also seem to be excluded, though they generally either will not care or will reinterpret the "God" language to mean something else. (As an example of how this might be accomplished, Ernst Troeltsch treated God as a metaphor for our common humanity.) As such, I don't see the monotheistic language of our civil religion as being especially offensive or discriminatory toward any particular group. Certainly it is (deliberately) vague enough to embrace pretty much all monotheists.

Moreover, there are real advantages to having a civil religion. There is always the danger, naturally, that a single dominant religious group (like the evangelicals) could appropriate the civil religion and try to force their specific beliefs on others. But as long as there are safeguards and the safeguards are enforced (as to date they have been), I think the advantages outweigh any disadvantages. There are good, rational reasons for our American ideals, for national unity and for defending our country. But adding a semi-religious sheen can add impetus, especially for the rationally disinclined. It can also domesticate religious fundamentalism.

I fail to see how taking "In God We Trust" off our coinage or "Under God" out of the pledge would take God out of American culture. It's rather annoying when people, sometimes purposefully, conflate removing endorsements of religious belief in our government with removing expressions of faith in public altogether.

While I think it an relatively minor issue, both are wrong legally and ethically and the ceremonial deism argument that protects either are contradicted by their original purpose and continued effect. Current events has given an interesting demonstration of the latter. Notice how much the flat lie about Obama's reluctance to say the pledge has a negative impact. Now imagine an atheist candidate who really didn't want to say it because it contradicts his beliefs. These phrases were meant to and continue to contribute to the notion that belief in God is fundamentally American while the opposite is not. It makes belief in God an American virtue like justice and liberty. It promotes a discriminatory environment divided into an "us" group that is under God and trusts in God, and a "them" group that does not share these qualities.

The awesome thing is that most of the people who go out of their way to oppose those who see this as a violation of the establishment clause openly support these the government using these expressions with arguments that grossly violate the constitution. The reason they are allowed is that they supposedly are so ceremonial and generic that they don't actually contain any real religious meaning. Which is why, you know, anything that threatens their hallowed status in the government prompts thousands of Christians to protest in front of government buildings praying in Jesus's blood.

I think the real question should be, can you take America out of God? I doubt it.

The word God is non-sectarian, in my opinion. Simply a universal term for the belief in a higher being, which the majority of the world's population shares, regardless of religious persuasion, or even no religious persuasion. Even some atheists are not offended by what's obviously also a cultural and traditional phenomenon.

One thing I'll hand the Kiwis, they have a great national anthem, and I think the Maori would be the first to object to the removal of that offensive word, "God". Hell, it can even make the All Blacks choke with emotion, and what's wrong with a little emotion even if "that word" is there?

God Defend New Zealand

Hello There,

Here is the Poll Question, And the Results of this Poll:

Should the motto "In God We Trust" be removed from U.S. currency? * 4132697 responses

Yes. It's a violation of the principle of separation of church and state.
34%

No. The motto has historical and patriotic significance and does nothing to establish a state religion.
66%

Not a scientific survey. Click to learn more. Results may not total 100% due to rounding.

Here is what I Voted For in this Poll:

No. The motto has historical and patriotic significance and does nothing to establish a state religion.

Here is the Link to this MSNBC Online Poll:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/10103521

So far as I know...

God on the money and God in the Pledge were ADDITIONS based on politics.
I don't wish to engage on this thread, been there, done that...don't wanna do it over again.