Violation of church and state?

Why is it that the words "in god we trust" and "one nation under god" remain in our governments currency and pledge of allegiance. It's an obvious violation of the separation of church and state. Also it offends many people who are left out due to their beliefs.(atheists) Im just wondering why it's been debated for so long and yet it remains the same?

6 Answers

Relevance
  • Best Answer

    The Supreme Court ruled many years ago that those words can remain on money because they do not advocate any specific religion, but merely refer to a higher being.

    The motto was first challenged in Aronow v. United States in 1970, but the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit ruled: "It is quite obvious that the national motto and the slogan on coinage and currency 'In God We Trust' has nothing whatsoever to do with the establishment of religion. Its use is of patriotic or ceremonial character and bears no true resemblance to a governmental sponsorship of a religious exercise.

    The Supreme Court later the Supreme Court upheld the motto because it has "lost through rote repetition any significant religious content"

    I disagree, but that is what the court ruled.

  • Frank
    Lv 7
    8 years ago

    These words were added fairly recently, during the Eisenhower administration.

    The bottom line is that some people don't really believe in the non-establishment clause and try to explain it away by saying that as long as you don't say "which" God, you're not making any laws regarding "an establishment of religion".

    And, what politician is going to run on the "get God out of our money" platform? Plenty are pro-Constitution, but only selectively so.

  • Anonymous
    8 years ago

    Separation of church and state refers only to the state(govt) being disallowed from creating or obligating the people to a specific religious belief. BTW under god was added to the pledge during the cold war, out of fear.

  • 8 years ago

    Because of two things:

    1. Seperation of church and state is incorrectly used to remove religious aspects of government, when in actuality it was intended to prevent the government from creating or enforcing a national religion.

    2. It doesn't leave out any religion, as the phrases you mention are ambiguous in their meaning of God. It doesn't say "In the Judeo-Christian God, Yahweh, We Trust." Therefore, it is not specific - as for agnostics and atheists, one could say that the universe, science, or the self is the "God" in which one trusts.

  • How do you think about the answers? You can sign in to vote the answer.
  • 3 years ago

    they have the entire marvelous to construct those huts of their backyard. it fairly is not any longer a public materials, so as that they do no longer look to be violating separation of church and state. they're additionally no longer digging into the floor or construction large platforms so zoning isn't an argument. you need to ***** with regard to the noise from the events yet this is approximately it.

  • Anonymous
    8 years ago

    You obviously have interpreted it wrong like may others.

    "...I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should 'make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof,' thus building a wall of separation between Church & State." - Thomas Jefferson

Still have questions? Get your answers by asking now.