Motto Mania: Calif. woman promotes government-endorsed ‘In God We Trust’ signs

November 28, 2011 | Filed under: In God We Trust,Views | Posted by: Rob Boston

Posting “In God We Trust” signs in city and county government buildings has become all the rage in California.

The drive is spearheaded by a Bakersfield woman named Jacquie Sullivan who persuaded officials in her town to adopt the motto and then took the crusade to other cities. The most recent town to approve the motto is Port Hueneme in Ventura County. The vote was 4-1.

Mayor Sylvia Muñoz Schnopp explained her vote in favor of the motto this way: “You see, I also do this on behalf of our men and women who defend our freedoms, those who are military veterans, reservists and active-duty personnel who live in our community.”

The only problem with that, of course, is that a motto that references God does not include all veterans or active-duty personnel. Some members of the military are non-believers. Others are involved in Wicca and Paganism and don’t recognize a traditional God concept.

In fact, the sole dissenting vote in Port Hueneme came from a veteran.

“I was born in the Bible Belt and served in the U.S. Navy to defend the rights of all Americans,” remarked councilman Ellis Green. “I’m a devout Christian. The concept of separation of church and state is real. It’s not imagined. It is not our right as a council to impose our deity on anyone.”

Good for you, Mr. Green.

As I explained to the Ventura County Star, it’s not really possible to challenge these religious postings in court. Congress adopted “In God We Trust” as the national motto in 1954 (partly in reaction to fears of “godless communism” in the Soviet Union). A few cases have been filed challenging the use of the phrase on money, but they haven’t been successful.

Federal courts have ruled that government’s use of the phrase “In God We Trust” is an acceptable form of something the courts dub “ceremonial deism” – that is, the tendency of the state to use generic religious language for nationalistic purposes.

My guess is that the courts are afraid to make a tough and unpopular call and devised ceremonial deism as a dodge. Under our Constitution, the government is supposed to be neutral on questions of theology – and yes, that includes whether God exists. Feel free to hash that out with your friends and family. Stand on a soapbox and expound on your view in a public park. Distribute fliers encapsulating your view of God. Start a website to explain it all. Join with like-minded believers (or non-believers) for fellowship.

It’s your right as an American to have an opinion about faith. The government, however, should not have one – nor should it endorse your view of theology over your neighbor’s. When the government posts “In God We Trust” in public buildings and stamps it on money, it is expressing an opinion: That God exists. That there is only one God. That this God is worthy of our trust.

The message isn’t subtle: If you agree with these statements, you are the better American, you’re the “real” American. Those who don’t are second-class citizens.

No matter how you slice it, that’s not neutrality toward religion.

9 Responses to Motto Mania: Calif. woman promotes government-endorsed ‘In God We Trust’ signs

Brian Wood November 28, 2011 - 3:10 am

Is it not obvious that Hindus, Buddhists, Wiccans, Shintoists, Taoists, Confucians, animists, agnostics, atheists and many others cannot get a fair shake in courthouses bearing this motto? We need to make that case.

dougindeap November 28, 2011 - 7:08 am

Good points well put. The government's inscription of the phrase "In God we trust" on coins and currency, as well as its addition of the words "under God" to the pledge of allegiance in 1954 and adoption of the phrase "In God we trust" as a national motto in 1956, were mistakes, which should be corrected. Under our Constitution, the government has no business proclaiming that "we trust" "In God." Some of us do, and some of us don't; each of us enjoys the freedom to make that choice; the government does not and should not purport to speak for us in this regard. Nor does the government have any business calling on its citizens to voice affirmation of a god in any circumstances, let alone in the very pledge the government prescribes for affirming allegiance to the country. The unnecessary insertion of an affirmation of a god in the pledge puts atheists and other nonbelievers in a Catch 22: Either recite the pledge with rank hypocrisy or accept exclusion from one of the basic rituals of citizenship enjoyed by all other citizens. The government has no business forcing citizens to this choice on religious grounds, and it certainly has no business assembling citizens' children in public schools and prescribing their recitation of the pledge–affirmation of a god and all–as a daily routine. But that's just me talking. The courts, on the other hand, have sometimes found ways to excuse such things, for instance with the explanation that they are more about acknowledging tradition than promoting religion per se. Draining the government's nominally religious statements or actions of religious meaning (or at least purporting to do so) and discounting them as non-religious ritual–sometimes dubbed "ceremonial deism"–is one way the courts have sometimes found them not to conflict with the First Amendment. Ordinary folks, though, commonly see things quite differently; when most read "[i]n God we trust," they think the Government is actually declaring that "we" as a people actually "trust" the actual "God" they believe in. If they truly understood it as merely a ritualistic phrase devoid of religious meaning, they would hardly get as exercised as they do about proposals to drop it. As you can imagine, those more interested in championing their religion than the constitutional principle of separation of church and state sometimes seek to exploit and expand such "exceptions" even if it requires they fake interest only in tradition.

Neal Patel November 28, 2011 - 11:53 am

What was so bad about "E Pluribus Unum"? It seems more fitting, considering that we call ourselves "The UNITED States of America".

Nancy November 29, 2011 - 7:21 am

Neal the problem is that the christian society in this country needs to be constantly reminded of what they believe and they are so insecure in their religion that they must force their beliefs on us even though their words make liars out of those of us that don't share their beliefs. If (as they say) they believe in the bible truth should be very important to them. Unfortunetly this is not so and coming up with phrases like “ceremonial deism” doesn't make it any truer.

- Kieres November 29, 2011 - 10:16 am
  
  This Christian would have absolutely no problem in jettisoning "In God We Trust" since I'm tired of my fellow Christians using God as a political whore. Plus there is that whole "taking God's name in vain" part too.
  
  - Nancy November 30, 2011 - 6:07 am
    
    Thanks Kieres. A motto for a country should have meaning for all the country. "E Pluribus Unum" says it best and truthfully.
    
Nancy November 29, 2011 - 7:28 am

On another note the congress of this great nation has just reaffirmed the in god we trust motto instead of working on our financial problems because they had to teach our President a lesson in history. See when you start basing things on lies you have to keep lying and it takes away from spending time doing something positive like putting America back to work. We have alot of men and women coming back from war and the time congress spent on reaffirming this motto is not going to help them get a job or keep a roof over their heads. But our lie of a motto is still secure.

exbrit69 November 29, 2011 - 11:41 pm

Do Christians trust God when they get sick or do they visit the doctor, dentist or hospital? Do Christians put their trust in God at night or do they lock and bolt their doors? Do Christians trust their God so that they never buy insurance? Do Christians put their trust in God when they cross the street or do they look? What a bunch of total hypocrites

exbrit69 December 1, 2011 - 6:00 pm

"In God we trust" What a load of rubbish. Do Christians trust him enough to not take out any insurance? To not bother looking when they cross the street? To not go a dentist, doctor or hospital when they are sick? To leave their doors unlocked at night? As we are wont to say in the UK: What a load of cobbler's.