31.1 F
Spokane
Thursday, February 27, 2025
spot_img
HomeNewsAtheists lose latest legal fight over ‘In God We Trust’

Atheists lose latest legal fight over ‘In God We Trust’

Date:

Related stories

Trump’s antisemitism order faces backlash in Spokane

Spokane Jews react to Trump's antisemitism executive order, sparking debate over its impact on free speech, student protection and Israel.

NAOMI community fulfills the Surgeon General’s parting prescription

NAOMI helps Spokane women heal from trauma and addiction through community support, breaking the isolation linked to health and societal challenges.

Trump’s pick of Paula White-Cain for Faith Office sparks controversy

Trump's pick of Pentecostel Pastor Paula White-Cain to lead the White House Faith Office sparks uproar within his Christian base of conservative Calvinists.

Oldest Black church in Washington seeks to maintain its vital ministry

Spokane's Calvary Baptist Church, founded in 1890, celebrates its 135th anniversary. The oldest Black church in Washington, it remains vital in faith and community service.

Kootenai libraries approved all mature book relocations, except the Bible.

Kootenai libraries move 16 young adult books to mature book section under Idaho’s new law. Authors of these books express their opinion. So far, only Bible request denied.

Our Sponsors

spot_img

INGODWETRUST[Eds: The word “tenant” in the 10th paragraph is in the original document.]

(RNS) Atheists lost their case against the “In God We Trust” motto on the nation’s currency Wednesday (May 28).

It’s a battle they have lost several times before, as court after court has affirmed that printing and engraving the country’s motto on its money does not violate the U.S. Constitution.

The plaintiffs, a group that included humanists and minor children, argued before a federal appeals court that the words amount to a government endorsement of religion, disallowed by the First Amendment’s Establishment Clause. They further held that, forced to carry around a religious statement in their pockets and pocketbooks, their constitutionally guaranteed right to freely exercise religion is being violated.

But the three-judge panel of the 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in New York noted that the courts have long looked at the motto not so much as the entanglement of government in religion, but as a more general statement of optimism and a “reference to the country’s religious heritage.”

The decision in Newdow v. United States of America pleased those who have worked to protect religious expression in the public sphere. “Americans need not be forced to abandon their religious heritage simply to appease someone’s animosity toward anything that references God,” said Rory Gray of the Alliance Defending Freedom.

But it frustrated those who see religion creeping into places where they believe church and state should be separated. The group American Atheists, which was not a party to the suit, said the court’s reasoning — based on historical acceptance of the motto — is faulty.

“Tradition is a terrible excuse for any behavior,” said American Atheists spokesman David Muscato. “If we allowed ‘tradition’ to guide our views, what else would we uphold — slavery, denying the vote to women?”

“The simple fact is that ‘In God We Trust’ has no rightful place on currency in the United States, a country with separation of church and state, and it never has,” he continued.

Atheists have seen a spate of unfavorable rulings lately. Last week a federal court in Kentucky rejected atheists’ suit against the IRS, for the many breaks and privileges it offers churches and religious organizations. And in the 5-4 Greece v. Galloway ruling earlier this month, the Supreme Court affirmed that government bodies may convene meeting with highly sectarian prayers.

The 2nd Circuit also questioned the atheists’ objection to money that forces them “to bear on their persons … a statement that attributes to them personally a perceived falsehood that is the antithesis of the central tenant of their religious system.” The atheists had reminded the court that the Religious Freedom Restoration Act requires the government to prove that it has gone to great pains to avoid so burdening religious expression.

“We respectfully disagree that appellants have identified a substantial burden upon their religious practices or beliefs,” the judges responded.

Lauren Markoe
Lauren Markoe
Lauren Markoe covered government and features as a daily newspaper reporter for 15 years before joining the Religion News Service staff as a national correspondent in 2011. She previously was Washington correspondent for The State (Columbia, S.C.)

Our Sponsors

spot_img
spot_img
0 0 votes
Article Rating
Subscribe
Notify of
guest
0 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
spot_img
0
Would love your thoughts, please comment.x
()
x