“IN GOD WE TRUST” Will Stay On Currency. The Case Is Thrown Out. Why Should This Be Supported?

A case about the religious US currency is struck down. The complainant claims that the famous head word IN GOD WE TRUST that is seen on the American dollars is making a huge gap of the Religious Freedom Restoration Act and is an encumbrance for people to practice their religious rights and their religious freedom.

Benita Pearson- the judge from Ohio, contradicts with the complainant, indicating that they have no cogent evidence to the above claimed and declared this:
“Plaintiffs cannot demonstrate that use of the motto on currency substantially burdens their religious exercise,” she wrote down in her judicial decision. “Credit cards and checks allow plaintiffs to conduct the bulk of their purchases with currency not inscribed with the motto. And cash-only transactions, such as garage sale or a coin-operated Laundromat, the use of the motto on the currency does not substantially burden Plaintiffs’ free exercise”

The public defender who has been the primary plaintiff and supporting the case is advocate Michael Newdow, who’s main target was to relieve the word “Under God” from the Pledge of Allegiance. Now, he wants to remove the “In God We Trust” from the American Dollar. The legal proceeding was registered in the U.S. District Court’s Northern District of Ohio in 2015. The grammatical construction is claimed to be in indecent exposure of the First and the Fifth Amendments and the Religious Freedom Restoration Act as well.

“Plaintiffs either specifically do not trust in any ‘G-d’ (with NOT trusting G-d being a basic tenet of their belief systems) or hold G-d’s name so dear and exalted that to inscribe it on a monetary instrument is deemed sinful,” claimed Newdow in his court statement.

The other side ( Judge Pearson ), had a different opinion on the plaintiff’s side and claimed the following determining factor:
“Plaintiffs argue that cash transactions force them to bear a message that they [feel] violate their religious beliefs. But as the Supreme Court stated in Wooley v. Maynard, ‘The bearer of currency is thus not required to publicly advertise the national motto. ‘Furthermore, Plaintiffs’ other concerns, that they may be subject to peer pressure on ridicule, or that their children may question their beliefs, are unlike the choice between a ‘basic benefit and a core belief’ described in the Supreme Court’s case law.”

In the meantime while the church and the state separation has been one of the state’s fundamental principles, a few experts rendered their own determining factors along the subject matter.
“Congress shall pass no law respecting an establishment of religion. It doesn’t matter if it violates free will or not. The words “In God We Trust” respects an establishment of religion. On that grounds it should be stricken from government currency.”

“The phrase “separation of church and state” is a simplistic and misleading representation of an intent of the founding father. Their goal was to foster, nourish, and encourage religious belief in God (as opposed to belief in no God) because they correctly believed that people who think they will someday return and report to their creator are much more likely to be peaceful, loving, thoughtful, forgiving, courteous, etc than people who do not hold such a belief.

History is proving the correctness of their perception. All the stats say we are becoming less and less believers in God and they also clearly show our slow decent into rudeness, selfishness, greed and violence. Some will say there is no connection, they need to think that through very carefully”.

Image Source: http://dailyreportusa.com/