Adding fire to a debate that’s gone on for years, a user recently asked online for others’ thoughts on removing “In God We Trust” from American currency.
The phrase originated during the Civil War and was added to all U.S. currency in the 1950s when Congress voted it in as the new official motto of the United States, replacing “E Pluribus Unum” (Latin for “Out of many, one”).
Over the years, though, some groups have argued that the phrase is antithetical to the First Amendment, which states, “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion.”
It’s a topic that some people have strong feelings about. Below I’ve gathered ten of the most interesting opinions on removing the motto officially from American currency.
1. The Phrase Is Not Traditional And Unnecessary
One respondent highlighted that the phrase was only added to currency during the Cold War and argued, “It’s completely unnecessary and not ‘tradition’ for us at all.”
On the other hand, a respondent acknowledged that it had only been added in the last century but noted, “Considering the cold war was from 1947 – 1991, a lot of things were introduced in those 44 years.”
2. Least Of Our Concerns
The United States is experiencing several major cultural and economic issues, so, unsurprisingly, several people agreed “that [the motto] is honestly the least of our concerns right now.”
Someone agreed and added, “I can’t remember the last time I looked at a bill and read anything other than the number on it.” While another said, they’d “be more interested in elected officials doing their jobs” than worrying about what money says.
Related Article: 11 Best Money Habits To Start Building Today
3. Financial Tips On Money
One user jokingly said that the phrase should be replaced with “Better spend me now, I’ll be worth 9% less in a year,” which led another to suggest, “we should have financial tips printed right onto money.”
It sounds a bit silly, but someone thought it could make a difference, saying “it feels like this could be the one thing that unites us as a country. We need this.”
Popular: Smithsonian Apologizes for Unlawfully Removing Pro-life Students
4. Bring Back “E Pluribus Unum”
While some agreed that the words on money were of little concern, another user thought that “at a time like this, E Pluribus Unum seems more relevant and needed.”
Others agreed; one noted that “Even as a Christian, I would MUCH prefer ‘E Pluribus Unum,'” to which another responded, “Especially as a Christian! Separation of church and state should be significant to Christians because it also upholds your religious freedom.”
5. Undermines Religious Freedom
A self-identified “conservative Christian” highlighted that “I know plenty of people who would get up in arms about the removal of the phrase, but by the same token, they would be upset if it read ‘In Allah we trust’ or ‘In Brahman we trust.'”
That user continued to make this case, citing, “the first amendment to the constitution explicitly states that the government has no authority to tell you who/what you should have religious faith in.”
Popular: Ron Desantis’ Office Rejects MSNBC’s Insincere Apology
6. Christians Should Submit To Authority, Not Become Authority
That same conservative Christian also noted that “Christians are to submit to the governing authority.” However, instead of citing the Constitution again, they went to scripture, stating, “Nowhere does the Bible say that we should attempt to BECOME the governing authority and subjugate people under us.”
7. Remove Religion From Policies First, Money Second
One user clarified their political stance regarding the issue but was more concerned about policies that affect people’s daily lives.
They admitted, “I’d prefer they remove God from political policies first. Separation of Church and State is a thing for a reason.” Another agreed, stating, “Yep. We have God in our government in worse ways than him being mentioned on our currency.”
8. God Doesn’t Care
Scripture came up again when a user cited it to emphasize that God and money do not mix. They cited Matthew 22:21, where “Jesus said to render unto Caesar what is Caesar’s.” They argued that Jesus “didn’t care about money, and neither does God. And if God is being offended or “erased” by removing the phrase from money, then he’s not a very strong god, to begin with.”
9. Pledge Of Allegiance Is A Bigger Problem
One respondent said they were more frustrated by The Pledge of Allegiance: “Take out UNDER GOD.” I mean, people came to America for religious freedom. Others argued, “Why to argue for removing under God from the pledge of allegiance? Argue for removing the pledge entirely.”
10. Not Worth The Time And Effort
Aligning with those who said that there are more pressing matters, one user called out specifically that removing the phrase is not “worth the massive political headache and distraction it will create.”
They argued any action to remove the phrase “will burn a ton of time, energy, and political capital to get this changed. And no tangible benefit will be achieved when it’s all said and done.”
This thread inspired this post.
Featured Image Credit: ShotStudio /Depositphotos.com.
This article originally appeared on Ash & Pri.