‘In God We Trust’ Suit

June 19, 2006

Atheist Loses ‘In God We Trust’ Suit
From the Associated Press June 13, 2006

Source

A federal judge Monday rejected a lawsuit by an atheist who said the use of “In God We Trust” on U.S. coins violated his 1st Amendment rights.

U.S. District Judge Frank C. Damrell Jr. in Sacramento said the minted words amounted to a secular national slogan that did not trample on Michael Newdow’s religious views.

“There is no proper allegation that the government compelled plaintiff to affirm a repugnant belief in monotheism,” Damrell said in dismissing the suit.

Newdow, a Sacramento doctor and lawyer, lost an effort two years ago to have the Pledge of Allegiance banned from public schools because it contains the words “under God.”

He took his pledge fight to the U.S. Supreme Court, which said he lacked standing to bring the case because he didn’t have custody of the daughter on whose behalf he brought the suit.

A federal judge in Sacramento sided with Newdow in September after he filed an identical lawsuit on behalf of parents with children in three Sacramento-area school districts.

That case is pending before the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals.

Informed of the “In God We Trust” decision, Newdow said he was not disappointed because it would give him an edge in an appeal.

June 19, 2006 | Filed Under Faith, Politics

Comments

8 Responses to “‘In God We Trust’ Suit”

  1. TitansAFC on June 19th, 2006 12:43 pm

    Bad ruling by the judge, even though the right side of the lawsuit prevailed. It is not a “secular national slogan.” The ruling sets bad precedent.

    This needs to be ruled on from a higher court, and a better legal opinion needs to follow the next ruling.

    Right result, very wrong reason.

  2. jesusislord on June 20th, 2006 1:44 pm

    This dope is why our country is in such bad shape. If we take God out of the pledge, what kind of message will that send to our troops? The terrorists will think there God is better and that we don’t really like ours. It sets a bad precedence.

  3. J-Dub on June 21st, 2006 1:00 pm

    “The terrorists will think there God is better and that we don’t really like ours. It sets a bad precedence.”

    I am astounded that someone actually wrote this!

    Titans, I don’t think the reasoning was wrong at all. The judge said “There is no proper allegation that the government compelled plaintiff to affirm a repugnant belief in monotheism.” Of course the slogan is not secular but it does not compel one to believe in a God. That is what I don’t understand about all these ridiculous lawsuits. How does a slogan, the pledge of allegiance, a Christmas tree, and the depiction of the ten commandments force a belief on anyone? Just because our government is based on Judao-Christian principles, does not mean the citizens are forced to believe or practice Judaism or Christianity. We are each free to believe and practice as we wish.

    These lawsuits are just ridiculous! The people who bring them to court are filled with an extreme amount of contempt and hatred of others who do not share their athiest views…

  4. johnsforjesus on June 21st, 2006 3:25 pm

    Last time I checked this was one nation, under God, not one nation, under litigious wackos with an atheist agenda. It shouldn’t surprise anyone that these jerks are trying to tear apart the moral fabric of this country. They want to take this country down from the inside! Their no better than the terrorists. Their actually worse because they call themselves “Americans”.

  5. Gary G on June 21st, 2006 4:26 pm

    Good points, Johns. How can you call yourself an American without saying the pledge? I think a big problem is people don’t say the pledge very much anymore. Once they get out of school, that’s it. If they did say it more, they might think about what being American means. The founding fathers wouldn’t have put God in when they wrote the pledge if they didn’t want us to remember that this country was founded mainly on Christian principals. If they’re not going to allow prayer in school, this is the least they can do so kids know the truth!

  6. J-Dub on June 21st, 2006 5:13 pm

    Actually Gary G, the “under God” part of the Pledge of Allegiance was added in the 1950’s during the Cold War. It was meant to signify the difference between the godless, totalitarian Russian regime and the free, democratic United States.

  7. Gary G on June 22nd, 2006 7:44 am

    J-Dub, thanks for the heads-up. I always thought Jefferson wrote the pledge. Scary to think of what things were like before the 1950s. I guess it proves that sometimes out of something bad (Russia) something good can come. Either way, I guess we know who had the last laugh, and it wasn’t the commies! That’s what you get your government isn’t based on solid religious fundamentals. It’s amazing liberals still don’t get this! How much more proof do they need!

  8. johnsforjesus on June 22nd, 2006 10:22 am

    Applause for Gary G! This is why we have to SUPPORT OUR TROOPS. Only through constant vigilence can we ever hope to keep the red machine of communism from taking root elsewhere throughout the world. Socialist forms of government hinder the ability for Christianity to spread as the good Lord Jesus intended it to. Once the rest of the world gets to know our saviour Jesus Christ, acts of terrorism will cease. Kudos to our President for realizing the real mission in Iraq.

Leave a Reply




Polls

Is Fox News "Fair and Balanced"?

  • Yes (60%)
  • No (40%)

Poll Ends: October 29, 2008 @ 10:22 am

Loading ... Loading ...