new coins- No "In God We Trust" is this true?
Posted July 14th, 2008 by troyusaguy
output
I recieved this email, do any of you know if its true?
REFUSE NEW
COINS
This simple action
will make a strong statement. Just Do It.
Please
help do this.. refuse to accept these when they are handed to you. I
received one from the Post Office as change and I asked for a dollar bill
instead. The lady just smiled and said 'way to go' so she had read this e-mail.
Please help out....our world is in enough trouble without this too!!!!
U.S.
Government to Release New Dollar Coins
You
guessed it
'IN GOD WE TRUST'
IS
GONE!!!
If
ever there was a reason to boycott something, THIS IS IT!!!!
DO
NOT ACCEPT THE NEW DOLLAR COINS AS CHANGE
Together
we can force them out of circulation.
Please
send to all on your mail list !!!
Bookmark/Search this post with:
What theists are essentially
What theists are essentially saying is that the motto -- which has only been there officially since the 1950s -- is an inherent feature of currency, and that to remove it is to oppress them.
This is clearly absurd. The unfairness comes when unbelievers are left with no tenable option other than to use currency which offends them. It is directly offensive to an unbeliever for the money to mention God; it cannot possibly be offensive to theists for it NOT to mention God, because I can name any number of objects that do not mention God, which you use all the time.
Imagine if Christians were a minority in the US, having been superseded by Satanists. Now imagine that they replaced "In God We Trust" with "All Hail Lord Lucifer." Now imagine that the only tenable way for you to avoid using this money would be to become a subsistence farmer or move to a barter community.
This is essentially the situation unbelievers are in. You would go far in demonstrating your Christian empathy by agreeing that it is unfair -- and utterly unnecessary -- to infuse the universal common currency with a non-universal profession of faith.
And let's not forget what Jesus said about rendering unto Caesar what is Caesar's. Do you really think God wants his name plastered all over something as base as currency?
----------
Liberty for Dummies
You kids argue all you want,
You kids argue all you want, have fun, get your creative juices flowing. Debate sharpens you. However, I don't give a flying shit what they stamp or don't stamp on that useless coinage. It's good when you can't find a stone to skip and if your creative enough, it'll scrape your ass clean in an emergency. For all I care they can stamp a picture of Mary Poppins it, at least then you might be able to collect it and sell it for more later.
BUMP
there isnt a mix of church and state, our money supply is privately owned. you know that. No they are taking in god we trust off the rim and i think they will include it on the coin somewhere Dont forget the 1972 double die penny you can pick this up cheap and it may take off in value because no one knows how many there are
Whatever
I happen to work at "the place" that makes these decisions and implements them...and this is a crazy rumor.
Chuck E. Cheese?
___________
Lisa C.
“Elections are short term efforts; revolutions are long term projects.”
--Ron Paul
Join the rEVOLution here: http://www.campaignforlib...
Finally
Finally they take that out.
Awesome!
Its about time that they took reference to God off of there, There should be no mix of church and state at all. It doesn't belong there
Then don't
go to any GOP Conventions. You can't do anything without them telling you to pray. It's sickening.
To answer the original question here, it's bogus.
Yes, some of the coins are missing Psalm 91:2. But the ones that have it are on the rim of the coin. Some are even double-strikes, meaning that it got tamped twice, one offset from the other.
It's just the Mint goofing up. It happens. Some more famous examples of late:
1937 3-legged Buffalo nickel
1955-S Double strike penny
1970s dates over dates dimes (lots of versiosn of those)
1990-P double strike penny
And occasionally they'll strike the wrong coin on a round. They call those "mules" and when they hit circulaiton, they are worth a lot.
Others get struck off-center, same situation.
It happens to paper money as well, that's why "star" notes exist--they're replacements for defectives, but even those get into circulation every once in a while.
This email is just some nutcase venting outrage over that which he knows nothing.
Troyusaguy, disregard it.
Foolishness.
Why are you trying so hard to make yourself look foolish, Tannim? It’s very unattractive and downright rediculous on your part.
In the first place, he’s asking a question (look at the subject line again). We should never call people nutcases just because we don’t care for what they say. He should be congratulated for being curious (most people either don’t even get that far or just pretend they have the correct answers).
You’re merely trying to make him look dumb so you can think you look smart. For several months I have had four or five new dollar coins I’ve wanted to get rid of because “In God We Trust” had been seemingly omitted. To the best of my knowledge they’re not misprinted coins.
--Cliff, Sioux City, Iowa
???
Whatever you're saying/accusing this guy of is waaaaaaay out there bro. Go find Bigfoot or something.
GREAT!
At least part of our government has some sense! It doesn't belong there and never has.
Doc Holladay
http://www.myspace.com/do...
Actually I agree, because
Actually I agree, because God's name does not belong on trash currency printed by a dirty, corrupt government.
SUPPORT OUR FOUNDERS' AMERICA
Support the Constitution of the United States
Again, we find ourselves in
Again, we find ourselves in agreement. :)
LOL ...Good One
LOL...Good One
G.O.D.
Gold.......Oil...........Drugs
That is the only God this Govt. cares about.
*****************
"My role in the revolution is to wake up the lemmings of this country, who sit back and accept the pablum the media feeds them"
Jesse Ventura
Ventura/Paul 2008
Out of government, and off
Out of government, and off my money.
Do you support the Constitution or not?
"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."
NO LAW. End of story.
That's backwards.
First, the coins missing the so-called motto are the correct ones. That's why they are worth more. The Mint calls them printing errors, when in fact, the so-called motto on coinage has been the errors from day one.
BTW, "In God we Trust" was originally supposed to be "my God, in whom I trust" which is a direct Bible quote from Psalms 91:2. That's according to the Congressional Record of testimony on the original bill. How much more direct can you get on that First Amendment infringement???
Second, this does not apply to the private FRN currency, because it is private and not public money.
Third, a dollar coin, religious slogan or not, costs 4X a paper dollar, but lasts 60X longer, so they are cheaper to produce, even with increased metal prices. Seems to me that we ought to promote their use as a cost-saving measure for government. Other nations figured this out long ago.
Fourth, for all you First Amendment illiterates, do the math:
Establishment Clause + Free Exercise Clause = Separation of Church and State.
The why is left as an exercise, but I'll give you two hint: 1. the two clauses force complete neutrality by government regarding all religion. 2. Reread Jefferson's Danbury letter on the nature of worshipping God. Connect the dots.
"Suspicious error"
Considering those words have been a hotbed of controversy for a few years now, I don't think it's a "coincidence" they were left off or put in the wrong place"...just like everything else...I suspect they are just putting out feelers to the American people to gage the reaction...and then proceed from there...
What happened to Susan B. Anthony Silver Dollar?
Why didn't it catch on then?
Couple of reasons.
1. Size. It was too close in size to a quarter, hence the nickname "Carter Quarter".
2. Design. It sucked. While the Eagle Moon thing tried to continue the Eisenhower design, the reeded edge was a problem as was the silverish color. They fixed those things with the Sacajawaea, but it had its own problems. The Presdiential coins are far superior in design. Even saying that, modern coin design for the most part sucks.
3. Psychology. The Ike Dollar suffered from a size perception. Let's face it, it was a clunker, and something that huge had better be silver like its predecessors in the Morgan and Peace Dollars. To combat that for a clad, they reduced the size, but people still liked their single greenbacks.
4. Vending opposition. In the 1970s few vending machines (soda, candy, cigarette, pinball, arcade, change, phones) if any took dollar coins. The retrofitting for Anthonys was insane, and the industry opposed it. Only recently has dollar coinage been fitted into vending machines as the technology has improved and come down in cost (in conjunction with the dollar bill changers). The Post Office was one of the first widely-visible ones to do this.
Jefferson's letter to the
Jefferson's letter to the Danbury Baptists is wholly irrelevant to interpretations of the Constitution, and indeed, Jefferson himself is wholly irrelevant to the Constitution.
Jefferson is relevant to interpretations of the Declaration--another important document more people should read.
The First Amendment plainly guarantees Freedom of Worship and forbids creation of a national church, like the Church of England. There is no such thing as a constitutional "separation of church and state," so prohibitions against religious displays are unconstitutional.
I would call the coinage of money a grey area. There's a cultish-looking pyramid with an all-seeing eye on the back of the dollar I don't like, but I'm not foolish enough to say that it should be removed because it "infringes" on the (so-called) "constitutional separation of church and state".
The closest thing we have to a federal infringement on the First Amendment religious freedoms is Bush's 'Faith-Based Initiatives'.
SUPPORT OUR FOUNDERS' AMERICA
Support the Constitution of the United States
Wrong again.
See Everson. The separation law is based on Danbury, period. That's settled law.
And Madison, who wrote the First Amendment, was in complete agreement with Jefferson, and used Jefferson's Virginia Statute as the model.
Everson was not a Founder,
Everson was not a Founder, and Jefferson was not an author of the Constitution.
The Danbury letters were written twelve years after the Constitution was ratified.
The law cannot be that sloppy, based on opinion and hearsay, or it isn't Law at all. There is no separation of church and state in the First Amendment.
SUPPORT OUR FOUNDERS' AMERICA
Support the Constitution of the United States
I never said he was--Everson was decided in the 1950s
But relying on a Founders argument alone is ludicrous as well.
And the time differential between the Danbury letter and the ratificationis irrelevant as well.
Do the First Amendment math.
Otherwise you flunked.
If it's not in the Law, it's
If it's not in the Law, it's NOT the Law.
The time differential is relevant in the sense that the letters are not relevant. If the Founders had wanted to exclude religious display in the modern context of "separation", they would have written it into the document.
You sound very much like a modern-day liberal Democrat, trying to use creative interpretation to set one part of the Constitution against the other. Perhaps you'll pull out the general welfare clause as a crutch, next.
SUPPORT OUR FOUNDERS' AMERICA
Support the Constitution of the United States
Make fun, buddy.
Saying the law is not the law doesn't work. From Everson, 330 U.S. 1:
"The 'establishment of religion' clause of the First Amendment means at least this: neither a state nor the Federal Government can set up a church. Neither can pass laws which aid one religion, aid all religions, or prefer one religion over another. Neither can force nor influence a person to go to or to remain away from church against his will or force him to profess a belief or disbelief in any religion. No person can be punished for entertaining or professing religious beliefs or disbeliefs, for church attendance or non-attendance. No tax in any amount, large or small, can be levied to support any religious activities or institutions, whatever they may be called, or whatever form they may adopt to teach or practice religion. Neither a state nor the Federal Government can, openly or secretly, participate in the affairs of any religious organizations or groups, and vice versa. In the words of Jefferson, the clause against establishment of religion by law was intended to erect "a wall of separation between church and State." Reynolds v. United States, supra, at 98 U. S. 164
and:
"The First Amendment has erected a wall between church and state. That wall must be kept high and impregnable. We could not approve the slightest breach."
Those are from the majority decision. This is from the dissent on religious freedom:
"This freedom was first in the Bill of Rights because it was first in the forefathers' minds; it was set forth in absolute terms, and its strength is its rigidity. It was intended not only to keep the states' hands out of religion, but to keep religion's hands off the state, and, above all, to keep bitter religious controversy out of public life by denying to every denomination any advantage from getting control of public policy or the public purse."
Or this, from the above cited Reynolds, 98 U.S. 145 and 98 U.S. 164:
"Accordingly, at the first session of the first Congress, the amendment now under consideration was proposed with others by Mr. Madison. It met the views of the advocates of religious freedom, and was adopted. Mr. Jefferson afterwards, in reply to an address to him by a committee of the Danbury Baptist Association, took occasion to say:
'Believing with you that religion is a matter which lies solely between man and his God; that he owes account to none other for his faith or his worship; that the legislative powers of the government reach actions only, and not opinions -- I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should 'make no law respecting an establishment of religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof,' thus building a wall of separation between church and State. Adhering to this expression of the supreme will of the nation in behalf of the rights of conscience, I shall see with sincere satisfaction the progress of those sentiments which tend to restore man to all his natural rights, convinced he has no natural right in opposition to his social duties.'
Coming as this does from an acknowledged leader of the advocates of the measure, it may be accepted almost as an authoritative declaration of the scope and effect of the amendment thus secured. Congress was deprived of all legislative power over mere opinion, but was left free to reach actions which were in violation of social duties or subversive of good order."
Now, what part of plain English don't you understand?
You think I sound like a "modern-day liberal Democrat?" Hardly. Just some guy who knows his history.
But you sound like an idiot.
I've got my facts. Where are yours?
Geez, who the hell cares???
Aside from the absurd suggestion that we owe our values to Christian Dogma, why the hell do you actually care?
God has never belonged on our money, although I will laughingly admit that its only value is based in faith, hehe in the Fed.
America owes its greatest strength to its founding as a secular nation of laws and not men or gods.
"our world is in enough
"our world is in enough trouble without this too!!!!"
And how, exactly, does this put our world in "more trouble"? Are you honestly suggesting that your faith hinges on whether or not a particular phrase is printed on a monetary unit? Come on.
If I wish to own gold coins, which I do, then I am only
concerned about the size, weight, composition and price of those coins, as well as some other related factors. For instance, I have Krugerrands from South Africa and also the Canadian Maple Leaf. Neither of those coins contains any such phrase even remotely related to: "In God We Trust". The gold in them is still, for all intents and purpose, the same gold. Whether or not the striking of those coins was performed with this or that die, containing this or that phrase, does not change the integrity of the gold which makes up the coin. U.S. Eagles and double eagles have the phrase and certainly U.S. silver coinage that I own also contains the phrase mentioned. However, it is their precious metal content which is most important to me. If I had purchased a gold coin, struck with the inscription: "In Marx We Trust", that would not make me a marxist.
my understanding is our
my understanding is our country was based on christian values, so "In God We Trust" would reflect that. I have not researched why it was put on our money.
im not for organized religion but rather more spiritual and seek truths, there can only be one truth.
the churches going in to the 501c3 and not talking about government really erks me, so I stopped going to church.
I do like in god we trust on our money and see it symbolic to try to remove it.
the poster below me seems a little to angry, if you disagree you can simply state that. You dont need to call names and cuss and surse- you lose credibility.
"My understanding is our
"My understanding is our country was based on christian values"
That is to assume that all atheists go around raping, killing, stealing, burning, and drinking.
Those things are not Christian values, they are human instinct.
you people
have so much time to waste.
god......if you believe in such an idea as it.......doesn't give a fuck about your worthless coins.....about worthless gold.........about worthless silver.....
if IT gave a damn about anything....something.........i assure you.....
we won't be finding out any time soon......
so get on with your lives............
spend your time more wisely............
read something useful..........
and stop taking shit so literally.......the bible is a big poem.
that's it.
get over it.
we're all on a big fucking rock spinning in the middle of fucking no where special.......
your're not special....and i'm not special.
no one gets out alive.
all that you touch and all that you see - is all your life will ever be.
doesn't say shit about no fucking worthless god.
you people are tools.
I think I could have put
I think I could have put that a little more articulately, but you nailed it pretty well.
thanks
but i don't pride myself on such posts.
i was simply born into a christian family and LEARNED early on how to run from such danger and abuse of my mind. the shit people concentrate on is unreal.........literally. even my fellow paul supporters.
fight for our country?.....you got me.
fight for your religion?.........you lost me.
Why do people feel that the
Why do people feel that the best method of converting an atheist to christianity is by posting bible quotes?
That is comparable to saying, "Oh, you dont believe in dragons? Well, here is a picture of one that my little brother drew. Proof enough for yah?"
Because the floggings must continue until morale improves.
(nt)
Haha...
ya some christians seems to do that eh?
Religion is a disease of the mind, born of fear, which has done nothing but bring untold misery down upon the human race.
love your quote!
good one.
don't boycott the no in god
don't boycott the no in god we trust coins ... sell them .. they are worth a lot of money .. and buy money created by god ... gold and silver ...
i sold 1 dollar coin with no in god we trust on it for 800 dollars =] ... and i bought god's money =D
Oh please stop...
Would you rather have coins with God's name on them or be free? Which do you think God would prefer we choose? Isn't is obvious?
If you want to be free, please help get Pennsylvania delegates who were ELECTED in the April primary to the national GOP convention. We have a few who will NOT go without adequate financial assistance. Not everyone can cover about $1,800 of expenses and they can only raise so much at spaghetti dinners.
Go to http://cpalpac.com/home/d... to contribute. These people will NOT vote for McInsane. They are rabid liberty lovers and they intend to go to battle in Minneapolis to convert those who have not been using their minds.
I'm a Believer
And I don't think we are suppose to be worshiping coins. Lay up your treasures in heaven and no thats not talking about money. The love of money is the root of all evil. I would recomend you pray and tell God every day how much you trust in him or maybe just show him by actually listening and hearing his voice and obeying him. I don't think having that inscription on our money is important to our salvation.
Luke 20:23-26
23 But He perceived their craftiness, and said to them, "Why do you test Me? 24 Show Me a denarius. Whose image and inscription does it have?"
They answered and said, "Caesar's."
25 And He said to them, "Render therefore to Caesar the things that are Caesar's, and to God the things that are God's."
26 But they could not catch Him in His words in the presence of the people. And they marveled at His answer and kept silent.
do you render all your money to God since it is inscribed with his inscription? I didn't think so! Do you think the ritual of printing this motto is an honor to God. I don't think rituals are part of the New Testament.
Dan 3:13-15
14 Nebuchadnezzar spoke, saying to them, "Is it true, Shadrach, Meshach, and Abed-Nego, that you do not serve my gods or worship the gold image which I have set up?
If the golden image he set up was coins and nebuchadnezzar put "in God we trust" on it do you think that God would have then told the boys "ok now you can bow down to it". I don't think so!
Ex 20:4-5
4 "You shall not make for yourself a carved image — any likeness of anything that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth; 5 you shall not bow down to them nor serve them. For I, the LORD your God, am a jealous God
That pretty much covers it all doesn't it. That would inclued a false name of God. God is not his name it is Jesus. Thats the only name I know that God has. God is what he is! He is the Author, He is Alpha, He is omaga,He is the beginning and the end, He is the everlasting Father and the IamI but his name is Jesus. You say "what about LORD" well thats not on the coin but same thing He is sovereign, He is majesty, He is the ruler, He Is the Authority and the power but His name is Jesus. I don't need an inscription to tell God how much I trust in him. I also think he already reads every mans heart. He knows if you trust in him. It sounds to me like someone has told you your nation will be judged as a whole in the endtime. I'm "born again" I don't go through the Judgement in heaven I am in Jesus and He is immortal and has payed my dept already. I have received remissions of my sins (that means blotted out from the record) so how would someone bring charges on me if there is no record of the charge. Now as far as the flesh is concerned yeah we might be distroyed with everyone in the time of tribulation but that is the devil not God. God doesn't pour out his wrath till after the thousand year reign. If you believe in pre trib keep watching. There will be people in heaven from the time of the great tribulation and there is only one second coming. Where does it say in the bible the Church will rise twice in the endtimes? The time of tribulation is the final 3and 1/2 years after the anti christ appears there goes pre trib out the window. pre trib teaches you are raptured at the beginning of the seven years the anti christ doesn't show up for another 3 and 1/2 years after that. If Israel gets a peice deal and gets set borders that is the confirmation of the covenant this starts the seven years. So according to pre tribe if you havent been raptured and there is a peace deal in Israel then you've missed the rapture keep watching you'll see the confirmation of the covenant. Also it sounds like you are afraid that God will pour out his wrath on you for a sinful nation. Well if its pretrib you won't be here so what do you care, if not, a Christian isn't suppose to love their life to the death. You should not be afraid of the devil causing you to be killed (your flesh that is). He would be doing you a favor and sending you straight to heaven. That really isn't much of a threat is it "LOL". Fear is of the devil. Don't fear my friend "trust in Jesus".
You're a Monkees song?
YAWN. Save the evangelizing for the pulpit rubber wafer circuit. The question here was about coinage.
A Neil Diamond
His composition, though without the Monkees we may not know it.
Sic Semper Tyrannis!
Professor Bernardo de la Paz
Idle of Millions
Didn't know that.
of course, without Shrek, that song wouldn't be having a rennassiance either...
hmmm
I was discussing this very thing a few months ago regarding the new quarters that had come out. I don't know anything about the new dollar coins, but on the quarters, it was inscribed on the side. How it was put to me was that it was there so they could say it was there but that overtime, it would wear down and be illegible.
First of all, they're not coins.
A coin is made of a valuable metal, of a guaranteed weight. The US Mint hasn't made coins since they quit striking sliver in the 1960's. What they make now are slugs.
Secondly, it's not appropriate for our government to place religious slogans on anything they're printing or manufacturing.
-jcr
The adoption of "In God We
The adoption of "In God We Trust" as the official national motto, and the mandate that it be placed on all money, was a 1950s reaction to the Cold War (just like the addition of "under God" to the Pledge of Allegiance), because the Soviets had abolished the church and the US wanted to distinguish itself from that.
The motto had been used before on money, but sporadically, and with no mandate. The unofficial national motto had previously been "E Pluribus Unum" (Latin: "from many, one"). A much more fitting motto which reflects the federation of states.
For any Ron Paul supporter to suggest boycotting mottoless money is just plain farcical. It shows a real lack of understanding of the most basic concepts of constitutionalism. If you were talking about boycotting money WITH the motto, that would actually make sense.
Daily Paul has become a nest of theocrats.
----------
Liberty for Dummies
That is correct. Starting in 1864, the placing of that
phrase was a case of "allowing" it rather than, as you point out, "mandating" it.
I love you phoobaar.
___________
Lisa C.
“Elections are short term efforts; revolutions are long term projects.”
--Ron Paul
Join the rEVOLution here: http://www.campaignforlib...