Sunday, November 13, 2011

In Gods We Trust

The vast majority of people just take for granted a monotheistic point-of-view...a Christian point-of-view.  Despite the separation of church and state and the prohibition against the establishment of a state religion, the phrase "In God We Trust" has been on our coins since 1864...and has been required by law on our coins since 1908.  
I create these images to make a small point about the separation of church and state.  How would Christians react to the phase "In Gods We Trust" being put on our coins and paper money?  They feel it is perfectly reasonable to represent their religious point-of-view on our nation's money...but it is highly unlikely they would tolerate our religious point-of-view being stamped or printed there.

This one-sided approach of the vast majority extends to other areas of our lives.  In Missouri, teachers in public schools can teach Christian church hymns to our children for their "educational value."  But, you can imagine the reaction to anyone teaching religious songs about Odin or Thor in the public school classroom.  In rural Kansas, churches are allowed to hand out Bibles to students as they exit their public schools.  But you can imagine the reaction if Heathens were to hand out religious materials to children leaving their public schools.

Plus the images above just sort of bring a smile to my face.  :-)

Mark Ludwig Stinson
Jotun's Bane Kindred
Temple of Our Heathen Gods


  1. Yup. The government's inscription of the phrase "In God we trust" on coins and currency, as well as its addition of the words "under God" to the pledge of allegiance in 1954 and adoption of the phrase "In God we trust" as a national motto in 1956, were mistakes, which should be corrected. Under our Constitution, the government has no business proclaiming that "we trust" "In God." Some of us do, and some of us don't; each of us enjoys the freedom to make that choice; the government does not and should not purport to speak for us in this regard. Nor does the government have any business calling on its citizens to voice affirmation of a god in any circumstances, let alone in the very pledge the government prescribes for affirming allegiance to the country. The unnecessary insertion of an affirmation of a god in the pledge puts atheists and other nonbelievers in a Catch 22: Either recite the pledge with rank hypocrisy or accept exclusion from one of the basic rituals of citizenship enjoyed by all other citizens. The government has no business forcing citizens to this choice on religious grounds, and it certainly has no business assembling citizens' children in public schools and prescribing their recitation of the pledge--affirmation of a god and all--as a daily routine.