Affirming motto In God We Trust is the religious equivalent of marking territory

November 5, 2011 at 7:24 pm 3 comments

Affirming the motto In God We Trust is the Religious Equivalent of Marking Territory 

The next time someone asks why are atheists so strident–so militant?  Just hold up the headline–Congress passes the nonbinding (unnecessary) resolution reaffirming “In God we Trust” as the national motto.   

But why are atheists so angry? Because it’s RUDE. It’s Believers Behaving Badly.  

In every other sphere we suppress our antisocial and baser instincts for the good of society, harmony. But religion gets a pass.  NO, not really religion, just Christianity.   The one that claims the Golden Rule even though similar sentiments were expressed before it came along.

How shall we observe the Golden Rule in your seeming violation of it? Do you want the same treatment in return? Is this the treatment you want from nonbelievers or the other religions?

On the face of it, they say the resolution before congress wasn’t divisible, but those who should know say it was.  Boehner probably didn’t get my email.   He governs me, but evidently doesn’t represent me.  Why should I pay taxes to a religious organization–the U.S. government?

This action is an outstanding example of what’s wrong with modern day Christianity especially in politics.   This is an act of religion.  Worse, religion is so confusing to the victim’s mind, and yet it dopes them with neurochemicals to the effect that they feel confident in their action.   Perhaps, they feel a tiny nano-rapture. 

This is the kind of thing that goads us to make our rhetoric sound almost as programmed as theirs. This is what makes us crazy.

Are they crazy?  A lot of us think so. Or maybe they’re just deluded? That’s closer. They are undeniably under the effect of religion and guilty of VUI–voting under the influence. Obviously, they need an intervention. A 396 member intervention.  Let’s plan one for March.  Peaceful though, only First Amendment solutions.  None of that stuff that their sacred text recommends they do to us.

It’s sad that they can’t differentiate God from Country. Nor do they seem capable of admitting they have a problem.  (See elsewhere my thesis of how radical God & Country really is in this brand of believer.  And believe them when they invoke it, because the people come in a distant third.    

If you go deep enough, though, in the soul of the believer, you’ll find at the final depth, that they’ll throw over Country in favor of God.  It’s only at the last, though, when they must stand as Christian soldiers and reveal themselves as being for God over country or people.   You may have heard Newt Gingrich describing how his leader of the freeworld couldn’t be trusted if he didn’t pray.  That might take you nostalgic folk back to George H.W. Bush’s comment that he made while he was president that he didn’t think atheist were citizens of the U.S.  

Because religion is so intertwined in our genes and there fore in our minds, a majority of people are unable to see these actions as the unAmerican activities that they are.  

It is the invasion of the body snatchers and they are screaming God. If this was an alien presence invading our citizens we wouldn’t let them suffer.  But the snatchees have control.  How do they rationalize it–with the cry, Christian Nation! Yes, sadly Christianity has had its fist around the heart of the nation since the beginning. True patriots–those who didn’t think someone’s religion should come before our country–struggled to birth the nation in religious freedom.

If you’re not sure that they are talking only about the Christian God, ask them if you can display the name of every god below “our” motto as they will display it in public schools and public buildings.  No, they’ll say, that would be tantamount to prayer in the schools.  Oh right. But wait! What’s the difference between a religious affirmation on the school building and a prayer inside?  Nothing if we do it right, they’ll whisper. 

It promotes our one religion at the expense of everybody’s beliefs and for that matter, at everybody’s expense–and they buy it because they’ve never been able to break our grip on our government, it’s a tradition, you know, like slavery and has to continue.

Entry filed under: atheism, atheist, freethought. Tags: , , , , , , , , , , .

Dousing the Constant Fire? Randomly firing neurons inspired by the Dan Dennett conference

3 Comments Add your own

  • 1. Justin Acuff  |  November 10, 2011 at 12:33 pm

    I can’t really disagree with you on your views regarding religion in politics, especially considering that I have published articles for an editor of mine regarding the same issue. The mention of “God” by a politician immediately, to me, is a violation of my first amendment rights (establishment clause).

    However, I can play devil’s advocate.

    How can you say that we should keep God and Christianity out of government as long as the majority of the country is Christian? Shouldn’t it be subject to vote, as are the rest of our laws?

    • 2. douglasfalknor  |  November 12, 2011 at 9:02 pm

      I know there are Christian political parties in some of the European countries, socialist parties, too. Something tells me that the Christian parties in Europe wouldn’t be as far out as one here would. I’ve heard it speculated that when all the folks emigrating from the old world to the American colonies and earlier that they brought us a load of God genes or whatever genetic package that might actually have some effect on the outcome of a person’s religiosity.

      Nobody has ever been able to keep God and Christianity out of the government. At the same time, there are Christians including ministers in the separation of church and state organizations. I believe their thinking is that they might be the next victim if “state” was taken over by a denomination or sect. Then there could be a very serious competition with the control of the state going to successively strong religious organizations.

      Are you familiar with the term “tyrrany of the majority”? It warns us against mob rule. It’s the one nagging problem that speaks volumes against pure democracy. It surfaced for me again when I was wondering if we could have a national referendum. Google that and you’ll find scary talk and scarier people that’ll make you want to hug a Tea Partier. A few stops at those websites and I gave up on the national referendum idea.

      I’ve heard that the measure of a democracy is how it treats it’s minorities. Maybe we should have expected that 396 to 9 vote–especially from a disfunctional congress. Maybe it took their approval rating up to ten percent?

  • 3. Ash  |  February 28, 2013 at 7:51 am



Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

Trackback this post  |  Subscribe to the comments via RSS Feed


I write for agnostics, freethinkers, atheists and humanists. In my nonfiction, the purpose is the celebration of our noble human spirit. The general pursuit may be Evolutionary Theology, though believers seem to populate that field (so maybe it's evolutionary Humanism). By looking at who we are and where we came from, we can derive much meaning, and perhaps more importantly, understanding, as well as some sense of where we could go.

Religion is God’s Way of Showing Us it’s Earlier in Human Evolution than We Thought

This title is an upcoming book at the publisher's now. I'd like feedback on this title. It's meant to make people think and feel something. And to hint at things for both believers and non- on multiple levels. The book is of a wider scope, though, one which is ultimately a way to grasp more meaning for ourselves. Believers are always telling us our lives don't have meaning without a god. We often counter that it's more meaningful to be looking for our own meaning than to be arbitrarily ascribed it by an imaginary supernatural being. Ultimately, and this is what I think is unique about this book, you'll see how we can be just as spiritual in our own way. Since we've inhertited a capacity for religion (some more than others) as an evolutionary adaptation, believers and non- are both potentially spritual in the same way--but it is an earthly, secular spirituality in which we all can share.

%d bloggers like this: