[an error occurred while processing this directive] [an error occurred while processing this directive] [an error occurred while processing this directive] [an error occurred while processing this directive] [an error occurred while processing this directive]
[an error occurred while processing this directive]
[an error occurred while processing this directive]

"In the year of our Lord"
Tuesday, March 27 at 12:01 AM

This Speakout has not been edited

By Robert E Forman, Lakewood

I'm am "debating" the idea of dropping "In God We Trust" from our coins and currency - and replacing that phrase with another one, a better one, a far better one that will stand up to any and all constitutional challenges because the phrase I am proposing is IN the US Constitution.

"In God We Trust" is NOT in the Constitution.

"In the year of our Lord" IS.

Think about it. Think how utterly "delicious" it would be if our coins and currency was dated EXACTLY as the US Constitution is dated.

Envision the face of Washington, Lincoln, Jefferson on the front of the coin - and in a circular arc around the top and right side were the words "In the year of our Lord 2007" or "In the year of our Lord 2008" etc.

"In God We Trust" is NOT in the US Constitution and the ACLU and the Americans for the Separation of Church and State "people" MAY have a "point" depending upon the whims of various federal judges and justices.

But "in the year of our Lord" is IN the Constitution - NOT in the Bible. Quoting six words that is IN the Constitution can hardly be "unconstitutional" - Because the Constitution, by definition, is constitutional and is not unconstitutional.

The "irony" is that a good many people insist that the US Constitution contains absolutely NO reference to ANY deity whatsoever. But since "in the year of our Lord" is IN the Constitution, that puts them in a Catch-22.

Either they admit they are ignorant - or they admit they lied.

But for my purposes, it matters not that they are liars or are stupid fools.

The fact IS this: Our Founding Fathers dated the supposed Supreme Law of our nation with the words "in the year of our Lord." It clearly should be permissible and constitutional to date our coins and our currency in the EXACT SAME MANNER: "In the year of our Lord 2007".

As a side note, I will offer a slight change to Pledge: Drop "under God" and START the Pledge with "In the year of our Lord 2007, I pledge...."

I know that some people have a problem with putting any reference to God on secular coins in the first place, and with "pledging allegiance" to a country that is becoming more morally corrupt day by day.

But few Christians will deny that the US and Israel have both been blessed by God. Our country may be forsaking God, but God has blessed this country enormously over the years since 1776 and perhaps before.

I am personally not opposed to "In God We Trust" or "In the year of our Lord" - just as our Founding Fathers were not opposed to putting "In the year of our Lord" on the very document that created this nation in the first place.

But if the ACLU and others ARE opposed to "In God We Trust" - fine. Let us quote the US Constitution and put "In the year of our Lord" on our money instead.


READER COMMENTS

"Imagine how you sound to me before becoming so self-righteous that you insult or judge others based on your religious bias. "

Isn't your Lack of any belief your own bias by which you make those remarks? Isn't is part of your freedom to not believe?

Posted by Marianne McEachern on April 2, 2007 01:09 PM

How about "U S legal tender.' Keep God out of it and describe it accurately.

Posted by BG on March 31, 2007 09:55 AM

I believe the rock group "Styx" made a point when they said "I've got too much time on my hands". I'll tell you what ... why don't we let God (or the Lord) decide what should be on the coins? It's his name and he should have a say in if he wants it depicted on currency, which a lot of people have claimed is the true evil in our society. Money is the root of all evil, right? As ridiculous as that idea sounds, imagine how it sounds to someone like me (who is still waiting on factual proof that there is a God) that a diety would care what you put on a coin or who you pledge allegiance to. I would think God would have much bigger concerns (the Sudan, Hurrican Katrina) than the words we stamp on the back of a nickel. Time to get on with your life.

Posted by Trevor on March 30, 2007 11:55 AM

since the 10 commandments are law then, it follows that it is illegal to have another God, stay home from church on the Sabath, not honor your parents, covet your neighbors posessions, not keep the Sabath holy, or say "oh for God`s sake" What a great country this would be under those religious laws. Sounds like Afgan law.

Posted by on March 29, 2007 05:39 PM

"Year of Our Lord": big whoop. What part of "poetic license" do people not understand? Does a literary reference to the Man in the Moon or Mother Nature make those any more real? To the Chinese, this is the Year of the Pig.

As for the continual flap over "In God We Trust" being printed on money (or not), actually, it's the people of faith who should be demanding it be taken off, because it reduces the deity to the level of crass commerce. Anyway, coins and dollar bills are meant to be traded for goods and services, not displayed or idolized. But do they ever see it that way? No, they just figure the more "God" appears in print, the more political leverage that gives them. Why not print "In God We Trust" on toilet paper while you're at it?

Jay's claim that this country was founded on the Bible's 10 Commandments is pretty ironic considering that the founders broke every one of them in the process of founding this country. Conversely--and this is where we get to the "legal system"--there are any numbers of horrible things people can do, which rightfully have been declared illegal, that technically don't break a single one of the Commandments.

Posted by Hans Christian Brando on March 28, 2007 07:04 PM

This nation was founded with the Biblical 10 Commandments as the foundation of our legal system, and our Lord as the provider of rights given to men. If we decide that there is no lord and that Men are the supreme beings, then we can look forward to the UN running our nation, and our rights as nothing more than gifts to be taken away at a whim of those who are unelected and look at us all as 'worthless eaters'.

Posted by Jay on March 28, 2007 01:52 PM

Think about how utterly "delicious " if our coins and currency was dated EXACTLY like the Constitution is dated.

" utterly delicious " ? That is down right freaky.

He's says he is debating the idea of dropping, "In God We Trust, like he has the power to do this on his own.

I really would not like to sit down and listen to this man speak.Creepy.

Posted by on March 28, 2007 08:39 AM

'in the year of our Lord'

Anno domini - A.D.

Sorry, outmoded usage. All progressive secularists agree we should now refer to A.D. as the Common Era to eliminate any possible reference to the Resurrection of Jesus. I propose we amend the Constitution to eliminiate reference to 'A.D.' and replace it with 'C.E.' We could thus put 'In the Common Era We Trust' on all our currency and the like.

Sorta loses something in the translation doesn't it? I have an idea. Why don't we just leave God where He is instead of trying to substitute ourselves for Him?

Posted by Dave on March 28, 2007 07:12 AM

Nice idea - going to the Constitution. However, that document does mention deities. So, following your logic, let's put them on our coins, and in the pledge.

Let's see:
"Monday" is in the Constitution. Monday, supposedly gets its name from Mona, the Saxon Moon god.

"Sunday" is also in the Constitution. Sunday, supposedly gets its name from those worshiping the Sun.

I support your effort. Without further ado, and with no possible legal challenge, we can put images of two Gods on our coins. So the Pledge of Allegiance could have in it an indisputably correct reference to "under" Mona and the Sun.
Obviously, you and all who claim as you do must admit the reference in the Constitution to these Gods.
Else, to use your very nasty phrase, "But for my purposes, it matters not that they are liars or are stupid fools."

Which are you?

Posted by cp_steinmetz on March 27, 2007 06:47 PM

Hmm... just sounds like another battle for the ACLU to fight. Frankly, I would love to see all references to "god" or "the christ" or the "lord" removed from all aspects of american public record. It is an insult to all those who do not accept your christ and your god.

Posted by Chris on March 27, 2007 09:19 AM

To equate the dating of the Constitution with a reference to God-- get a life. There was no other way to refer to the date.

Posted by Docjay on March 27, 2007 08:38 AM

Gary, lay off the coffee. A weak mind's last resort in debate is name calling...oops!

Posted by T on March 27, 2007 08:15 AM

I am going to go out on a limb here, and hope that you werent speaking for everybody. I am more inclined to think that the people of this country, rather than GOD, have provided the means to accomplish what we have since 1776. Also, just as a thought, "In The Year Of Our Lord" will in my mind mean just that, "OUR" indicating theirs, yours, and NOT mine. It is frankly insulting to me that because I agree with the ACLU that I am either ignorant, or a "stupid fool". Imagine how you sound to me before becoming so self-righteous that you insult or judge others based on your religious bias. It may be just me, and the way that I think, but that makes you ignorant, and a "stupid fool."

Posted by Gary on March 27, 2007 05:14 AM

POST A COMMENT










Remember your personal info?






LATEST SUBMISSIONS
[an error occurred while processing this directive] [an error occurred while processing this directive] [an error occurred while processing this directive] [an error occurred while processing this directive] [an error occurred while processing this directive]
[an error occurred while processing this directive] [an error occurred while processing this directive]