Ed Brayton is a journalist, commentator and speaker. He is the co-founder and president of 
The board in Kern County public schools, in Bakersfield, CA, have approved a plan to put posters declaring "In God We Trust" in every classroom and office in the school system:
Trustees of the largest high school district in the country voted 4-1 Monday night to mandate displays bearing the nation's motto -- "In God We Trust" -- and other historical documents in over 2,300 district classrooms and offices.The display of the Constitution, Declaration of Independence and Bill of Rights will be included in the posters approved by district trustees in Bakersfield, Calif. Monday night.
Kern County High School District trustee Chad Vegas initially proposed the measure as a way of promoting patriotism. But the idea sparked a contentious debate.
But the woman who originally suggested the idea gives away the game immediately:
The classroom displays were first suggested by the non-profit group In God We Trust -- America Inc., whose president, Jacquie Sullivan, is a Bakersfield councilwoman."I encouraged the trustees to put this on the agenda," she said. "It's very important. We need to promote patriotism and promote it in our schools. We can't just assume that the younger generations are going to have that strong love for God and their country the way the older generations do."
Sullivan's organization has offered to provide funding for the project at Kern.
The councilwoman, who said she is a registered Republican and a Christian who attends a local Baptist church, told FOXNews.com that she has neither a religious nor political agenda in pushing for the measure.
"It's not political. It's not religious. It's patriotism," Sullivan said. "American patriotism is love of God and love of country. It's pride in our country."
Obviously, the goal is for the schools to advocate and promote "the love of God" to students. Good luck getting that one past the Lemon test, folks. I smell a lawsuit. Not to mention the plain absurdity of the idea that patriotism requires "love of God." That can only mean that atheists can't be patriots - and I have no doubt that is exactly what this halfwit believes. That makes it no less obnoxious and idiotic.
Incidentally, the school has said that the posters will cost $12,000 to purchase and that it will come out of their regular budget for instructional materials. Imagine how many textbooks that would buy. If an average textbook costs $50, that's 240 textbooks. But instead that money is being wasted on a constitutionally dubious project because some school board members want to use the schools to promote "the love of God."
Politics
Comments
Ed - what exactly does it mean that "in god we trust" is the nation's official motto? Does that have any legal bearing? Could it allow the courts to find this constitutional?
Posted by: Taz | November 9, 2007 9:38 AM
Ed,
Well stated and well written. I read your material almost every day. Great job. Thank you.
Posted by: dale | November 9, 2007 9:42 AM
If love of god = patriotism, it's time to put Cthulhu in office already. What could inspire patriotism more than a huge, bloated, octopus-like deity who devours those who fail to worship him correctly?
Let's see the "new atheists" deny the existence of a god-president like that!
Cthulhu 2008 for god, country and the end of the world! Jehovism and neo-conservativism are taking way too long to get us all killed.
Posted by: Mike O'Risal | November 9, 2007 10:03 AM
Given that "In God We Trust" is right next to some Masonic symbols on our money, can't we start a nice conspiracy rant about how this is all some nefarious plot by the Masons?
Where is Nicolas Cage when we really need him?
Posted by: Jim Ramsey | November 9, 2007 10:49 AM
What could inspire patriotism more than a huge, bloated, octopus-like deity who devours those who fail to worship him correctly?
it's working for the Bush admin so far.
Posted by: Graculus | November 9, 2007 11:02 AM
To be perfectly honest, I think it's a good idea to have the Constitution and the Declaration of Independence posted in schools. It might get them actually thinking about the principles on which this country was based. However, it might be inconvenient to the proponents when the students start in on the phrases "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion" and "no religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office or public trust under the United States", though.
Posted by: RM | November 9, 2007 11:15 AM
When was the last time you were in a classroom? Pupils dont actually READ the stuff on the walls. And to save me coming up with words of my own:
http://underassault.blogspot.com/2007/10/clutter.html
Posted by: Donalbain | November 9, 2007 11:19 AM
"American patriotism is love of God"...at least since history got retconned in the 1950s.
Posted by: Jason Failes | November 9, 2007 11:19 AM
In a related topic - remember the "In God We Trust" license plates in Indiana? I was only mildly perturbed by the idea initially, but I just got back from a visit to family there. About 1/3 of the cars I saw there carried the new plates - about the same number as the standard "no-slogan" plates, and about the same number as the total of the two dozen or so different types of specialty plates. Just to add to their visibility, the "In God We Trust" plates are an eye-catching red, white, and blue, compared the pastel green and white of the standard plates.
Until you drive there, you really can't imagine how oppressive and intimidating the effect can be. I don't normally have a second thought about the "Darwin-fish" on my rear bumper, but the second or third time I found myself stopped at a light and literally surrounded by "In God We Trust" plates, I started to worry a little.
And those are just license plates. Anyone who imagines that "In God We Trust" posters in the schoolroom won't have a chilling effect on school-age atheists and agnostics is fooling themselves. Sadly, I fear Taz may be right - since it is the national motto, the Religious Right may have found a "Get Out of Lawsuit" card.
Posted by: BobApril | November 9, 2007 11:27 AM
Jim Ramsey wrote: "Given that "In God We Trust" is right next to some Masonic symbols on our money . . ."
It's a canard, right up there with the satanist symbols on Procter and Gamble products. See http://money.howstuffworks.com/question518.htm for the former and http://snopes.com/business/alliance/procter.asp for the latter.
Posted by: JakeR | November 9, 2007 11:30 AM
I'm not so sure, actually. Even if one can make an argument that the displays themselves are secular, won't the policy still get snagged on the purpose prong? That the purpose is the promotion of religion is clear.
Posted by: MartinM | November 9, 2007 11:54 AM
Once, a few friends of mine were planning to smoke a dube after school. On the way over to one guy's house, I found a dollar on a lawn. When I read "In God We Trust", it gave me the strength to just say no. I even used the holy national motto to convince another kid to not smoke the mary jane as well. We both immediately went to a barbershop and had our hair cut and hippy-style sideburns removed.
People just don't understand how the national motto provides guidance to kid's lives. If we put it up in every single room of a school district, man, that's going to be a lot of encouragement to choose wisely!
Posted by: Jon Garglete | November 9, 2007 12:02 PM
Given that the sponsor of the board policy has publicly stated that love of God is one of the major purposes of the program, it is a pretty straight forward Lemon Test item. Unfortunately the courts have tended to ignore the Lemon Test when they find it inconvenient, given the composition of this SC, they might just do that, if Bush gets another appointment, or heaven forbid another Republican gets into the oval office (Canada ... nay, the Moon anyone?) then the court might just find it Constitutional on the grounds that it is the national motto. [IE., steaming pile of BS]
Posted by: dogmeatib | November 9, 2007 12:46 PM
Incidentally, the school has said that the posters will cost $12,000 to purchase and that it will come out of their regular budget for instructional materials. Imagine how many textbooks that would buy.
Bah! Who needs stinking textbooks. They'll probably just take it out of the budget for those evilutionist texts, don't want that godless crap anyways.
Posted by: DuWayne | November 9, 2007 12:56 PM
I got married in a courthouse because neither of us wanted a religious ceremony. Our friends had great fun taking photos and making sure that the huge "IN GOD WE TRUST" on the wall was visible in every photo.
Posted by: bullfighter | November 9, 2007 2:12 PM
If an average textbook costs $50, that's 240 textbooks.
Awww how cute, the idea that an average textbook costs $50 is so precocious. [having been on three textbook procurement committees in the last year, I WISH they only cost $50]
Posted by: dogmeatib | November 9, 2007 2:29 PM
@Taz
Just because it's the nation's "official motto" doesn't mean that it's constitutional. Laws aren't pre-screened for constitutionality, so it's quite possible for the legislature to pass an unconstitutional law and the president to sign it into law.
It just means that nobody has successfully challenged Title 36.I.A.3.302.
There's no "get out of jail free" card on this one.
Posted by: ArtK | November 9, 2007 2:31 PM
I hope they mention the old motto E Pluribus Unum and how it was the motto if our country and how it was replaced in the 1950s. we went from "one out of many" to a motto designed toe tear the country apart.
Posted by: Phil | November 9, 2007 3:39 PM
Until you drive there, you really can't imagine how oppressive and intimidating the effect can be. I don't normally have a second thought about the "Darwin-fish" on my rear bumper, but the second or third time I found myself stopped at a light and literally surrounded by "In God We Trust" plates, I started to worry a little.
I just moved to Indiana, and I've had the same reaction. It's a little bit like "Big Brother is watching" from Orwell's 1984. At least there are no eyes on the plates watching you ... so far.
Why can't these "patriots" get worked up about the other national slogan, E pluribus unum?" Is it because they don't really get it? Or is God the only thing they trust?
Frankly, I've always found him to be too capricious to be trustworthy. "Out of many, one" seems a much more realistic concept.
Posted by: wheatdogg | November 9, 2007 3:42 PM
Those who promote this want to take God out of religion, and turn it into a secular concept. "Religion" is man's way of worshipping God. As they see it, God Himself is a fact of nature and reason, like atoms and numbers and liberty. This way, their beliefs not only become the standard for patriotism, but their beliefs become truths about the country and the world.
I know Ed doesn't care for Michael Newdow, but he's going after the "In God We Trust" motto, and is in the right of it. Trouble is, a lot of atheists are concerned that if his case makes Supreme Court, the justices will essentially be forced to either follow the law regarding separation of church and state and rule it unconstitutional - or declare God's existence a consensual fact agreed upon by all reasonable citizens, therefore secular, and therefore not part of religion. And atheists are screwed. The fuzzy halfway area of claiming that "In God We Trust" doesn't really mean United States citizens do and should trust in God may not be available if things get too explicit.
Posted by: Sastra | November 9, 2007 4:55 PM
ArtK: "The motto's primary effect is not to advance religion; instead, it is a form of "ceremonial deism" which through historical usage and ubiquity cannot be reasonably understood to convey government approval of religious belief." Allegheny, 492 U.S. at 625 (O'Connor, J., concurring).
Posted by: kehrsam | November 9, 2007 4:58 PM
I got married in a courthouse because neither of us wanted a religious ceremony.
Heh. My wife and I tried that also, and ended up with a judge who evidently thought preaching was part of his job description. I decided to just bear it and my wife just smiled (the judge had a MS accent and she couldn't understand a word of what he was saying), but after 10 minutes of preaching or so my witness informed the judge that he was the only Christian in the room. That caught him off guard a bit, but he decided to finish his spiel anyway; he did look a little sheepish when he signed the certificate, though.
Posted by: MJ Memphis | November 9, 2007 6:47 PM
If love of god = patriotism, it's time to put Cthulhu in office already. What could inspire patriotism more than a huge, bloated, octopus-like deity who devours those who fail to worship him correctly? Let's see the "new atheists" deny the existence of a god-president like that!
An atheist might argue that reality is that which, even if we do not believe in it, is still able to rip us limb from limb with eldritch tentacles.
Posted by: Coin | November 9, 2007 6:53 PM
I'd be glad to post "In God we Trust" in my classroom. Of course, right under it would be the "All others pay cash" part.
The second best part of the old Shakey's pizza joints was the signs. The best part was the plain wooden tables. Didn't have to worry about spilling your beer. When they replaced them with little round tables, tablecloths, stained glass chandeliers... I just about puked.
Posted by: BaldApe | November 9, 2007 7:58 PM
kehrsam wrote:
Ceremonial deism isn't religion? It's just a public declaration of a specific spiritual sentiment endorsed by he US government and paid for by all of us? (My eyes are rolling, can you tell? ;) )
Still, that doesn't preclude the motto from being used for primarily religious purposes. Which in this case I think it clearly is.
More generally, at what point does it cease to be in line with it's historical usage? Certainly, words and phrases historically used one way can become commonly used in other ways. Meaning and context changes as our culture changes. We must be able to address those changes legally. I'm not saying they have changed that much, just that I think (given the current climate in that region) they could, and that the motto could be reasonably construed as an endorsement, for the simple reason that it so often is. (By people on both sides of the debate, to be fair.)
Posted by: Leni | November 9, 2007 11:18 PM
Sullivan states:
Patriotism? Sounds like indoctrination to me.Posted by: Ex-drone | November 10, 2007 1:31 AM
Ha. Haha. HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
[sobs]
Can't wait for the school district to lose the suit and have WorldNetDaily proclaim "IN GOD WE TRUST UNCONSTITUTIONAL, DOGS AND CATS LIVING TOGETHER."
Posted by: FishyFred | November 10, 2007 2:29 AM
The same with the change made in the 1950s to the Pledge of Allegiance -- taking the line "one nation, indivisible" and literally dividing it in half to add a divisive statement. These changes were pushed by militant Christians explicitly to exclude atheists from our nation, to turn it from "our nation" to "not your nation".
What's really annoying about it is how a large number of religious folk can't seem to understand why this would upset the non-religious, and actually themselves get upset when some atheist tries to undo these antagonistic changes, basically accusing atheists of doing the same thing the militant Christians did in the 50s.
Truly militant atheists wouldn't be simply trying to remove divisive (and non-original) religious language from secular rituals, they would be trying to change the words to "In Atheism We Trust" and "One nation, under no god, indivisible". Maybe if we could start plastering school walls with posters saying those things people like Jacquie Sullivan would get it through their thick skulls why using the government to promote your religious beliefs at the exclusion of others' is a destructive and stupid idea.
Posted by: jpf | November 10, 2007 7:26 AM