A great editorial from the May 25th issue of the Colorado Daily:
snip...
On May 17, the 4th Circuit Court of Appeals held that it is constitutional to post the nation's motto, "In God We Trust," in a courtroom. In its decision, the Court held that a portion of the "Lemon Test," which is used to determine if a law violates the First Amendment prohibition against establishing a religion, is a "low hurdle" that only blocks laws that are motivated solely by an intention to establish a religion.
This would be a "low hurdle" indeed - one that no theocratic law could fail. Those who seek to enact theocratic laws argue that they are necessary to boost the moral character of its citizens. Since moral character is not a purely religious concern, the establishment of a national religion itself could not be deemed unconstitutional on this interpretation.
However, it is not my purpose to discuss the constitutionality of this issue. I am concerned with its moral quality, and the moral character of those who would support it.
It is not truly the word "God" that makes this motto problematic. It is the word "We." If there is a "we" (or an "us") who trusts in God, then there must be a "they" (or a "them") who do not.
"We" versus "They."
"Us" versus "Them."
The motto asserts that there are two classes of people. There is a group of first-class "we" citizens - included and accepted - that share a trust in God. There is also a group of second-class "they" citizens to be thought of as outside of civil society who do not trust in (the same) God.
Making this the nation's motto says that there is nothing more important - no idea greater, no cause more worth fighting for and dying for - than that of dividing equally peaceful citizens into groups of "us" and "them" based on religious belief.
Is this really what America stands for?
more here:
http://www.coloradodaily.com/articles/2005/05/24/opinion/opinion01.prt