RICHMOND, VA - Again, the state's lawmakers have found a controversial yet equally insignificant issue that deflects attention from the severe budget crises facing the Commonwealth. Yesterday, legislation requiring public schools to post signs saying "In God We Trust" was passed by the Virginia Senate. This bill, sponsored by Sen. Nick Rerras (R-Norfolk), has raised a debate that begs the question of whether such a motto is appropriate in the modern secular state. Not only should the religious statement be absent from the sphere of public education, it also should be removed from the nation's currency and public edifices altogether.
The motto has appeared on United States coins since 1908 but was not affirmed as the official national motto for another 48 years. While many Americans may find an acknowledgement of the Creator an appropriate qualification on the self-important leviathan - i.e. the federal government - the motto is nothing more than a McCarthy era anachronism. Though many believe that the slogan originated in the colonial era, no founding father had any part of it. If the phrase were not already the nation's motto, the same legislation to place it in our secular schools would never stand a prayer of passage.
The United States' first declaration in the Bill of Rights is that Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion. The ambiguity of the First Amendment leaves more than enough room for a diverse range of interpretation. The rise of the Christian Coalition and religious right within the last 20 years exists as a very tangible example of the relationship between religious organizations and the federal government. However, recent decisions in Virginia point to a trend toward constricting the influence of religion in institutions of learning. The Virginia Military Institute in Lexington recently ceased prayer before meals in a measure to comply with the statutory separation of church and state. Yet Rerras' proposal promotes exposure of even younger children to a motto that is overtly religious in construction.
As the Rerras bill was debated in committee, Sen. R. Edward Houck (D-Spotsylvania) proposed that the notation "National Motto enacted by Congress, 1956" be added after "In God We Trust." This does much to secularize the statement, yet the mere fact that the motto is not appropriate to stand alone speaks poorly for the legitimacy of the national statement in the first place. It also raised controversy within the Senate, as Senators believed the Houck amendment would trivialize the meaning of the reverent maxim.
Trivial or not, the national motto as it appears on the nation's currency inevitably tramples the rights of the nation's increasingly diverse population. The idea of religious tolerance has changed since Madison drafted the Bill of Rights. The concept has evolved from referring to non-preference for a particular religion - the likely intent of the motto's ambiguity - in favor of a tolerance for those who recognize no Creator altogether. Some may argue that the national government does not have a responsibility to seek to include members of all religious beliefs within the national community, but few would argue that a republic that alienates those who maintain it is dysfunctional at a very fundamental level. For as long as the United States touts a motto that promotes a religious concept, but simultaneously ignores the existence of competing views, it ceases to be an appropriate maxim to represent the whole of the nation.
|
Sen. Rerras believes this motto to be "very inspirational" and an idea that "helps [the nation] persevere in difficult times" ("Modified 'In God We Trust' bill advances," Richmond Times-Dispatch, Feb. 11). His first amendment rights ensure that the government may not infringe upon these beliefs. Yet as soon as Rerras advocates that the source of this personal motivation be promulgated throughout the classrooms of the secular Commonwealth, he crosses the line of appropriate discourse and borders on religious indoctrination.
Madison held a strong belief that the best government construction for the United States would be one that pitted faction against faction to preserve the interests of the minority. An individual who finds no faith in a higher power is decidedly a minority in today's culture. This in no way limits, however, that individual's right to be free from rhetorical assault, be it in the classroom or at the bank teller's window.
Not only is "In God We Trust" inappropriate for our schools, the dictum is inappropriate for our nation. In the spirit of the most patriotic era in recent history, our legislators must find symbols that unite and inspire, not latch onto those that discriminate and alienate. The General Assembly should vote down Rerras' bill. It is as wrong for Virginia as the motto is wrong for America.
(Preston Lloyd's column appears Thursdays in The Cavalier Daily. He can be reached at plloyd@cavalierdaily.com.)
Read More
UPADHYAYA: The Great and not-so-Good sides of U.Va.’s 2030 housing plan
By Apal Upadhyaya | YesterdayInstead of improving the dire state of existing infrastructure, however, the University has shifted attention away from it and chosen to expand.
EDITORIAL: Support low-barrier shelters in Charlottesville
By Editorial Board | 2 days agoInvesting in low-barrier shelters now will pay off in increased stability for the homeless, which will undoubtedly improve the safety of shelters and the community writ large.
SHRAUGER: McIntire’s three-year model limits opportunities for first-year students
By Alex Shrauger | 4 days agoBy pigeonholing students into commerce so early, the University violates its own mission of providing a holistic education that produces students capable of succeeding in a variety of fields.
