American Atheist Magazine Oct 1981

8/9/2019 American Atheist Magazine Oct 1981

1/32

The $2.50

AmericanAtheis tA Journal of Atheist News and Thought (Vol . 23, No. 10) October, 1 981

.. .. :

LEBA~oN

. ... . .

v


2/32

III


3/32

VENDEMIAIRE (October) 11,981; Vol . 23, No. ro

NEWS

American Bar Association Bows to Bigots 4

Statement to The Media Upon Filing of Mississippi Suit 5

Egad Atheist Ads 5

Go California 6

ARTICLES

A Brief History of Religious Mottoes on UnitedStates Currency and Coins - Madalyn O'Hair 7

France 1981 : New Trends - Jean-Yves Riviere 16

On What Is Atheists' Morality Based? - Vladislav Sherdakov 18

FEATURED COLUMNISTS

Hell Is Not for Children - Richard M . Smith 19

Prayerbook Gamble - Ignatz Sahula-Dycke 21

The Blame and Shame of It - David L Kent ~ 23

I Don't Wanna Talk About It - Gerald Tholen 25

REGULAR FEATURES

Letters to The Editor 2

Editorial : Israel - Jon G_ Murray 3

Atheist Masters: What Would You Substitute for The bibleAs a Moral Guide? - Robert G _ Ingersoll . 14

Poems 26

American Atheist Radio Series :The Ninth Commandment - Madalyn O'Hair 27

Editor-in-ChiefMadalyn Murray O'Hair The American Atheist magazine is

published monthly by the AmericanAtheist Center, 2210 Hancock Drive,Austin , TX 78756 , a non-profit , non-political , educational organization.

Mailing address : P_O. Box 2117 ,-Austin, TX 78768 -2117 .Copyright 11,981(1981) by Society of Separationists , Inc.

Subscription rates : $25/one year ;$40/two years .

Manuscripts submitted must be typed,double-spaced,accompanied bya stamped,

self-addressedenvelope .The editorsassumenoresponsibilityforunsolicitedmanuscripts .

ON THE COVER

The cover of this issue of T heAmerican Atheist magazine isan indica -tion of the sweeping changes inside .

The clutter and claptrap are gone .Instead there is a bold statement madewith a simple pictograph .

Inside, the doodads and whirligigshave disappeared . With alldeference toour late artist, an Argentinian revolu-tionary, the South American way is notour way . ,:--

We agree that a revolution isneeded.That revolution which iscoming now isone solidly between the ears - not outon the streets with machetes or terror.

What The American Atheist repre-sents is of such a magnitude of changein thinking, in lifestyle, that it needs nograndiose picturization. The ideas arethe revolution.

So let's get on with it .

Managing EditorJon G . Murray

PoetryAngeline Bennett

Robin Eileen Murray -O'HairGerald Tholen

Production StaffDavid Kent

Richard RichardsonRichard SmithGerald TholenGloria TholenRalph Shirley

Non-resident StaffJames E . Brodhead

G. Stanley BrownIgnatz Sahula-Dycke

Fred Woodworth

The American Atheist magazineis indexed in

MONTHLY PERIODICAL INDEX

ISSN :.0032 -4310

Austin, Texas Vendemiaire (October) 11,981 Page 1


4/32

Letters to The EditorHi-

One or two ideas - though wefindthe magazine exciting and absorb -ing, perhaps production should becut back to a quarterly appearance .Printing costs are constantly escalat-

ing, and this would be one way to cutcosts .

AI Mildred FischerArizona

Dear AI & Mildred ,The religious community knows

that it must reinforce its constitu-ency on a continuing basis to keeptheir interest and participation at thedesired level. Most churches rein-force at least four times a month,sometimes as high as twelve times .Atheists too need reinforcement of

their ideas , and once a month is nottoo often at all. In fact , we strive tohave our Newsletter, for members ofAmerican Atheists, and this Journalarrive at different times of themonth, so that each Atheist isreinforced twice monthly.

Jon

Dear Dr. O'Hair:I became an official member of

American Atheists in September1980 and it was one of the mostgratifying acts of my life. I'm sure we

are all aware of the alienation and. hostility we are subject to as Athe-ists, and I f elt that the only way to getalong in polite society was to keepmy Atheism in the closet . Howwrong I was I am shocked at thenumber of people who will' come out 'if s omeone makes the first move .

Janet MoserPennsylvania

Dear Janet,One of the most compelling reo-

sons for the establishment of anAtheist organization in the first placewas to provide Atheists with ameeting ground and a basis forcommunication . You will be sur -prised now that you are 'out of thecloset' how many other Atheists willcome to you. Freedom of the mind isa great feeling, isn 't it?

Jon

Page 2

Primates in asinine Bible Belt ,Do you recall what happened to

little animal who screamed WolfLike the 20th century W itch

Doctors, you try to scare hell out ofreasoning animals . At age 661 shouldn'tgive a hoot how ignorant, unread,

and superstitious 95 of the otheranimals are. This is probably the lastyou'll ever hear from this Old Reason -ing, Rational-thinking, Wellread, Non -superstitious , Non-greedy Animal .

Due to the fact ~) of primates areas greedy as the sparrows who eat atmy feeder, I can't really afford thisThe greedy animals are getting tome We'll be eating each other againin less than one hundred years .

The animals of the Moral Majorityare trying to put us in the Dark Agesagain, and an animal called Reagan is

sleeping with 'em. God I 'm glad I'mas old as I am .

H. W. CoenIndiana

Dear sir,I must take offense at your letter,

not for being referred to as pri -mates , N because basically that iscorrect . The -insult comes from thefact that you accuse LI S of cryingNwolr and because you insinuatethat we are greedy.

Isuppose that you could compareus with the sparrows who eat atyour feeder. A truly reasonable manmight feel well compensated by thefact that those sparrows dropped byand made the day a little morepleasurable. I wonder if the spar -rows feel greedy?

As for myself - I am doing what Ifeel is necessary for me to do :change the world a little for thebetter . I regret that you seem to feelthat we are imposing on your gen-erosity or that we may unnecessarilybe trying to frighten you .

In any event we do thank you foryour past support , and I hope thatyou have found at least some com -fort in the fact that there are Atheistswho are devoted to trying to makeyour world a little less primitive andignorant .

Sincerely,Gerald Tholen

Vendemiaire (October) 11,981

We are not Ncrying woW as much aswe are trying to reach equal groundin terms of persuasive power withthe religious community . We cannotstand toe to toe and defeat themphilosophically if they outgun usmonetar ily and technically 1000 to 1.

We must have vote blocs , andsenators, and law firms, and com -puters of our own to spread theword . N In a capitalist nation onlycapitalist cause organizations cansurvive . Your rational-thinkinq should have shown you the need fo ryour support so that our mail solic i-tat ion would not have been necessary .

Jon

Dear Madalyn O'Hair , et alThe writer can no more afford this

check than you can affo rd to bewithout it .

Please don 't ever let this o rganiza-tion fail

The writer is 89 yrs old . I haven 'tworked in twenty-two years . I quitchristianity in 1911 . Turned Athei stthen. The Age of Reason - ThomasPaine - made me start thinking .

I live in a small downtown hotel .Five people here don 't speak to mebecause I 'm an Ath eist. They areroman catholics . (purgatory ') What astupid belief') Where was their jew

god, when their pope got shot?Good luck . My best wishesAs Jon Murray says , I hope to see

religion wiped off the face of thisearth in my lifet ime.

David H . WilliamsCalifornia

Thanks .Daoid . We know that ea chAtheist helps how and when he /shecan. and that is all we ask. You canco unt on the staf f here in Aust in tokeep it going . We hope that yourChapter outreach program can

reach the point soon that you canbnng Atheist friends to that hotel o fyours and turn the table on thosecat holics for once . We are stretchingas for as we L'an for now, and e ver ydonation like your s helps us stretcha little further . Hang in there .

Jon

American Atheist


5/32

Editorial Jon G. MurrayThis issue of The American Atheist is different graphically from

those that have gone before. We hope that you all like the newdesign and find the new type face we have selected easier to read.The design change isnot the only change inthe journal, however.Starting with this issue we plan to change editorial policy as well .Our new policy willbe to tell itlike itis . There are many aspectsof our culture that we see every day and do not question,occurrences that we have become accustomed to see or hear.

Starting with this issue we plan to explore and expose some ofthem.As indicated by the cover art, we have chosen a very sensitive

and volatile issue to begin this new editorial policy . The MiddleEast is probably the most tenuously balanced area in the worldtoday. A disturbance in that balance could lead to global implica-tions almost overnight . Much of the information from this area is .so twisted that no one really knows what ishappening at any giventime. Some things are clear, however, inan overweening way.Thebasic one of these is that the problems faced by all concerned inthe Middle East stem from religion.

Each participant inthe balance holds particular religious tenetswith ferocity . Those tenets overshadow their judgment of theproblems inthe area . Unless one recognizes the theological basisfor the postition of all concerned in the Middle East, one hasmissed the boat in terms of understanding what keeps the area insuch turmoil .

The primary religion that has caused the most problem in theMiddle East is, of course, as inmost troubled areas, the minorityone. Any time that a minority religion , in terms of numbers only,seeks to dominate a geographical area inwhich it isoutnumberedby many fold, there is conflict. If the greater numbers ormajoritarian religion dominates the minority is usually eitherignored or persecuted, as the case may be, without the conflictspreading to global proportions.

What we have in the Middle East, with the theocratic jewishstate ofIsrael, isa small group ofreligious zealots (small interms ofthe number of non -jew semites in surrounding areas) who aredetermined to physically, militarily, economically, culturally andreligiously dominate . This domination of a geographical area inwhich the jew isa recent import isbased upon the clairnof the jewsthat the old testament stories of the bible give them the status of god's chosen people - being chosen by that god to rule thearea inquestion . They back this biblicalimperative with the moneyand modern weapons of one of the two greatest military powers inthe world today - the United States .

Those ofthe jewish religionin the United States pressure so thatbillionsof dollars oftax support isgiven each year to Israel whetherthe United States can afford it or not , in terms of domesticconsiderations . Many non-jews in the United States back thissupport because their own religion owes its origin to the jewishwritings of antiquity . What we have is some 3 million allegedAshkenazic type semites, not allof the jewish faith (and that is all,by their own count) in this country who extort 6 billion dollarsworth of military and other aid for Israel annually from our 215million non-jewish population .

Not alone could these funds be used fordomestic programs forall Americans, but the exempted taxes and the interest involvedcould lower the tax burden for all our citizens .

On top of the monetary loss, these same 3 million(alleged) jewspressure the broadcast industry so that itgives continued supportto their position . When have you ever seen a program, on anynetwork, giving either the muslim or PLO prospective of theMiddle East situation? Never. Itis not permitted. Itis not permittedfor the same reason that you have never seen an accuratepresentation of the political concept ofcommunism on the media,or an accurate presentation of Atheism . What you do see is acontinued degradation of Germany (and persons of Germandescent .) Often this isvery subtle but there, just the same. Indeed,who is not sick of the repeated propaganda pieces of Masada,Exodus, Fiddler on The Roof, and old testament stories (alwaysstarring the non -jew Charlton Heston)? One more holocaustdocumentary willset us all screaming and clawing the walls.

Austin, Texas

ISRAEL

Let us look at the following example. Your ancestors carne to

the United States on the first boat of settlers. One of your grea tgrandfathers started a farm, fresh off that boat . Every succeedinggeneration of your family was born and reared on that acreage .Then , one day an army of religious zealots came in, militarily, andtook your land . They took the house in which all of yourforefathers had been born for the last 400 years . The village clownthe road, where you had sold your crops for generations, theywipe off the map completely . It does not exist any more . At tha tpoint would you fight for your land? Of course you would . Wouldthose of your family who survived or were taken pr isoners bebitter and hostile to the new landlord? Of course they would . Nowmultiply that loss by a factor of twenty to make it more like the8,000 years that your familyhad claim to the land . And, remembe rthat the only claim the intruders would stress would be theirreligious right to the land .

You will then know exactly how the Palestinians feel aboutIsrael . Have you ever heard that view expressed openly in the

United States? No, because the dominant judeo/christian com -munity here willnot permit it . Yet, that ishow the Palestinians seeit. Should not that view be given equal time at any and every set o fnegotiations held by the parties involved to bring an end to thehostilities in the Middle East? Reason dictates so, I think .

As an Atheist,l am not impressed by biblical admonitions. Thatthe jews are supposed to be the chosen people of god has nobearing on the fact that they are causing my country to be involvedin the support of the theocratic s tate of Israel . The nation in theworld which pioneered the concept of separation of state andchurch cannot now turn ' to support of a theocracy - anytheocracy, anywhere . Ido not advocate support of the PLO by theUnited States, either . We need to stay clear and assume a neutralposition with respect to the religious claims involved . We do not .

The myths that were compiled to form modern iudeo/chris -tianity had their origins inthe area we now call the Middle East. O nthe basis of those tales and myths the United States willsupport atheocracy to the point of nuclear war . For ifthe spawning groundof the tales that we now call christianity is violated, its adherentsfear that it willfail . We find ourselves involved in a new twentiethcentury crusade, a crusade to regain the holy land through themercenary services of the theocracy of Israel .

Someone must expose this idiocy . No one in the religiouscommunity can . So, it is up to the Atheists.

Now, some ofyou have written this journal inthe past referringto yourselves as jewish Atheists. A spate of letters has beenreceived at the Atheist Center objecting to any comments inthisjournal regarding Israel or judaism, by persons designatingthemselves as jewish Atheists . There is no such thing as ajewish Atheist . The term jewish refers to a religious stance, notan ethnic group . Semite is the proper term for the ethnic group .There are many non-semites who are religiously jewish also .(Sammy Davis and Elizabeth Taylor to name two ) All jewishcustoms are based on religious ritual . The true jew has no secularholiday, or custom or food habit . Allof these are dictated by holyrote. Everything that an individual hails as making him jewish isbased on religious ritual .

Iwill,as an Atheist, publicly denounce U -S_aid to Israel and askfor the inclusion of the PLO in any and all talks relevant tos ituations in the Middle East held by any party . I do not ask allAtheists to share this view, but I do feel that it is the only viewconsistent with upholding the secular nature of our country -what isleftof it. Icannot stand idlyby and watch my country plan aholocaust as self -fulfillingprophecy of a myth . That is s imply toobizarre. Myintelligence and desire for self -preservation willnot letme remain silent any longer.

Vendemiaire (October) 11,981 Page 3

v


6/32

Front Page Review

We are mad as hell ...

AMERICAN BAR ASSOCIATION BOWS TOBIGOTS

With the finest clipping service possibl e, that is, American Atheists in everystate scrutinizing the news to clip and ad vise the Americ an Atheist C enterwhat is going on where , no one , apparently, saw the U.P.I. story of Au gust13th. The litt le reported event occurr ed in N ew Orleans , on August 1 2th. It isof such singular importanc e, as we wat ch our freedoms sink in th e bog offundament alism. that w e repeat it verb atim in qreat part.

American Bar Association delegat es, rejecting arguments they w ereendorsing anti -semitism, narrow ly agreed to accredit the fundam entalist

iOral Roberts University 's law school .: Avoiding what would hav e been a major court battl e over religious

discrimination , delegates to the AB .A national c onvention voted 147-127 togrant 'provisional accreditation ' to the Tuls a, Oklaho ma, law school.

'The AB .A had twice declined to certify the school because it requi res itsstudents to sign an honor cod e recogni zing jesus christ as their savior and'whole man : and vowing to adopt a fund amentalist chr istian phil osophy intheir daily li ves.

The action to amend the AB.A 's legal education st andard came after aheated, hour -long debate before its poli cy making Hous e of Delegat es.

'The most emotional pl ea against Or al Roberts came from form er U.s.Solicitor General Erwin Griswold, who charged , 'under this standard , anyuniversity could put upa sign : no jews n eed apply .'

However , no one spoke for the Ath eist or the a gnostic , who cert a inlywould not hav e a pra yer in such a uni versity.

Dean Norman Redlich of N ew York Uni versity La~ School said while hecould not personall y sign the Oral Roberts code, 'We are not approvingreligious dis crimination , we are recognizing the deeply felt beliefs of others.'

'The AB .A was forced to act on the cont roversy beca use of a federalcourt ru ling on Jul y 17th that found th e organization had violated OralRoberts' c onstitutional righ ts by refusing to accredit its law school ongrounds of religious bia s. Again , thi s has been so qui et that Am erica nAtheists , the wa tchdog for separati on of s tate and churc h in the Unit edState s, did n ot even kno w that s uch a suit was in progress'

One d elegate c harged the AB.A with giving Oral Roberts 'the right todiscriminat e on religious grounds. As I see this , we are becom ing a part andprocess of legitimizing discrimination.' But Missour i Attorney Gene ralAshcroft argued, 'This i s a question of the free exe rcise of rcliq ion.' The focusof the disput e was an AB.A rule that declared law sch ools 'shall maintainquality of opportunity in legal education wit hout discrimina tion or segrega -tion on grounds of ra ce, color, religion, national origin or sex.'

AB.A accreditation is critical to any university because 43 states will not

allow gradu ates to take b ar exams without a degree from an AB.A approvedlaw school . Forme r AB.A Pr esident Whi tney ... urged the delegates to ' take a deep

gulp and agr ee to some thin gs we might not like'. With th e AB.A yielding to religious fanatics a nd bigots who wou ld force

students t o take a vow of co mmitment such as t his, one can see o ther such_ __ ____ ____ L

vows i n the offing, with other schools oflaw, or of medicine, demanding thattheir students be and forever remainroman catholic, or mormon , jew ormethodist and co ercing this stand ardas a legal one, through the h ighly bi asedreligious courts of our land.

It was Madison who said, Because , itis proper to take alarm at the first

experiment on our liberties. We holdthis prud ent jealousy to be the first dutyof citizens and one of (the) noblestcharacteristics of th e late Revolution ..The freemen of Americ a did not wait tillusurped power had st rengthen ed itselfby exercise, and entangled the qu estionin precedents . They saw all the con-sequences in the prin ciple, and theyavoided the consequences by denyi ngthe principle. We revere th is lesson toomuch soon to forget it.

The AB.A has denied the principleof freedom from religious o bligation (for

what has jesus chr ist to do ;; 'ith thesecula r legal system of the UnitedStates ) . We will all suffer the con-sequences now , since the AB .A'saction can be used as a precedent.

As a nation, we have not revered thelesson. Those w ho do not k now historyare condemne d to repeat it , and therepetition wi ll be upon us as more andmore of th e rational yield more andmore ofte n to the irrational. Ratherthan permit Oral Roberts' law school toextract such a pledge, the state ofOklahoma should h ave shut it d own.

Rather than submit t o the insult th eAB.A should ha ve appealed the federa lcourt decision - after all, it is anorganization exclusively of a ttorneysand there is sufficient talent in it thatthere was no necessity to yield.

Th e news is c ho se n to d e mo ns tr ate , m o nth af te r mo n th , th e dead r e actio n ary ha nd o f re ligion . It di c tates your hab its, sexual c o n d u c t, family size . Itce nsures c inema , th eate r, te levisio n , eve n edu ca tio n . It di c ta tes life va lu e s a nd l ifes ty le s . Re lig ion is po litics and , a lways, the most au th o ritarian a ndreactio nary p o liti cs. W e e ditori a lize o u r ne ws t o em ph asize t hi s t h es is . U n like an y ot h er m agaz in e o r n ews p a p er i n th e U ni te d S ta tes , we say so .

Page 4 Vendemiaire (O ctober) 11,981 Amer ican Atheist


7/32

Focus on Atheists

... and we won't take it anymore

Statement to the Media

UponFiling of Mississippi Suit

In mid-August American Atheists filed suits in bothArkansas and Mississippi challenging state constitutionswhich exclude Atheists from holding office or public trust .

In Mississippi, Paul Tirmenstein turned out to be one ofour bravest Atheists . He met your national officers and ourattorney in Jackson and it was he who hassled with thefederal court for hours to put the suit on the docket.

After a hard day of searching for one attorney with anyguts (to be the attorney of record) in the whole state ofMississippi, Paul retired to his motel room and wrote outthe following statement which he read at the news

conference the next day - where he also took on the entirepress of that state.I am bringing this suit on behalf of every citizen of this

state who has the kind of patriotism that calls for obeyingand supporting the Constitution of the United States .

Section 265 specifically bars Atheis ts from holding officein Mississippi. This mandates belief in a mythical super -natural god, which an Atheist refuses . This religiouslymotivated attempt to bar men of the mental capacity andcalibre of Thomas Jefferson, Abraham Lincoln, BenjaminFranklin, Thomas Edison, Albert Einstein, and Luther

i Burbank, Atheists all , from holding office , is unequivocally

I unconstitutional, and should be so declared by the court . Amere declaration of its unconstitutionality is insufficient to

'

correct this insult to and discrimination against thoseAmericans who have the mental capacity to recognize afraud and refuse to believe in fairy tales and Santa Claus.

When a former attorney general in an interview with theClarion Ledger said that section 265 is not discriminating hewas lying through his teeth, giving us a prime example of thekind of doubletalk which devious religion ists use to befuddlethose who lack the intelligence which enables them toseparate truth from falsehood . His statement that 265 wasintended to contribute to getting good men and women bypreventing Atheis ts from holding office was the assumptionof the right to declare that Atheists are not good people . Noone has that right . This is the obnoxious kind of tyrannywhich christianity has spawned throughout the ages and

which the First Amendment was intended to eliminate fromall levels of government .. I would suggest that anyone who entertains such

opinions of Atheists and has the temerity to express themshould turn his finger around 180 0 and then point . It will thenbe in the direction of a bigoted un-American whose idioticstatements carry the full imprint of fundamentalist lunacy.

This suit is being brought in a legal attempt to correct anabusive and discriminatory law of which Mississippichris tians should be deeply ashamed. Paul Tirmenstein

Austin, Texas

Egad Atheist AdsRecently , American Atheist Public Relations Director ,

Keith Berka, had the idea ofproviding every member with apage 0/ small block ads which could be used for displayadvertising in newspapers, magazines, college papers ,trade journals, etc ., across the nation . The ads , beingeach about 2 square, would cost very little and w ithmembers in every state of the union putting one ad in eachmonth the effect would be one of American Athe istscoming on like gang busters all over the nation.

It was left to the discretion of each member where (s )hewanted to place the ads, how often, or which of the ' 15 adswhich were furnished (s)he wanted to have placed . This is areport on What happened?

I was shocked to see an ad in The Tennessean advertisingliterature against God . I could hardly believe what I wasseeing . It was our ad, and you did it, and what a story it isbecoming . We are delighted with the response to thecamera ready ads which many of you have placed in yourlocal newspapers . As we knew beforehand, it wasn 't goingto be a bed of roses, and no-one described the situationbetter than one of our members in Illinois : Thanks forsending the sheet of camera ready ads - I thought it was agreat idea. Our area is served by three newspapers , so Itook the ad to the paper that has the largest circulation , theQUAD CITY TIMES . It serves the Davenport , Iowa , and

Rock Island-Moline-East Moline, Illinois, territory . It tookfour trips to the newspaper, but I finally got it in . Here 's howit went:Trip #1: The desk clerk in the ad department looks over thead and takes the necessary information to schedule the ad .He then says that he will have to get approval from his bossbecause it is a mail order ad . He returns with the informa-tion from his boss that the ad will have to be verified beforethey can run it because of possible problems with mail orderads. So I ask to speak w ith the ad manager . He arrives and Itell him that there will be no problem in verifying the ad andthat our local library right around the corner carries your

magazine on a regular basis . After a little more hemmingand hawing, he comes out and says that he is refusing to

print the ad. He also refused to give a reason for not printingthe ad . berause of possihle legal action . After accusinq himof bowing to his fear of local churches, I asked to speakWIth someone else . He said the publisher wasnt In at themoment, but I could see him later, so I scheduled anappointment for that afternoon .Trip #2 : I s how the ad to the publisher and tell him of his admanager 's refusal to print it, along with a little spiel abouthow such a little ad couldn 't hurt their paper , and how itwould only be fair since they print nearly two full pages of

Vendemiaire (October) 11,981 - Page 5

I


8/32

ads fr om local chur ches each week. He agreed to print th ead if it were first approved by the Iowa Cons umerProtection D epartment, and he gave the phone nu mber andname of who m to contact. It seems that there is a recentlypassed law in Iowa about mail order ads, and the attorneygeneral has requ ested that all newspapers contact theiroffic e when m ail order ads are received. So I called the officein Des Moin es, read them the ad, and they sa id there wouldbe no problem and that they would contact tht> newspaperand tel l them i t IS OK to print t he ad. since it IS only forinformation.Trip #3: Th e peons at the front d esk had not gott en wordthat the ad had been appro ved, and since the ad man agerwas not in at that tim e. they would have nothing to do withthe ad . They also said that when I came back to p;~1,. for thead, a certified check or cash would be required .Trip #4: After first ca lling the ad manager to m ake sure hispeople knew that they were to accept the ad, I t rekked backover to the newspaper office , paid for the ad. and schedul edit for July 30. Success at last I wasn't real thrilled ab outbeing placed at the bottom of the obituaries , but hopefullythe ad was seen by a few interested people . So if you'v egotten some requests for information lately from theeastern Iowa and western Illinois area, this may be th esource - at least I hope so .

Again , I thought the ad sheet was a gr eat ide a. I hop e tohear in a future newsletter that many other s took advantageof it as I did.

Others have had little or no difficulty In placing the adsAn Evansville, Indiana , member's ad was run directlyunderneath a huge display ad ballyhooing a catholic TVspecial . Harold Chur ch, Director of the T ennessee Chap-ter, set off a major media exp losion by placing a block of theads in The (Nashville ) Tennessean. The editor comment ed, While the editorial philosophy of The Tenne sse an In noway supports the Atheist view of religion or of god, thispaper does believe firmly in the First Amendment to theU.S. Constitution which guarantees the freedom of spe echand expression . Three days later, a columnist for the papercommented , I refer to the Sunday editorial warningreaders away from an ad that might be considered offens iveto some . For me , the warning apparently worked I look edthrough the paper half a dozen times and couldn't find thedamned th ing .... Finally , a seeing - eye fri end point ed outthe ad to me on page 24 of the Show case section. Why didwe apologize for running the almost invisibl e ad') I can on II,.'speculate , and while speculating . I pontificate thusly:. . Atheists did not m an the r acks at the Inquisition. Atheists did not burn witch es at Sal em. It is not Atheist terrorists who ar e starving the mse lves to

death in Ireland . It is not Atheists who are killing British soldiers


9/32

A Brief History of Religious Mottoeson

United States Currency and CoinsMadalyn O Hair

At the time of the founding o f our nat ion, the situation inEurop e was that the theocratic state of medieval times hadcompletel y disappeared . But, no nation had adopted theidea of mutual independence of religion and politicalgovernmen t. Expression s of the need for the same had beenvoiced b y dissident g roups and by some of the intellectualleaders of the 18th century Enl ightenment . The pre vailingsituation was that one faith was favored as the officialstate-supported religion, but other faiths were perm itted toexist with varying degrees o f freedom. At one extreme wa sHolland where w ide freedom was allowed all sects andwhich gave as ylum to the per secuted o f all Europeancountrie s. At the other e xtreme wa s Spain , where theInquisition was stil l a reality in 1787 and where th e spirit of

medieval into lerance still preva iied.Religious wars had plagued Europe during the 16th and

17th centur ies and were still remembered as recent hi story.In Peopl e ex reI . Ever son vs. Board of Education, 330 U .S.1, 194 7 the United States Supreme Court noted:

The centuries immediate ly before and contempora-neous with the colonization of America had been f illedwith turmoil , civil strife , and persecution , generated inlarge part b y established sects dete rmined to maintaintheir absolute politic al and religious supremacy . Withthe power of go vernment support ing them , at varioustimes and place s, Catho lics had persecuted Prote s-tants, Protestant s had pe rsecuted Catholics, Protes-tant sects had per secuted other Protestant sects,Catholics of one shade of belief had persecutedCatholics of another shade of belief, and all of th esehad from time to time persec uted Jews. I n efforts toforce loyal ty to w hatever re ligious group happened tobe on top an d in league with t he government of aparticular time and place , men and women had beenfined, cast in jail , cruelly tortured , and killed . Amongthe offenses for which these punishments h ad beeninflicted were such things as speaking disrespectfull yof the view of ministers of government-established

churche s, non-attendance at those churches, expre s-sions of non-belief in their doctrines , and failure to pa ytaxes and tithes to support them . '

It was to this background that the Constitution of theUnited States spoke . At the Constitutional Convention ,prayers at opening sessions were deliberately circumvented .The Constit ution wh ich emerged from that deliberation hadnot one word concerned with god . The omission was notinadvertent . It did not remain unnoticed . A number ofministers and congregations immediately contacted the newgovernment to petition that some reference to god be putinto the document . In ratification of the Constit ution,theists in state after state raised their issue of concern : thelack of a reference to god. However, om ission of an invocation

Austin, Texas

to god and the pro scription of religious tes ts for office i n thepropo sed Con stitution were acceptable to the Ame ricanelectorate when th e voters were called on to pas s theConstitution in rat ifying conventions.

The matter wa s completed in 1789 , the Constitut ion beingratified and declared to be in effect the first Wedn esday inMarch of tha t year. Wa shington was elected to the presi-dency and began to serve as of April 30, 1789. A t that time,4% of the populace of the United States was church involvedand every ma jor statesman was a de ist, including t he first sixpresidents of the United States .

The first d irections as to mottoe s on cur rency were givenin Statute II, Chapt. III, Januar y 18, 1837 , An Actsupplementary to the ac t entitled 'An Act establishing a

mint , and regulating the coin s of the United States.' (a)Sec. 2, Sixth:

The engra ver shall prepare and engrave, with thelegal de vices and inscription s, all the dies used ' in thecoinage of the mint and it s branche s.

- and in Sec . 13: And be it further ena cted, That u pon the coins struckat the mint there shall be the following devices andlegends ; upon one side of each of said coins there shallbe an impre ssion emblem atic of liberty, with aninscription of th e word LI BERT Y, and the year of thecoinag e; and upon the r everse of each of the gold and ,silver coins, there shall be the figu re or representationof an eagle , with the inscriptio n United States ofAmerica, and a designation of the va lue of the coin;but on the r everse of the dime and half dime, cent andhalf cent , the figure of the eagle shall be omitted .

The coinage was tota lly secular; as c lean from a mentionof god as was the Constitution .

Howeve r, the theistic community grew. At the time of thepassage of this law , churches could claim 12 % of thepopulation, and by the time of pre-Civil War days , churchmembership had risen to J 6% of the population by 1850 andto 23% by 1860.

Hoping to overcome the omi ssion of the mention of godin the Constitution , on February 3 , 1863 eleven .Prote stantdenominations (including United Presbyterians and theMethodist Episcopalian General Conference) organized theNational Reform A ssociation , which had as one of itsprincipal purposes to amend the Constitution of the UnitedStates to declare the nation's allegiance to Jesus Chri st, to indicate that this is a Christ ian nation and to undeniabl y put the legal basis of the land on Christian laws,institutions and usages . The Association formally peti-tioned Congress to amend the preamble of the Con stitutionso as to read :

We , the people of the United States, humbly acknowl -edging Almighty God as the source of all authorit y and

Ve ndemiai re (October) 11,981

I I

Page 7


10/32

power in c ivil governm ent. the Lord Jesu s Chri st a s theRuler among the nation s. His r evealed will a s the supremelaw of the land . in order t o constitute a Chri stiangovernment, and in order to form a more perfect union ,establish justice, insure domestic tranquility , provide for thecommmon defense , promote the general welfare , and securethe inalienable right s and the blessing s of life. libert y. andthe pursuit of happiness to our selves. our po sterit y. and allthepeople, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the

United States of America . The Christian Amendment ne ver succeeded in obtain ingeither the appro val of Congre ss or of an y of the states, butcontinued it s effort s into the 20th century , when up to thelate 1950s its registered lobbying agent s were still c ontactingthe United States Congre ss.

The National Reform Associat ion at tracted man y emi-nent men into it s ranks, both be fore and afte r its formalstructuring in 1863 . These were men such a s Supreme CourtJustice William Strong , Prof . J. H. McIl vaine of Princeton,former go vernors J. W . Geary and James Pollock ofPennsylvania, J. M. Harvey of K ansas, J . W. Stewart ofVer mont and the Comm issioner of Public Schoo ls of RhodeIsland, to name the most notabl e.

James Pol lock, who became t he director of the mint,figures large ly in the placing of the motto In God We Truston U. S. c oins. He was born in Milton , Pennsy lvania onSeptember II, 1810, graduated from P rinceton and beganlaw practice i n Pennsylvania in 1833 . He serve d in Congressfrom 1844 to 1848. He was presi dingjudge of the 8thj udicia ldistrict fro m 1851 to 1855 an d governor of Pennsylvaniafrom 1855 to 1858. President Lincoln picked him as themint's 10th dir ector in 1861, a nd he remained in that jobuntil h e resigned in 1867.

The addition of the motto In God We Tr ust o n coins ofthe United States, becomes then more than an in nocenthappen stance. What the religious fana tics who advocate dthe Chri stian Amendment could n ot do ove rtly, throug h thewill of th e electors, was acc ompl ished cove rtly, through thedetermination of on e of their memb ers, Jame s Pollock: i.e.,the recognition of the nation's dependence upon th e will ofthe chri stian god was broadca st on our co ins if not in ourConstitution.

The p erson who first [allegedl y] addre ssed the fed eralgovernment for the inclu sion of a relig ious motto on thecoins was Rev . Mark Richards Watkinson. In the folklore oftheistic America , he wa s the pastor at First ParticularBaptist Church in Ridleyville, P ennsylvania in 1861 wh en heproposed the same . The facts , however , are different .

In early 'years Mark Watkinson prepared himself for theministry at the Universit y of Lewisbu rg, Pennsylvania , laternamed Bucknell University , and then at the ColumbianCollege, now George Washington University, in Washing -ton, D . C. He was still a young man, not yet ordained - in1851 - when he first served at the First Particular Bapt istChurch in Ridleyville . (This church has been modernizedand enlarged , and is Prospect H ill Baptist Church , 7th Lincoln avenues, Prospect Park , Pennsylvania .) The Rev .Watkinson left the church in 1853 to take up service as thepastor of the Schuylk ill Bapti st Church in Philadelphia ,Pennsylvania, where he remained until 1861 . He left the min -istry in that year and died 16 'years later , on September 26 ,

PageS

1877 fit the ag e of 52.According to a Committee on Coi nage, We ights and

Meas ures Report to accompany H. R. 17296, titled ToRestore The M otto 'In God We T rust' to The Coi ns of T heUnited State s, reported out on F ebruary 27 , 1908, a Hi story of the Motto ' In God We Tru st' i s given.

From th e record s of the Dep artment [of th e Trea-sury] it appear s that the fi rst sugge stion o f therecognition of the Deit y on the coin s of the United

States was contained in a lette r addressed to theSecretar y of the Treasur y, Hon. S. P. Chase, by theRev. M. R. Watkin son, mini ster of the gospel , Ridley-ville , Pa., under date of November 13 , 1861 , which wa sas follow s:

Ridle yville, Pa., November 13, 1861 D ear Sir : You ar e about t o submit your annual reportto Congre ss respect ing the affai rs of t he nationalfinances. One fact touching our c urre ncy has hitherto beenseriously overlooke d. I mean the recog nition of theAlmig hty God in some for m in our coins . Yo u are probably a Chris tian . What if our Republicwere now s hattered beyond reconstruction? Wouldnot the antiquaries of succeeding ce nturies rightl yreason from our past that we we re a heathen nation ?What I propo se is that instead of the Godde ss ofLiberty we s hall have next inside t he 13 star s a ringinscribed with the wo rds 'perpetual union' ; within thi sring the al l-seeing eye crowned w ith a halo ; beneaththis eye t he American flag , bearing in its field starsequa l to the numbe r of the States united ; in the fold s ofthe bars the words 'God, liberty, law .' This wou ld make a beautifu l coin, to which nopossible citizen could o bject . This would relieve usfrom the igno miny of he athenism . This would place usopenly under the divine prote ction we have personallyclaimed. From my heart I have fe lt our natio nal shamein disowning God as not the least of ou f presentnational di sasters. To you first I address a su bject tha t must be agitated.

M. R. Watkinson, M inister of t he Gospel

Hon. S. P. Chase, Secreta ry of the Tr easury.

The letter showed a great concern for and kno wledgeahout that which i s Caesar 's - [Matt. 22:21).

Salmon P . Chase had be en' an antislavery senator, thengovernor of Ohio be fore he wa s appointed Secretar y of theTreasury during Lincoln' s presidenc y. He had been born

. January 13 , 1808 and reared in Keene , New Hampshire,where hi s father kept a ta vern. But when h is father died , thenine year old Salmon was sent to live w ith his unclePhilander Chase, the Episcopal b ishop of Ohio . There hecame under such relizious influence that he would write inhis diary at age 22 . April 10 . 1830. On this da y I united withthe chur ch. By conviction I am a christian . My rea son isfullyconvinced and m y understanding perfectl y satisfied. M yheart also I think cordially and gratefull y assents to the planof salvati on through free grace in chri stJesu s. Ma y he. whoendo wed me with intelle ct. enlighten m y und erstand ing.Ma y he. who has gi ven me affe ctions . dra w them suprem ely

Vendemiaire (October) 11 ,981 Amer ican Atheis t


11/32

to himself . He, later, even gave up the woman he lovedbecause she lacked religious convictions.

This extant diary well demonstrates, throughout, hi~ dailyfanatical religious commitment . Salmon Chase had threewives and four children who predeceased him . He was laternamed Chief Justice of the United States Supreme Courtand served there from 1864 to 1873 .

However, the damage that he did as Secretary of theTreasury was effectuated within one week of the receipt ofWatkinson's letter, for he immediately wrote to the Directorof the Mint, James Pollock, as follows:

Dear Sir: No nation can be strong except in thestrength of God, or safe except in His defense. Thetrust of our people in God should be declared on ournational coins. You will cause a device to be prepared withoutunnecessary delay with a motto expressing in thefewest and tersest words possible this national recog-nition .

Yours truly, S . P Chase

What could not be done through thewill of the people wasdone through the scheming of several men.

However, neither man could effectuate the change. The Actof 18 January 1837 had dictated inscriptions and mottoes.Enabling legislation was needed to make a change. Towardthat end, James Pollock immediately began to work on amotto. First the five words Our Trust Is In God were tried,but they took too much space. To attain brevity , at one pointit was fairly well settled by Pollock and his staff that the fourwords Our Trust In God would be used. It was preferredover Watkinson's God, Liberty, Law . Other mottoesconsidered and discarded were Our God and Our Countryand God And Our Country . ,

Before the year was out, bronze patterns for a half dollarand a $10 gold piece were minted using God Our Trust,which was preferred by Pollock, although over the next fewyears a number of trial pieces were minted to show thevarious mottoes under consideration. And, in December,1863, designs were submitted to the Secretary of theTreasury.

The Secretary of the Treasury in a reply letter addressedto the Director of the Mint, under date of December 9, 1863,noted:

I approve of your mottoes, only suggesting that onthat with the Washington obverse the motto shouldbegin with the word, 'Our ,' so as to read, 'Our God

And Our Country.' And on that with the shield itshould be changed so as to read: 'In God We Trust . ,,,

The coin motto had been given birth. Congress wasapproached and An Act in Amendment of an Act entitled,'An Act Relating to Foreign Coins and the Coinage of Centsat the Mint of the United States ,' approved Februarytwenty -one, e ighteen hundred and fifty -seven, was passedby Congress on April 22, 1864. That act read as follows :

Beit enacted bv the Senate and House ofRepresentativesof the United States of America in Congress assembled.That, from and after the passage of this act, thestandard weight of the cent coined at the mint of theUnited States shall be forty-eight grains, or one tenth

of one ounce troy; and said cent shall be composed ofninety-five per centum of tin and zinc, in suchproportions as shall be determined by thedirector of the mint; and there shall be from time to timestruck and coined at the mint a two-cent piece of thesame composition, the standard weight of which shallbe ninety-six grains, or one fifth of one ounce troy ,with no greater deviation than four grains to eachpiece of said cent and two-cent coins: and the shape ,mottoes, and devices of said coins shall be fixed by thedirector of the mint, with the approval of the Secretaryof the Treasury: and the laws now in force relatingtothe coinage of cents and providing for the purchase ofmaterial and prescribing the appropriate duties of theofficers of the mint and the Secretary of the Treasurybe. and the same are hereby, extended to the coinageprovided for .

Mint Director Pollock had carte blanche and could, at hisdiscretion, christianize our coins.

The first public issue coin toemploy the new motto was thebronze two-cent piece. By June30, 1865 , Pollock was able to

report that 26 ,780,000 of thetwo-cent pieces had been mint-ed, all at Philadelphia, Pa.Finally the actual motto wasconsidered in An Act to autho-rize the Coinage of Three-Centpieces , and for other Purposes,passed by Congress on March 3,1865, Section Five of that Actbeing:

And be itfurther enacted,That, in addition to thedevices and legends uponthe gold, silver, and other

coines [sic] of the UnitedStates , it shall be lawfulfor the director of themint, with the approvalof the Secretary of theTreasury, to cause themotto 'In God We Trust'to be placed upon such coins hereafter to be issued asshall admi t of such legend thereon.

By 1865, church affiliation had dropped to 15% of the 'population, the events of the Civil War having had a chillingeffect on religion. There was little use for the two-cent pieceon which the motto was first used, and after the Civil War itlost its popularity. Authority to redeem and melt the two- .

cent pieces was given the mint by a congressional act of 1871.N one were minted after 1873.

While authority to place In God We Trust on all coinshad been given by the Act of 1865, it was some time before itwas effectuated. In 1866 the motto was placed on $5, $10 and$20 gold pieces, silver quarters , halves and dollars , and onthe shield nickel, new in that year . It was dropped fro thenickels - from the 1883 Liberty Head - until sculptorFelix Schlag placed it on the Jefferson nickel of 1938.

Austin, Texas Vendemia ire (October) 11,981

IV

The 2cent bronze piecewas issued

from 1864 to 1873.

Page 9


12/32

The first dime with th e mott o was th e Win ged Liberty[Mercury - the Roman g od who served as herald andmessenger of the other go ds] of 1916. It was no t assigned tothe twenty-cent pieces, trade dollar s or $1, $2.50 a nd $3 goldpieces.

The next person to influence coinage design was T heo-dore Roosev elt. He had long b een interested in art andsculpture, and wa s quite e xcited wh en he encountered. onAugu st 3rd , 1903, an equ estrian statue of General Sherm an

at the Fifth A venue entr ance to C entral Park . New Yo rk.The sculptor wa s Augu stus Saint-Gaudens. Roo seve ltimmediately commissioned Saint-Gauden s to prepare hisinauguration medal . The quality of the medal wa s soexcellent that he decided to change the nation 's coinagedesigns, which he con sidered to b e of poor arti stic quality.He que stioned Secretar y of the Treasur y Leslie M . Shaw ,who told him that there wa s no legal impediment to hisrequesting new coin de signs from Saint-Gaudens . Shawpointed out that the dir ector of th e mint , with th e approvalof the Secretar y of the Trea sury, had discreti onary power,that coin d esign was not m andated by Congress. Rooseveltimmediately wrote the artist [November 6. 1905] andcommi ssioned new designs.

Saint-Gaudens reworked various designs for over I gmonth s, and Ro oseve lt was c losely interested in the concep-tualizations. S ain t-Gaudcnv'xon. in writinc his father's biou-raphy, notes, Finall y he attacked the difficult pr oblem ofthe inscripti ons by placing upon th e previously milled edgeof the coin, in one case. th e forty- six star s and, in the oth ers,the thirteen stars with th e' E Pluribu s U num. 'The motto 'InGod We Tru st: as an inarti stic intrusi on not r equired b ylaw. he wholl y discarded and th ereby drew down uponhimself the lightning o f public comment . It is interesting todiscover in regard to this that Secretary Salm on P. Chasereceived quite as severe a censure for placing th e words up onthis coin a s was aroused b y their r emoval. The Remini s-

cences of Augus tus Saint -Ga u d e ns edited by Homer Saint-Gaudens.

Rooseve lt's effo rts to change the coins were met with stiffresista nce from mint off icials who resented his intrusion intotheir interest sphere. Roosevel t, however , was q uite con -cerned to have a ttractive co ins and saw that the work o nthem was pushed [which included the necess ity of purch as-ing a n ew 'Janvier machine]. The first coins were put int ocircul ation about 18th Nove mber, 1907 .

At thi s point the pub lic had become awa re that the motto In God We Trust had been dropp ed from the n ew $10 and$20 gold piec es. The matter became a religiou s and po liticalissue. However, the church publications of the d ay tendedoverwhelmin gly to support Roo sevelt. For ex ample, amajor Pre sbyterian public ation, The Westmin ster, com-mented in p art:

'The motto is a relic fr om the days when piou s phraseswere in scribed on regali a. public docum ents, weaponsof war. and c oins. They have been omitt ed, one by one ,not perh aps because real trust in 90d has waned, butbecause of an increasi ng sense of t heir incongruity anda keener sense of their true meaning.' .

Rooseve lt's reaso ning for the omission has been ascribed t o

certain letters he purportedly wrote. One such is reproducedin The Letters of Theodo re Rooseve lt. edited by Elting E.Moriso n, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, Mas sa-chusetts, 1952. T his letter is written to Rev. Roland C . Dryerof l\ unda , New York , one of th e persons protesting throughorgani zations and individu ally, concern ed with the omis-sion of the m otto from the coinag e. This letter was dated11th November. 1907. Howeve r, another letter writtenallegedly to Wil liam B oldly was discove red in an auctionof the Bower s and Rudd y Galleries' American AuctionAvsoc iar io n und er number I24Q f tilt' Ke nvinuton Collcc-tion . and was s old in 1975 . The Harvard issue book had beenprinted 23 year s prior . The letters are identicalc- as follows:

HISTORY OF U.S . CURRENCY AND RELIGIOUS ENT ANGLEMENT 1no entanglement- in god we trust adde

7 9 8 85 9 95 2 8 COI NS

IALF CENT ..O NE C EN T

,TW O C N T - I IHRE E C ENT I I IT -tAU CENT


13/32

Dear Sir : When the question of the new coinage cameup we lookt [sic] into the law and found there was nowarrant therein for putting 'N GOD WE TR UST onthe coins. As the custom, altho [sic] without legalwarrant, had grown up, however . , might have felt atliberty to keep the inscription had' approved of itsbeing on the coinage. But as I did not appr ovc of it . Idid not direct that it should again be put on. Of coursethe matter of the law is absolutely in the hands of

Congress, and any direction of Congress in the matterwill be immediately obeyed. At present, as I have said,there is no warrant in law for the inscription.

My own feeling in the matter is d ue to my very firmconviction that to put such a motto on coins, or to useit in any kindred manner, not only does no good butdoes positive harm, and is in effect irreverence whichcomes dangerously close to sacrilege. A beautiful andsolemn sentence such as the one in question should betreated and uttered only with that fine reverence whichnecessarily implies a certain exaltation of spirit . Anyuse which tends to cheapen it . and, above all, any usewhich tends to secure its being treated in a spirit oflevity, is from every standpoint profoundly to be

regretted. It is a motto which it is indeed well to haveinscribed on our great national monuments, in ourtemples of justice, in our legislative halls, and inbuildings such as those at West Point and Annapolis-- in short wherever it will tend to arouse and inspire alofty emotion in those who look thereon. But it seemsto me eminently unwise to cheapen such .a motto .byuse on coins, just as it would cheapen it by use onpostage stamps. or in advertisements . As regards itsuse on the coinage we have actual experience by whichto go. In all my life I have never heard allY humanbeing speak reverently of this motto on the coins orshow any sign of its having appealed to any highemotion in him. But I have literally hundreds of times

Two years after the 2-cent piece made its debut. anotherdenomination. the S-cent piece. ~ms introduced. The twoobverse designs were quite similar (below).

heard it used as an occasion of , and incitement to. thesneering ridicule which it is above all things un -desirable that so beautiful and exalted a phrase shoul dexcite. For example, thruout [sic] the long contest ,extending over several decades, on the -free coinag equestion. the existence of this motto on the coins wa s aconstant source of jest and ridicule; and this wa sunavoidable. Everyone must remember the innumer -able cartoons and articles based on phrases like 'In

God we trust for the other eight cents'; 'In God we trustfor the short weight';'ln God we trust for the thirty-seven cents we do not pay'; and so forth and so forth.Surely I a m well within bounds when' say that a use ofthe phrase which invites constant levity of this type i smost undesirable. If Congress alters the law anddirects me to replace on the coins the sentence inquestion the direction will be immediately put intoeffect; but I very earnestly trust that the religioussentiment of the country, the spirit of reverence in thecountry, will prevent any such action being taken.Sincerely yours

Theodore Roosevelt ..The pressures of the religious community, which ignored

any concept of state ;' church separation, were felt inCongress, and in 1908 that body considered a bill to makethe use of the motto In God We Trust a requirement oflaw. A report was issued by the Committee on Coinage,Weights and Measures. to accompany H. R . 17296 . and thethrust of this report was that the measure simply reflects thereverent and religious convic tion which underlies Americancitizenship. The report also characterized the United Statesas a Christian nation and evidenced that the intent of themotto was religious. The report follows:

Your subcommittee deems it unnecessary to recountin detail the history of the legislation which requiredthe stamping of this significant motto on certaindenominations of gold and silver coinage of the UnitedStates, except to say that by the act ofJanuary, 1837,mottoes and devices for our coins were prescribed. andthat in April , 1864, in March, 1865. and in February.1873, laws were enacted by Congress providingsubstantially that the words In God We Trust mightbe inscribed upon such coins of the United States aswould admit of such inscription . and that in pursuanceof such authority the Hon. Salmon P. Chase. the thenSecretary of the Treasury of the United States,directed that the inscription In God We Trust bestamped on gold and silver coins of certain denomina -tions. Numerous petitions have been referred to yoursubcommittee from various sources throughout theUnited States asking Congress to restore this motto onthe coinage as has . been done since the passage of theacts above referred to, and until the omission of thesame from certain gold coins of the United Statesknown as 'The St . Gaudens . 'These petitions all ask for

The godless ..20-dollar gold piece was issued in 1907and1908. The public clamor 0. theists caused the ,placement ofthe motto on the reverse side of some 1908 and allsubsequent issues (illustration at left).



14/32


15/32

The Hou se passed the bill .


16/32

WHAT WOULD YOU SUBSTITUTEFOR THE BIBLE AS AMORAL GUIDE?

You ask me what I would substitute for the bib le as amoral guide.

I know that many people rega rd the bible as the onlymoral guide and believe that inthat book onl y can be foundthe true and p erfect standard of mora lity.

There are many good precepts , many wi se sayings a ndmany good regulations and laws in th e bible , and these aremingledw ith bad precepts , with foolish sayings, with absurdrules and cruel laws .

But we must remember that the bibl e is a collection ofmany books written centuries apart , and that it in partrepresents the growth and te lls in part the history of apeople. We must also remember that the writers treat ofmany subjects . Many of these writers have nothing to sa yabout right or wrong, about vice or virtue .

The book ofgenesis has nothing about mo rality. Thera isnot a lineinitcalculated to shed light on the path ofconduct .No one can call that book a moral gu ide. It is made up ofmyth and mira cle, of tradition and legend .

In exodus we have an account of the manner in whichjehovah de livered the jews from Egyptian bondage .We now know that the jews were never enslaved by the

Egyptians ; that the entire story is a fiction . We know this ,because there is not found in hebrew a word of Egyptianorigin , and there is not found in the language of theEgyptians a word of hebrew origin . This being so , we knowthat the hebrews and Egyptians could not have livedtogether for hundreds of years .

Certa inly exodus was not written to teach moralit y. Inthat book gou cannot findone word against human sl avery.As a matter of fact, jehovah was a believer in that inst itution.

The killing of cattle with disease and hail , the murder ofthe first-born, so that inevery house was death , because theking refused to let the hebrews go , certainly was not moral ;it was f iendish . The writer of that book regarded all thepeople of Egypt , their children , their flocks and herds, as theproperty of Pharaoh , and these people and these cattlewere killed, not because they had done anything w rong, butsimplyfor the purpose of punishing the k ing. Isit possible toget any morality out of this history?

Allthe laws found inexodus, in cluding the ten command-ments, so far as they are really good and sensible , were atthat time in force among the peoples of the world .

Atheist Masters

Robert G. Ingersol l

Written for he Boston nvestigator

Murder is, and alway s was, a cri me, and always willbe , aslong as a majority of people ob ject to being m urdered .

Industry alway s has been and al ways willbe the enemy oflarceny .

The nature of man is such that he admi res the teller oftruth and despises the l iar. Among al l tribes, among allpeople , truth-telling has been considered a v irtue and falseswearing or false speaking a vice .

The love ofparents for children isnatura l, and this loveisfound among allthe animals that live . So the loveo f childrenfor parents isnatural , and was not and cannot be crea ted bylaw. Love does not spring f rom a sense of dut y, nor does it

bow in obedience to commands . -So men and women are not virtuous bec ause of a n ythingin books or creeds .

All the ten commandments that are good were old , werethe result of experience . The command ments that wereoriginal with jehovah were foolish .

The worship of any othe r god could not ha ve beenworse than the worship ofjehovah , and nothing co uld havebeen more absurd than the sac redness of the sabbath .

If commandments had been given against slavery . andpolygamy , against wars of invasion and extermination ,against relig ious persecution in all its forms , so that the

.world 'could be free , so that the bra in might be developedand the hea rt civilized , then we might , with propriety , callsuch commandments a moral guide.

Before we can truthfully say that the ten commandmentsconstitute a mora l guide, we mus t add and subtract . Wemust throwaway some , and write others in their places .

The commandments that ha ve a known app licatio n here,in this world , and treat of human obligat ions are good , theothers ha ve no bas is in fact , or experience .

Many of the regulations found in exodus, leviticus,numbers and deuteronomy , are good . Many are absurd andcruel .

. Page 14 Vendem iaire (October) 11 ,981 American Athe ist


17/32

The entire ceremonial of worship is insane.Most of the punishment for violations of laws is unphilo-

sophic and brutal .. .. The fact is that the pentateuchupholds nearly all crimes, and to call it a moral guide is asabsurd as to say that it is merciful or true.

Nothing of a moral nature can be found in Joshua orjudges . These books are filledwith crimes , with massacresand murders. They are about the same as the real history ofthe Apache Indians .

The story of Ruth is not particularly moral .In first and second Samuel there is not one word

calculated to develop the brain or conscience .Jehovah murdered seventy thousand jews because

David took a census of the people. David , according to theaccount, was the guilty one , but only the innocent werekilled.

In first and second kings can be found nothing of ethicalvalue. All the kings who refused to obey the priests weredenounced, and all the crowned wretches who assisted thepriests , were declared to be the favorites of jehovah. Inthese books there cannot be found one word in favor ofliberty .

There are some good psalms, and there are some that areinfamous . Most of these psalms are selfish . Many of themare passionate appeals for revenge.

The story of Job shocks the heart of every good man. Inthis book there is some poetry, some pathos, and somephilosophy , but the story of this drama called Job , isheartless to the last degree . The children of Job aremurdered to settle a little wager between god and the devil .Afterward, Job having remained firm , other children aregiven inthe place of the murdered ones. Nothing, however,is done for the children who were murdered.

The book of Esther is utterly absurd, and the onlyredeeming feature in the book is that the name ofjehovah isnot mentioned .

I like the song of Solomon because it tells of human love ,and that is something I can understand . That book in myjudgment, is worth all the ones that go before it, and is a farbetter moral guide.

There are some wise and merciful proverbs. Some areselfish and some are flat and commonplace .

I like the book of ecclesiastes because there you findsome sense, some poetry, and some philosophy . Take away -the interpolations and it is a good book .

Of course there is nothing in Nehemiah or Ezra to makemen better, nothing inJeremiah or lamentations calculatedto lessen vice, and only a few passages in Isaiah that can beused In a good cause.

. In Ezekiel and Daniel we find only ravings of the insane.In some of the minor prophets there is now and then a

good verse, now and then an elevated thought .You can, by selecting passages from different books,

make a very good creed, and by selecting passages fromdifferent books, you can make a very bad creed.

The trouble is that the spirit of the old testament, itsdisposition, its temperament, is bad, selfish and cruel . Themost fiendish things are commanded, commended andapplauded.

The stories that are told of Joseph, of Elisha, of Danieland Gideon, and of many others, are hideous; hellish.

Jehovah was not a moral god. He had all the vices, and helacked all the virtues. He generally carried out his threats,but he never faithfully kept a promise.

At the same time, we must remember that the oldtestament is a natural production , that it was written bysavages who were slowly crawling toward the light . Wemust givethem credit for the noble things they said , and wemust be charitable enough to excuse their faults and eventheir crimes .

I know that many christians regard the old testament asthe foundation and the new as the superstructure, and whilemany admit that there are faults and mistakes in the oldtestament , they insist that the new is the flower and perfectfruit .

I admit that there are many good things in the newtestament, and if we take from that book the dogmas ofeternal pain , of infinite revenge , ofthe atonement, ofhumansacrifice, of the necessity of shedding blood; if we throwaway the doctrine of non-resistance, of loving enemies, theidea that prosperity isthe result ofwickedness, that povertyis a preparation for paradise , ifwe throw all these away andtake the good, sensible passages , applicable to conduct ,then we can make a fairly good moral guide - narrow , butmoral .

Of course, many important things would be left out . Youwould have nothing about human rights , nothing in favo r ofthe family, nothing for education, nothing for investigation ,for thought and reason, but stillyou would have a fairlygoodmoral guide.

On the other hand, ifyou would take the foolish passages ,the extreme ones, you could make a creed that wouldsatisfy an insane asylum .

Ifyou take the cruel passages, the verses that inculcateeternal hatred, verses that writhe and hiss likeserpents, youcan make a creed that would shock the heart of a hyena.

It may be that no book contains better passages than the ~new testament, but certainly no book contains worse .

Below the blossom oflove you findthe thorriof hatred ; onthe lips that kiss, you find the poison of the cobra .

The bible is not a moral guide .Any man who follows faithfully all its teachings is an

enemy of society and willprobably end his days in a prisonor an asylum .

What is morality?In this world we need certain things. We have many

wants . We are exposed to many dangers . We need food,fuel, raiment and shelter, and besides these wants, there iswhat may be called the hunger of the mind.

We are conditioned beings, and our happiness dependsupon conditions. There are certain things that diminish,certain things that increase, well-being. There are certainthings that destroy and there are others that preserve .

Happiness, including its highest forms, isafter all the onlygood, and everything, the result of which is to produce orsecure happiness, is good, that is to say, moral . Everythingthat destroys or diminishes well-being is bad, that is to say,immoral . Inother words, allthat isgood ismoral, and allthatis bad is immoral .

What then is, or can be called, a moral guide? Theshortest possible answer is one word: Intelligence .

We want the experience of mankind, the true history of

Austin, Texas Vendemiaire (October) 11,981 Page IS


18/32

the race. We want the history of intellectual developm ent,of the growth of the ethical , of the idea of justice , ofconscience , of charity, of self-denial. We want to kn ow thepaths and roads that ha ve been traveled by the hu manmind .

These facts in general , these his tories in outline, theresults reached , the conclusions formed , the principlesevolved , taken together , would form th e best conceivablemoral guide .

We cannot depend on what are called inspired books , or the religions of the world . These religions are based onthe supernatural, and according to them we are underobligation to worship and obey some supernatural being , orbeings . All these religions are inconsistent with intellectualliberty. They are the enemies of thought , of investigation, ofmental honesty .T hey destroy the manliness of man . Theypromise eternal rewards for beli ef, for credulity , for whatthey call fa ith .

This is not only absurd , but it is immoral .These religions teach the slave virtues. They mak e

inanimate t hings holy, an d falsehoods sacred. T hey createartificial crimes . To eat meat on Friday , to enjoy yo urself onSunday, to eat o n fast-days. to be happ y in lent, to dispute apriest, to ask for evidence , to deny a creed, to express yoursincere thought, all these acts are s ins, crimes aga inst somegod. To give your honest opinion about je hovah, Moham-med or christ, is far worse than to ma liciously sland er yourneighbor . To quest ion or doubt miracles, is far worse thanto deny kn own facts. Onl y the obedient, the credulous , thecringers, the kneeler s, the meek, the unquestion ing, thetrue believers, are regarded a s moral, as virtuous . It is notenough t o be honest , generous and useful ; not enough t o begoverned by evidence , by facts . In addition to this , you mu stbelieve. These things ar e the foes of morality . They sub vertall natural conceptions of virtue .

And all inspired books , teaching that only thos e whoobey the commands of th e supernatural are, or can be , trulyvirtuous , and that unqu estioning faith will berewarded with eternal joy , are grossly immoral .

Again, I say: Intellig ence is the only moral guid e.

United World Atheists

FRANCE 1981: NEW TRENDSJean- Yves Riviere

Jean - Yves Riviere is President of the recently createdAssociation pour laDeclericalisation des InstitutionsRepublicaines (ADIR), and is a member of the Union desAthees, in charge of international relations.

THE SOCIALIST STATE AND THE CHURCHIt should be interesting to strike a balance of the

respective positions of religion and Atheism in France, atthe time when a new era seems to have started in thiscountry with the advent of the Soci alist Party to power .

Before President Mitterand 's election , things were plain .Churchgoers were in charge in all Departm ents of Stat e, ornearly so . Could we reasonably exp ect a sudd en and radi calchange? I would say : no.

The Socialist Party has evol ved. Indeed, the Socialism oftoday has little in common wi th how it could be viewed acentury ago , through Jaures and Zol a. Such a concept isthoroughly outdated now .

The recent presidential as w ell as legislative pol ls sho wedthat a new electoral force has d eveloped in the course of thelast decade - a force including catholic democrats togetherwith marxists - and crystallized around the personality ofFrancois Mitterand . This accounts for th e defeat of th eCommunist Party , which has l ost about half of its sup -porters to the advantage of the Socia list Party. It alsoaccounts for the ambiguous attitude of th e new governmentin regard to religious affairs .

Even though most of the French Ministers of State

Page 16

carefully avoid displaying any religious faith , or unfaith, theywill undoubtedly be submitted to hard pressures on the partof the church. Moreover , it is worth noticing that thecatholic priests have long sin ce been sneaking in the l eft-wing organizations - syndic ates and political partie s - evenat the cost of conspi cuous - maybe more conspicuou s thanreal dissensions wi th the roman catholic hierarchy . Theresult of th ese intrigu es is that the church has perh apsgained in political power m ore than it has lost in spir itualinfluence and respe ctability.

Many soc ialist voters who elected Francois Mitteran d tothe Presidency of the Fr ench Republic cannot h elp but feeluneasy when they hear him nam e the pope his sancti ty oraddress him as v ery holy father, as he did in a rece nttelegram deploring Wojtyla's absence fr om the Eu charisticCongr ess in Lourdes thi s summ er. It seems that calling thepope the pope would b e enough for a socialist Pre sidentwhom one could exp ect to behave as a secular chief ofstate, and by no means as a religious leader's devot ee.

Such details may sound trifling , but th ere are many oth ersigns which suggest that ab out the most signific antchurch /State matters, public fin ancial aid to confession alschools for instance, things are not going to be settled easily .

Vendemia ire (October) 11,981 American Atheist


19/32

RELIGION IN FRANCEAs far as I know, there has been no official Gallup poll

about religion published in France since 1972 . At that time,a rough estimate was that out of ten people, nine hadreceived the catholic baptism ; seven asserted that theybelieved in god; fewer than four reported themselvesconvinced of jesus christ's divinity; two would go to churchevery sunday . Thus, one is allowed to conclude, accordingto these figures, that 30 % of the population, all ages mixed,

actually were non- believers , whereas only 20 % werepracticing believers . Up to now , there is no evidence of anysignificant change in favor of the church .

One of the major concerns of the roman catholic churchin France, as well as in all industrialized countries is thesteady decrease in ecclesiastical callings . We have nofigures available since 1975, when the number of secularpriests was estimated to be 32 ,000 (1970 : 36,000; 1965 :41,000) for a global population amounting to about fiftymillion. But one can see no reason why this number wouldbe higher than 28 ,000 now . Otherwise it would mean asudden reverse of the trend , and it is perfectly obvious thatthe catholic church would have made a fuss about it .

Such a disaffection for priesthood largely accounts for all

, ATHEISM AND THE YOUTHAs a result of the decline of religious faith and practices,

one can notice a simultaneous ' growth of Atheism, espe-cially amid the youth . Religions deny man the right of beingrational and rationally behaving. So Atheism is the logical 'response to the religious claims.

Indeed, Atheism has little to offer as a substitute for whatreligions provide. . This is its weakness . Religious-mindedpeople need faith : They need gods and goddesses to believe .in, to help them live . They need an after , life insurance andthey are willing , anc1 ' ready to pay the price , for it, andAtheism just offers them reality. '

But the youth do not care about either insurance or faith.Now, there is another fact that has to .be taken into

account: Children 's religious education is no longer what itused to be one century or only fifty years ago. Formerly,deeply religious-minded parents would condition the childat an early stage to the acceptance of the .belief in aninvisible being (lB), that was steadily watching its deeds andcould even read its thoughts. Such a concept was atthesame time associated with the firs t taboos (the excrementaland sexual ones, in particular). Thus, god - or whateverthis omnipotent IB may be called - would become afamiliar to the child. Later, as , the child was growing, theunconscious acknowledgment of the ' IB prevented anynegative reaction to further teachings about religion.

the show-business displayed by the church, especially sinceWojtyla's accession to the papacy . It looks as though thecatholic hierarchy had been given instructions not to balk atany tomfooleries whatsoever, in order to revive the popularawe and gullibility. ,

Pope Jean-Paul IIh imself did set the fashion when , on hisarrival in some foreign country, he would fall on all fourswith his nose stuck to the ground, like a dog sniffing at apiece of dung . A peak is likely to have been reached on good

friday, when he washed the feet of twelve beggars in theBasilica St Peter-of-Rome - as, according to the holyscriptures, christ did to the apostles during the last supper .The archbishop of Paris , monseigneur Lustiger made apoint of not lagging behind. On the same day, he washed thefeet of twelve priests assembled in the choir of Notre-Damede Paris . Still better, he publicly climbed the stairs of the Butte Montmartre , wearing a wooden cross (weight aboutforty pounds) on his shoulder, while the priests and thecrowd were chanting the usual dirges.

Nobody can say if the popular faith has been increasingsince those holy performances . But it isdefinitely admit tedamong the pious that they have stupendously delighted thelord, Up There .

But nowadays as parents ar~ notso deeply involv~d inreligious matters, the IB is no longer evoked at , an early ,stage of childhood . 0 the necessary associatioris .havenoj been impressed into the child's uncorisciousund afte r~ 'wards, when the teachings about religion will take place, it is ,already too late . The child's mind has become morecriticaland it simply rejects the absurd IB concept . .The condition -ing willnot work . This could explain to some extent why lessreligious -minded parents will always bring forth a ,stiillesserreligious -minded generation. '

An article recently issued in the French daily newspaperLe Monde states that teaching children aged seven to 12catechism has become a tricky job . Idon't know if I'm goingto believe in jesus, I haven't decided yet, one kid said when 'interviewed . Anda lassie: Me, I want to see this jesus first .How can one believe in someone we can't see? It is no usetel ling them about miracles, the female catechism teachermournfully admits , or else they at once identify jesus withSuperman or Goldorak. ( Catechism of to-day , in LeMonde. Messidor 5. 1981) .

As for teenagers, I would say that no more than 30% ofthem believe in god. If y ou ask some 'of the remaining 70%,they are likely to answer you that they don't give a damn .And you will be lucky if they don't just roar with laughter at,your funny question.

~



20/32

ON WHAT IS ATHEISTS MORALITY BASED?By Professor Vladislav Sherdakov, D.Se.

Institute of Philosophy, USSR Academy of Sciences

My attention has been attracted by some of theutterances made by U .S. President Ronald Reagan, whoclaims that it is impossible to trust Sov iet leaders becausethey do not believe in god. This mistrust can just as well beextended to the majority of the Soviet people and all non-believers in general , including those in the United States.

Since my professional interests cover ethics, religion andAtheism, I have found it possible to convey some of mythoughts about the Atheists ' moral principles .

What has given rise to the opinion that morality stemsfrom religion and that Atheism consequently leads toamorality and nihilism? Is this opinion confirmed bythefacts of life?Not at all . As facts show, criminals and amoralpeople are to be found among both believers and non-believers . All the many attempts to prove that cr ime runshigher among Atheists have come to nothing. In thecountries with a high percentage of religious peopleamorality and crime are hardly lower , and sometimeshigher, than in countries where Atheism is widespread.

Someone m ight say that those who commit crimes arenot believers in the full sense of the word . They only saythey believe in god, but in fact have no faith . It is hardlypossible to agree with this view . The strongest faith can goside by side with evil desires , intentions and their realiza -tion. Quite penetrating observations on this subject can befound in The House of Death and other works ofDostoyevsky, who can hardly be suspected of part iality forAtheism . Many simply think that ifsomeone has strong faithhe is not capable of doing wrong . Man is a much morecomplicated phenomenon. His heart isa constant tangle ofcontradictory desires . The person who has committed a

crime can immediately turn to god , repent what he has doneand beg forgiveness. To believe and to liveup to one 's beliefare quite different things . There are many believers, butthere have always been few believers who live up to theprinciples of their faith. The christian religion and churchhave always had vast opportunities for putting into practicetheir ideals : they have had the patronage of the authorities,as wellas ideological monopoly. But they have never beenable to reach their goals anywhere .

I think that by accusing Atheists of immorality , Presid entReagan based his arguments not so much on facts or logicas on political considerations . Politicians , ideologists andthe clergy insome countries zealously support the viewthatAtheism undermines belief inthe sanctity ofmoral precepts

and substitutes utilitarian considerationsformoral motives .Of course , morality has been closely linked with religionfor a long period of history ; religion sanctions moral rulesand values. But this does not at allmean that morality arisesfrom religion , that it does not have its own sources andfunctions other than those of religion and that it cannotexist without religion . Isitpossible that only believers can bekind and honest? Of course not .

It seems to me that any be liever inany country could find

Page 18

Atheists around him who would nev er be accused ofimmorality . Ifwe take a closer l ook at the people a round usand the motives of their conduct , we see that both b elieversand non-believers are guided by the same motives . Peoplebecome moral or immoral not because of religion orAtheism but for qu ite different reasons.

The majority of people in the Soviet Union are no n-believers. Still, the late dean of the Canterbury Cathedra lHewlett Johnson , who visited our country more than once ,spoke about the Soviet people 's moral purity. Sound mo ralsdo not call for religious support . The moral principles o f anation are high ifi t is inspired wi th a great idea, with a goa lcapable of leading itforward , and ifallare concerned with acause they find important . A lofty idea makes moralprinciples much stronger . For the Soviet people such agreat idea is a society of social equality which has noexploitation and oppression .

What is morality? It is sometimes interpreted as a systemof rules , bans and commands which man shou ld obeybecause this is what the lord , people and publi c opinionwant him to do . This interpretation of morality is lim ited.Morality is something more than a sys tem of precep ts. It isthe very mode of man 's existence , the mode that e nableshim to be aware of his function , meaning and goal o f life.

Charles Darwin, who developed the fundamenta ls of thescientific concept on the origin of man, believed that man 'sability to have moral qualities made him basica lly differentfrom animals . Indeed , man is man not only because he iscapable of reasoning but also, and no less so , because hehas morality . There isa Russian expression that translatesliterally as He 's lost his human appearance 'z it is said in

reference to someone who has erred morally but notnecessarily intellectually .

The principal requirement of mo rality is not to beobedient but to remain human in any s ituation. This meansthat man must respect his own d ignity and the d ignity ofothers .

Who can be regarded as morally superior : the one who ishonest because it is required by god or the one who doesnot believe in god but is honest by nature ? In thisconnection an incident comes to mind. Once when I wasstaying in a Soviet village , an old woman entered thebuilding housing the management of the collective farm .Slip nc;kpowhpr e the chairman wa s and explained that shewanted to get h is permission to take fiftyeggs at the poultry

farm. Someone remarked jokingly : You're a poultry maidyourself . so you can take the eggs , no one willknow . Thewoman replied: I 'mtoo old for that kind ofthing . It'llsoon betime for me to die and Idon 't want to answer for it to god inthe next wo rld.

Iwondered at the time : Ifthe old woman were not afraidof god, would she have stolen the eggs ? Was her honestyworth much ifit was sustained by fear? Late r on I saw that Ihad been mistaken. The matter was not in god , of course .

Vendemiaire (Oct ober) 11,981 American Atheis t


21/32

That woman was not a thi ef by nature. Her words about godwere merely an outwa rd form in which, by force of hab it,she expressed he r moral c onvictions and feelings . It is ourconsc ience that prompts us to do good, and conscience is aquality intrinsic in both beli evers and non -believers .

If a person obeys the demands made on him by someauthority, be it god , society or a social institution , hedisplays discipline and obed ience. But morality supposes afree choice , freedom of action . A moral deed is not one done

at somebody's order but one done according to the dictatesof reason and conscience .

True, conscience Can sometimes be in the wrong . Manycrimes against humanity were perpetrated with clearconscience . The history of religions provides numerousexamples of this. People killed, plundered and torturedothers while being confident that they were acting in a waythat pleased the lord . Much depends on how conscience

has been formed and what it is filled with . However , weAtheists do not think that conscience shou ld be replaced byrationalizing , by considerations of pract ical suitabil ity oreven concern for publi c interest. Consc ience accu mulatesthe centurie s-long e xperience of human coope rat ion . It alsocarries a meaning whi ch is no t quite clear at this or tha tperiod, but wh ich often pro ves to be co rrect later on . This iswhy our moral sentiments sometimes prevent us frommaking d ecisions that seem appropriate f rom the point o f

view of the public good or the desire to reduce human

Documents

American Atheist Magazine Oct 1981