PDA

View Full Version : Mike Newdow seeks help


jim alison
September 15, 2006, 12:00 PM
From: <Mike Newdow>
Date: Mon, 11 Sep 2006 18:22:37 EDT
Subject: Help?
To: jaliso
Hi, Jim.

How's the house sale / move coming along? Have things panned out one way or another? I hope you're well, in any event.

I have a question regarding your possibly helping write an amicus brief in the challenge to "In God We Trust" case. I have some people writing a brief that counters the resolution that was made in Congress this year, in celebration of the 50th anniversary of the motto. That resolution is attached.

What the amicus is hoping to do is to take each of the "whereases" and provide another that shows two things:

(1) That one can come up with similar quotations for Christianity, rather than Monotheism, and
(2) That one can come up with similar quotations for equality, rather than Monotheism.

Any chance you can help?

Thanks, as always.

- Mike

THE RESOLUTION

>:|I forgot to attach the Resolution.
>:|
>:|Also, I should let you know that my Opening Brief due date is 9/19/06.
>:|
>:|- M


NATIONAL MOTTO OF THE UNITED STATES

Mr. MCCONNELL. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Judiciary Committee be discharged from further consideration, and the Senate now proceed to S. Con. Res. 96.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered. The clerk will report the concurrent resolution by title. The legislative clerk read as follows: A concurrent resolution (S. Con. Res. 96) to commemorate, celebrate, and reaffirm the national motto of the United States on the 50th anniversary of its formal adoption. There being no objection, the Senate proceeded to consider the concurrent resolution.

Mr. MCCONNELL. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the concurrent resolution be agreed to, the preamble be agreed to, and the motion to reconsider be laid upon the table.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered. The concurrent resolution (S. Con. Res. 96) was agreed to. The preamble was agreed to. The concurrent resolution, with its preamble, reads as follows:

S. CON. RES. 96

Whereas the phrase ‘‘In God We Trust’’ is the national motto of the United States; Whereas, from the colonial beginnings of the United States, citizens of the Nation have officially acknowledged their dependence on God;

Whereas, in 1694, the phrase ‘‘God Preserve Our Carolina and the Lords Proprietors’’ was engraved on the Carolina cent and the phrase ‘‘God Preserve Our New England’’ was inscribed on coins that were minted in New England during that year;

Whereas, while declaring the independence of the United States from Great Britain, the Founding Fathers of the Nation asserted:
‘‘We hold these Truths to be self-evident, that all Men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.’’;

Whereas those signers of the Declaration of Independence further declared: ‘‘And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes and our sacred Honor.’’;

Whereas, in 1782, one of the great leaders of the United States, Thomas Jefferson, wrote:
‘‘[C]an the liberties of a nation be thought secure when we have removed their only firm basis, a conviction in the minds of the people that these liberties are the gift of God? That they are not to be violated but with His wrath?’’;

Whereas the distinguished founding statesman, Benjamin Franklin, when speaking in 1787 at the Constitutional Convention, declared:
‘‘Our prayers, Sir, were heard, and they were graciously answered. All of us who were engaged in the struggle must have observed frequent instances of a Superintending providence in our favor. To that kind providence we owe this happy opportunity of consulting in peace on the means of
establishing our future national felicity. And have we now forgotten that powerful friend? or do we imagine that we no longer need His assistance. I have lived, Sir, a long time and the longer I live, the more convincing proofs I see of this truth — that God governs in the affairs of men. And if a sparrow cannot fall to the ground without his notice, is it probable that an empire can rise without his aid? We have been assured, Sir, in the sacred writings that ‘except the Lord build they labor in vain that build it.’ I firmly believe this; and I also believe that without his concurring aid we shall succeed in this political building no better than the Builders of Babel. . . .’’;

Whereas the national hero and first President, George Washington, proclaimed in his first inaugural address in 1789: ‘‘[I]t would be peculiarly improper to omit in this first official act my fervent supplications to that Almighty Being who rules over the universe, who presides in the councils of nations, and

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE S7444 July 12, 2006

whose providential aids can supply everyhuman defect, that His benediction may consecrate to the liberties and the happiness of the people of the United States a government instituted by themselves for these essential purposes, and may enable every instrument employed in its administration to
execute with success the functions allotted to his charge.’’;

Whereas one stanza of the ‘‘Star Spangled Banner’’, which was written by Francis Scott Key in 1814 and adopted as the national anthem of the United States in 1931, states: ‘‘O
thus be it ever when free-men shall stand,
Between their lov’d home and the war’s desolation;
Blest with vict’ry and peace, may the
heav’n-rescued land Praise the Pow’r that
hath made and preserv’d us as a nation! Then
conquer we must, when our cause it is just,
And this be our motto: ‘In God is our trust!’
And the star-spangled banner in triumph
shall wave O’er the land of the free and the
home of the brave!’’;

Whereas, in 1861, the Secretary of the Treasury, Salmon P. Chase, while instructing James Pollock, Director of the Mint at Philadelphia, to prepare a motto, stated:
‘‘No nation can be strong except in the strength of God, or safe except in His defense. The trust of our people in God should be declared on our national coins. You will cause a device to be prepared without unnecessary delay with a motto expressing in the fewest and tersest words possible this national recognition.’’;

Whereas the phrase ‘‘In God We Trust’’ first appeared on a coin of the United States in 1864;

Whereas, in 1955, the phrase ‘‘In God We Trust’’ was designated as a mandatory phrase to be inscribed on all currency and coins of the United States;

Whereas, on March 28, 1956, the Judiciary Committee of the House of Representatives, in its report accompanying H. J. Res. 396 (84th Congress), stated: ‘‘It will be of great spiritual and psychological value to our country to have a clearly designated national motto of inspirational quality in plain, popularly accepted English.’’;

Whereas, on July 30, 1956, President Dwight D. Eisenhower signed H. J. Res. 396 (84th Congress), making the phrase ‘‘In God We Trust’’ the official motto of the United States; and

Whereas the occasion of the 50th anniversary of the formal adoption of the national motto of the United States, ‘‘In God We Trust’’, presents an opportunity for the citizens of the United States to reaffirm the concept embodied in that motto that—
(1) the proper role of civil government is derived from the consent of the governed, who are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights; and
(2) the success of civil government relies firmly on the protection of divine Providence:

Now, therefore, be it Resolved by the Senate (the House of Representatives concurring), That Congress—
(1) commemorates the 50th anniversary of the national motto of the United States, ‘‘In God We Trust’’;
(2) celebrates the national motto as—
(A) a fundamental aspect of the national
life of the citizens of the United States; and
(B) a phrase that is central to the hopes and vision of the Founding Fathers for the perpetuity of the United States;
(3) reaffirms today that the substance of
the national motto is no less vital to the future success of the Nation; and
(4) encourages the citizens of the United
States to reflect on—
(A) the national motto of the United
States; and
(B) the integral part that the national life of the Nation, before and after its official adoption.


Let me see if I understand what you want
You want:
I have a question regarding your possibly helping write an amicus brief in the challenge to "In God We Trust" case. I have some people writing a brief that counters the resolution that was made in Congress this year, in celebration of the 50th anniversary of the motto. That resolution is attached.

What the amicus is hoping to do is to take each of the "whereases" and provide another that shows two things:

(1) That one can come up with similar quotations for Christianity, rather than Monotheism, and
(2) That one can come up with similar quotations for equality, rather than Monotheism.
**************************************************
The problem I am having with this is this:

[me to Mike]
>:|If from the above you see I am not understanding what you want correct me or
>:|steer me in the right direction
>:|

{Mike back]
>:|I think you're in the right direction.
>:|
>:|Basically, what I think the amicus wants to say is that the justification
>:|given by Congress for having "In God We Trust" as our motto is bogus. They culled
>:|through "our history" to conclude that those words - which support Monotheism
>:|- are representative of our "heritage." But they could have just as easily
>:|found quotes and incidents that support Protestantism or Christianity as our
>:|"heritage," too.

>:|
>:|Or - if they were really interested in having a motto reflective of our
>:|founding - they could have found words and incidents that support what is truly our
>:|American ideal: equality.
>:|
>:|- Mike
*************************************************

[me to Mike]
That is the problem I have with this.

Those whereas thingies weren't referring to Monotheism, as such, when those things were said and done. Everyone of them were referring to the Christian God (actually the Protestant Anglican version or the Protestant Congregational version) Monotheism would have also included the Jews and Muslims and they were not being referred to with those whereas comments.

Depending on what part of the country they were in they were talking about the Protestant (most commonly Anglican or Confrontational) version of Christianity

The references to the DOI, many/most scholars feel that those references were to the "Deist God, not the God of Abraham

That is about the only thing that can be said but I am not sure i can find any quotes by any founders that state it is the Deist God.

There are quotes by scholars that state that but not founders I don't think

Anyone have any idea or want to help?

EverLastingGodStopper
September 15, 2006, 01:17 PM
Wow, Jim, what a task you have ahead of you this weekend. I hope that some of our historians can give you and Mike a hand with this project.

Are you going to file the amicus brief? Or do you need more information in order to do it?

Majestyk
September 15, 2006, 01:40 PM
Has anyone approached the IGWT issue from "THIS NOTE IS LEGAL TENDER FOR ALL DEBTS, PUBLIC AND PRIVATE", thereby, making acceptance of the note as a method of payment, compulsory?

If, it is argued that "under god" in the pledge can be allowed because participation is not compulsory, then how can this be reconciled with placing a clear statement of faith on notes that not only would require undue effort to avoid using but acceptance of which is compulsory?

ninewands
September 16, 2006, 05:54 PM
Jim,
You can tell Mike I'm in. I'll PM you with the particulars.

Invisible Insanity
September 16, 2006, 11:02 PM
Doesn't "In God we trust" or "Under God" make a theological claim as to how many "God(s)" there are? How can such a statement be non-religious. What about the Wiccans and Wicca (which is recognized as a religion) who believe in multiple Gods. Whether compulsory or not, these statements alienate a group. It's hypocritical to believe that Wicca is a legitinmate religion while declaring a single God. I don't know, just some thoughts out there, not sure if this helps.

jim alison
September 17, 2006, 07:23 AM
Jim,
You can tell Mike I'm in. I'll PM you with the particulars.

I will tell him

jim alison
September 17, 2006, 07:30 AM
Wow, Jim, what a task you have ahead of you this weekend. I hope that some of our historians can give you and Mike a hand with this project.

Are you going to file the amicus brief? Or do you need more information in order to do it?

I needed more information to understand excatly waht he wanted He did claraufy with this additional info

---------------------
Essentially, they're trying to make Madison's point:

"Who does not see that the same authority which can establish Christianity,
in exclusion of all other Religions, may establish with the same ease any
particular sect of Christians, in exclusion of all other Sects?"

They want to show that the argument being used in the Senate Resolution -
i.e., that our nation was founded on Monotheism (as evidenced by statements, etc.
from the past) - can also be used to show that the nation was founded on
Christianity, or on Protestantism.

Then, they also want statements to show that the real founding principle was
equality.

N'est pas?
----------------------
And I din't understand French either (grin)

There is another or group of others who are actually writing this particular btief. However, he said they were not that well acquainted historically speaking with church state , so he was hoping to find history and or legal types that had more knoweledge of the history of all this to help out.

After he clarified by adding the comment about Madiosn I better understood what they wanted and was able to send 3 itmes I hope they will find helpful. Perhaps it won't be what they want either.

At this this time in my life I don't have the time to be of much help. All my "stuff" is in storage. We are trying to sell out house, in fact might finally have a buyer .

But all my time and energy had been wrappted up in that.

I am trying to move back to my home state OHIO, Ohio needs me (grin)

jim alison
September 17, 2006, 07:36 AM
Doesn't "In God we trust" or "Under God" make a theological claim as to how many "God(s)" there are?

That was the original finding of the 9th Circut of Appeals.
A finding that this year a District Court upheld as still valid since the USSC didn't say otherwise when it tuled that Newdow didn't have standing
but didn't address the ruling of the 9th Circuist of Appeals on the merits of the case.

Richard1366
September 17, 2006, 06:37 PM
It would seem to me that the first task is to show that the Constitution upon which all of our laws are based was intended to be and actually is a secular document. Our founding fathers went out of their way to keep religion and god out of our government and out of our national psyche.

Mens Rea
September 26, 2006, 08:46 PM
Jim:

I'm a 3rd year law student working on an argument to remove "IN GOD WE TRUST" from the US currency. Ironically, I'm over at you-know-who's school right here in your back yard and was surprised when my faculty advisor approved the topic. Needless to say, as a freethinker I tend to fly under the radar at my school.

I was motivated to write on this topic by a speach given by Newdow here: http://youtube.com/view_play_list?p=ABE90C3575A7E53E

I'm considering three angles. The first is originalist intent. Second is that the statement is an establishment clause violation. Lastly, I'm arguing against majorityism (sp?); if 51% of the country converted to islam, the xians I know would die if "IN ALLAH WE TRUST" were put on currency.

So yes, I'd love to help.

Talk to you soon,

<contact information edited at user request>

Shake
October 3, 2006, 02:40 PM
Ahem.

Whereas, the Treaty of Tripoli clearly states that, "the Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion," the above resolution is bunk. :D