Talk:Ceremonial deism

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I just undid a reset to an earlier form. The current form unquestionably lacks some neutrality, but it has a few relevant facts that the other did not.

Yes, it's too one-sidedly critical of ceremonial deism, but it achieves this effect purely through mentioning a few objective facts with no rhetoric.

In order to restore neutrality, more such objective facts that could support the pro-ceremonial deism stance should be added, rather than censoring the opposition.--Rorrenigol (talk) 06:55, 18 November 2007 (UTC)

Just now saw your comments here (sorry I didn't reply before) -- but I reverted you because your whole elaborate thing about a period of 14 years being "long and customary" was simply historically factually false, since In God We Trust was used on COINS as early as the Civil war -- just not on bills (as is documented on the In God We Trust article). AnonMoos (talk) 12:00, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

---

I just added a few references to when the term has been used in supreme court decisions. If there are any objections (style, formatting, content, neutrality, citations, &c.) please let me know -- this is my first edit to a Wikipedia article, and I'm sure I'm guilty of plenty of gaffes, but I'd like to learn.Nitsua60 (talk) 03:35, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

The beginning of the article mentions that the term was coined in 1962 and has been used by the Supreme Court since 1963. However, I just reread the 1963 Abington v. Schempp opinion, and find no mention therein. Brennan, in his extensive analysis of possible future First Amendment issues, includes a section entitled Activities Which, Though Religious in Origin, Have Ceased to Have Religious Meaning which mentions explicitly both the U.S. motto and the Pledge (374 U.S. at 303). Can someone either find the 1963 usage or advise me on how to clarify that? Thanks. Nitsua60 (talk) 03:35, 20 January 2008 (UTC)