Hello Dr Meaden and thank you for welcoming me into this quite diverse group. I have already visited The Godless Gardener and have much in common with many there. I see I am in good academia company and this is very helpful for my inquisitive nature. I was never afforded a formal secondary education, but that has not hindered my hunger for answers.
There have now been three Supreme Court cases dealing with the Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA) as it pertains to federal laws. A review of the opinions show that RFRA was strongly supported by 8 of 8 justices inGonzales v. O Centro Espirita(2005), by 9 of 9 justices inBurwell v. Hobby Lobby(2014) and by 9 of 9 justices inHolt v Hobbs(2015). Thus, the time is ripe for Atheists to challenge being essentially forced to bear the message, "In God We Trust" – in violation of their religious beliefs - as the price to pay for simply choosing to carry the nation's currency in their pockets.
In fact, in the seven federal circuits where "In God We Trust" has yet to be litigated, challenges are now being organized to do just that. Accordingly, I am searching for individuals and organizations who wish to serve as plaintiffs and who are from those seven circuits (i.e., who are from Alabama, Arkansas, Delaware, Florida, Georgia, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kentucky, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, Nebraska, New Hampshire, New Jersey, North Carolina, North Dakota, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Virginia, West Virginia or Wisconsin). If you or anyone you know would like to participate, please email contact information – including city and state of residence - to NoMoreIGWT@gmail.com as soon as possible.
Because the Supreme Court has indicated that it is more concerned about constitutional guarantees when children are involved, those who wish to protect their children from the government’s religious transgressions are especially encouraged to write. Please be assured that we will move for a court orders to keep the names of families with children under seal. (To date, those motions have always been granted, and – as far as I know – the families’ names have always remained undisclosed.)
PS - Please pass this on to any others who you think might have an interest. Thanks, again.