Talk:United States national motto

	United States portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

This page is so incredibly inaccurate its ridiculous

The page needs to be completely redone. There was no controversy over the National Motto changing because there had never legally been one before so it never did change. The Defacto National Motto had been "In God is Our Trust" since 1814, and in 1862 - The Pennsylvania Infantry of the Union army used "In God We Trust" as their battle cry in the Battle of Antietam, in 1865 Congress passed a law that altered what phrases may appear on money - altering from "In God is our Trust" to "In God We Trust". Everytime this is edited, a revisionist brings up E Pluribus Unum which was never a US National motto. Additionally the US being officially declared the National Anthem was done in 1916 and not 1932. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 120.29.83.147 (talk) 11:39, 24 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

untitled

The second citation is a broken link. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.54.213.67 (talk) 02:29, 6 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, fixed. Zad68 (talk) 15:52, 6 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

unofficial

Is this like an "unwritten law'? What's supportable is that it was an officially and widely used (on some coins and in one state's motto) one. It was never by any stretch of the imagination 'an unofficial motto', like "the windy city" is/was an unofficial title of the city whose motto is "Urbs in Hortio" before the 1956 legislation. The very concept of an "unofficial motto" sounds wrong, as a motto is an official branding. You might have an unofficial animal or flower, but motto? Not so much. 72.228.177.92 (talk) 02:23, 22 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Also "was generally considered uncontroversial at the time, given the pressures of the Cold War era.": should that be "was a reaction to communist atheism conditioned by the cold war era"? The current text is 1) false, as the MSM of that time doubtless record and 2) irrelevant logically to the action of choosing a motto except if one assumes knee jerk reactionism as an unquestionable basis of action. 72.228.177.92 (talk) 02:37, 22 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

"The constitutionality of the modern national motto has been questioned with relationship to the separation of church and state which has never been in the text or in any part of anything outlined in the First Amendment." This sentence also seems to be awkwardly making a deeper point that is somewhat unrelated to the issue of the national motto.75.81.48.224 (talk) 19:11, 24 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

First, newbie alert. Expect rookie mistakes. "...given the pressures of the Cold War" is a rehetorical device to compress a broader investigation into a trope. It provides an aura of facticity absent the substance of analysis. While it should not be assumed the author has selected this shortcut as part of an agenda, it is true that the details are important. The "Cold War" is not a conclusion; it is a detail. That there should be a national motto and that it should be "In God We Trust" has a history and evolution which deserves greater attention.

One has to assume that the motto was not universally acclaimed but was accompanied by claims of unconstitutionality from the start. The article as it stands could be read to suggest that constitutional objections were an afterthought. Again, this does not seem to be a subversive attempt to inject an unrelated bias but more the result of too abrupt a turn, as if it appeared out of nowhere. If the historical evolution of the motto's adoption was spelled out, such constitutional issues as there were, what objections were made would not be an addendum but would provide context and enrich the article. BeingNothing The Speaking 12:11, 27 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed merge with United States of America

I think that this article should be merged. It's just a part of the US. Schuddeboomw (talk) 19:00, 11 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

No. The article on United States (which is the proper location, not United States of America) is far too long; merging this in would add several paragraphs of very marginal information to something that's already extremely bloated. --Golbez (talk) 19:08, 11 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

No. I believe previous redirect was perfect. For people outside United States, redirect from United States of America to United States is the preferred and accurate redirect. Mr RD 23:30, 11 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion is (I believe, unless this was put in *way* the wrong place) merging the article on the motto with United States; Schuddeboomw simply put the notice on the wrong page, and I'm not going to move it to the right page because this is a merge that should not happen. --Golbez (talk) 06:14, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

No. --evrik ^(talk) 16:24, 29 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed merge with In God We Trust

There seems to be no reason for this page to exist. The articel for In God We Trust has exactly the same information and more.HAL 333 23:46, 20 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]