if you are not using the same arguments that you would use if the motto said, 'We Trust In No God,' then you are being a moral hypocrite. You are proving that you care nothing about treating others as you would wish to be treated by them. If you are using arguments that you would claim constitute injustice if others applied them to you, then you must admit that they constitute the same injustice when you use those arguments against them.

you know that if the roles were reversed, and you were out here, and somebody was sitting up there insisting that a national motto that said 'We Trust In No God' be posted in all the schools, you would know that he was doing it in order to force his religious views on you and your children. For that very reason, we know that the reason you support this proposal is because you want to force parents who do not share your religious beliefs to encounter this message of exclusion every time they sit in a classroom.
http://urltea.com/210d

This article is much better than the one I clipped
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,308405,00.html

...I"m sure that the arument is simply that making any statment for or against trust in God is goine to exclude one party or another and therefore be inapropriate. So "we trust in no God" would be opposed just as much, and would also be inapropriate. Sothing we could all agree on (and that woudl be legal) might be "in God some trust, but in the law we all abide"

...okay what I said sounds kind dumb at the end, but you see where I"m gooing with this...