> >It seems that there were changes to the law in 1977 which were upheld
> which later legalized gold contracts as enforceable. Therefore gold can be
> used
> as a currency.
No. This supreme court decision is often cited by goldniks as a striking
down of the 'gold clause' but it isn't. The decision in the case involved
determined that in that case the gold was being used as a commodity and not
monetarily and so the voiding of the contract on the basis of the gold clause
did not
apply.