Bible Verses Removed From Grand Canyon

[Grojlach]

Originally posted by pritchke: Hitler would be proud.

*sigh*
I still think we should add Godwin's Law and its consequences (as applied in the news groups mentioned in its definition) to the official rules.

[Rokenn]

Originally posted by Night Stalker: Radical atheism is as much a faith based religion as radical Christianity. Atheism just places it's faith in the concept that God doesn't exist. As for religious text being unConstitutional, the 1st Ammendment says "freedom of religion" - not freedom from religion.

I prefer to be called a Bright [img]tongue.gif[/img]

As for the so-called radicalism, well Atheist (err Brights) are one of the few groups it is still acceptable to condemn and blame for our christain socities troubles

[ 07-15-2003, 05:49 PM: Message edited by: Rokenn ]

[Aelia Jusa]

Originally posted by Chewbacca: quote: from the article The plaques are inscribed with passages from the Book of Psalms, specifically, by chapter and verse 68:4, 66:4 and 104.24. The last verse, in the King James Version of the Bible, reads: "O Lord, how manifold are thy works! in wisdom hast thou made them all: the earth is full of thy riches."

If this isn't religious poetry, what is? I don't have a Bible handy, so I can't comment on the other verses. It's practically a prayer, a prayer to the christian God on public goverment land.
[/QUOTE]Yes that's what I was thinking when I read it - I don't think you could really say that if you removed the Psalms reference that nobody would realise it was a religious verse. It basically says 'God made this, what a wonderous thing'. Joe Bloggs could have said it; it's still religious.

Now I don't find it offensive per se. That is, if I was at the Canyon and I saw it there I wouldn't feel angry or slighted in any way. However the way I see it is - this is public land, that is, 'owned' by the government. So stuff that it on that land is endorsed by the government. Now there is a plaque that says that God made this structure, implying that the representative government endorses creationism and God. So therefore they are a Christian government. And if the separation of church and state is something that America believes in, and is in the constitution, then that is a contradiction.

[Chewbacca]

Originally posted by pritchke: quote: Originally posted by Chewbacca: [QB] from the article The plaques are inscribed with passages from the Book of Psalms, specifically, by chapter and verse 68:4, 66:4 and 104.24. The last verse, in the King James Version of the Bible, reads: "O Lord, how manifold are thy works! in wisdom hast thou made them all: the earth is full of thy riches." ] "O Lord" - Could be referring to a noble man or king who builds and creates many temples and buildings. Are you sure O Lord isn't referring to king Solomon, or another great king from those times. You see just because it is from the bible you automatically assume God when in reality it can be applied in other ways.

yeah, if you take the words "O Lord" out of the context of the rest of the verse and the rest of the book as well, twist it around a bit and put it back in, sure. I'm pretty sure the religious group who donated those plaques thought that exactly. [img]graemlins/laugh.gif[/img]

O Lord can also be interpreted as GOD so the logic works both ways.

[Timber Loftis]

Originally posted by Chewbacca: I suppose if someone chose to appreciate the poetry of the bible in a national park, they could bring their own copy. Or they can buy some private, non-goverment land to set their plaques. Face it, however one sees the Bible, it is widely considered a religious text, to some the very word of God. It has no place on goverment property as that could be percieved as goverment endorsement of a religion.

We've been here before. They would certainly be allowed to post poetry from the Odyssey, but not from Psalms? What about a Dante's Inferno quote on public land. Is that religious -- or sacreligious? Dante would say it's both. Yet it would be fine to put "abandon hope all ye who enter here" at the gates of Alcatraz.

[Chewbacca]

I wonder if we could all agree that when one goes to the Grand Canyon, it is too see the Grand Canyon? Not plaques or verses or anything else really.

Following this common sense logic why is it a big deal that these plaques were removed if they wouldn't neccessarily benifit everyones expirience of seeing the Grand Canyon? A christian can still goto the Grand Canyon and enjoy it in their own way, now so can an aethist, buddist, ect.

Would you rather a nice long expensive lawsuit over the issue, when the goverment can just take them down and retrun them out of what seems to me to be a better safe than sorry point of veiw.

[Aelia Jusa]

Originally posted by Timber Loftis: We've been here before. They would certainly be allowed to post poetry from the Odyssey, but not from Psalms? What about a Dante's Inferno quote on public land. Is that religious -- or sacreligious? Dante would say it's both. Yet it would be fine to put "abandon hope all ye who enter here" at the gates of Alcatraz.

But Timber, there's a difference between poetry and poetry suggesting religious support from the government. Unless your Odyssey quote included something along the lines of 'praise be to Zeus for he made this great Canyon' then it's not comparable to the Psalms quote that was removed. For me at least, though I can't speak for whoever complained, it's the content of the poetry and what it implies, not the source.

[Grojlach]

Sorry for going off-topic for a moment here... Maybe we could turn this into a seperate topic if needed.

Originally posted by pritchke: I wasn't calling anyone Nazi's but Hitler seemed to be a guy that liked to take away people's freedom. So if he was watching all these text being removed it would probably make him simile. No one is being called a Nazi, it is just that sometimes I wonder what was the purpose of defeating Germany if we cannot display a plaque with poetry.

Yikes.
Sorry Pritchke... But whether it's the annoying font ( ) or some deeper grudge on your side that's surfacing, I *do* think hurling nazi-remarks into a debate could both seriously hurt your otherwise probably fair points *and* damage your reputation as a serious and to-the-point debater. And this "excuse" isn't really helping either.
While I don't care much about the topic subject at hand (both religion and active atheism are things that happen to other people ), I do think your points would have been a lot more respectful without that childish and cheesy remark - sorry to say this, but I normally consider it to be one of the most obvious signs of weakness someone could show during a discussion, in fact; and your points really didn't need it.

Take the above the way you want - as an insult from an uptight Godwin's Law groupie (oh no, I'm uptight and I hang on to rules. But so did the nazi's! They must be so proud of me *snif* ), or as an advice for future debates, as was my intention.

[pritchke]

Originally posted by Chewbacca: A christian can still goto the Grand Canyon and enjoy it in their own way, now so can an aethist, buddist, ect.

And they could not enjoy it before with the plaque? I mean the plaque must have been very noticeable and offensive when compared with the tiny size of Grand Canyon. Sorry I couldn't resist, the thing I find distrubing is the people actually complain about these things. They are just out looking for a fight because picking a fight increases there feeling of importance for some reason. People going to see the canyon are not even likely to notice the plaque, thay should be in awe of the canyon.

[ 07-15-2003, 06:32 PM: Message edited by: pritchke ]

[pritchke]

Anyway I enjoyed the debate, but I must run.

Sorry about the Hitler comment, my fustration of having the freedom of religion and expression taken away. Lets face it, anyone of any religion should be allowed to donate a small plaque if the text is within reason. there was nothing stopping a Buddist from donating one, if they did, no one would complain and I would have no problem with it, I actually enjoy readings from other religions, and their art. We should be more open as a society and appreciate all religions.

[ 07-15-2003, 06:43 PM: Message edited by: pritchke ]