Bible Verses Removed From Grand Canyon

[Chewbacca]

Originally posted by pritchke: quote: 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. [/QUOTE]If I saw a plaque there I would read it, thinking it had some historical relevance to the Grand Canyon. I wouldnt expect poetry, religious or otherwise.

Public goverment displays of a religion, big and small, offend me. If you can't imagine why, I respect that, but thats how it is. I'm not an atheist either.

I wouldn't be looking for a fight by complaining, merely acting out of the principles I believe in. Again if you disagree I respect that, but thats how it is.

[pritchke]

I do understand were you are coming from and I respect your view. But I just believe removal is not an appropriate solution. We really should not be offended by such minor things as plaques and religious poetry. If it bothered someone that much then they could preform a pro-action. Instead of complaining (negative) they could try to see if they could donate (positive) a plaque with poetry from whatever religion they are to be placed next to that plaque or wereever they like. That way they would know that they still have the same rights and freedoms if it was accepted. How do you think that the original people who donated the plaque now feel. I would appreciate looking at any plaque from any religion because it reminds me how really similar they are despite the differences.

This time I am really gone for today.

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

[Chewbacca]

Originally posted by pritchke: I do understand were you are coming from and I respect your view. But I just believe removal is not an appropriate solution. We really should not be offended by such minor things as plaques and religious poetry. If it bothered someone that much then they could preform a pro-action. Instead of complaining (negative) they could try to see if they could donate (positive) a plaque with poetry from whatever religion they are to be placed next to that plaque or wereever they like. That way they would know that they still have the same rights and freedoms if it was accepted. How do you think that the original people who donated the plaque now feel. I would appreciate looking at any plaque from any religion because it reminds me how really similar they are despite the differences. This time I am really gone for today.

I like that way of thinking, being pro-active [img]graemlins/thumbsup.gif[/img] Its a refreshing viewpoint in the whole issue.

I actually do appreciate the teachings of all religions myself as well as appreciate the similarity amongst them. We have focused on the differences for too long as a human race, but thats a different topic. [img]smile.gif[/img]

Cheers!

[Cloudbringer]

What I fail to see is why anyone thinks a poem or other verse from any book, in this case the Bible (but just as easily another 'religious' volume) is in any way an attempt by the Federal government to force a particular religious belief on the nation?

If a hundred thousand visitors go to the Grand Canyon in a particular week/day etc and see a psalm are they being told by the government that this is the religion of the country and has Congress thus 'established' a 'state' religion? Millions more don't see that psalm plaque so how are they being forced into this 'state' religion? Not in any way I can see. Thus my belief that those who pick these petty feuds are doing it for the sheer pleasure of being difficult or as pritchke says, they want the attention a court case brings.

I think where it broke down is when the law started interpreting the Constitution's sanction against Congress establishing a state religion to mean that no religious symbols may be displayed anywhere public funds are used and people may not practice their beliefs in such places.

[Cerek the Barbaric]

Originally posted by Cloudbringer: I think where it broke down is when the law started interpreting the Constitution's sanction against Congress establishing a state religion to mean that no religious symbols may be displayed anywhere public funds are used and people may not practice their beliefs in such places.

You are correct in theory, Cloudy, but in reality the term "no religious symbols my be displayed" has been translated to mean "no Christian symbols may be displayed". I challenge anyone to cite or provide documentation of a case where a symbol of any religion other than Christianity was removed from public or federal property.

Your mention of totem poles is a perfect example. These are monuments erected to pagan gods (from the Christian viewpoint). So if there are any totem poles standing in any of our National Parks, then I believe everyone can agree they should be taken down and removed immediately - lest people believe the Government is trying to forcibly establish these Native American gods as the "offical American pantheon" of dieties to be worshipped. Does anybody happen to have the A.C.L.U.'s 800 number?

Chewbacca - I understand your viewpoint and resentfulness towards Christianity, but I honostly have to wonder how staunchly you would be defending the A.C.L.U. if they were forcing the removal of these plaques if they had contained quotes from some of the great Native American chiefs or shamans and exalted their gods of nature for creating such a natural wonder.

[Chewbacca]

Originally posted by Cloudbringer: What I fail to see is why anyone thinks a poem or other verse from any book, in this case the Bible (but just as easily another 'religious' volume) is in any way an attempt by the Federal government to force a particular religious belief on the nation? If a hundred thousand visitors go to the Grand Canyon in a particular week/day etc and see a psalm are they being told by the government that this is the religion of the country and has Congress thus 'established' a 'state' religion? Millions more don't see that psalm plaque so how are they being forced into this 'state' religion? Not in any way I can see. Thus my belief that those who pick these petty feuds are doing it for the sheer pleasure of being difficult or as pritchke says, they want the attention a court case brings. I think where it broke down is when the law started interpreting the Constitution's sanction against Congress establishing a state religion to mean that no religious symbols may be displayed anywhere public funds are used and people may not practice their beliefs in such places.

I'll begin with your second point. In this case the ACLU sent a letter, noting the complaints. Someone in the Department of the Interior read the letter, looked at a history of complaints and decided instead of wasting the already under-funded parks systems money on a legal battle over plaques, they took them down. This has gotten little press outside Arizona. I wonder if the Church group sued to have the plaques put back if you would think they were doing for the sheer pleasure of being difficult or to get the attention of a media trial?

Back to your first point, I think it is the perception that counts. Of course these plaques don't represent our goverment's attempt to force religion on anyone. We are talking about Arizona, not Alabama. But it can be percieved as a something like that to some people, goverment favoritism of one religion, or of religion in particular over lets say atheism. Perception can be stronger than fact.

As for your third point, thats the whole problem...interpretation. You have yours, I have mine. We could back and forth all day, each presenting a case as to why our own respective interpretations are correct. I would rather just smile and let it be. [img]smile.gif[/img]

[Djinn Raffo]

Originally posted by Cerek the Barbaric: I challenge anyone to cite or provide documentation of a case where a symbol of any religion other than Christianity was removed from public or federal property.

Could you name a public or federal property that has a symbol of any religion other than Christianity?

[ 07-16-2003, 02:05 PM: Message edited by: Djinn Raffo ]

[Chewbacca]

Originally posted by Cerek the Barbaric: Chewbacca - I understand your viewpoint and resentfulness towards Christianity, but I honostly have to wonder how staunchly you would be defending the A.C.L.U. if they were forcing the removal of these plaques if they had contained quotes from some of the great Native American chiefs or shamans and exalted their gods of nature for creating such a natural wonder.

I am fed up with people telling me how resentful I am towards Christianity. Thats a boat-load of crap, and just about flamebait in my opinion.

If you read any of my posts on this thread, it would be clear that I would honor the history of the Grand Canyon, and that I would be open to a diverse display of plaques or none. PERIOD.

You clearly know very little about Native Americans and their "Gods" of nature. You don't need plaques for what you can have in your heart.

[Cerek the Barbaric]

I saw your post saying that you would support a display of a variety of religious texts. I also saw this post you made before that...

Originally posted by Chewbacca: Hitler would be proud...sheesh. Thats a poorly chosen statement if I ever saw one, not to mention incorrect and over the top. The point is, these were bible verses, the religous text of christainity. Blame the supposed persecution of things christian or the fact that its just beautiful literature all you want, but it still a piece of religious text that has references to the Christian God. In case you didnt know, some Americans dont believe in God. Considering the Grand Canyon is considered sacred by native americans, who were forcibly christianized in mass for all intents and purposes, I consider these plaques not only unconstitutional but offensive as well. Good riddance I say, we have enough painful reminders of the past.

You can call my comment about your resentfulness towards Christianity a boat-load of crap if you want, but your own words seem to suggest otherwise. According to your last statement above, any public display of Christianity is a "painful reminder of the past" and the plaques were "offensive".

I'm not trying to flamebait you. I am merely drawing conclusions from statements you have made. I also said that I respect your viewpoint and beliefs and I have echoed that same sentiment in the past.

[*\Conan/*]

Originally posted by Djinn Raffo: quote: Originally posted by Cerek the Barbaric: I challenge anyone to cite or provide documentation of a case where a symbol of any religion other than Christianity was removed from public or federal property.

Could you name a public or federal property that has a symbol of any religion other than Christianity? [/QUOTE]

Which museum would you like to talk about on the very door steps of Washington DC. The SI is a great example of this. Let's look at the new American Indian going up a stone's throw from the capital. Although the federal funds don't cover all the expenses, that's where private donations are relied on. Mission statements are including a higher priority of knowledge and traditions of many for funds also. Very good place to visit Djinn

I think it's wrong to remove these plaques myself, come on ! How old are these does anyone know? We all know it's wrong to quickly remove any "forefather's" site's and markers.

[img]graemlins/2cents.gif[/img]