Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Biblical verses removed from Grand Canyon

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Latest Breaking News Donate to DU
 
Nambe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-14-03 09:39 PM
Original message
Biblical verses removed from Grand Canyon
PHOENIX, Arizona (Reuters)


After more than three decades at the Grand Canyon, three bronze plaques inscribed with biblical passages have been removed by U.S. park officials over concern that the religious messages violate the U.S. Constitution, officials said Monday.

Officials said they had no choice but to remove the plaques from three popular spots at the majestic canyon's busy South Rim after an inquiry was made by the state chapter of the American Civil Liberties Union.

"They are religious plaques on federal buildings and that's not allowed based on the law," said Maureen Oltrogge, a Grand Canyon National Park spokeswoman. ---

Privatize bush It’s a Good Thing
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
DianeG5385 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-14-03 09:46 PM
Response to Original message
1. Ya know some things are sacrosanct
Even though I am not religious, I have spent many years at the Grand Canyon and, against my will, have felt the presence of God...While in most circumstances secular, such as school and government buildings I would protest against the presence of state sanctioned religion, I somehow don't mind God's presence at the Grand Canyon. Call me a hypocrite.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Az Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-14-03 10:00 PM
Response to Reply #1
5. I understand the feeling you have
I started a thread in the Lounge ( http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=105&topic_id=21721&mesg_id=21721&page= ) concerning just such a feeling. I used to climb mountains and was in awe of the view I had. It is a profound sensation. However it is not the view that has the plaque on it. If there is a god his/her/its plaque would be the canyon itself. I don't think he/she/it needs our limited abilities to justify the magnificence of the scenery. It is in fact a federal building and nitpicking or not it is the right thing to do to a government building.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
alaine Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jul-15-03 12:56 AM
Response to Reply #1
29. God doesn't just belong to Jews and Christians.
I'm not offended by references to god, as long as every existing religion's god is included. Since this is not possible, I think we should go with what I learned in my southern baptist sunday school as a child, which was "when in doubt, leave it out."

With all due respect to atheists, double the above. Embarassing how I get offended by things that obfuscate the right to freedom OF religion, but forget to respect atheist's freedom FROM religion.

God bless the ACLU.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
johnnybegood Donating Member (45 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-14-03 09:53 PM
Response to Original message
2. This is why we take a bad rap.
The "religion police" are out in full force trying to stomp out every vestige of Christianity. I wonder what would happen if some of those buttes were re-namend after the Christian God. The ACLU would have a fit. But it's okay for Hindu Gods to be represented. Bullshit.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Az Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-14-03 09:55 PM
Response to Reply #2
4. Um
Help me out here. What representation of Hindu religion are we talking about here?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lkinsale Donating Member (662 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-14-03 10:25 PM
Response to Reply #4
15. Vishnu Temple, Wotan...
Names of points and rock formations.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Az Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-14-03 10:46 PM
Response to Reply #15
19. Ah
Well if I understand the ACLU's position it is not the rock formations that are objectionable. It is the federal building bearing the plaque that is problematic. If someone wants to name a rock formation God's hand I don't think the ACLU would have a leg to stand on as that is not the federal government dictating religion.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
alaine Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jul-15-03 01:11 AM
Response to Reply #15
30. What about Thursday and Friday?
Freya and Thor ring a bell? (Viking Gods). Or all the hundreds of thousands of Native American place names in the U.S., many of which have a subtext related to the mythology of indigenous tribes. Therein lies the rub. Jewish or gentile are the only real religions, everything else is referred to as mythology, the occult, cult, beliefs, traditions,etc, i.e. they don't count. The word 'trivia' had a holy subtext in neolithic days, meaning the intersection of three roads, indicating a holy or magical place. To get rid of the religious references would mean dismanteling the whole language, but names and references are not as serious violations to me as federally endorsed religious laws and 'commandments'. Maybe there should be a "Jesus jump-off" or "Mary Magdelene mountain", or something, but Christians would probably see this as sacriligeous.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bowens43 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-14-03 10:02 PM
Response to Reply #2
7. Bullshit is right.
Religious text has no place in a federally funded park.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
varun Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-14-03 10:23 PM
Response to Reply #2
12. I'm a Hindu
and if I see any Hindu scriptures on any govt. property in USA, I'll vehemently opose that.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DieboldMustDie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-14-03 10:55 PM
Response to Reply #2
23. Don't know about national park sites...
but there are plenty places in the U.S. with Christian names that I never hear anyone complaining about: e.g. San Francisco, Corpus Christy, Saint Petersburg.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DBoon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-14-03 11:01 PM
Response to Reply #2
25. Zion Nat'l Park
Does have peaks named after Biblical patriarchs. Just the way it is. I live in a city (Los Angeles) named after Roman Catholic spirits. I do see a difference between the historical legacy of a geographic name and deliberately placing an artifact with enscriptions from a particular religious text in a public facility AFTER it has become a public facility.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
johnnybegood Donating Member (45 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-14-03 09:53 PM
Response to Original message
3. This is why we take a bad rap.
The "religion police" are out in full force trying to stomp out every vestige of Christianity. I wonder what would happen if some of those buttes were re-namend after the Christian God. The ACLU would have a fit. But it's okay for Hindu Gods to be represented. Bullshit.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bowens43 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-14-03 10:04 PM
Response to Reply #3
8. Are you at all familiar with the concept
of the separation of church and state? It's a very good thing.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Mari333 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-14-03 10:01 PM
Response to Original message
6. Good. When I visit the Grand Canyon
I dont need other people's religious messages taking away from the Grandeur of the place. Each individual person can bring, in their own minds, their own definition of what the Grand Canyon means to them, without someone else's words muddying up the effects.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
pruner Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-14-03 10:08 PM
Response to Reply #6
9. well said
n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Nambe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-14-03 10:15 PM
Response to Original message
10. Would non-religeous verse be acceptible?
Edited on Mon Jul-14-03 10:16 PM by Nambe
Many recreations of Native American legends or ancient Chinese oracles are brilliant and fluid in places of awe and grandeur. I would like that if it was discrete and well done. Psalms has great stuff if you omit the specific superior being words and condemnation threats.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
hayu_lol Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-14-03 10:24 PM
Response to Reply #10
13. The layers of earth laid down by eons of time...
are part of the puzzle that fumblementalists claim their god did deliberately to confuse the awful scientists of today with their unbacked theory about the age of the earth being more than 6000 years old...dont you all remember that...coupled with the puzzle of the dino bones in different layers...by the same diety who has all the time in the world for practical jokes.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Sirius_on Donating Member (478 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-14-03 10:24 PM
Response to Reply #10
14. Its a double standard
Thats the first thing I thought of. I remember visiting many parks out west where there was a Native American saying that had some mention of God(s) or spirits in it. Public land too.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TennesseeWalker Donating Member (925 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-14-03 10:22 PM
Response to Original message
11. In General
I couldn't care less whether or not the Ten Commandments are displayed on a courthouse, or in school, or on a yard sign next to somebody's water meter.

One, NOBODY pays much attention to them anymore, they ARE the basis for a lot of common law, and help to make the distinction between "good" things and "bad" things...they are pretty basic norms, like, don't steal, don't kill, blah blah.

Those are pretty good things to think are OK. It also helps me weed out people who can't have too much critical thinking going on when they think this matters soooo much that they HAVE to put a sign in their yard, or try to force children to have voluntary prayer in schools. Those people need to be identified SOMEHOW. How else are we gonna know who's awake?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Mari333 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-14-03 10:27 PM
Response to Reply #11
16. well if you dont mind the 10Cs then I guess you wont mind
verses from the Satanic bible or the Kama Sutra..because , legally, one cannot put just ONE religious text on public property without the right of others to do the same..

Thats why there should be NONE....the govt must stay non partisan..

PS...there are 3 versions of the 10 Cs . Catholic, Protestant, and Jewish.

Many of the 10Cs are Unconstitutional just by their wording. I prefer to see the Constitution and the Bill of Rights on US public property. THOSE are the real foundations of the USA.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Sirius_on Donating Member (478 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-14-03 10:31 PM
Response to Reply #16
17. 10 Commandments are positive
Most of the 10 commandments would be followed by athiests as well as Christians. The effects on society by those laws are positive. Satanism is the love of evil, without doubt regressive and dangerous.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DieboldMustDie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-14-03 10:48 PM
Response to Reply #17
21. The first three...
or four (depending on how you count them) are decidedly Jewish/Christian.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NickB79 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-14-03 11:20 PM
Response to Reply #17
26. So are verses from
the Torah, the Quran, Budhhist texts, Hindu writings, Native American religions, etc. Most religions are based on messages that are positive in nature. Very few religions can last long if based upon evil beliefs. So, why none of these being posted alongside the 10 C's?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TennesseeWalker Donating Member (925 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-14-03 10:32 PM
Response to Reply #16
18. lol...I really don't care what they post
I just don't want it cluttering up my view.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JewelDigger Donating Member (440 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-14-03 10:47 PM
Response to Reply #16
20. ehm, just curious....
Could you please explain your statement "Many of the 10Cs are Unconstitutional just by their wording."

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ChillEB Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-14-03 10:56 PM
Response to Reply #20
24. I believe s/he means...
The actual mention of "God" within the commandment, perhaps? The ones that do not, could conceievably be considered 'constitutional' in and of themselves. Assuming they appear without a big "the Ten Commandments as Handed by God to Moses which you will all GO TO HELL if you do not follow" label, most are really just permutations of the Golden Rule ...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jsw_81 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jul-15-03 12:10 AM
Response to Reply #20
27. Unconstitutional 10C's
Christian fundies are fond of saying that our laws are based on the 10C's, but this is simply not the case. Here are a few commandments that would almost certainly be struck down if passed into law:

Thou shalt have no other gods before me. <---Unconstitutional. Americans are, thanks to the first amendment, free to worship one god, ten gods, a zillion gods, or no god(s) at all.

Thou shalt not make thee any graven images... <---Unconstitutional. Americans are free to make virtually any kind of "graven image" they want.

Thou shalt not take the name of the lord in vain. <---Unconstitutional. We're free to take the name of the "lord" in vain any time we want.

Keep the Sabbath holy. <---Unconstitutional. Our government is not allowed to force any citizen to keep any "holy" day.

Honor thy father and thy mother <---Unconstitutional. In most cases it's a good idea for children to honor their parents, but the government couldn't pass a law forcing children to do so.

More here:

What Is Wrong With the Ten Commandments?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
delete_bush Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jul-15-03 12:28 AM
Response to Reply #20
28. Depends...
on which of the 3 old testament versions you're using.

A) The first time Moses came down from Mount Sinai with commandments, he merely recited a list (Exodus 20:2-17), which is the version most churches today erroneously call the "Ten Commandments," although they were not engraved on stone tablets and not called "the ten commandments."

B) The first set of stone tablets was given to Moses at a subsequent trip up the mountain (Exodus 31:18). In this =tory, Moses petulantly destroyed those tablets when he saw the people worshipping the golden calf (Exodus 32:19).

C) So he went back for a replacement. God told Moses: "Hew thee two tables of stone like unto the first: and I will write upon these tables the words that were in the first tables, which thou brakest." (Exodus 34:1) Here is what was on the replacement tablets (from Exodus 34:14-26):

1) Thou shalt worship no other God.
2) Thou shalt make thee no molten gods.
3) The feast of unleavened bread shalt thou keep.
4) Six days thou shalt work, but on the seventh day thou shalt rest.
5) Thou shalt observe the feast of weeks.
6) Thrice in the year shall all your menchildren appear before the Lord God.
7) Thou shalt not offer the blood of my sacrifice with leaven.
8) Neither shall the sacrifice of the feast of the passover be left until the morning.
9) The first of the firstfruits of thy land shalt thou bring unto the house of the Lord thy God.
10) Thou shalt not seethe a kid in his mother's milk.

Although I find boiling a goat in its mother's milk a bit repugnant, I don't believe that #10 or any of the others would be found to be unconstitutional. Although if * gets a chance at a nomination then all bets are off.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
hatrack Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-14-03 10:52 PM
Response to Original message
22. Good!
Edited on Mon Jul-14-03 10:54 PM by hatrack
The last thing I need to see when visiting one of the most awe-inspiring sites on the planet, when peering a mile straight down to 1.2 billion year-old rock, is a frickin' Sunday school lesson!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri May 03rd 2024, 03:34 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Latest Breaking News Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC