There are no Gays here. Move Along.

[Freddy_the_Pig]

*Originally posted by Siege *
Has anyone else noticed that it’s not just footage of gay rights demonstrations which have been removed from this video, but also footage of pro-choice demonstrations, anti-Vietnam war demonstrations and pro-feminist demonstrations?

That was the problem. It only showed liberals demonstrating, and it was narrated by an Abraham Lincoln impersonator in such a way as to make it sound as if Lincoln approved of all of the liberal causes.

[gobear]

And even more horrifying. . .

This fall the Park Service approved a creationist text, Grand Canyon: A Different View, for sale in park bookstores and museums. The book, written by Tom Vail, claims that the Grand Canyon is really only a few thousand years old, developing on a biblical rather than an evolutionary time scale. “For years, as a Colorado River guide, I told people how the Grand Canyon was formed over the evolutionary time scale of millions of years,” Vail writes in the introduction to the book. “Then I met the Lord. Now I have a different view of the canyon, which, according to a biblical time scale, can’t possibly be more than about a few thousand years old.” One of the contributors to the book is creation “scientist” Gary Parker, who observes, “Where did the Grand Canyon itself come from? The Flood may have stacked the rock like a giant layer cake, but what cut the cake? One thing is sure: the Colorado River did not do it.” Earlier this year the Bush administration prevented park rangers from publishing a rebuttal to the book for use by interpretive staff and seasonal employees who are often confronted during tours by creationist zealots.

I take this quite personally because I gave naturalist lectures to tourists as an NPS volunteer when I worked at Phantom Ranch. The freaking PURPOSE of the NPS is to preserve the parks and to teach the public–how dare the Bushisstas mandate the sale of Christian mythology masquerading as “science”!!!
:mad:

[Homebrew]

Still dishonet but better. The Park Service is reediting the video. They say they will leave in the protests; but will also add in scenes from Promise Keeper Rallies and pro-life marches despite them not occuring at the Mall or the Lincoln Memorial.

But today that story has changed. “We have been assured that they are redoing the tape, but are not stripping out scenes of gay and lesbian events at the Lincoln Memorial, because to do so would be historically inaccurate,” said Winne Stachelberg, political director at the Human Rights Campaign, a national gay rights group. Stachelberg told the Gay.com/PlanetOut.com Network that National Park Service Chief of Public Affairs, David Barna, made those reassurances to her this morning.

“It certainly sounds as if the park service is getting pressure from right-wing extremists groups to drop images of the gay community and add other images,” Stachelberg added.

That was the problem. It only showed liberals demonstrating, and it was narrated by an Abraham Lincoln impersonator in such a way as to make it sound as if Lincoln approved of all of the liberal causes.

The gay-rights demonstrations lasted all of 13 seconds on the video. Overreact much?

Yes, and anybody who would want to put up a cross is evil, anti-humanity, and omigawd they want to corrupt our rights and destroy our country.

I don’t understand the need to put up any religious monuments on public property. Why can’t Jeezers keep your religion a private matter like The Man said to in Matthew 6:5?

[stpauler]

I doubt it…but…is there a copy of this video we can download from the park service?
[Complete and utterly shameless hijack]

IANAX (Christian), but I still would like to send Bush for Christmas a big bag of penis-shaped pretzels to choke on.

[\Complete and utterly shameless hijack]

[Diogenes_the_Cynic]

*Originally posted by gobear *
**And even more horrifying. . .

I take this quite personally because I gave naturalist lectures to tourists as an NPS volunteer when I worked at Phantom Ranch. The freaking PURPOSE of the NPS is to preserve the parks and to teach the public–how dare the Bushisstas mandate the sale of Christian mythology masquerading as “science”!!!
:mad: **

Are they using tax payer dollars to pay for this creationist tripe? How can they get away with that?

I’m not surprised, GWB has publicly stated that he thinks “the jury is still out” on evolution which shows that he he is not only the idiot he is rumored to be but that he no doubt secretly believes in creationism but doesn’t have the courage to say it to a microphone.

This country has regressed more towards theocracy under the current administration than at any time since the Scopes trial.

[gobear]

Well, the bookstores in the NPS visitors’ centers at the Grand Canyon are technically not run by the NPS but by the Grand Canyon Association, a private group, so the issue of tax-payer dolars isn’t relevant. AFAIK, the NPS does not directly disseminate any creationist crap, although they have definitely soft-pedaled their response to it.

[Guinastasia]

And people still complain about how Christians are being persecuted in our “secular” society.

Give me a fucking break.

[Miller]

*Originally posted by Reeder *
**Perhaps it’s an insult. But I see no juvenile name calling there. **

No, it was definitly juvenile name-calling. Trust me on this one.

Doesn’t mean it wasn’t true, of course.

[iampunha]

Siege, I was under the impression that the big reason for Lincoln’s suspension of habeas corpus was because of possible uprising in Maryland, and it was suspended only for that purpose and not abused (as far as I know, anyway. Gleaned that much from a survey class.). With Virginia a Confederate state, had Maryland also seceded, the District would have found itself in a rather difficult state of defense;)

Oh, and milroy, do watch what color pot you bring when you accuse others of being black.

[Random]

*Originally posted by Coldfire *
**Oh, [sub]Please, no speculation on what that 20 foot gay monument would look like.[/sub] :eek: **

No need to speculate, as any Chicagoan knows.

http://www.resultsthatmoveyou.com/l_neighborhoods-chicago-lakeview-illinois-real-estate.asp#Lakeview

*Originally posted by Coldfire *
**[Seriously, now. All these things seem so exclusionist. Why can’t people agree to respect each others symbols and memorials, rather than trying to have them removed, even if it possibly means your own symbols will be removed as well?

If a national park is a good place for a 20 foot cross, it’s also a good place for a 20 foot gay monument. And seeing as parks are pretty big, they wouldn’t even have to be next to each other.

What’s the big deal? It seriously escapes me. **

I agree.

I do local government law. This issue comes up for me regularly and as recently as last week. Legally, the rule is much as you say. Generally, the goverment cannot construct, maintain or pay for any sort of religious symbols on public property. If it allows one group to privately put up a creche in a public area, then another private group can pay for an put up a menorah, Muslim crescent, or Wiccan, um, {whatever} in the same area. More generally, if a particular public property is opened to private religious displays like this, any private display must be allowed, whether political, atheist, environmental, cultural or whatever. Yes, this arguably would include the local hate groups.

There’s some grey areas. (Is a Christmas tree a religious symbol? How about a wreath? Or if that’s religious, how about greenery put up on lamposts in a business district each December, or lights, or cartoon snowmen?)

People take this seriously. I’ve seen angry letters when a municipality ended a practice of decorating a particular public building for Christmas (and yes, the decorations were definitely Christmas-specific, and the policy change happened after at least one non-Christian resident objected to the display.) People rejected the First Amendment explanation (which included the point that even private Christian displays couldn’t be permitted unless all groups had equal access) on the grounds that “the majority celebrates Christmas” or “America is a Christian country”. (Some objectors were somewhat more inclusive and used terms such as “Judeo-Christian”, but even these complaints made it clear that more obscure sects shouldn’t have the same access.) I guarantee that some of these same angry letter-writers would be heard from if the town went the other way and allowed Muslim, Wiccan or certain political displays.

My favorite letter came from a lobbying group associated with a specific Christian denomination and contained (in the same paragraph, yet) a claim that one particular display (containing a Santa, colored lights, Christmas tree, etc.) was secular and that the people who removed it were motivated by a atheistic desire to prevent Christians from celebrating the Christmas holiday.

[Random]

On re-reading, I didn’t make one point clear enough. All of what I said applies to displays on public property. Anyone can put up whatever display they want on their own private house or land.

[Priam]

*Originally posted by Random *
More generally, if a particular public property is opened to private religious displays like this, any private display must be allowed, whether political, atheist, environmental, cultural or whatever. Yes, this arguably would include the local hate groups.

More than arguably. Here in Cincinnati a few years ago the local KKK wanted to put up a white cross on Fountain Square, I believe, and sued the city council because other organizations had put up items. Needless to say, they won their case. Also needless to say, the cross was almost immediately vandalized and knocked down.

[Dunderman]

*Originally posted by NoClueBoy *
**Oh! The ELECTIONS! :smack:

I thought you guys had messed up the Mayan calendar. **

You’re probably kidding here. I really thought they’d messed up the Mayan calendar. What does that say about me?