Do you have adblock enabled?
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Counterpunch.org)   Jesus dug the Grand Canyon, says dingbat. Bush Administration agrees   (counterpunch.org) divider line 358
    More: Asinine  
•       •       •

14500 clicks; posted to Main » on 23 Dec 2003 at 10:40 PM (11 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



358 Comments   (+0 »)
   

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | » | Last | Show all
 
2003-12-24 01:25:03 AM  
Holy Farkin Moses, Jesus dug the Grand Canyon=Stupid President. Defend your premise!
 
2003-12-24 01:27:00 AM  
i also read it twice, with the hope that somewhere in the article that would un-sicken me. just about every day i read something about our country getting closer and closer to a religion-based society. i just took my dinner out of the oven and i don't think i'm gonna eat. this article made me sick to my stomach. Fuggin' religious turds.
i just gave serious thought to the question, would i vote for bush or sharpton if they were the only two. the fact that i don't know scares the bejebus out of me.
i am so proud to be an atheist.
 
2003-12-24 01:28:35 AM  
by the way, here are the HORRIBLY OFFENSIVE psalm quotes. They probably burn the eyes of athiests like holy water on a vampire.

Psalm 68:4 (KJV)
Sing unto God, sing praises to his name: extol him that rideth upon the heavens by his name JAH, and rejoice before him.

-----

Psalm 66:4 (KJV)

All the earth shall worship thee, and shall sing unto thee; they shall sing to thy name. Selah.

----------

Psalm 104:24 (KJV)

O LORD, how manifold are thy works! in wisdom hast thou made them all: the earth is full of thy riches.

-----------------


OH MY GOD!!! THESE VERSES ARE SO OFFENSIVE THEY MAKE MY HEAD WANT TO EXPLODE.

\sarcasmo
 
2003-12-24 01:29:48 AM  
Doubtful at best.
 
2003-12-24 01:30:10 AM  

I didn't read the entire thread so I'm sorry if this has already been covered.

1. The plaques were donated 33 years ago and placed in the National Park at the Grand Canyon.

2. In July of this year, the Arizona Civil Liberties Union wrote a letter of inquiry and the plaques were removed. (No complaints were made nor any lawsuits filed)

3. The park received over 200 letters protesting their removal; only 1 in support of it.

4. The article posted on fark decided to omit the aforementioned facts and instead resorted to scare tactics. (The article implies that the plaques are new and were placed there by the Bush administration, neither of which is true)

I'm agnostic and couldn't care less about the plaques, but I do take offence to biased articles, written as though they are fact based news stories, being published and taken literally.

Yes, this is what we mean when we talk about the leftward slant in jounalism.
 
2003-12-24 01:32:31 AM  
Why would government employees NEED a place to pray at work? Can't they rush to their local church afterwards? Shouldn't they be working, supposedly making our government better instead of praying that God will give Bush more approval points?

/Damnstraight
*cough*Odin*cough* ;)
 
2003-12-24 01:34:58 AM  
2003-12-24 01:07:10 AM weezbo
Yeah, freedom from being proselytized.
------------------------------------------

As a free thinking Christian, this strikes me as really weak. If you are so sure in your faith or lack therof, why do you want to restrict the freedom of speech of those who want to tell you about their religion?

The free exchange of ideas and the arguments that ensue are some of the things that make our country great.

What good is an idea or belief if you can't defend it against the questions of others?

As a Christian, I am ready at the drop of a hat to defend my faith. And that goes for pretty much all of my beliefs, religious or otherwise. Anything else would be intellectually dishonest.
 
2003-12-24 01:40:05 AM  
2003-12-23 11:28:57 PM helix400

Zakuu
///I'm sick of this, all of it. I overheard Fox news debating Christian symbols being placed on public areas today, and in the bottom of the screen it said "WAR ON CHRISTIANITY." I mean WTF. It's a battle for common rights.///

I'm pretty religious myself, and I often am a fan and stick up for Fox News. But I saw the same thing, and thought exactly like you did. War on Christianity? What the? How stupid is that? That's going beyong bias and going into a tabloid level. Are they borrowing from War on Terrorism and trying to paint that Christianity is under attack? Pretty stupid stuff.


And if you go back to watching Fox News after this little revelation, you deserve to lose your free will and ability to think critically.
 
2003-12-24 01:41:09 AM  
I never actually hated christians until reading Fark.

If your worldview and explanation of things like, oh, DINOSAURS, rests on the idea that God is trying to trick you, please kindly take yourself out of the gene pool.
 
2003-12-24 01:45:38 AM  
The free exchange of ideas and the arguments that ensue are some of the things that make our country great.

This would be fine if the fundies and the neoconners would let opposing opinions flow freely. Did you read this part of the article?

Last month, the Park Service bowed to demands from Christian groups to edit out footage of anti-Vietnam War protests and images of gay rights and pro-choice demonstrations.

Seems that the fundies and neoconners want only their point-of-view heard. Why? Simple - because it doesn't hold up to debate with people capable of independent thought.

The Nazis controlled the flow of information. So did the Communists, Saddam, Franco, Mussolini, and all others who wanted to cut off debate. It's easier to con the masses this way.

Religious fanaticism doesn't belong in government, be it Islam fundamentalists in the Middle East or Christian fundamentalists in Washington. Why the neoconned don't see the similarity is beyond me.
 
2003-12-24 01:46:48 AM  
Harry Pooter:

Watching Foxnews somehow makes you lose your freewill, but reading the pure crap linked to here somehow is thought provoking?

Please read the post I made above.

If you have any questions about the information:

GIS for "grand canyon plaques"
 
2003-12-24 01:47:22 AM  
Now man I'm not debating the merits of this particular article and the situation contained within. But man, can't the religious keep religion where the fark it belongs? Like in church and in home? Why do they feel the need to ram it down the throat of everyone else? Please, Baby Jesus would not want the farking force fed dogmatic bullshiat that most fundmentalists spew out of their sewer holes.
 
2003-12-24 01:51:52 AM  
ThingsThatFlash:

And so does the left in this country:

Twelve Cases of Campus Censorship
 
2003-12-24 01:52:45 AM  
Seriously, I don't run around in the streets demanding that government agencies post signs that say "There is no God." I respect the religious freedom of people to practice theirs, why do they want to opress mine?
Bah.... Fundies ruin it for the rest of you reasonable folk.
 
2003-12-24 01:54:24 AM  
2003-12-24 01:34:58 AM F. Scott Fitzpanarchy

2003-12-24 01:07:10 AM weezbo
Yeah, freedom from being proselytized.
------------------------------------------

As a free thinking Christian, this strikes me as really weak. If you are so sure in your faith or lack therof, why do you want to restrict the freedom of speech of those who want to tell you about their religion?


For the exact same reason I want to restrict John Q. Telemarketer from telling me about his amazing time-share condo in Nigeria, farkwad: It's annoying.
 
2003-12-24 01:57:19 AM  
Cheeseburger

Guess you caught out my lack of knowledge of the document.
Still, it could be convincingly argued that there is a secularist approach that could be taken to the metaphor. The Supreme Judge of the world is the course of human events, for instance. Or evolution :)
Regardless, I don't think that calling for the removal of plaques advertising a particular flavor of religion from public lands quite equates to a drive to remove 'God' from all parts of history.
 
2003-12-24 01:59:12 AM  
EvilBobRoss

Why has a simple 30-year-old bronze plaque caused so much commotion? Why do atheist people feel the need to ram it down the throat of otherwise agnostic people that religion is simplistic? By your post, who is shoving whose bullshiate down whose throat?
 
2003-12-24 01:59:59 AM  
I really had hoped that I wouldn't be witness to the unraveling of the US. There are so many here in the US who are totally willing to sell out our country for their 30 pieces of silver, which seems to translate into about a 300 dollar rebate in today's economy.
 
2003-12-24 02:06:22 AM  
And so does the left in this country:

Campus censorship is wrong. But government censorship is, to use a term Dubya might use, "wrongerer".

Government has no business promoting religion - be it Christianity, Islam, Judaism, Scientology or any other. And such blatant censorship as was practiced by giving into the fundies in the Lincoln Memorial film, coupled with the continued posting of the biblical signs in national parks, is inexcusable.

The myth of the "liberal media" is just that - a myth perpetrated by the neoconning media (Rush, Ann Coulter, Faux News, etc.). There are liberal pundits (Michael Moore, Al Franken) whose views are often more extreme than mine. But neither has a regularly-scheduled radio show or their own network. The neoconners consider any report showing them in a poor light as "biased". Amazingly, the neoconned believe them.
 
2003-12-24 02:07:14 AM  
Me... I'd just like a lack of religious articles in the goverment. Yah know being that promotion of one religion above others is a step behind establishment of religion. Religious goverments scare me. Hey, I might sound paranoid but we were killing witches not so long ago.
Sooooo maybe sometimes I get scared at goverment promoted religion.. as a matter of self preservation.
 
2003-12-24 02:07:57 AM  
F. Scott Fitzpanarchy

2003-12-24 01:07:10 AM weezbo
Yeah, freedom from being proselytized.
------------------------------------------

As a free thinking Christian, this strikes me as really weak. If you are so sure in your faith or lack therof, why do you want to restrict the freedom of speech of those who want to tell you about their religion?


I don't. They're free to rent their halls and invite all comers and even start a door knock campaign or post stuff on their cars or front yards or anything else. I merely want to restrict them from doing it on my dime or on land that I have partial ownership of. I also do not wish my government to provide explicit or implied endorsement of said religion.


The free exchange of ideas and the arguments that ensue are some of the things that make our country great.


Indeed they are. Do you want to turn our national parks into Burma Shave ads that have "Godditit" "Goddidn'tdoit" "Allah'swillmadeit" posted all along them? Because that would be actual discourse. This is a hit and run advertising tactic, it's getting their own opinion out there and then leaving no one to hear a response to it.


What good is an idea or belief if you can't defend it against the questions of others?


What good is a belief if you cannot value it without the endorsement of your governing body?


As a Christian, I am ready at the drop of a hat to defend my faith. And that goes for pretty much all of my beliefs, religious or otherwise. Anything else would be intellectually dishonest.


Good for you. Do you get much of a chance to do so when you see a Darwin fish on a car humping a Christian fish? Do you stand there and argue with it or track down the people who made the thing?
This is not discourse that I'm objecting to. This is a monologue that has become increasingly shrill in our culture that brooks no opposition nor is opposition desireable because everyone having their say in lovely brass plaques would turn the side of the Grand Canyon into a brass novel in surprisingly little time. There are two solutions which are in the spirit of freedom of religion. One is equal time for all religions and the other is having the government stay out of it and not giving any religious opinion whatsoever. Which one is more tenable, not to mention cheaper?
 
0fu
2003-12-24 02:14:32 AM  
i swear i saw something about this on 7OO club, right before an advert for the DayStar network
(bringing word of the end times to the entire world)
hmmm day star pronounced with a charismatic lisp: dayuh star ...dayuthstar,
the logical conclusion: GW Bush is teh Vadar! all hail Pat Roberts, the streets will flow with the blood of the non believers...estachion ESTACHION(sp)!
./did you take anything out of our tent?
 
2003-12-24 02:18:35 AM  
Seriously, has anyone thought about religion in government from the atheist side?
1.) Christians are a vast majority of the population. K, now reverse that.
2.) The country instead of having a pro-christian slate now has an anti-christian stance.
3.) Less than three centuries ago this country killed witches, reverse that. Have them crush christians between stones.

How comfortable would you feel?
 
2003-12-24 02:18:48 AM  
EvilBobRoss

Government stopped the burning of witches, read history!
 
2003-12-24 02:22:45 AM  
F. Scott Fitzpanarchy

by the way, here are the HORRIBLY OFFENSIVE psalm quotes. They probably burn the eyes of athiests like holy water on a vampire.

Yeah, horribly offensive like these:

Ex 20:4
Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image, or any likeness of any thing that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth.

Matthew 6:5-6
5 And when thou prayest, thou shalt not be as the hypocrites are: for they love to pray standing in the synagogues and in the corners of the streets, that they may be seen of men. Verily I say unto you, They have their reward. 6 But thou, when thou prayest, enter into thy closet, and when thou hast shut thy door, pray to thy Father which is in secret; and thy Father which seeth in secret shall reward thee openly.

I guess Jesus was against free speech, too.
 
2003-12-24 02:24:16 AM  
Crap,

Government stopped the burning of witches

Using religious mantra. Read History!
 
2003-12-24 02:28:25 AM  
While I am a recovering fundamentalist (I've been clean for 27 years now), I have no problem with others worshiping as they please. What I do have a problem with is a theocracy.

Up until the 1980 election I considered myself a Republican, though I did occasionally vote for for a Democrat if I thought he/she was the better candidate. But when the fundamentalist Christian movement (Falwell, Robertson, Bakker) took over the party during Reagan's first presidential campaign I switched sides.

As a business owner, I like my government to be fiscally responsible. I used to believe the Republicans were better at achieving this goal. The past quarter-century has proven me wrong.
 
2003-12-24 02:28:41 AM  
Because this is the best religion themed thread today:

Christmas Greets to all.

We now return you to your regularly scheduled flamewar :)
 
2003-12-24 02:33:02 AM  
weezbo

Where does it end? How much is enough? If the hollow slogans are removed from currency, will that be the end of it? If opening prayers at government functions are disallowed, will that be enough? Military chaplains? Church attendance in prisons? Should we demand reprimands for DMV employees that slip up and wish someone a Merry Christmas?
 
2003-12-24 02:35:50 AM  
let me add two cents no one will read.

Government Sucks.
Religion Sucks.

Add the two, and what do you get? Modern Iran. fark that shiat.
 
2003-12-24 02:42:53 AM  
Cool, tadlette Merry Xmas :-)
 
2003-12-24 02:44:23 AM  
weezbo

Will check back tomorrow. Good to see you again.
 
2003-12-24 02:46:52 AM  
Where does it end? How much is enough? If the hollow slogans are removed from currency, will that be the end of it? If opening prayers at government functions are disallowed, will that be enough? Military chaplains? Church attendance in prisons? Should we demand reprimands for DMV employees that slip up and wish someone a Merry Christmas?


Remove the hollow slogans from currency? Sounds good.
Removing opening prayers from government functions sounds good as well.
Military chaplains and church at prison can stay. The former because, hey, people who are in the military should have an opportunity, like everyone else, to worship as they see fit. I don't think there should be full time chaplains, but since they do go the other direction, ie provide for all religions, I don't have a lot of problem with it. Church at prison is fine, after all, there should be some punishment factor involved :p

For the last, I actually find that rather amusing. When Christmas was made a national holiday, the inevitable secularization of it began. Now, having gotten a clear victory in the government of a clear endorsement of a particular religion's value over all others, there's a terror within some sects of Christianity that Christmas is losing its religious significance. So much so that it's really not all that offensive to me that it is a national holiday.
 
2003-12-24 02:47:47 AM  
Cheeseburger

A pleasure as always. I'm outta here myself.
 
2003-12-24 02:54:37 AM  
NotJesus: How the hell could Bush possibly have a 55% approval rating? Are that many of us really that stupid?

 
2003-12-24 03:02:45 AM  
ThingsThatFlash:

"Campus censorship is wrong. But government censorship is, to use a term Dubya might use, "wrongerer".

Uuuuh, if it's a state college it is government censorship, Einstein.

"The myth of the "liberal media" is just that - a myth perpetrated by the neoconning media (Rush, Ann Coulter, Faux News, etc.). There are liberal pundits (Michael Moore, Al Franken) whose views are often more extreme than mine. But neither has a regularly-scheduled radio show or their own network. The neoconners consider any report showing them in a poor light as "biased". Amazingly, the neoconned believe them."

I don't listen to Rush, Ann Coulter, et al..., but I do see a very distinct left wing bias in the mainstream media. Maybe you don't see it because you agree with what they are saying.

As much as I would love to debate it, the overall bias in the media topic should be saved for another thread.

My original point regarding bias is with the article at hand. It is pathetic. It took me 15 seconds on Google to see that they were purposely distorting facts in order to make it sound like something it isn't, namely that the Bush Adminstration had those signs placed on federal property. They did not, and with only the slightest research you would find that out yourself. Instead, the liberal Farkers took the article for its' word and are now preaching fear of an oncoming American theocracy. That's pathetic and irresponsible.
 
2003-12-24 03:13:31 AM  
I agree, it is already known that the plaques were made a long time ago. However, Bush has made deliberately wrong statements of fact in favor of some religious agenda. For example, the lie that embryos are deystroyed in stem cell research (they are not, cells are harvested from the emb. but the emb. is left intact.) Further, Bush is known to ask potential advisors etc. how they felt about faith based initiatives. This country is becoming less rational which is extremely dangerous. Allowing the plaques to be put up is unconstitutional and Bush shoould order them taken down. But because of his faith, he will just ignore the problem, essentially blessing the project by abstaining from comment or action.
 
2003-12-24 03:30:59 AM  
I agree with the nuns about society decay. However I do not agree that "our society is based on Christianity" thinking. Most of the world is not Christian. We should not force our beliefs on others any where in our national parks. Park not church. Why do we all focus on specifics paticular to a religion and not on the general idea? Love one another.
Maybe Bush could pray at the Grand Canyon. He would need a week at least though to plan for a press conference. You know, to look like a Christian. Can you see him building houses for habitat for humanity like ex pres. Jimmy Carter? By the way Jimmy Carter fired ex-pres. Bush from the CIA for corruption.
ps
I like the new abortion policies and law however I do not like his families penchance for killing little "brown" babies.
 
2003-12-24 03:34:12 AM  
EvilBobRoss spewed the following:

Seriously, has anyone thought about religion in government from the atheist side?
1.) Christians are a vast majority of the population. K, now reverse that.
2.) The country instead of having a pro-christian slate now has an anti-christian stance.
3.) Less than three centuries ago this country killed witches, reverse that. Have them crush christians between stones.

How comfortable would you feel?


Slipping down ...the slippery slope ...can't ... stop ...sliding ... almost frictionless ... can't stop the momentum ....

Jesus man, are you freaking serious? Atheists are evil or something? I'm going to bed, but arguing with that kind of logic shouldn't take anyone else here too long.
 
0fu
2003-12-24 03:39:06 AM  
whenever Dubya is mentioned in polite conversation i immediately chime in with "the turkey was a fake." it makes me feel very 'in crowd'.
 
2003-12-24 03:52:02 AM  
0fu

whenever Dubya is mentioned in polite conversation i immediately chime in with "the turkey was a fake." it makes me feel very 'in crowd'

I was referring to his famous prayer at cabinet meeting pictures. I know you are one of the many persecuted Christians. I myself am one. Persecuted by our complete lack of understanding or lack of wanting to understand other points of view. lol ..not, get real, get educated. Yeah I feel like I'm in the in crowd when I have an asshat for a president who can fool quite a few folks that he is a Christian. YEAH. I'M COOL.
 
2003-12-24 03:56:19 AM  
I am an atheist, and I am most certainly evil, but this is NOT post hoc.
 
2003-12-24 04:10:28 AM  
Keep your bullshiat religion out of my government.

/thank you and go fark yourself
 
0fu
2003-12-24 04:20:35 AM  
edchuckndoug: Taoist, actually,
the comment stems from Dubyas erstwhile thanksgiving visit to the loyal troops in the current occupied territories.
if i actually HAD to choose a religion that didn't deal with practical enlightenment... Bokanon would be my only prophet.
BTW, i was babtised when i as 10, i couldn't stop laughing...

"and i sayud unto the apostalates their will comah ah timuh of greaat confilgration(ah)."
 
2003-12-24 04:22:29 AM  
er.. religions
 
2003-12-24 04:24:28 AM  
Jesus built my hotrod...
 
2003-12-24 04:29:42 AM  
X-mas is that mystical time of year when the ghost of Jesus rises up from the tomb to walk the earth and feast on the flesh of the living. We sing carols to lull him back to sleep.
/Peter G.
 
0fu
2003-12-24 04:31:38 AM  
what about Pantheists: aka "god is everthing and thus not really worth mentioning" ?
why place delimiters on your definition of the devine? unless one really feels the need to belong to the super secret-squirrel happy funtime club of everlasting joy, and i think they have medication for that now.
/twitch
 
2003-12-24 04:57:37 AM  
unless one really feels the need to belong to the super secret-squirrel happy funtime club of everlasting joy

URL please.
 
0fu
2003-12-24 05:07:38 AM  
RockisDead:

http://objective.jesussave.us/
 
Displayed 50 of 358 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | » | Last | Show all



This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter





In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report