It’s not a question of the book containing religious theories, it is that the book contains religious theories. In other words, the book claims scientific validity and claims that the alternate views are objectively correct. This is why it is opposed. If it were about Jesus coming and blessing the waters of the Colorado, it would be getting less attention because it would clearly be a religious story, not a religious theory.

To me there are two issues with the book being for sale:
1. Giving the book the imprimateur of being scientifically accurate or an equally valid scientific interpretation.
2. Giving the book the appearance of Government sanction.

Item 1 can be addressed by the category of the bookstore under which it is sold and maybe disclaimers. If it’s sold in the “Inspirational” section right next the the Hopi Indian religious stories, a book of school children stories on their trip to the Grand Canyon, and an art book describing the pretty colors that can be seen, and maybe even a collection of Ansel Adams’ work, then I lessen resistance to sale for this reason. Lot’s of things can be “Inspirational” without being science. This is somewhat more complicated by virtue of the content of the book itself. It argues that it is science and that it is a more valid interpretation than the standard science answer. That makes it somewhat different in character than art, photos, and children’s vacation reports. The treatment of the Indian stories within that book could make it similar or different – I don’t know. That’s why I suggest disclaimers.

Item 2 is trickier in my mind. I think the problem is confusion over what it means for the NPS to review and approve or reject materials for sale. Some people feel that by virtue of being sold in a Government run store, it is necessarily being advocated by the Government. Some feel that if the Government sells [i]any[/i] religious themed material, it must sell [i]any[/i] religious themed material. It would help if we had a list of the criteria used by the NPS for approval or rejection. I think it possible we could view books on sale not to be [i]advocated[/i] by the Government merely by virtue of being sold. I think it possible that some religious themed materials could be sold without granting appearance of advocacy or declaring [i]all[/i] religious materials as fair game. A fair, neutral government policy would be applying the neutral criteria for any book against religious works equivalently. If they meet the same standard as other works, they are acceptable. So if one criterion is number of sales, another is relation to the Grand Canyon, and a third is scientific or naturalistic connection, then apply that to “Inspirational” books. One could argue that this book and perhaps the Hopi book have issues with the third criterion, but meet the other two. One could argue that the “Inspirational” category is most open to alternate views because it is a subjective category, and meaning is found many ways.

The larger issue that is exemplified by the book approval is the pattern of behavior exhibited by the Federal Government. This pattern of behavior is also being scrutinized for a trend that is counter to the First Amendment. An isolated book choice is one thing, a pattern of pushing Christian themed decisions, viewpoints, and materials is something else. There [i]appears[/i] to be a pattern of the latter – not only within the NPS, but accross the Government under direction of the President via Executive Orders and political appointments. That is ultimately what people are really objecting to here. The book is just one concrete example.

If that means that the rules of Amendment I if the Bill of Rights do not apply to vendors or contractors of the United States of America, then I stand corrected.

I guess this is all water over the bridge (or through the canyon) so to speak.

http://parkplanning.nps.gov/document.cfm?parkID=442&projectId=13746&documentID=15714

In chapter 10, which deals which concessions, there is no mention that a religious work can or cannot be sold, only that items for sale must be preapproved by the National Park Service. It does state that they want products “that interpet and foster awareness, understanding and appreciation of the park and its resources.” Those words are of course open to interpetation as well.

Let me rephrase what you obviously missed before: Nobody is upset that a Christian book is for sale. People here are upset that a Christian book is being used to subvert scientific knowledge in a government controlled agency. I would have no problem with a PRIVATELY OWNED bookstore opening up right next to the National Park store, and selling whatever they want. They could sell a book that says the grand canyon was created in 7 days, or that it was channeled out by Martians.

Please understand, I am not attacking you personally. Just like you, I am simply voicing my opinion, and I am trying to do it without getting too emotional or calling people names.

BTW, I’m not promoting Christianity. I’m an athiest. My point was that native American mythology is no different from religion. Why are you so upset that one book that deals with Christian “mythology” is available for people to buy. It smacks of intolerance to me. Yeah, live and let live. Deal with irony of that statement. You think humans needed religion as an excuse to kill each other? We’d have found a way either way.

To close, I dare you to go tell a Navajo, Hopi, or Paiute that their beliefs are nothing but myths and legends. I’m guessing most would have a rather vocal response for you.

And I find it curiously furiating that someone promotng christianity also poses a “live and let live, folks” end to a post. Seems incongruent with the history of religion, no?

With likewise respect, the issue here is not about bashing Christianity, nor banning books. It is about the current administration suppressing science in the name of religion. While the orders may or may not come from Bush himself, they are certainly coming from his appointees.

Did you not read the original post by Phil?
http://www.badastronomy.com/bablog/2006/12/29/bush-white-house-still-promoting-creationism/

Or this one:
http://www.badastronomy.com/bablog/2006/12/14/ongoing-science-suppression/

Or these:
http://www.badastronomy.com/bablog/2006/11/27/chilly-climate-part-i/
http://www.badastronomy.com/bablog/2006/11/01/white-house-tampering-of-science-part/
http://www.badastronomy.com/bablog/2006/06/11/nasa-admits-deutsch-muzzled-scientist/

Phil is not suggesting that any book be stopped from printing or selling, and neither are the people posting here. What we are suggesting is that the United States government cease any and all suppression of scientific fact. Period. No matter if the data collected conflicts with current popular belief, goes against the current political party in power’s viewpoint, or even if it contradicts one or all religious beliefs. ESPECIALLY if it contradicts a religious belief.

Religion has its place in society. It is an important part of many people’s lives. However, our constitution was written to prevent the forced adherence of any religion upon the people by the government, and that is exactly what these examples represent.

Imagine the uproar if Congress passed a law that said every Presbyterian church was required to sing Phil’s Apollo Moon Hoax as a hymn on Sundays. It sounds ridiculous, but so does “add the word ‘Theory’ wherever the Big bang is mentioned” or “the Grand Canyon was formed during Noah’s flood.”

- G

I realize many folks here don’t want to admit it, but the vast majority of people in this country believe in God (and many of those believe in creation). Why is it so blasphemous to sell a single book which appeals to them? This effort to ban (yes, BAN…don’t try to weasel out of what people are really pushing for) any book dealing with Christianity from a government-run bookstore is hypocritical. I’m as athiestic as they come but being exposed to the beliefs of others does not get my undies in a wad. Too many folks are far too uptight these days.

If people did not buy the book, then it would not make a profit and the NPS would stop selling it. Apparently, there is a market for it. Live and let live, folks.

I’ve got an alternate solution – they keep selling the book, but put a disclaimer on the cover: “This book is a complete load of hooey and is totally contrary to all the evidence of science about the history and formation of the Grand Canyon. You are welcome to take any inspiration you can glean from lies.”

Of course I’m sure that would tweak a few people as well.

Melusine said:
> Funny, I reread Fahrenheit 451 this year – bought a new edition and I must say Ray Bradbury is a more interesting writer than I remember.

Actually, I reread Fahrenheit 451 last year, and also read Something Wicked This Way Comes, and I’m not that impressed with Bradbury. F451 had an interesting theme but I thought it was clunky and hard to connect to.

Ranger X said:
> It is absolutely FALSE that it is unconstitutional for the book to be sold. The book is NOT sold by Grand Canyon National Park; it is sold by the Grand Canyon Association, a PRIVATE, non-profit association.

That’s a red herring. The bookstore is in the GCNP visitors center and is under the official control of the NPS. The GCA is a non-profit group that runs the bookstore for the NPS (along with doing several other things), but that does not make the bookstore an independent venture. As that National Parks Traveler link discusses, the GCNP director has ultimate authority over and responsibility for everything sold in the bookstore. That is why the NPS gets to approve or deny all book offerings. The fact is the book is on sale by approval of the NPS. If the NPS did not approve, it would be rejected, just like the other 22 books and products considered the same year. It may be arguable that the sale of the book is not unconstitutional, but not on the grounds you provide.

I also experienced problems loading the site with Netscape 8.1. The white center boarder and right menu took extra time to complete loading.

I note that in IE, often the “right” menubar is actually below the “Leave a Reply” box. Phil, I think there’s something in your coding that’s wonky.

Also, why do you think,”The God Delusion” belongs in the religion section, Monkey? It belongs in the Philosophy section or the Science section. It might be of interest to those perusing religious books but it isn’t a religious book. Maybe you should read it.
_______________________________________________________________

After reading my own post I realized that it may have been interpreted incorrectly. I, in my own admission of guilt, should have made amends with that.
First, I have read, and push others to read, TGD by Dawkins. An absolutely fabulous piece of work
Second, I am NOT suggesting that it BELONGS in the religion section. Rather, I believe that if it appears there and some young or new person to religion comes across it and thinks that it is a religious text then they may read it and learn something. Or, at least, get a pespective other than that of their religious upbringing.

In my discussions (myriad discussions from the backwaters of Taiwan where missionaries try to “correct the ways of the misguided people of this country” to ‘anywhere’ canada – imainge me standing face to face with a priest in 35 c weather in humid tropical Taiwanese mountains arguing religion and trying to convinvce him that he is single handedly trying to force unwanted change based on unethical premises on people in need of nothing of the sort) I have always come across a lineage of similar pionts to discuss. They (im going to go out on a limb and say that most of my confrontations are with christians) always have the same erroneous points to make, and always have the same cyclic conversations. I would hope that some would read this text (The GD) and possibly learn.

So, I hope that if I can put one copy of TGD on the religion shelf, then perhaps one child may be saved from a life of blind faith. Or, at least, have the chance to see the other side. I know it is a small detail and a trivial action, but the meaning is there. Please do not misconstrue my intentions as ‘believing’ that it honestly belongs there, just that it can do a service if it is read by someone who frequents that section.

I know they would never search it out in the sacraligious science or nature section – what would god think?

Take care,

Also, why do you think,”The God Delusion” belongs in the religion section, Monkey? It belongs in the Philosophy section or the Science section. It might be of interest to those perusing religious books but it isn’t a religious book. Maybe you should read it.

(That statement just gave me a deja vu flash.)

So the evidence for intelligent design and for a 6,000 year old Earth are equally found only in religion and neither is supported by scientific evidence.

Sorry for the split post – posting 404 error forced me once again to split up a post.

see part 4 below

see part 3 below

This was addressed but allow me to add my version. Intelligent Design is not science. Tell me is corn intelligently designed from materials people found in nature? If so how does corn differ from a designed cotton blouse?

The point is the conclusion of who designed life or how life was designed, be it from natural forces or unnatural forces, is the conclusion. Science doesn’t draw the conclusion, it provides the supporting evidence.

see part 2 below

“Think about the oversimplified fantasy of Noah’s flood and then compare that with the complex and subtle nature of the reality of the canyon as Creek Running North described. Creationists love to say that scientists lack the appreciation of beauty and have no sense of awe, but you tell me: whose canyon story is more beautiful, whose is more interesting, whose is more awe-inspiring, and has more detail, evidence, and self-consistency?”

Well its a rhetorical question, I guess, but since you asked – the answer is the scientists version by light years with tehcreationists fable justsounding like anthropcentric, illogical garbage. A loving God decides thatpeople have been abitnaughty and thus mustall be exterminated Dalek-like insome mega-mega-mega flood … ? Give us a break, Religious fascists, give us a break ..

The BA continues with :

“Creationists deny all this because they have to. If they accepted it, they’d realize they’re wrong, and they cannot accept that. They claim their rock-solid faith makes them strong, but in reality it makes them weak, brittle. They cannot learn, they can only deny, deny, deny. And this is what we want to teach people when they visit the grandest canyon on Earth?”

Hell no & Amen to that!

& for the literal minded, yes that _is_ irony.

Definition of a religious fundamentalist – someone who hears the parable of the (Good) Samaritan and then tries to find outr the Samaritans name while passing by all the other injured people on the road ..
Peopellike the creationists doadiservice tobothScienceand religionas the really smart people (Carl Sagan, Isaac Asimov and others) have pointed out numerous times.

and were the book in question placed in the “Mythe/Folklore” section on the bookshelf I would have no issues with it…sadly it is not in that section.
________________________________________________________________
Well….
I take it upon myself as a form of civil action to remedy this problem by doing what any free-thinking bookstore employee would (read:should) do.
I move the books.
Not always all of them, sometimes one, sometimes many…depends on the mood I am in at the moment I find the ‘book’ (and perhaps how many there arctually are…some smaller towns can be be less than equitable with their bible to ‘other books’ ratio). I take exception to the fact that it is in the non-fiction section and I do my part.

They actually fit in quite nicely between the rest of their brotherly fiction nevels.

I also find the nerve to place copies of the Blind Watchmaker or The God Delusion in the theism section…this one is more for public education than civil action, but it brings a slight grin to my face.

Now, next I will try to work on the placement of ‘god’ in the CDN national anthem…..that may take more than simple book switching!!

http://www.grandcanyonassociation.org/Merchant2/merchant.mvc?Screen=PROD&Store_Code=GCA&Product_Code=M20120&Category_Code=NATIVE

I mean, religious views! Pfaugh!

Lyle: ‘Intelligent Design’ was legally proved to be nothing more than just a rehashed version of creationism in the Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District trial. Evidence was shown that a creationist book was turned into an intelligent design supporting book by simple search and replace of creation with intelligent design. See http://talkorigins.org/faqs/dover/kitzmiller_v_dover.html for the court transcripts and decision.

PS: agreed on the dark blue background, using Mozilla browser.

“PARKS AGENCY LEAVES CONTROVERSIAL BOOK ON SHELF

Excerpt begins -
‘In the end, no formal action was taken (after discussion), and the book remains on sale because Mr. (David) Barna (a spokesman for the agency) said in a written statement.” It is not our role to tell peole what to believe.” ”
End excerpt. Parentheses are mine.

I don’t read the on-line edition, so I can’t say if this is contained therein. Please read the full article; I just quoted that paragraph for the impact.

We get the government that we deserve, so next time -

Throw The Rascals Out!