|
|
|
|
|
|
|
flagstaff_climber
Aug 10, 2004, 9:22 PM
Post #52 of 72
(5247 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 22, 2002
Posts: 310
|
In reply to: First of all, let me educate all of you people out there that thinks that the constitution says there is a separation of church and state. It doesn't say that - period. The constitution says that , "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof...". The courts took this and said, "Separation of Church and State exists." The only reason separation of church and state exists is because of the Judicial system, not because the framers wanted it. SEPARATION OF CHURCH AND STATE IS NOT FOUND ANYWHERE IN THE CONSTITUTION!! Obviously, the framers wanted the free exercise of religion without the state granting rights to one over another while at the same time allowing people of all religions to worship as they see fit. b]
In a representative democracy, or at least close to it. There is no way to insure the above without separation.
That being said, a plaque is a plaque is a plague, no matter what it says..... it has no place on the top of a Mountain.
Rick
|
|
|
|
|
beth23
Aug 10, 2004, 10:23 PM
Post #53 of 72
(5247 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 27, 2002
Posts: 74
|
In reply to: In reply to: BTW - leaving crap on top of summits in general is lame. The mountain isn't yours, it's everyone's. My partner had to scale the summit hut of Whitney last month to take down a big Canadian flag that some dufus put up there. As well as 3 different sets of prayer flags that were probably put there not by a spiritual buddhist but by some tourist hiker who bought them at a trendy store back in the city and thought they were rad putting them up on the Whitney summit hut. They eventually would have blown away and turned into garbage on top the mountain. Whitney ain't Everest, don't go throwing up prayer flags like it is. LNT there! The summit hut violates LNT, so why didn't your partner dismantle it and chuck the pieces off the summit ?
Stick to the point of discussion of not leaving crap on summits and don't be a dumb-a$$. The summit hut was completed in 1909 and was funded by the friggin Smithsonian Institute during the 5 years it took to build. It's historic and has been used for everything from scientific experiments to a place for stranded hikers to spend the night. Iit's been there longer than you or I have been alive so that statement you made is pretty pointless.
Leaving crap all over the summit hut is lame. But the summit hut is not. Get it??
|
|
|
|
|
micahmcguire
Aug 10, 2004, 11:19 PM
Post #54 of 72
(5247 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 18, 2002
Posts: 889
|
The issue of the debate, or maybe some of you have missed it(near the beggining of the thread. I'm not reading all those posts!), is not over the content of the plaque and whether it is religious or not. The issue is that the man did not have permission to fix a plaque to the rock and leave it there. It'd be just about the same if I bolted a "Eat at McDonald's" plaque onto the nose of George Washington at Mount Rushmore. It wouldn't be illegal because of the corporate interest it promoted, it would be illegal because its against the law to put a plaque there. Same with Denali.
Don't be so hasty with your "don't push your religion on me" bullcrap. Forced religious sterility is as insulting to the religious as forced religious sentiment is to the nonreligious.
Reno wrote-"The shape of a cross was around LONG before the Christians used it as a symbol of Christianity.
A cross is not a unique identifier of any single religion. Hence, your argument doesn't apply."
True, there are many religions worldwide that use a variation of the cross as a symbol.
A point to note along the same lines however is that there are many religions worldwide who share a belief in the Old Testament of the Bible and subscribe to its version of the creation of the universe. Moreover, there are an even greater number of religions worldwide that believe in a manner of universal creation which is very similar to the biblical "in the beggining God created the heavens and the earth." This plaque does not alienate other religions and proclaim the sole correctness of Christianity as thoroughly as you might be assuming.
As for Arlington, I've been there, and there are crosses...and stars-of-David, and Bhuddist wheels, ect. Each gravestone is of a typical shape and is embossed with a symbol corresponding to the faith of the person buried there. Some have no symbols. There is no one religion that seems to take a front-row seat, although our country has an undeniable Christian majority and our government an undeniably Christian "flavour" to it.
|
|
|
|
|
drake
Aug 12, 2004, 12:19 PM
Post #55 of 72
(5247 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 24, 2004
Posts: 136
|
Polarwid:
It looks like you did a great thing to honor your father. If I understand it correctly, the government named the peak as a memorial to POW's & people that are MIA. It's a shame that uncle Sam has not made that summit more accessable to people who want to visit this memorial.
Maybe this would have been a better idea in other countries also. Just designate one peak in the country for perminant flags, buildings, memorials and plaques of any kind. That way, climbers may climb the rest of the peaks with and stand on an uncluttered summit.
A peak that is easily accessed by anyone who wants to visit. One that has easy access to the summit by car, wheelchair or gondala (sp?)
Sorry for your loss Polarwid. Sounds like your hike up the peak could have easily turn into an epic.
Drake
|
|
|
|
|
mtnbkrxtrordnair
Aug 12, 2004, 9:20 PM
Post #56 of 72
(5247 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 11, 2003
Posts: 267
|
In reply to: In reply to: In reply to: BTW - leaving crap on top of summits in general is lame. The mountain isn't yours, it's everyone's. My partner had to scale the summit hut of Whitney last month to take down a big Canadian flag that some dufus put up there. As well as 3 different sets of prayer flags that were probably put there not by a spiritual buddhist but by some tourist hiker who bought them at a trendy store back in the city and thought they were rad putting them up on the Whitney summit hut. They eventually would have blown away and turned into garbage on top the mountain. Whitney ain't Everest, don't go throwing up prayer flags like it is. LNT there! The summit hut violates LNT, so why didn't your partner dismantle it and chuck the pieces off the summit ? Stick to the point of discussion of not leaving crap on summits and don't be a dumb-a$$. The summit hut was completed in 1909 and was funded by the friggin Smithsonian Institute during the 5 years it took to build. It's historic and has been used for everything from scientific experiments to a place for stranded hikers to spend the night. Iit's been there longer than you or I have been alive so that statement you made is pretty pointless. Leaving crap all over the summit hut is lame. But the summit hut is not. Get it??
Ok, let me get my flamethrower out, thanks.
It's a matter of perspective. Just because the freaking Smithsonian put it there don't mean it's not litter. Because they put it there in 1909 just means it's historic litter. In my opinion it does not belong there. If you want to build a stone hut, do it in your back yard. And it's there precisely because it was built in 1909. If it wasn't there and someone proposed today that it be built, there would rightfully be a huge outcry and it would not be built. If you disagree that's your prerogative, but I don't appreciate being called a dumb-a$$ just because you don't agree. So next time try expressing your opinion while being civil to your fellow users or STFU.
The hut violates LNT and it is lame. According to your theory, it would be fine to put a hut on all the Colorado 14'rs for all the poor stranded hikers. While they're at it let's build a cable car so the poor hikers don't get stranded in the first place or have to hike, and they can sip Lattes while they wait for the ride down.
I think I'm going to cut the chains to the observatory on top of Mt. Washington so it blows away in the 200 MPH wind.
|
|
|
|
|
vayporz
Aug 12, 2004, 10:09 PM
Post #57 of 72
(5247 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 29, 2003
Posts: 12
|
hmmm.... where to begin, even if I should...
Some people would reguard the love most of us have for the outdoors as its own religion when they observe how we reguard the lands we revere for their beauty and grandeur. We have certain "rituals" we do to make sure we don't hurt the nature that we gain joy from "worshipping" in the actvities we do within it.
Is What we have here are two competeing belief systems?
Well, not really, but two things most of us hold in high esteem: 1st, the right to believe in any Diety we choose (or no Diety), and 2nd, the right to explore and enjoy the outdoors untouched by man (or at least touched minimally). Both are perfect things in an imperfect world. We know no one is perfect in what they believe, and no land is not touched by man in some manner.
I think many of us would agree that there is something almost spiritual about being outdoors, hanging onto rock 100+ feet off the ground, or hiking a 13,000+ foot ridgeline of rock and snow. That's why you find us there, we re-charge our souls out there in ways not too disimilar from when others sit in churches, mosques, or synagoggues.
Leaving the plaque might satisfy one man's need to express his soul-afirming belief in a God. But he immediately ruins the soul restoring feeling for another of coming atop a peak untouched.
two things come to my mind here
"Give unto Ceasar what is Ceasar's. Give unto God what is God's."
and
"Take nothing but pictures, leave nothing but memories."
|
|
|
|
|
g-funk
Deleted
Aug 12, 2004, 10:09 PM
Post #58 of 72
(5247 views)
Shortcut
Registered:
Posts:
|
In reply to: In reply to: In reply to: In reply to: In reply to: In reply to: In reply to: Seperation of Church and State. The National Parks are owned by the federal government, and therefore they are not to be used as venues for promoting religion. Is this a law or something? What should we do about all those crosses at Arlington Cemetary? haha. indeed, one of the most ubiquitous of misconceptions... Well said, johnnyk. To elaborate: Visit Arlington's website for some photos: http://www.arlingtoncemetery.org/ I don't see any crosses, do you see any crosses? But hey, even Dick Cheney got it wrong during the last election... apparently he was confused by the well-known poem by Canadian WWI soldier John McCrae: In Flanders Fields the poppies blow, between the crosses row on row... Wasn't he Secretary of Defense, and shouldn't he have known better (I mean, if he was doing his job)? I doubt he cares about the average soldier. coylec Bingo. He was Defense Secretary and that was exactly the context he was discussing it in. From the article I linked: In accepting the Republican nomination for vice president, Cheney closed his speech with a moving description of the helicopter ride he used to take from Andrews Air Force Base to the Pentagon when he was Secretary of Defense... "Just before you settle down on the landing pad, you look upon Arlington National Cemetery...its gentle slopes and crosses row on row," Cheney said. "I never once made that trip without being reminded how enormously fortunate we all are..." So I think the message is, he rarely if ever looked out the window, and probably never thought about "how enormously fortunate we all are." I gotta confess, I thought there were crosses there too. I coulda sworn I saw them with my own eyes. But hey, I didn't fly over it in a helicopter every day for four years, and I didn't invoke the image in an attempt to win an election. Not trying to disparge Flander's Field, but the solemnness of Arlington is really enhanced by the tombstones. It's really a powerful experience to pay your respect there. Back on topic: Leave No Trace, much? (thanks to those above who have pointed out that fact). coylec
I've seen the rows on rows of crosses at the cemetary in France. It's a pretty striking and solemn image.
Back to the topic, keep your personal trash off of our public mountain. That goes for plaques, trinkets, and cairns that are serving no purpose (i.e. marking the trail)
|
|
|
|
|
mingleefu
Aug 12, 2004, 11:09 PM
Post #59 of 72
(5247 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 24, 2003
Posts: 466
|
In reply to: Don't be so hasty with your "don't push your religion on me" bullcrap. Forced religious sterility is as insulting to the religious as forced religious sentiment is to the nonreligious.
Thank you. dang, I just read through this whole thread, and the prominent recurring theme is intolerance. The comments are not intolerant to religion, but rather intolerant to Christianity. I would contend that if it were a marker bearing some eastern philosophical jingoism, we wouldn't be discussing it right now because it would be deemed "spiritual" and would have significance ascribed to it when, in fact, it would be equally out of place on the mountain as the plaque that the belgian placed.
I'm a Christian, tried and true. And two things anger me in these situations. First, non-Christians who harp on Christians who're just trying to do their thing- not because that thing is "wrong" persay, but because they're Christian and trying to do their thing. Second, Christians who do not pause to consider if their idea for pursuing the Great Commission will have more calamitous effect than favorable.
I guess I'm simply posting to say that this fella doesn't represent all Christians. (as noted earlier, Gen 1:1 comes from the Jewish Torah just the same-) My heart goes out for what I think was his mission, but I do not condone his methods. He shouldn't have left anything up there. I carried other people's garbage off SFWC a week ago, and had plans to carry out their crap bags too but rapped off before remembering to retrieve them. LNT is the minimalist approach- Leave it cleaner than you found it.
As well, the blatant intolerance of Christianity is offensive. If someone started cracking Homosexual jokes or Chauvinist comments, there would be a frenzy of defensive retorts- Yet Christians such as myself are expected to bend over and take it up the tailpipe in response to such an affront. Horse Hockey.
Christianity is equally protected by the law as is any other religion. Yet, non-Christians become ravenous when they are confronted with Christianity in the public sector. While the majority of people may not be pious devotees, a majority would say that they "go to church" or "believe in God". In the US, Christianity is undeniably the foremost religion practiced. If you are a non-Christian and are having a hard time coping with that, I'm sorry that it is hard for you. But sit back and pause for a moment to consider how you tolerate Eastern philosophy while attacking Western.
"We are living in a time when sensitivities are at the surface, often vented with cutting words. Philosophically, you can believe anything, so long as you do not claim it to be true. Morally, you can practice anything so long as you do not claim that it is a 'better' way. Religiously, you can hold to anything, so long as you do not bring Jesus Christ into it. If a spritual idea is eastern, it is granted critical immunity; if western, it is throughly criticized. Thus, a journalist can walk into a church and mock its carryings on, but he or she dare not do the same if the ceremony is from the eastern fold."
-Ravi Zacharias.
The guy shouldn't have left anything up there, religious idealogical relics or not.
Off topic?? maybe...
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
bsignorelli
Aug 12, 2004, 11:41 PM
Post #61 of 72
(5247 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Feb 1, 2003
Posts: 415
|
In reply to: Placing a permanent marker (or leaving something that isn't permanent) on land that you do not "own" is a form of litter. "Take nothing but photos, leave nothing but footprints."
Sort of like leaving draws on a climb when you go home for the night?
:twisted: Bryan
|
|
|
|
|
hipdos
Aug 13, 2004, 12:21 AM
Post #62 of 72
(5247 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 6, 2004
Posts: 45
|
There is a bit of an explanation for the 'intolerance' displayed here if you look at the message on the plaque.
"In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth."
What a crock. Maybe 'he' created the heavens, but didn't the earth take billions of years to come about?...At least this bloke might have thought about putting something that made sense on his plaque (before giving himself an uppercut and forgetting about the idea altogether). OK, now someone is going to say it's a parable or you're not supposed to take it literaly some other guff...
|
|
|
|
|
korporal
Aug 13, 2004, 12:26 AM
Post #63 of 72
(5247 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 2, 2004
Posts: 175
|
I haven't read all of the replies so this may have been mentioned.
I am agnostic and I don't think that the placer of this plauqe is trying to spread Chirstianity. I see it more as a quote to reflect on where you are and how great it is. The reference to God is to show that it takes a godly ("perfect" and "all powerfull") thing to create such a magnificant place. And not to try and convert you.
Side note: My brother thinks that the park service or upset climbers should just some some toothpaste.
|
|
|
|
|
freeclimberchris
Aug 13, 2004, 12:42 AM
Post #64 of 72
(5247 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 21, 2003
Posts: 90
|
We like to call it separation of church and state.
|
|
|
|
|
beth23
Aug 13, 2004, 1:33 AM
Post #65 of 72
(5247 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 27, 2002
Posts: 74
|
In reply to: According to your theory, it would be fine to put a hut on all the Colorado 14'rs for all the poor stranded hikers. While they're at it let's build a cable car so the poor hikers don't get stranded in the first place or have to hike, and they can sip Lattes while they wait for the ride down. .
See, now you're being a smart-a$$ again (see, I refrained from calling you a dumb-a$$, happy now? 8^) ). Where did I EVER say any of the crap you're implying? NOWHERE! :twisted: I talked about ONLY Whitney summit hut and nothing else (and all I did was say it's been there almost a century...where'd I say every peak in the world needs one...NOWHERE!). You're putting words in my mouth...words I'd never say. And I didn't say you were being a DA cause I disagreed with you, I called you that cause your comment was pointless and brought nothing to the discussion at hand. Thanks for proving me right again though 'bro!!! :wink:
|
|
|
|
|
mingleefu
Aug 13, 2004, 3:41 AM
Post #66 of 72
(5247 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 24, 2003
Posts: 466
|
In reply to: I haven't read all of the replies so this may have been mentioned. I am agnostic and I don't think that the placer of this plauqe is trying to spread Chirstianity. I see it more as a quote to reflect on where you are and how great it is. The reference to God is to show that it takes a godly ("perfect" and "all powerfull") thing to create such a magnificant place. And not to try and convert you.
That you are agnostic has very little bearing on the meaning of the plaque. Mille's purposeful placement of the plaque on the summit is explained on the website as being explicitly "to witness to others". So we're on the same page, "witnessing" refers to evangelism, which is all fancy words for telling other people the gospel of Christ. Later in the article, He twice mentions the "usual" practice in the Alps where "climbers bring honor to God" via purposefully placed iconography.
His intent was not to refer to any sort of "god" (lower 'g') or other ambiguous deity or demiurge. Taking a verse from biblic reference means taking meaning from biblic reference. It must be understood that putting Gen 1.1 on a mountain does not come from attempting to highlight the glory of the mountain itself, but rather it is an essay at pointing out how the mighty mountain is merely a minute reflection of the glory of God. The consideration is not that God had to work hard to create the mighty mountian, but rather that the mountain works hard to honor God.
He placed the plaque there for you to consider God, not the mountain.
Make no mistake, this is about big 'G' God.
...I'm just waiting for the Jewish Scholars to chime in here about how the Hebrew bible starts with a Dependent clause, effectively changing the emphasis in Gen 1.1 anyway...
|
|
|
|
|
mingleefu
Aug 15, 2004, 10:11 PM
Post #67 of 72
(5247 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 24, 2003
Posts: 466
|
Yeah, this horse is dead-- but it still lingers in my mind, so i'm going to beat it till my heart's content.
No need to reply, I'll just let this gem of a thread fade away. (Replies in PM are welcomed, though). Anyway, I saw this pic on the frontpage, and it really just kinda supports my point.
In reply to: I would contend that if it were a marker bearing some eastern philosophical jingoism, we wouldn't be discussing it right now because it would be deemed "spiritual" and would have significance ascribed to it when, in fact, it would be equally out of place on the mountain as the plaque that the belgian placed. ... Sit back and pause for a moment to consider how you tolerate Eastern philosophy while attacking Western. "... If a spritual idea is eastern, it is granted critical immunity..." -Ravi Zacharias.
(image is linked to its photo page)
http://www.rockclimbing.com/...p.cgi?Detailed=35497
Caption: "This is a picture at K2 Base Camp. No - prayer flags are not common here - it's a Muslim country. Not Buddhist like Nepal. These were installed by Nepali porters jires by some international expeditions."
At the time of submission, only two comments exist. Neither of those two contributors have commented so far on the issue of the plaque on Denali. Admittably, this does not necessarily prove a polarity in any individual as relates to tolerance of religious practices. These flags are Buddhist, in a primarily Muslim country, yet the comments regard this practice favorably. How much more intrusive are these flags than a single plaque?
Did anyone react the same way to this picture as he or she reacted upon hearing of the plaque on Denali?
This may strike a nerve with some, who feel I am antagonizing the issue. However, in my mind, the issue strikes on prejudice and intolerance.
Something to think about, anyway.
Stepping away from the microphone...
|
|
|
|
|
scgreene2000
Sep 28, 2004, 5:12 AM
Post #68 of 72
(5247 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Feb 20, 2003
Posts: 85
|
[quote="bumblie"]In reply to: Visit Arlington's website for some photos: http://www.arlingtoncemetery.org/ I don't see any crosses, do you see any crosses?
Perhaps you should checkout the "photos" section. :roll:
OK well if you look at the headstones you will find all kinds. Too many people have seen the film about a private that needs saving and sees those cross "shaped" stones. PLEASE LOOK AT THIS LINK AND YOU WILL FIND WHAT IS ON THE STONES AT ARLINGTON NATIONAL CEMETARY!!!
http://www.arlingtoncemetery.org/...horized_emblems.html
|
|
|
|
|
scgreene2000
Sep 28, 2004, 5:34 AM
Post #69 of 72
(5247 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Feb 20, 2003
Posts: 85
|
In reply to: Yeah, this horse is dead-- but it still lingers in my mind, so i'm going to beat it till my heart's content. No need to reply, I'll just let this gem of a thread fade away. (Replies in PM are welcomed, though). Anyway, I saw this pic on the frontpage, and it really just kinda supports my point. In reply to: I would contend that if it were a marker bearing some eastern philosophical jingoism, we wouldn't be discussing it right now because it would be deemed "spiritual" and would have significance ascribed to it when, in fact, it would be equally out of place on the mountain as the plaque that the belgian placed. ... Sit back and pause for a moment to consider how you tolerate Eastern philosophy while attacking Western. "... If a spritual idea is eastern, it is granted critical immunity..." -Ravi Zacharias. (image is linked to its photo page) http://www.rockclimbing.com/...p.cgi?Detailed=35497 Caption: "This is a picture at K2 Base Camp. No - prayer flags are not common here - it's a Muslim country. Not Buddhist like Nepal. These were installed by Nepali porters jires by some international expeditions." At the time of submission, only two comments exist. Neither of those two contributors have commented so far on the issue of the plaque on Denali. Admittably, this does not necessarily prove a polarity in any individual as relates to tolerance of religious practices. These flags are Buddhist, in a primarily Muslim country, yet the comments regard this practice favorably. How much more intrusive are these flags than a single plaque? Did anyone react the same way to this picture as he or she reacted upon hearing of the plaque on Denali? This may strike a nerve with some, who feel I am antagonizing the issue. However, in my mind, the issue strikes on prejudice and intolerance. Something to think about, anyway. Stepping away from the microphone...
Mingleefu,
I think many people are turned off by western judao-christian traditions because of the things that have spawned from them read countless wars the Holocaust and genocide, et al. Give that the Japanese were Zen Buddhist during WWII
|
|
|
|
|
ophir
Sep 28, 2004, 4:40 PM
Post #70 of 72
(5247 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 2, 2004
Posts: 35
|
o can we all put some crap at the top the next climb we do then everone will know I was there and they will think i'm cool. fined him a 100 bucks huh, they should have back handed him too. Why should people be allowed to leave stuff hangin around nation parks if you want to deface something find a city and have fun we have already trashed those areas. Why not be able to put a plack or carve youre name in the rock, or mabey just bring some krylon. because these are "national parks" founded to save some of the natural space we have left.; Can you imagine what el cap would look like if every one that has climbed left a bumpersticker at the top of his or her route. a trailor park not a national park.O but he is doing this in they name of religion does the good lord like the idea of trashing out earth? (out of the gene pool please). Can someone send me a list of religions that are accepted as plaque elligable? I would like to turn our crags into my new tick list and need a group to justify it.
:shock:
|
|
|
|
|
j_dub
Sep 29, 2004, 12:15 PM
Post #71 of 72
(5247 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 3, 2004
Posts: 142
|
This guy clearly failed the LNT lesson.
Pack it in, pack it out. Otherwise you're an asshole who litters in a national park. End of story.
|
|
|
|
|
johnson6102002
Sep 29, 2004, 12:24 PM
Post #72 of 72
(5247 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 23, 2004
Posts: 843
|
In reply to: This guy clearly failed the LNT lesson. Pack it in, pack it out. Otherwise you're an asshole who litters in a national park. End of story. |
|
|
|
|
|
