Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by on Sunday May 28 2017, @03:22PM   Printer-friendly
from the why-so-choosy-about-rocks? dept.

http://www.sciencemag.org/news/2017/05/creationist-geologist-sues-us-park-service-after-it-rejects-request-collect-samples

The Interior Department is facing a lawsuit from a Christian geologist who claims he was not allowed to collect rocks from Grand Canyon National Park because of his creationist beliefs.

In the suit filed earlier this month, the Australian geologist, Andrew Snelling, says that religious discrimination was behind the National Park Service's (NRS's) decision to deny him a permit to gather samples from four locations in the park.

Snelling had hoped to gather the rocks to support the creationist belief that a global flood about 4,300 years ago was responsible for rock layers and fossil deposits around the world.

NPS's actions "demonstrate animus towards the religious viewpoints of Dr. Snelling," the complaint alleges, "and violate Dr. Snelling's free exercise rights by imposing inappropriate and unnecessary religious tests to his access to the park."

The lawsuit was filed May 9 in the U.S. District Court for the District of Arizona. NPS has yet to respond to the allegations.


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 1) by kurenai.tsubasa on Sunday May 28 2017, @10:06PM (2 children)

    by kurenai.tsubasa (5227) on Sunday May 28 2017, @10:06PM (#516892) Journal

    I thought family values included the earth being 6,000 years old?

    Ok, ok. There's something here. Before my mommy and daddy went completely bonkers, they believed that the account of the creation of the Earth in Genesis was accurate from the point of view that a day to Yahweh may be a billion years long, such as in Hinduism one Brahma day lasting billions of years [wikipedia.org] in human reckoning. Of course, they also believed that the story in Genesis was prescient, and thus was the beginning of the descent into madness.

    There need be no conflict between religion and science. There is only conflict because religious nutjobs want there to be conflict. Asshats like this guy who wants to find evidence of a world-wide cataclysm instead of merely one of the major flood events during the end of the last glaciation cycle destroys the credibility of a philosophical tradition that reaches back for thousands of years. If Yahweh must be the one god to rule them all, why must he in the darkness bind them? Why can't Yahweh have created a magnificent universe with dizzying scales to humble even the most ambitious of human imaginations?

    Well he can't, because gays apparently. (And why can't gays be included in family values as people who contribute to the capability of a family to care for children? Because reasons. Because apparently every married couple with 2.5 kids are an island. Because those cis+hets I keep hearing about never divorce, though I think I've only met a dozen of these virtuous people who never divorce in my whole life. Only heathens include gays in the extended family.)

    I guess we can't have family values unless Yahweh is a small god who is only capable of producing stuff fully created instead of slow-cooking it for billions and billions of years. So, I now dub Yahweh the god of fast food! More important gods like Brahma don't have all kalpa! If it's not ready on a time scale of merely thousands of years, he's going to get ahold of Yahweh's manager and have the punk fired!

    Fucking millennial gods. Millennials can't do anything right!

  • (Score: 1) by khallow on Monday May 29 2017, @12:31AM (1 child)

    by khallow (3766) Subscriber Badge on Monday May 29 2017, @12:31AM (#516940) Journal

    Because those cis+hets I keep hearing about never divorce, though I think I've only met a dozen of these virtuous people who never divorce in my whole life.

    In my father and mother's immediate families, there were 7 siblings in total who all married, of which most (four) have married and never experienced divorce. Their children tend to stick together as well. So I guess, what I'm saying here is that I have more than a dozen such "virtuous people" fairly closely related to me who have stayed married for life. It seems a cultural thing, but there's a lot of people out there who've managed to stay the course and stay life partners. I'm not going to claim that this actually is virtuous or that everyone should do it. To the contrary, I think there are a lot of people who for one reason or another aren't suitable for life-long marriage and it would be immoral to try to shoehorn them into this framework.

    • (Score: 2) by Azuma Hazuki on Monday May 29 2017, @02:05AM

      by Azuma Hazuki (5086) on Monday May 29 2017, @02:05AM (#516970) Journal

      That's the most sane, reasonable, and dare I say it enlightened thing I've ever heard you say. I'm genuinely impressed.

      ...who are you and what have you done with the real Mr. Hallow?!

      --
      I am "that girl" your mother warned you about...