Another example is the area of addiction recovery. Rehabs funded with federal dollars proudly tout their sweat lodges, talking circles, and sage burning for native clients. But try, as a therapist, to remind a deeply Christian grandma about a Bible verse pertaining to her grief counseling---not with federal dollars!!! One issue here is the definition of religion. See historian Tom Holland about how this word is uniquely Western.
Japan, the Soviet Union, China, India and the US have now all landed a spacecraft on the moon. I think giving consideration to each nations various religion concerns and objection is not as important as making sure the moon is not "claimed" by any one of them, divided up or fought after.
You can also see this religious preference for indigenous beliefs in play in the bizarre battle over construction of the thirty meter telescope on Mauna Kea in Hawaii. One of the primary objections made by activists (really just a handful of academics with dubious credentials) was that the mountain was 'sacred' to native Hawaiians and the construction would prevent loosely defined 'native cultural practices'. Both federal and state governments took this nonsense seriously and construction has been delayed for years, despite the fact most native Hawaiians are Christian and don't even engage in the practices this project is alleged to disrupt. In reality what happened is that activists have extracted paid consulting work from the developers to incorporate meaningless cultural activities and community outreach programs that no one will care about. A total scam.
Sure. However the phrase "In God We Trust" is the official motto of the United States. It is also the motto of the U.S. state of Florida. The motto has been included on U.S. currency since the Civil War era, and it became the official national motto in 1956 when President Dwight D. Eisenhower signed a law establishing it as such. It's interesting that the United States government is founded on the principles of religious freedom and the separation of church and state, as outlined in the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. However, the presence of religious phrases, such as "In God We Trust" on U.S. currency and the phrase "under God" in the Pledge of Allegiance, has led to debates about the extent to which the government reflects a religious preference. these phrases may be seen as promoting a particular religious viewpoint and that they could be perceived as violating the principle of separation of church and state.
The Navajo Nation is essentially a semi independent country within the US. Hearing their objections is reasonable and respectful. They came to the right conclusion. This is a complaint about nothing. Had the Vatican sent a delegation they’d probably have heard them out too
Sometimes "science" and "scientists" can act as religiously as any religion. I've dealt with many science ideologues in my lifetime, and they can be as narrow-minded and self-centered as any religious zealot. Science as the pursuit of truth applies to self-proclaimed scientists as much as anyone. To paraphrase the old saying -- "Scientist, know thyself and thy motivations."
While I am in agreement with aligning to the original constitution, and dissolving patriarchal practices in any religion, NASA and the White House are withholding so much information in regards to space travel and their true intentions. It is therefore, hard to separate the actual alliance or non alliance between the Navajo and politicians. Native Religions know more about the stars than most religions present today and my intuition tells me that the White House is in great need of what the Navajo know. Also, the government has a hold, along with NASA, on everything , every aspect of our lives. They aren’t just freely allowing whoever has the money to fly to the moon to do so. There is so much they have been hiding. It cannot be that straight forward. Unless I’m misunderstanding you there. Thank you for your intelligent article on this. There does need to be conversation.
You need not look to the moon to see some tribal/government canoodling. President Biden proclaimed the Baaj Nwaavjo I’tah Kukveni National Monument surrounding the Grand Canyon a few months ago, pulling almost a million acres out of USFS/BLM multiple use management and dedicating it to the preservation of Indian archeological sites under the Antiquities Act. The Navajos along with a couple other tribes were worried about uranium mining, radium pollution of water sources, protection of Native American burial sites and artifacts/ruins, and access for religious ceremonies. And here, you go down the rabbit hole: Every issue they raised was already covered by extant federal law and was actively being managed. National Monument status added nothing in terms of additional statutory protection. But it did set up a Tribal Commission giving the tribes a preferential role in management--and if it is modeled on the Bears Ears commission, the feds say straight out that they will do everything in their power to shield its work from the Freedom of Information Act. As to uranium mining, the one active mine is expressly grandfathered in, and the proclamation is incredibly vague about the thousands of existing mining claims in the area. Perhaps that's because it would be a federal takings to abrogate those claims, meaning that every patented claim would need due process and reasonable compensation for its property rights. But wait, there's more: these Monument proclamations are exempt from NEPA analysis; the existing data on radium pollution reveals that natural leaching, not mining, is the primary and historic source. And while the media reports talked about grandfathering in existing public uses, the Proclamation says what it has to say under the law: everything is subordinated to the preservation purpose of the Act. As to what that looks like, consider the Red Butte Management Area created by the Kaibab National Forest at the tribes' behest: that area is closed to vehicular recovery of elk (which is broadly permitted in Arizona game management units); off-limits to any commercial activity; and may be closed to public access at the tribe's demand--ostensibly to protect religious ceremonies, but because their ceremonies are secret, nobody knows what that means. And if you think that Monument status creates a wonderful tourist and educational attraction, think again. Bill Clinton pulled the same vote-buying game when he designated the Agua Fria National Monument 24 years ago--and to be fair, there are some really cool ruins around there. But a quarter century later, the "monument" is one crappy web page hosted by the BLM giving directions to a crappy road leading to a crappy trail to one ruin complex. No staff, no visitor center, no nada. Except...he bought votes. And that's exactly what is going on with Biden: he's doing his dangdest to turn Utah and Arizona blue, and trading off our multiple use public access lands to do it. I'd say more, but have to await the FOIA response that the USFS has been stonewalling since last October. And I'll make a prediction: if we get a Democrat Congress and President next election, you will see reparations suddenly land on the table, and at least a portion of this new Monument will become trust lands for the adjacent tribes. Biden pretty much telegraphed this in saying that monument designation and preferential management access was a "first step." The tribal commission could easily concoct a justification for, say, the former Tusayan Ranger District becoming "returned" to the Navajos. And don't think this deconstruction of our public lands will end here: if you look at the justifications claimed to take this million acres of land, you'll find they apply in almost every respect to any other million acres of federal land in the Southwest. Congress failed us mightily in handing a president unilateral authority to override Congressionally-directed multiple use land management.
This is interesting and the same trend is happening in Canada - under the guise of reconciliation - when no one is becoming reconciled to the mess the gov's made of First Nations policies. I often wonder why this religion and land acknowledgements are being included now when we had to work hard to get rid of the pledge to the UK Monarchy and the Lord's Prayer in schools. As someone who suffered from religious PTSD, I'm really not that keen and it's starting to seem as formulaic as those.
a) Who can be so self- indulgent as to need their remains deposited on the moon?
And that probably costs some money. There are needy people on this planet suffering and dying that your money could help.
b) agreed we don't need to honor a whim of some Native Americans about not putting remains on the moon. It seems like an exercise in self absorption to request this. Not to deprecated all Native American spirituality but there has to be a limit.
Is it true that certain tribes have made land claims based on the fact that their ancestors were buried all around only to have DNA reveal that in fact the people claimed as "ancestors" were the victims of the tribes making the land claim?
Another example is the area of addiction recovery. Rehabs funded with federal dollars proudly tout their sweat lodges, talking circles, and sage burning for native clients. But try, as a therapist, to remind a deeply Christian grandma about a Bible verse pertaining to her grief counseling---not with federal dollars!!! One issue here is the definition of religion. See historian Tom Holland about how this word is uniquely Western.
Japan, the Soviet Union, China, India and the US have now all landed a spacecraft on the moon. I think giving consideration to each nations various religion concerns and objection is not as important as making sure the moon is not "claimed" by any one of them, divided up or fought after.
You can also see this religious preference for indigenous beliefs in play in the bizarre battle over construction of the thirty meter telescope on Mauna Kea in Hawaii. One of the primary objections made by activists (really just a handful of academics with dubious credentials) was that the mountain was 'sacred' to native Hawaiians and the construction would prevent loosely defined 'native cultural practices'. Both federal and state governments took this nonsense seriously and construction has been delayed for years, despite the fact most native Hawaiians are Christian and don't even engage in the practices this project is alleged to disrupt. In reality what happened is that activists have extracted paid consulting work from the developers to incorporate meaningless cultural activities and community outreach programs that no one will care about. A total scam.
Sure. However the phrase "In God We Trust" is the official motto of the United States. It is also the motto of the U.S. state of Florida. The motto has been included on U.S. currency since the Civil War era, and it became the official national motto in 1956 when President Dwight D. Eisenhower signed a law establishing it as such. It's interesting that the United States government is founded on the principles of religious freedom and the separation of church and state, as outlined in the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. However, the presence of religious phrases, such as "In God We Trust" on U.S. currency and the phrase "under God" in the Pledge of Allegiance, has led to debates about the extent to which the government reflects a religious preference. these phrases may be seen as promoting a particular religious viewpoint and that they could be perceived as violating the principle of separation of church and state.
The Navajo Nation is essentially a semi independent country within the US. Hearing their objections is reasonable and respectful. They came to the right conclusion. This is a complaint about nothing. Had the Vatican sent a delegation they’d probably have heard them out too
Sometimes "science" and "scientists" can act as religiously as any religion. I've dealt with many science ideologues in my lifetime, and they can be as narrow-minded and self-centered as any religious zealot. Science as the pursuit of truth applies to self-proclaimed scientists as much as anyone. To paraphrase the old saying -- "Scientist, know thyself and thy motivations."
While I am in agreement with aligning to the original constitution, and dissolving patriarchal practices in any religion, NASA and the White House are withholding so much information in regards to space travel and their true intentions. It is therefore, hard to separate the actual alliance or non alliance between the Navajo and politicians. Native Religions know more about the stars than most religions present today and my intuition tells me that the White House is in great need of what the Navajo know. Also, the government has a hold, along with NASA, on everything , every aspect of our lives. They aren’t just freely allowing whoever has the money to fly to the moon to do so. There is so much they have been hiding. It cannot be that straight forward. Unless I’m misunderstanding you there. Thank you for your intelligent article on this. There does need to be conversation.
You need not look to the moon to see some tribal/government canoodling. President Biden proclaimed the Baaj Nwaavjo I’tah Kukveni National Monument surrounding the Grand Canyon a few months ago, pulling almost a million acres out of USFS/BLM multiple use management and dedicating it to the preservation of Indian archeological sites under the Antiquities Act. The Navajos along with a couple other tribes were worried about uranium mining, radium pollution of water sources, protection of Native American burial sites and artifacts/ruins, and access for religious ceremonies. And here, you go down the rabbit hole: Every issue they raised was already covered by extant federal law and was actively being managed. National Monument status added nothing in terms of additional statutory protection. But it did set up a Tribal Commission giving the tribes a preferential role in management--and if it is modeled on the Bears Ears commission, the feds say straight out that they will do everything in their power to shield its work from the Freedom of Information Act. As to uranium mining, the one active mine is expressly grandfathered in, and the proclamation is incredibly vague about the thousands of existing mining claims in the area. Perhaps that's because it would be a federal takings to abrogate those claims, meaning that every patented claim would need due process and reasonable compensation for its property rights. But wait, there's more: these Monument proclamations are exempt from NEPA analysis; the existing data on radium pollution reveals that natural leaching, not mining, is the primary and historic source. And while the media reports talked about grandfathering in existing public uses, the Proclamation says what it has to say under the law: everything is subordinated to the preservation purpose of the Act. As to what that looks like, consider the Red Butte Management Area created by the Kaibab National Forest at the tribes' behest: that area is closed to vehicular recovery of elk (which is broadly permitted in Arizona game management units); off-limits to any commercial activity; and may be closed to public access at the tribe's demand--ostensibly to protect religious ceremonies, but because their ceremonies are secret, nobody knows what that means. And if you think that Monument status creates a wonderful tourist and educational attraction, think again. Bill Clinton pulled the same vote-buying game when he designated the Agua Fria National Monument 24 years ago--and to be fair, there are some really cool ruins around there. But a quarter century later, the "monument" is one crappy web page hosted by the BLM giving directions to a crappy road leading to a crappy trail to one ruin complex. No staff, no visitor center, no nada. Except...he bought votes. And that's exactly what is going on with Biden: he's doing his dangdest to turn Utah and Arizona blue, and trading off our multiple use public access lands to do it. I'd say more, but have to await the FOIA response that the USFS has been stonewalling since last October. And I'll make a prediction: if we get a Democrat Congress and President next election, you will see reparations suddenly land on the table, and at least a portion of this new Monument will become trust lands for the adjacent tribes. Biden pretty much telegraphed this in saying that monument designation and preferential management access was a "first step." The tribal commission could easily concoct a justification for, say, the former Tusayan Ranger District becoming "returned" to the Navajos. And don't think this deconstruction of our public lands will end here: if you look at the justifications claimed to take this million acres of land, you'll find they apply in almost every respect to any other million acres of federal land in the Southwest. Congress failed us mightily in handing a president unilateral authority to override Congressionally-directed multiple use land management.
This is interesting and the same trend is happening in Canada - under the guise of reconciliation - when no one is becoming reconciled to the mess the gov's made of First Nations policies. I often wonder why this religion and land acknowledgements are being included now when we had to work hard to get rid of the pledge to the UK Monarchy and the Lord's Prayer in schools. As someone who suffered from religious PTSD, I'm really not that keen and it's starting to seem as formulaic as those.
My thoughts:
a) Who can be so self- indulgent as to need their remains deposited on the moon?
And that probably costs some money. There are needy people on this planet suffering and dying that your money could help.
b) agreed we don't need to honor a whim of some Native Americans about not putting remains on the moon. It seems like an exercise in self absorption to request this. Not to deprecated all Native American spirituality but there has to be a limit.
Is it true that certain tribes have made land claims based on the fact that their ancestors were buried all around only to have DNA reveal that in fact the people claimed as "ancestors" were the victims of the tribes making the land claim?