David Engle said he felt a chill down his spine Sunday on a visit with his family to the Kansas City Zoo.
He could hardly believe it when he saw zoo visitors rubbing the heads and bellies of two large, smiling statues of Buddha at the entrance to the Tiger Trail area.
“We can’t have a cross or a nativity scene on public property,” said Engle of Overland Park, who complained to a zoo employee. “It is phenomenal to me that the zoo would put up Buddha statues.”
Engle, who said he and his family are Christians, said it was idolatry and “infuriating to God.”
(Now here's the best bit: the "Buddha" statues are not in fact Buddha at all, but a Japanese saint called Hotei - Details here )
36 comments
"...said it was idolatry and “infuriating to God.”"
"And what if we're worshipping the wrong God? Every week, we're just making Him angrier and angrier."
Well, it is easy:
and, well, not everyone is a fundamentalist christian like yourself, David ;)
"said it was idolatry and "infuriating to God.""
So what? It might be unconstitutional, or it might not, but whose imaginary friend it ticks off doesn't enter into it! By this comment, Engle has outed himself as someone who would have skipped for joy if it had been a Christian symbol, public space be damned, it's that it's some other belief that upsets him.
Jealousy is a sin, IIRC, time to get back on your knees, Dave.
If it will keep nuts like this one from attempting to put statues of Adam and Eve at the entrance to the snake exhibit, I say, "Yank 'em." Luck is a superstition too, and we have enough advocacy for soft-headedness of one kind or another on TV.
Right. Remove the statue. The Japanese saint Hotei & a Nativity set both should not be put on public property.
I'm not positive if the Zoo is public property, I think it is. Too busy to look it up!
David Engle said he felt a chill down his spine Sunday when he realized OTHER PEOPLE ARE DOING THINGS THAT I DON'T APPROVE OF. Then the whiny little bitch dropped dead of an aneurysm in front of his wife and children, who promptly burst out into cheers, dumped their bibles into the nearest refuse container and went out to buy cable TV, rock music CDs, the Twilight series and a ouija board.
"We can’t have a cross or a nativity scene on public property," said Engle of Overland Park, who complained to a zoo employee. "It is phenomenal to me that the zoo would put up Buddha statues."
You can't have Buddah or Hotei on public property, either. The zoo isn't public property. Nor, before the point is raised, does accepting tax money automatically make it subject to the Establishment clause.
Way to make a fool of yourself, Dave.
Unless the zoo is, in fact, public property (and most of the ones I've seen were owned by a foundation, not directly by city or state government) comparing their decoration to actual public decoration is apples and oranges. Maybe it's tacky to use religious sculpture as decoration for a non-religious institution, but it's not illegal, and I'd say the same thing if a fundy Buddhist wanted a private company to remove Christian decoration.
And where's that Susan B. Anthony quote about being skeptical of people who claim to know how God feels, since it always coincides with how they feel?
Lol. Because in my seven+ years as a zoo volunteer/employee I've seen SO MANY people coming to the zoo and spending their time worshiping things. Please. It's called establishing a theme. Zoos like to tie in the culture of the people that live where the animals do as a means of 1) teaching people a little bit about other people in the world in addition to something about the animals and 2) making the exhibit areas look awesome. That's all there is to it. Most zoo employees are very laid back about religion (a good number don't really even follow one) and such a display, if it was even religions in nature, is not meant as a promotion of a religion.
David Engle said he felt a chill down his spine Sunday on a visit with his family to the Kansas City Zoo. He could hardly believe it when he saw the family resemblance in the monkey section.
Perhaps a fitting zoo display for the thumpers would be a space reserved for a piece of the ark, if it's ever found.
i agree with Zoo, the statue was not meant to promote any religion or idolatry, it was meant as decoration for the asian themed part of the park. where do you want the jesus statue? in front of the bald eagle cages?
"This is a Kansas City Zoo and is therefore public property. This guy is not a fundy to complain about it if he finds it offensive. If this was a Muslim family and there was a frickin' cross at the entrance you'd be singing a different tune. Not fundy except for the last line about "infuriating God." "
BAWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW!!!!! FOREIGN CULTURAL REFERENCES INSULT MY GOD!!!!!!!!! BAAWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW!!!
You don't HAVE to participate, you know.
Even on public property, religious items are not necessarily disallowed, unless they are there for religious reasons. Would anyone object to a publicly owned museum from displaying religious artifacts? This statue is obviously there to add to the Asian atmosphere of this part of the zoo, not to promote a religion.
"David Engle said he felt a chill down his spine ... when he saw zoo visitors rubbing the heads and bellies"
If it good to ya, it gotta be good fo ya! Right awn!
Lemon test for deciding whether something violates the Establishment Clause:
1) Must have a secular purpose (Adding to the Asian ambiance of the part of the zoo that shows Asian animals)
2) Must neither promote nor inhibit religion (I don't see how this promotes any religion. Maybe if they were all over the zoo, or people were expected to pray near them, but that's not the case)
3) Must not create excessive government entanglement with religion (Well, for starters, who paid for the statues? If it was a donation, then there's no entanglement)
The Kansas City Zoo is private property, they can put up whatever statues they want. And crosses and nativity scenes shouldn't be on public property as much as buddha statues, or statues of Hotei, or any statue of any religous figure, because it violates the seperation of Church & State.
Obviously, Mr. Engle's objection is ridiculous. But I do take issue with using Buddha or Hotei statues as decoration in a zoo. It seems that the Kansas City Zoo were exploiting the images of a foreign culture to create an "Asian" atmosphere without actually appreciating the meaning of these statues. Imagine if a Chinese zoo used crucifixes to decorate an exhibit featuring European animals. It's the crudest form of Orientalism.
Confused?
So were we! You can find all of this, and more, on Fundies Say the Darndest Things!
To post a comment, you'll need to Sign in or Register . Making an account also allows you to claim credit for submitting quotes, and to vote on quotes and comments. You don't even need to give us your email address.
