Alas, the Founding Fathers (who were deists, yes) were no longer around when we started creating the national parks -- but there were plenty of people with religious viewpoints who *were* involved and who were part of the conversation back then. To ignore them and what they had to say on the matter is to ignore part of the history of the national parks (and much of the rest of our history). If that bothers you, deal with it: this is reality. It is there for you to learn from it, without actually requiring you to be a believer of any sort. In fact, part of the point in creating the parks and preserving this land is that people DO feel that spiritual connection to wilderness, and this is thought to be a GOOD thing. That spiritual connection need not be specifically religious, but it often is. If religion isn't for you, fine. But that doesn't mean the influence of religion doesn't exist in the larger society, or that admitting as much necessarily makes you an evangelist (it doesn't).
It seems to me that what you are really complaining about is the heavy-handed existence of religion in our society at large and, perhaps, the way people who believe sometimes forget that their rights end where yours begin, and that they have no right to impose their religious views on you, either socially or by trying to incorporate those religious views into civil law (that's unconstitutional, but it doesn't stop the ultraconservative right, for example). Perhaps that's why you are so oversensitive to even tangential religious references when Ken Burns was merely doing his job as a documentarian, and a good job at that. And I say this as a secular humanist: dude, get a grip.
reply
share