Free Speech and the Bible Museum

[cbayer]

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/richard-j-rosendall/free-speech-and-the-bible_b_5616498.html

Richard J. Rosendall
President, Gay and Lesbian Activists Alliance (GLAA)

Posted: 07/24/2014 7:16 pm EDT Updated: 07/24/2014 7:59 pm EDT Print Article

Exposing religious zealotry is undermined if we are overzealous ourselves.

An effort by the pro-LGBT group Truth Wins Out (TWO) to block the opening of a private Bible museum in the Nation's Capital is a misguided assault on constitutional protections that properly protect everyone, including LGBT Americans and their opponents.

A July 16 New York Times story reported on plans by Hobby Lobby owner Steve Green to convert a building near the National Mall in D.C. into a Bible museum:

Specifics of the exhibits have not been released, but the traveling show of Mr. Green's collection offers some clues. It included theatrical experiences such as hologram recreations of biblical scenes, re-enactments of fourth-century monks transcribing the Bible by candlelight in St. Jerome's Cave and a multimedia "Noah's ark experience."

TWO's Wayne Besen wrote on July 16:

Truth Wins Out strongly urged Washington, DC officials today to reject plans to build a National Bible Museum only blocks from the National Mall. The project ... would make a mockery of surrounding museums, which are based on research, history, and scholarship.

Citing Green's ties to the secretive National Prayer Breakfast group "The Family," Besen wrote:

A Green-funded museum would likely proselytize and promote one radical strain of Christianity, at the exclusion of more tolerant ... versions of the faith. National Mall museums should be about genuine scholarship, not divisive, sectarian efforts to evangelize.

more at link

[edhopper]

1. Unfortunately

those aren't Constitutional reasons to stop this. There are probably a large list of rules and regulations about Museums in this area, and this Museum may not meet them. But the ideology of the Museum can't be one of them.

[cbayer]

2. I don't think there is any valid reason to stop this and agree with the author that

trying to stop it really has the potential to backfire.

As a very wise Skinner once told me, let them do whatever they want. It is they who will look like fools in the end, not you.

[edhopper]

3. I think in the end

this will be bad. Many if not most visitors, and especially foreign ones, will not understand that this is not a Government sanctioned museum.
It will promote their fundamentalist view of the Bible, and Bible illiterate visitors (and let's face it, that is a big chunk of the population) will be told things that are not true and harmful to our country.

It's a pity, but like I said, unless they violate a regulation, they are allowed to build it.

I just don't see an upside for this.

[cbayer]

4. I think you maybe underestimate the average visitor to DC.

Let me be clear. I think the museum is a disastrous idea. I also think it will fail.

But I have no interest in trying to protect the general public from this kind of idiocy. I think that most people who choose to go there will already share beliefs with Ham or they will go there to laugh.

That's pretty much the makeup of the creationist museum attendance.

The upside is that they will be obvious and the country is turning away from this kind of fundamentalism.

At any rate, it's there right to do this and it's a right that I personally cherish, so while I may try to undermine them with ridicule and facts, I would not try to stop them.

[edhopper]

5. We agree on the legal rights of the Museum

we disagree on the gullibility of the public.

[cbayer]

6. Well, apparently Ham tends to agree with you because I think

he is hoping to sell this.

I would support informational and educational booths outside the museum, which would address some of your concerns I think.