Christians Protest Government Endorsement of Religion... Buddhism!

When there are protests of government favoritism towards religion, like in the context of special displays on government property, they usually involve Christians being favored. Now, though, the shoe is on the other foot: conservative evangelicals who usually defend such displays are protesting one — because it is about Buddhism. Especially ironic is that they are effectively protesting something which they helped make possible.

In Bloomington, Indiana, there is an exhibit in the city hall to mark the visit of the Dalai Lama to the city's Tibetan Culture Center and his lecture at the University of Indiana. In addition to photographs and craft work, there are religion-related items like statues of Buddha, religious cloth paintings, and a Peace Tree. The Christians who are protesting don't seem to realize that this exhibit is legal precisely because of rules which they have championed in defense of their own Ten Commandments monuments.

At the installation of the Christian symbol, according to the local Herald Times newspaper, Jim Billingsley read a statement explaining what was going on.

"These commandments are our symbol of peace, and we want to include them with the city's display to promote religious enlightenment. We want to be clear that we do not agree with the ideology of the Dalai Lama or Buddhist beliefs – we are Christians and believe in one God, our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ," he said.

[In an e-mail, Billingsley told WND] "I read a brief statement on the importance of the Ten Commandments being the bedrock on which our city and nation's cultural and legal foundations stand," he wrote. "We then proceeded to take two stone tablets of the Ten Commandments (each about 2 ft. tall and 1 ft. wide) and a table inside city hall and placed them right in front of the city's religious display of Buddhism."

"Shortly after we left, the city had the Ten Commandments removed. There is an obvious endorsement of one religion, and the deliberate exclusion of another going on here by Bloomington's city government," he said.

Source: World Net Daily

It sounds to me like the goal here is far more about protesting the presence of Buddhism than about trying to provide "balance." Notice that the official statement makes a point of saying "we do not agree with the ideology of the Dalai Lama" and that the Christians placed the Ten Commandments right in front of the Buddhist religious symbols.

Both literally and symbolically, the goal appears to me to be all about placing Christianity ahead of Buddhism because these Christians believe America is defined — culturally, socially, historically, politically — by Christianity. In such a context, no other religion can be given any sort of official recognition. It's certainly wrong for any other religion to be accorded any sort of respect normally reserved for Christianity.

It's no wonder that the government removed the Ten Commandments display. The Christian protesters claim that they are being discriminated against, but it doesn't take more than a couple of seconds of thought to realize that there must be a procedure for erecting a display in the city hall and that these people didn't even try to follow it.

[Deputy Mayor James McNamara] denied the city promotes one religion over another, saying instead the display of the statues of Buddha and the other religious artifacts are, in fact, "cultural."

Bernitt said the Ten Commandments also are cultural, and artistic, since they were carved from limestone, for which the Bloomington area is famous.

Kruzan earlier told the newspaper the Ten Commandments weren't being allowed because the installation "followed no process and does not constitute a work of art."

The idea that the government can display explicitly religious content in an otherwise secular context and for a secular purpose is something that has been vociferously championed by conservative Christians looking for an excuse to have the government promote the Ten Commandments. The same is true when it comes to religious art in the context of other art.

Now, however, these standards suddenly aren’t good enough! Why? Because such Christians only ever meant those standards to apply to Christianity and only expected them to be used for the benefit of Christians. As has happened in so many other cases, merely having non-Christians take advantage of formally neutral rules suddenly causes some Christians to rethink their position.

The Christians simply said that those actions opened the door to all religious materials, and their beliefs have just as much right to space in city hall as the Dalai Lama's.

Michael Douglas, a pastor at Pentecostal Faith Assembly, told the newspaper he wants an equal voice for his beliefs. "He (Dalai Lama) lost his voice in his country, (we) don't want to lose our voice in our country," he said.

I suppose if Douglas wants to create an exhibit about the cultural history of America that happens to include a few religious elements — and if there is some event that would cause the exhibit to be appropriate — then he can apply to have one erected. In other words, he should consider following the same rules and procedures as everyone else. The attempt to circumvent them in the manner described above is just another example of Christians attempt to assert special privileges for themselves. Ironically, it's in reaction to a failure by the government to accord them other special privileges.