National Forest off-limits to all but Indians

[Seth]

On the west side of Pike's Peak, a popular trail and camping area known as Horsethief Park has been closed to use by anyone but a member of the Ute Tribe by order of the Forest Supervisor of the Pike and San Isabel National Forest on Saturday, August 4th, from 6 am to 6 pm.

The authority to do so is cited as the Food, Conservation and Energy Act of 2008, Subtitle B, Sec. 8104, which states:

SEC. 8104. TEMPORARY CLOSURE FOR TRADITIONAL AND CULTURAL PURPOSES.
(a) Recognition of Historic Use- To the maximum extent practicable, the Secretary shall ensure access to National Forest System land by Indians for traditional and cultural purposes, in accordance with subsection (b), in recognition of the historic use by Indians of National Forest System land.
(b) Closing Land From Public Access-
(1) AUTHORITY TO CLOSE- Upon the approval by the Secretary of a request from an Indian tribe, the Secretary may temporarily close from public access specifically identified National Forest System land to protect the privacy of tribal activities for traditional and cultural purposes.
(2) LIMITATION- A closure of National Forest System land under paragraph (1) shall affect the smallest practicable area for the minimum period necessary for activities of the applicable Indian tribe.
(3) CONSISTENCY- Access by Indian tribes to National Forest System land under this subsection shall be consistent with the purposes of Public Law 95-341 (commonly known as the American Indian Religious Freedom Act; 42 U.S.C. 1996).

This statute clearly violates both the First Amendment's proscription on government advancement of religion and the Fourteenth Amendment's Equal Protection Clause because it is intended to reserve public lands for Indian religious practices disguised as "traditional and cultural" activities and because it denies other citizens use of public lands based on their racial status of not being members of a particular Indian tribe. The law does not permit such closures for other ethnic, racial or religious groups to accommodate their "traditional and cultural" activities.

How do you Atheists respond to this religious favoritism?

[Tero]

Oh we love cute little religions that are not Christian Jewish pr Muslim.

Native Americans respect nature better than we do, so another plus.

[Animavore]

Which "religious practices" are these you're referring to?

[Wumbologist]

I don't give a shit what they're using it for but I figure, all things considered, the least we can do is let them borrow their land back every now and again.

[Seth]

Which "religious practices" are these you're referring to?

Indian religious practices of course. They worship the earth as sacred, so it's easy for them to claim that just about any area is an area of "traditional and cultural" practice. Why should they get to have exclusive use of public lands while everyone else is prohibited from using the area on penalty of six months in jail and a $5000 fine if some non-Indian happens to violate the closure order?

Why can't their "traditional and cultural" practices coexist with use by other citizens, just like we have to coexist with others when using the Forests? What's so special about them?

[Seth]

I don't give a shit what they're using it for but I figure, all things considered, the least we can do is let them borrow their land back every now and again.

Why? It's not theirs anymore. We had a war, they lost. Tough shit.

[Animavore]

Which "religious practices" are these you're referring to?

Indian religious practices of course. They worship the earth as sacred, so it's easy for them to claim that just about any area is an area of "traditional and cultural" practice. Why should they get to have exclusive use of public lands while everyone else is prohibited from using the area on penalty of six months in jail and a $5000 fine if some non-Indian happens to violate the closure order?

Why can't their "traditional and cultural" practices coexist with use by other citizens, just like we have to coexist with others when using the Forests? What's so special about them?

Not sure. I don't really know how American law works with regards Indians. I thought there were special dispensations with them, things like preserving heritage and stuff? No?

[Seth]

Which "religious practices" are these you're referring to?

Indian religious practices of course. They worship the earth as sacred, so it's easy for them to claim that just about any area is an area of "traditional and cultural" practice. Why should they get to have exclusive use of public lands while everyone else is prohibited from using the area on penalty of six months in jail and a $5000 fine if some non-Indian happens to violate the closure order?

Why can't their "traditional and cultural" practices coexist with use by other citizens, just like we have to coexist with others when using the Forests? What's so special about them?

Not sure. I don't really know how American law works with regards Indians. I thought there were special dispensations with them, things like preserving heritage and stuff? No?

No. The First Amendment prohibits the government from "favoring or disfavoring" any religion. The applicable test is the Lemon Test, Lemon v. Kurtzman, in which the Supreme Court said that to be valid:

The government's action must have a secular legislative purpose;
The government's action must not have the primary effect of either advancing or inhibiting religion;
The government's action must not result in an "excessive government entanglement" with religion.

This regulation clearly serves the primary purpose of advancing Indian religious practices while inhibiting the religious practices of other religions.

And there are no "special dispensations" for Indians to preserve their heritage other than the Indian reservations where they have "sovereign" (actually domestic dependent nation) status and are free to practice their culture and religion as they like.

[Tyrannical]

Indians don't enjoy Constitutional protections. They only have rights under Federal laws and under the Indian Treaties.

[Animavore]

Which "religious practices" are these you're referring to?

Indian religious practices of course. They worship the earth as sacred, so it's easy for them to claim that just about any area is an area of "traditional and cultural" practice. Why should they get to have exclusive use of public lands while everyone else is prohibited from using the area on penalty of six months in jail and a $5000 fine if some non-Indian happens to violate the closure order?

Why can't their "traditional and cultural" practices coexist with use by other citizens, just like we have to coexist with others when using the Forests? What's so special about them?

Not sure. I don't really know how American law works with regards Indians. I thought there were special dispensations with them, things like preserving heritage and stuff? No?

No. The First Amendment prohibits the government from "favoring or disfavoring" any religion. The applicable test is the Lemon Test, Lemon v. Kurtzman, in which the Supreme Court said that to be valid:

The government's action must have a secular legislative purpose;
The government's action must not have the primary effect of either advancing or inhibiting religion;
The government's action must not result in an "excessive government entanglement" with religion.

This regulation clearly serves the primary purpose of advancing Indian religious practices while inhibiting the religious practices of other religions.

And there are no "special dispensations" for Indians to preserve their heritage other than the Indian reservations where they have "sovereign" (actually domestic dependent nation) status and are free to practice their culture and religion as they like.

Is that not the case with this?

[Seth]

Which "religious practices" are these you're referring to?

Indian religious practices of course. They worship the earth as sacred, so it's easy for them to claim that just about any area is an area of "traditional and cultural" practice. Why should they get to have exclusive use of public lands while everyone else is prohibited from using the area on penalty of six months in jail and a $5000 fine if some non-Indian happens to violate the closure order?

Why can't their "traditional and cultural" practices coexist with use by other citizens, just like we have to coexist with others when using the Forests? What's so special about them?

Not sure. I don't really know how American law works with regards Indians. I thought there were special dispensations with them, things like preserving heritage and stuff? No?

No. The First Amendment prohibits the government from "favoring or disfavoring" any religion. The applicable test is the Lemon Test, Lemon v. Kurtzman, in which the Supreme Court said that to be valid:

The government's action must have a secular legislative purpose;
The government's action must not have the primary effect of either advancing or inhibiting religion;
The government's action must not result in an "excessive government entanglement" with religion.

This regulation clearly serves the primary purpose of advancing Indian religious practices while inhibiting the religious practices of other religions.

And there are no "special dispensations" for Indians to preserve their heritage other than the Indian reservations where they have "sovereign" (actually domestic dependent nation) status and are free to practice their culture and religion as they like.

Is that not the case with this?

No. The National Forest is not part of an Indian reservation, it's public land. They are free to worship and practice their religion on public lands, but the question here is whether or not the Forest Service has legitimate authority to bar others from entering that exclusion zone. I say it doesn't and that the law is unconstitutional.

[Seth]

Indians don't enjoy Constitutional protections. They only have rights under Federal laws and under the Indian Treaties.

Actually, as of I believe 1954, all Indians are also U.S. citizens and thus enjoy all of the rights that every other citizen enjoys OFF of their reservations. They enjoy substantially more freedom ON their reservations, where they are only subject to tribal law with some oversight by the BIA and the FBI, which investigates on-reservation crimes. It's somewhat complicated.

[Trinity]

I....will.......not....respond........lest....I........say something.....I end up ..........in a ...non...hell.....for.....

[Tero]

Which "religious practices" are these you're referring to?

Indian religious practices of course.......

Why can't their "traditional and cultural" practices coexist with use by other citizens, just like we have to coexist with others when using the Forests? What's so special about them?

And look how well that coexisting went. The only Indians/Natives that retained useful lands are in Alaska. We lease mineral rights from their co-op.

[Tyrannical]

Ah, federal land us tricky. Indians have no legal right, and by right I mean right, to be on State land except by State law. A State is within it's right to quarantine them within Indian or Federal land. Indians only hold US citizenship and the privallage to vote under federal law.