Jump to content


Photo

Ken Ham Doing What Obama Has Not Been Able To


  • Please log in to reply
88 replies to this topic

#21 Adam Nagy

Adam Nagy

    Honorable Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,053 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Age: 37
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania

Posted 10 August 2014 - 05:47 AM

I think it are probably even out. Think about all the Christians that have subsidized the teaching of the religion of evolution in our classrooms.

Let's be for real. You really wouldn't expect a Jewish organization to hire members of the KKK now would you?

Good grief! Mike, the fact that you had to say it. Pi's comment is ludicrous isn't it? Next he'll advocate that Christian churches must hire Muslims for ministers. ;)

The idea that an organization must be shackled to hiring practices that defy its own mission statement is ludicrous. Why even have a mission statement?

"We want an organization filled with people that support our core values BUT to demonstrate our inclusiveness, we'll hire people that reject our core values."

Lunacy. On all levels. Just plain lunacy.

#22 Adam Nagy

Adam Nagy

    Honorable Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,053 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Age: 37
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania

Posted 10 August 2014 - 05:51 AM

Postscript: Due to the size of the creation museum, I suspect that many roles will be filled by people who don't agree with the overall mission statement of AiG. People working in gift shops, ticketing, etc...

Some positions will need hard workers that know how to do their jobs whether they agree or not.

#23 piasan

piasan

    Veteran Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2,742 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Oklahoma
  • Age: 71
  • Christian
  • Theistic Evolutionist
  • Oklahoma

Posted 10 August 2014 - 10:44 AM

Good grief! Mike, the fact that you had to say it. Pi's comment is ludicrous isn't it? Next he'll advocate that Christian churches must hire Muslims for ministers. wink.png.

WOW ! ! ! !   Adam, sure beat the stuffing out of that straw man.

 

He doesn't seem to understand the difference between churches in their religious mission and churches who are operating a for-profit business.  For example, the Catholic Church used to own the majority of Safeway grocery stores.  In it's religious operations, the Catholic church has every right to discriminate in their employment practices... and I've never said otherwise about any religious ministry.  In fact, I've pointed out AIG discriminates in their religious ministry and there is no issue whatsoever with that practice.  On the other hand, the Safeway stores owned by the Catholic Church are for-profit businesses and the Church has no right to discriminate in its employment practices at Safeway.

 

I've also pointed out Hobby Lobby.... which recently won their lawsuit over Obamacare due to their religious objections ... recognizes their legal and moral obligation to treat all employment candidates equally.  As far as I know, Hobby Lobby accepts no government funding.

 

The idea that an organization must be shackled to hiring practices that defy its own mission statement is ludicrous.

No one has "shackled" AE to accepting government money.  If they want to discriminate in hiring, all they need do is give all the sales taxes they collect to Kentucky.  If they want to keep that government money, then they should not be allowed to discriminate in employment based on the religious beliefs of potential employees .... especially in those jobs that are not directly involved in advancing their religious agenda.

 

You'll need to show how hiring non-YEC defies their mission statement.

 

"We want an organization filled with people that support our core values BUT to demonstrate our inclusiveness, we'll hire people that reject our core values."

Lunacy. On all levels. Just plain lunacy.

So, for example, if Hobby Lobby doesn't want to advance women because of their core (Biblical) value that women are not to be placed in positions of authority over men, that's just fine.... right?

 

Speaking of lunacy.

 

Postscript: Due to the size of the creation museum, I suspect that many roles will be filled by people who don't agree with the overall mission statement of AiG. People working in gift shops, ticketing, etc...

That's not what the creation museum says.  In post #8, I documented that the creation museum requires the following as "items needed for possible employment.":

1)  a salvation testimony

2)  creation belief statement and

3)  confirmation of agreement with AIG's Statement of Faith

 

This includes for jobs such as:

accounting specialist; administrative assistant; advancement coordinator - direct mail; grounds supervisor; groundskeeper; guest services coordinator; mail processor associate; security console operator; and warehouse specialist.

 

I also made it explicitly clear that since AIG and the Creation Museum do NOT accept government tax money, that's just fine.  I even acknowledged that there may be some positions at AE for which a religious test would be acceptable.... such as tour guides.



#24 Adam Nagy

Adam Nagy

    Honorable Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,053 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Age: 37
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania

Posted 10 August 2014 - 11:24 AM

This topic of discrimination always gets my mind going because people ignore its healthy role. People equate racial discrimination with all sorts of discrimination. The ability for any organization to set itself apart, and I mean absolutely any organization, is to hire those people that not just need a job but actually are hired for their ability to support the goals and vision of the organization.

The NFL has a very discriminatory hiring practice. Due to that practice all players are men and many are African for their physical strength and agility.

Hooters wants an environment where large breasted attractive women serve food. Very discriminatory.

Jockeys are hired to be light weight and strong. Should a class action law suit be awarded to over weight middle-aged men?

So AiG is stringent on their hiring practices to make sure people realize that their activity and success is predicated on a very specific biblical belief. Good for them.

Companies that do precision manufacturing and engineering are also looking for a very specific demographic. People who are good at spacial/abstract reasoning, problem solving and math. It's very discriminatory. Companies will provide preliminary tests to reject people who display an average or lower skill to perceive nuances in their environment and problem solving.

Pi, I'm not providing a straw man. I'm demonstrating that "discrimination", as what it's morphed into in recent years, is a perverted rubber ruler that gets implemented by the well-meaning then it dies the death of a thousand qualifications as practice and reason rejects it.

If Hooters wants to hire young attractive women to wait tables. We let them.

#25 piasan

piasan

    Veteran Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2,742 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Oklahoma
  • Age: 71
  • Christian
  • Theistic Evolutionist
  • Oklahoma

Posted 10 August 2014 - 12:52 PM

This topic of discrimination always gets my mind going because people ignore its healthy role. People equate racial discrimination with all sorts of discrimination. The ability for any organization to set itself apart, and I mean absolutely any organization, is to hire those people that not just need a job but actually are hired for their ability to support the goals and vision of the organization.

Make up your mind, Adam.... previously you said:

 

Postscript: Due to the size of the creation museum, I suspect that many roles will be filled by people who don't agree with the overall mission statement of AiG. People working in gift shops, ticketing, etc...

Some positions will need hard workers that know how to do their jobs whether they agree or not.

So, should the requirement be "hard workers that know how to do their jobs whether they agree or not" or should it be only those who are able "to support the goals and vision of the organization"?

 

Remember, I have repeatedly pointed out there are jobs for which an "ability to support the goals and vision of the organization" is a perfectly legitimate job requirement and there are other jobs such as "working in gift shops, ticketing, etc...." for which such a requirement is not valid.

 

The NFL has a very discriminatory hiring practice. Due to that practice all players are men and many are African for their physical strength and agility.

The NFL has one job requirement for players.... that they be able to play football at the highest level.  That is a legitimate job requirement.  For some reason, I don't think a 100 pound, 60 year old woman is likely to be very successful as a lineman in the NFL.

 

Hooters wants an environment where large breasted attractive women serve food. Very discriminatory.

Hooters also hires men to serve food.  The market place does a lot more to sort out the staff at Hooters as the "large breasted attractive women" get much larger tips.  But that's discrimination on the part of the customer, not the business.

 

Jockeys are hired to be light weight and strong. Should a class action law suit be awarded to over weight middle-aged men?

Jockeys are hired for one reason only..... to ride horses really fast..... many of them are middle-aged and a significant number are women.  If that overweight man can show the horse will run just as fast with a 300 pounder in the saddle as it will with the 110 pound jockey then he has a case.

 

So AiG is stringent on their hiring practices to make sure people realize that their activity and success is predicated on a very specific biblical belief. Good for them..

What about those jobs for which their Biblical belief doesn't matter? 

 

Previously you indicated there were jobs that would fit in that category.  I listed 8 of 13 positions offered by AIG/Creationist Museum for which belief in YEC has no relevance at all to the ability of someone to do the job... yet AIG maintains their religious requirement for such positions. 

 

I've acknowledged AIG's right, as a religious ministry that is not keeping government taxes to do so.  That's the difference... at AE, AIG will be keeping tax money that has been collected for the state of Kentucky.

 

Companies that do precision manufacturing and engineering are also looking for a very specific demographic. People who are good at spacial/abstract reasoning, problem solving and math. It's very discriminatory. Companies will provide preliminary tests to reject people who display an average or lower skill to perceive nuances in their environment and problem solving.

Right.... they look for people who can do the job.  Nothing wrong with that.

 

 

Pi, I'm not providing a straw man. I'm demonstrating that "discrimination", as what it's morphed into in recent years, is a perverted rubber ruler that gets implemented by the well-meaning then it dies the death of a thousand qualifications as practice and reason rejects it.

You absolutely positively set up a straw man.  Here it is:

 

Pi's comment is ludicrous isn't it? Next he'll advocate that Christian churches must hire Muslims for ministers. wink.png

Nowhere have I ever suggested religious ministries can't discriminate in their hiring for their religious positions.  I've even clearly stated there are some positions for which a religious test would be entirely appropriate.

 

Then you go on to point out there are jobs that people can do without agreeing to AIG's mission statement.... which is my whole point.

 

Then you added a whole list of other straw man arguments..... NFL players.... Hooters waitresses.... horse racing jockeys ..... precisions manufacturing and engineering ... and how those employers discriminate.... ENTIRELY on the ability of the employment candidate to do the job.



#26 Adam Nagy

Adam Nagy

    Honorable Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,053 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Age: 37
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania

Posted 10 August 2014 - 01:19 PM

Make up your mind, Adam....

It's not my mind that needs 'made up' it's AiG's to define their mission statement.

Nowhere have I ever suggested religious ministries can't discriminate in their hiring for their religious positions.  I've even clearly stated there are some positions for which a religious test would be entirely appropriate.

...and you display the rubber ruler I spoke about. Thank you.

Then you added a whole list of other straw man arguments..... NFL players.... Hooters waitresses.... horse racing jockeys ..... precisions manufacturing and engineering ... and how those employers discriminate.... ENTIRELY on the ability of the employment candidate to do the job.

If AiG defines the ability to do the job, at all levels from gift shop cashier to CEO, as supporting the vision of a Biblical Creation model to origins then that is their right.

If what you tell me is true that all employees directly employed for museum work (I can't believe that contractors and construction workers could practically be held to such scrutiny) are asked to profess and adhere to the Biblical vision of the company's namesake then good for them.

If on the other hand that wasn't their guideline... Then fine.

For example there is a manufacturing facility up the road from us that makes no apologies for being a Christian company but makes it clear that they hire for people's ability to do the work. From my own knowledge it was clear that, at least until recently, leadership was in place for both their ability to manufacture and their shared Christian faith. It happens organically that conducive leadership is based on shared beliefs as well as shared abilities.

There's nothing immoral about it.
  • gilbo12345 likes this

#27 Calminian

Calminian

    Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 621 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Age: 45
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • CA

Posted 11 August 2014 - 09:57 AM

If AiG defines the ability to do the job, at all levels from gift shop cashier to CEO, as supporting the vision of a Biblical Creation model to origins then that is their right.

 

Indeed and, effectively, case close.  I think it's extremely important that AE employees, particularly the ones interacting with the public, are in line with the mission and values of the park.  This would included quite a few positions including cashiers, maintenance workers, ride workers, etc.  

 

The mission of the park is to promote biblical creation and the historical accuracy of the biblical food.  Why would you want to hire people hostile to that mission?  

 

I just can't get over how atheists and evolutions are scared to death of this little corner of the earth where creationists congregate and promote their view.  They could care less about the discrimination, and would practice it themselves if it supported their values.  The irony.  



#28 piasan

piasan

    Veteran Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2,742 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Oklahoma
  • Age: 71
  • Christian
  • Theistic Evolutionist
  • Oklahoma

Posted 11 August 2014 - 07:34 PM

If AiG defines the ability to do the job, at all levels from gift shop cashier to CEO, as supporting the vision of a Biblical Creation model to origins then that is their right.

As a business or as a Christian Ministry?  Businesses are not allowed to create arbitrary job requirements.  Let's take that warehouse job.....  a business must be able to show that their conditions are "bona-fide requirements" to do the job.  Ministries, on the other hand, are exempt from such restrictions.  (Note:  It's not *my* "rubber ruler," it's the law.)

 

If what you tell me is true that all employees directly employed for museum work (I can't believe that contractors and construction workers could practically be held to such scrutiny) are asked to profess and adhere to the Biblical vision of the company's namesake then good for them.

If on the other hand that wasn't their guideline... Then fine.

Well, I provided the link directly to the AIG/CM jobs page.  If you look at the job requirements, you will find the ones I listed are on each and every job posting.  Contractors and their employees would, of course, be independent agents.

 

For example there is a manufacturing facility up the road from us that makes no apologies for being a Christian company but makes it clear that they hire for people's ability to do the work. From my own knowledge it was clear that, at least until recently, leadership was in place for both their ability to manufacture and their shared Christian faith. It happens organically that conducive leadership is based on shared beliefs as well as shared abilities.

Keep in mind, security camera operators; grounds keepers; and warehouse workers aren't exactly leadership positions.  When we speak of management in a company like you describe, interpersonal relationships also come into play.

 

I think it's extremely important that AE employees, particularly the ones interacting with the public, are in line with the mission and values of the park.  This would included quite a few positions including cashiers, maintenance workers, ride workers, etc.  

 

The mission of the park is to promote biblical creation and the historical accuracy of the biblical food.  Why would you want to hire people hostile to that mission?   

I understand there are positions where the beliefs in a Biblical creation would be relevant.  Notice, the jobs I listed that should be open to anyone were for things like accountants, security, and grounds keepers who have little or no contact with the public.  On the other hand, I made no mention of other positions for which the religious issues could be a legitimate requirement.... such as publicity and web design.

 

I just can't get over how atheists and evolutions are scared to death of this little corner of the earth where creationists congregate and promote their view.  

Where do you get the idea I'm in any way "scared to death" of AE? 

 

If AE is a religious ministry, then let them exercise their religious exceptions under the law .... and forward all the sales tax collections to the state. 

 

If AE is a for-profit business that wishes to retain a government incentive for "creating jobs" then those jobs should be open to anyone.


  • gilbo12345 likes this

#29 gilbo12345

gilbo12345

    Veteran Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,006 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Interests:Completed BBiotech (Honours)

    Currently studying Masters of Teaching.

    Enjoys games of tactics and strategy.
  • Age: 25
  • (private)
  • Creationist
  • Australia

Posted 11 August 2014 - 09:25 PM

I understand there are positions where the beliefs in a Biblical creation would be relevant.  Notice, the jobs I listed that should be open to anyone were for things like accountants, security, and grounds keepers who have little or no contact with the public.  On the other hand, I made no mention of other positions for which the religious issues could be a legitimate requirement.... such as publicity and web design.

 

I agree

 

If AE is a religious ministry, then let them exercise their religious exceptions under the law .... and forward all the sales tax collections to the state. 

 

If AE is a for-profit business that wishes to retain a government incentive for "creating jobs" then those jobs should be open to anyone.

 

Isn't it both? ;)



#30 Calminian

Calminian

    Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 621 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Age: 45
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • CA

Posted 15 August 2014 - 02:39 PM

As a business or as a Christian Ministry?  Businesses are not allowed to create arbitrary job requirements. ….

 

What is arbitrary about wanting employees to be on-board with the mission of the business?  I mean if they were wanting all employees to be, say, baptists, then yeah I could see where that might be a problem.  But if you just want people who believe in the flood, and perhaps its typology in regard to Jesus Christ, what's the problem?  It makes perfect sense.  As a business owner, you're smart if you hire people that support your cause, and frankly, stupid if you don't.  



#31 StormanNorman

StormanNorman

    Veteran Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,132 posts
  • Age: 46
  • no affiliation
  • Agnostic
  • Pittsburgh, PA

Posted 15 August 2014 - 03:15 PM

Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 prohibits employers with 15 or more employees from discriminating against employees or job applicants on the basis of race, color, s@x, religion, or national origin. Title VII covers hiring, firing, promotion, compensation, benefits, training opportunities, and any other term, condition, or privilege of employment. The exact definition of 15 or more employees means 15 or more people on the payroll for 20 or more weeks in the current or calendar year.

 

Title VII allows churches and religious organizations to discriminate on the basis of religion. Title VII states that it does not apply to ". . . a religious corporation, association, educational institution, or society with respect to the employment of individuals of a particular religion to perform work connected with the carrying on by such corporation, association, educational institution, or society of its activities."

 

 

http://www.ecfa.org/...eligiousDiscrim

 

By the way, a religious corporation is a religious non-profit organization which has been incorporated under the law.  My take on it is that any for-profit business does not fall under those described in the 2nd paragraph.



#32 Calminian

Calminian

    Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 621 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Age: 45
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • CA

Posted 03 September 2014 - 03:23 PM

 

http://www.ecfa.org/...eligiousDiscrim

 

By the way, a religious corporation is a religious non-profit organization which has been incorporated under the law.  My take on it is that any for-profit business does not fall under those described in the 2nd paragraph.

 

It sounds to me like your hope is that such an attraction will be shut down if it doesn't agree with your worldview.  Are you really worried about discrimination?  For instance, are you worried there are not enough white employees at the Black Entertainment Network?  Or is this just a means to an end?  Why would you feel threatened about christians gathering and creating a business that promotes their point of view?  Why would you want the AE to be forced to hire workers that disagree with what it promotes?  I'm just scratching my head trying to find out where you're coming from?  



#33 gilbo12345

gilbo12345

    Veteran Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,006 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Interests:Completed BBiotech (Honours)

    Currently studying Masters of Teaching.

    Enjoys games of tactics and strategy.
  • Age: 25
  • (private)
  • Creationist
  • Australia

Posted 03 September 2014 - 07:20 PM

 

It sounds to me like your hope is that such an attraction will be shut down if it doesn't agree with your worldview.  Are you really worried about discrimination?  For instance, are you worried there are not enough white employees at the Black Entertainment Network?  Or is this just a means to an end?  Why would you feel threatened about christians gathering and creating a business that promotes their point of view?  Why would you want the AE to be forced to hire workers that disagree with what it promotes?  I'm just scratching my head trying to find out where you're coming from?  

 

Great questions smile.png

 

I'm wondering about the discrimination against Christians in areas the Liberals control- education, media, movies etc.

 

 

 

What about family businesses who hire family members and not the public? Aren't they discriminating also? There are some fish and chip shops here which are like that. If the family is ethnic (say Greek) then the employees will all invariably be Greek. Does this mean family businesses can't rely on their family members to assist in the business? The same happens in the ethnic food restaurants... Indian restaurants will have Indian workers, Thai restaurants will have Thai workers, etc.. Is this not discrimination also?

 

There is a Dominos near where I used to live which was manned by an almost Asian staff, (one Aussie), aren't they discriminating by not having any Italian or Middle Eastern employees? Does this mean they should fire some of their Asian staff in order to make room for an Italian and a Middle Eastern employee? Or perhaps they should employ everybody so that way nobody can claim they are discriminatory.. Despite the fact that a limited amount of positions exist all of which are already full.

 

 

 

Are there any Christians working at the Richard Dawkins foundation? :P



#34 piasan

piasan

    Veteran Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2,742 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Oklahoma
  • Age: 71
  • Christian
  • Theistic Evolutionist
  • Oklahoma

Posted 03 September 2014 - 10:40 PM

It sounds to me like your hope is that such an attraction will be shut down if it doesn't agree with your worldview.

Straw man.  No one has suggested shutting them down.  The question is whether or not a business that employs religious discrimination in its hiring practices retain sales taxes collected for the state.  It isn't taking a penny out of AE's pocket.

 

Are you really worried about discrimination?  For instance, are you worried there are not enough white employees at the Black Entertainment Network?  

Two questions:

1)  Does the Black Entertainment Network have a written policy that one must be black (or at least non-white) to be employed?

2)  Is the Black Entertainment Network retaining tax money collected for government?

 

If the answer to either of those is "yes," you have a legitimate issue.

 

 

Why would you feel threatened about christians gathering and creating a business that promotes their point of view?

No one objects to "Christians gathering and creating a business that promotes their point of view."  That isn't the issue at all. 

 

If the purpose of the "business" is to promote the point of view of Christians, that's terrific.  AE is absolutely within their rights to practice religious discrimination in their employment practices.  However, if that is their purpose, they shouldn't keep the taxes collected for the state.

 

On the other hand, if this is a for-profit venture that is keeping money collected for the benefit of all the citizens of the state, then those jobs should be available on a basis of non-discrimination to anyone who has the qualifications to do the job.

 

 

Why would you want the AE to be forced to hire workers that disagree with what it promotes?   

No one is forcing AE to keep tax money.  If they want to restrict their hiring practices to those who accept and are willing to sign AIG's "Statement of Faith" that's just fine.  But if they do so, they are acting as a religious ministry and should not keep tax money collected for the government.

 

 

I'm just scratching my head trying to find out where you're coming from?  

Let's see if I can put it in terms you might relate to.....

 

A Muslim group is going to build a tourist attraction with the intention of using it to teach the Quran and promote Islam.  They project their attraction will generate around 1,000 jobs.  However, those jobs will be available only to devout Muslims.  Should they be allowed to keep state tax money to pay for up to 25% of the construction costs of their attraction?  As a side question, should the state also build a freeway offramp to improve access to this religious attraction?



#35 Calminian

Calminian

    Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 621 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Age: 45
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • CA

Posted 04 September 2014 - 12:01 AM

If the purpose of the "business" is to promote the point of view of Christians, that's terrific.  AE is absolutely within their rights to practice religious discrimination in their employment practices.  However, if that is their purpose, they shouldn't keep the taxes collected for the state.

 

But the state wants to give them the tax break.  The state wants the revenue they'll bring in, and is using this break to entice them to build there.  Why should AiG refused to let the state do this for them?  And why on earth would this bother you?  The only thing that makes sense, is that AE offends you in some way, so you want it to fail. 



#36 gilbo12345

gilbo12345

    Veteran Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,006 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Interests:Completed BBiotech (Honours)

    Currently studying Masters of Teaching.

    Enjoys games of tactics and strategy.
  • Age: 25
  • (private)
  • Creationist
  • Australia

Posted 05 September 2014 - 05:39 AM


A Muslim group is going to build a tourist attraction with the intention of using it to teach the Quran and promote Islam.  They project their attraction will generate around 1,000 jobs.  However, those jobs will be available only to devout Muslims.  Should they be allowed to keep state tax money to pay for up to 25% of the construction costs of their attraction?  As a side question, should the state also build a freeway offramp to improve access to this religious attraction?

 

Sure, if the state wants to let them keep the tax money...



#37 Calminian

Calminian

    Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 621 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Age: 45
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • CA

Posted 05 September 2014 - 09:30 AM

 

Sure, if the state wants to let them keep the tax money...

 

Exactly!  What are we afraid of?  If a state sees a muslim attraction as a boon for them that will create lots of revenue, and they want to offer a tax incentive to bring it in, that's their right.  Why would you want to take that way??  

 

And of course a muslim attraction is going to need muslim believers to promote it.  That would be expected.  

 

The same is true for natural history museums that promote the religion of evolution.  Let's let everybody have their attraction.  It's called the marketplace of ideas.  



#38 gilbo12345

gilbo12345

    Veteran Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,006 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Interests:Completed BBiotech (Honours)

    Currently studying Masters of Teaching.

    Enjoys games of tactics and strategy.
  • Age: 25
  • (private)
  • Creationist
  • Australia

Posted 05 September 2014 - 10:07 AM

 

Exactly!  What are we afraid of?  If a state sees a muslim attraction as a boon for them that will create lots of revenue, and they want to offer a tax incentive to bring it in, that's their right.  Why would you want to take that way??  

 

And of course a muslim attraction is going to need muslim believers to promote it.  That would be expected.  

 

The same is true for natural history museums that promote the religion of evolution.  Let's let everybody have their attraction.  It's called the marketplace of ideas.  

 

Its sad when the "freethinkers" aren't allowing freedom in the marketplace of ideas ;)

 

It comes off a bit biased, no?
 

We are happy to allow any other religion, (atheism included) to have the same situation. Yet when its time for that atheist to do so for Christians... Oh no, its just not good enough...



#39 piasan

piasan

    Veteran Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2,742 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Oklahoma
  • Age: 71
  • Christian
  • Theistic Evolutionist
  • Oklahoma

Posted 13 October 2014 - 07:31 AM

Let's see if I can put it in terms you might relate to.....

 

A Muslim group is going to build a tourist attraction with the intention of using it to teach the Quran and promote Islam.  They project their attraction will generate around 1,000 jobs.  However, those jobs will be available only to devout Muslims.  Should they be allowed to keep state tax money to pay for up to 25% of the construction costs of their attraction?  As a side question, should the state also build a freeway offramp to improve access to this religious attraction?

Sure, if the state wants to let them keep the tax money...

 

Exactly!  What are we afraid of?  If a state sees a muslim attraction as a boon for them that will create lots of revenue, and they want to offer a tax incentive to bring it in, that's their right.  Why would you want to take that way??  

 

And of course a muslim attraction is going to need muslim believers to promote it.  That would be expected.  

 

The same is true for natural history museums that promote the religion of evolution.  Let's let everybody have their attraction.  It's called the marketplace of ideas.  

Well, at least you guys are consistent.  As I feel I am also.  The difference is that I do not want government money used to promote "jobs" that are not available to any member of the public regardless of religious beliefs.  That is my position for the Ark Encounter and I would have the same position for any religious group seeking such a tax break.... be they Christian, Jewish, Hindu, Buddhist, Muslim, or Mormon.  It doesn't matter.

 

Why is the matter important to me?  Well, I spent a considerable part of my adult life defending the Constitution of the United States of America which I have sworn an oath to defend.  Even though I've been out of the service for over 30 years, I still take that oath seriously.

 

In recent news, it looks like the state of Kentucky is finally catching on:

A controversial plan to award $18 million in state tax incentives to a religious-themed amusement park in Grant County that plans to feature a life-size Noah's Ark could be in jeopardy because of potential hiring discrimination. ....

In a series of letters with Ark Encounter LLC, Kentucky's top tourism official said the preliminary tax credits are stalled because of language in the park's job application that requires "salvation testimony" and a "Creation belief statement." ....

In an Aug. 27 letter, Tourism Arts and Heritage Cabinet Secretary Bob Stewart pointed out a problematic job posting, which advertised for a computer-assisted design technician to work on the ark.....

Stewart wrote that such a job posting would be against state and federal hiring laws."Therefore we are not prepared to move forward with consideration of the application for final approval without the assurance of Ark Encounter LLC that it will not discriminate in any way on the basis of religion in hiring for the project and will revise its postings accordingly," Stewart wrote.....

"The commonwealth does not provide incentives to any company that discriminates on the basis of religion, and we will not make any exception for Ark Encounter LLC," Stewart wrote.....

Now, the cabinet will require "express written assurance from Ark Encounter that it will not discriminate in any way on the basis of religion in hiring for the project," and revise all postings for the application to be considered for final approval, Stewart said.

Read more here: http://www.kentucky....l#storylink=cpy



#40 MarkForbes

MarkForbes

    Veteran Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,291 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:South Africa
  • Age: 35
  • Christian
  • Creationist
  • Waverley

Posted 13 October 2014 - 12:17 PM

I'm not quite understanding the public funding aspect of this, can someone please help with this?

Is Ham fully funding the construction, and then will subsequently recieve tax breaks after it is built?

Not Ham, but it is fully privately funded. A tax break isn't a subsidy it's just the state waiving it's claim to some taxes. That's sometimes done, with the prospect of job opportunities being created. Ham and others explain that in their videos relating to the project. 






0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users