Connect with us

Creationist Ark Museum Suing To Practice Religious Discrimination At Taxpayer Expense

Published

on

Ken Ham’s Ark Encounter wants to ensure its “right” to practice religious discrimination and is now suing over “increasing government hostility towards religion.”

Australian-born Ken Ham believes many things. He believes the bible is the literal word of god, he believes in the Christian story of creation and that the universe is just 6000 years old. He believes in the story of Noah’s ark. And he believes in his god-given and constitutionally protected right to discriminate.

Employees of Ham’s Kentucky Creation Museum must “abide by and agree to our Statement of Faith, to include the statement on marriage and sexuality, and conduct themselves accordingly.”

That Statement of Faith includes claims that all “66 books of the Bible are the written Word of God. The Bible is divinely inspired and inerrant throughout. Its assertions are factually true in all the original autographs. It is the supreme authority in everything it teaches. Its authority is not limited to spiritual, religious, or redemptive themes but includes its assertions in such fields as history and science.”

“Satan is the personal spiritual adversary of both God and mankind,” is another claim employees must agree upon. So is life begins at the moment of conception.

And this claim about marriage and homosexuality.

WATCH: Creationist Ken Ham Is Furious Over Carnival’s Super Bowl Ad

“The only legitimate marriage sanctioned by God is the joining of one man and one woman in a single, exclusive union, as delineated in Scripture. God intends sexual intimacy to only occur between a man and a woman who are married to each other, and has commanded that no intimate sexual activity be engaged in outside of a marriage between a man and a woman. Any form of sexual immorality, such as adultery, fornication, homosexuality, lesbianism, bisexual conduct, bestiality, incest, pornography, or any attempt to change one’s gender, or disagreement with one’s biological gender, is sinful and offensive to God.”

Ham claims that his Ark Encounter museum, currently under construction, should also have the right to discriminate based on religion. His Creation Museum is run by his “ministry,” Answers in Genesis, but he claims the Ark project will be run by a separate entity not subject to the ministry’s same Statement of Faith.

That’s how he has planned to get millions in tax breaks for his Ark Encounter theme park, but the State of Kentucky finally realized that Ham would still discriminate in hiring and employment on the basis of religious belief and pulled the tax breaks. Ham  wants the “right” to not hire atheists, gays, or anyone who does not wholly embrace his religious viewpoints.

So now Ham is suing in federal court.

“Our organization spent many months attempting to reason with state officials so that this lawsuit would not be necessary,” said Ham in a statement. “However, the state was so insistent on treating our religious entity as a second-class citizen that we were simply left with no alternative but to proceed to court. This is the latest example of increasing government hostility towards religion in America, and it’s certainly among the most blatant.”

He also claims that Kentucky pulling the tax breaks, amounting to $18 million, “violates federal and state law and amounts to unlawful viewpoint discrimination.”

In other words, Ham wants to practice religious discrimination and wants the taxpayers to foot the bill for it.

 

Image: Ark Encounter
Hat tip: Talking Points Memo

There's a reason 10,000 people subscribe to NCRM. You can get the news before it breaks just by subscribing, plus you can learn something new every day.
Continue Reading
Click to comment
 
 

Enjoy this piece?

… then let us make a small request. The New Civil Rights Movement depends on readers like you to meet our ongoing expenses and continue producing quality progressive journalism. Three Silicon Valley giants consume 70 percent of all online advertising dollars, so we need your help to continue doing what we do.

NCRM is independent. You won’t find mainstream media bias here. From unflinching coverage of religious extremism, to spotlighting efforts to roll back our rights, NCRM continues to speak truth to power. America needs independent voices like NCRM to be sure no one is forgotten.

Every reader contribution, whatever the amount, makes a tremendous difference. Help ensure NCRM remains independent long into the future. Support progressive journalism with a one-time contribution to NCRM, or click here to become a subscriber. Thank you. Click here to donate by check.

News

‘Emergency’ Voting Proposal Is ‘Divorced From Legal Reality’ Say Experts

Published

on

Legal and voting rights experts are sounding the alarm after a Washington Post bombshell report revealed that President Donald Trump — who has been insisting on federalizing voting and has issued an executive order to pressure states to require proof of citizenship for voter registration — is now being urged by activists to sign an executive order declaring a voting “emergency.”

The proposed 17-page order would “unlock extraordinary presidential power over voting,” the Post reported, noting that the proposal “claims China interfered in the 2020 election” which would be the “basis to declare a national emergency.”

Former Trump national security official Miles Taylor warned that the “biggest electoral crime in American history might be unfolding.”

“The president cannot seize control of state-run elections by declaring a fake ’emergency.’ There’s no statute that permits it,” wrote Fair Fight Action communications director Max Flugrath. “Reviving debunked conspiracy theories to force changes before a major election is what politicians do when they believe they’re going to lose.”

READ MORE: Comer Changes Tune After Lutnick Allegedly Lied

Flugrath added that the Post’s reporting follows up on an October New York Times investigation which found “that Trump officials discussed a fake ‘national emergency’ to force new election rules on states. A DHS official said it could allow Trump to ‘go around Congress’ and take over elections.”

“What a gift such a clearly unconstitutional executive order would be!” election security expert David Becker told CBS News’ Scott MacFarlane. “Though divorced from legal and factual reality, it would enable the courts to invalidate this power grab well in advance of the election, and confirm the clear limits to fed’l interference in elections.”

Prominent elections attorney Marc Elias wrote, “My team and I have been anticipating this for months. It is unconstitutional and illegal. The media should note: Last time he issued an EO about voting, we sued and won. If Trump issues such an order we will sue again and we will win again.”

“Far right voices in Colorado,” journalist Kyle Clark noted, “have long called for this step as a prelude to military tribunals and mass executions.”

U.S. Rep. Ted Lieu (D-CA) said, that there is “no national emergency exception” to Article 1, Section 4 of the U.S. Constitution.

“States regulate elections unless Congress passes law,” he added, stating that is why Trump “desperately” wants to pass the SAVE Act, “to suppress voting.”

The NAACP called the proposed executive order a “dangerous proposal,” and “a direct assault on our democracy.”

Former WBZ-TV anchor Liam Martin commented, “I tend to think even this SCOTUS would block an attempt to federalize elections. But what Trump and his team are doing is setting the stage to declare the midterms void and refuse to seat the new members. What do we do then?”

READ MORE: ‘Theatre of the Absurd’: Melania Trump Presiding Over UN Security Council Sparks Uproar

 

Image via Reuters 

Continue Reading

News

Comer Changes Tune After Lutnick Allegedly Lied

Published

on

House Oversight Committee Chairman James Comer appears to be changing his tune on Howard Lutnick, now suggesting that it is “very possible” he might subpoena him after the Trump Commerce Secretary allegedly lied before Congress about the extent of his ties to convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein.

Just two weeks ago, MS NOW reported that Chairman Comer had dodged questions about subpoenaing Lutnick.

Asked at the time if his committee had any plans to subpoena the Commerce Secretary, Comer instead replied, “Well, we’re going to try to get these five [witnesses] nailed down. We’ve got a lot of very important people we’re trying to bring in to answer questions.”

On Thursday, the question came up again, and Comer offered reporters a different perspective.

Asked if “in the spirit of bipartisanship” he would request Lutnick testify, Comer replied it was “very possible, and I think it’s a good possibility his name will arise on some questioning today” as the Committee deposes former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton.

READ MORE: ‘Theatre of the Absurd’: Melania Trump Presiding Over UN Security Council Sparks Uproar

U.S. Rep. Nancy Mace (R-SC) said Lutnick was on her list to talk about with Clinton.

According to The Independent, Comer’s “suggestion that Lutnick could soon be facing a congressional subpoena comes after weeks of increased scrutiny of his relationship with Epstein, his onetime next-door neighbor in New York, after documents released by the Justice Department showed that he’d lied during an interview with the New York Post in October.”

Lutnick had “claimed to have cut off contact with Epstein after a 2005 encounter that he claimed had left him so unsettled that he’d vowed to ‘never be in the room with that disgusting person ever again.'”

Documents from the Epstein files showed that Lutnick had continued to maintain a relationship with Epstein as recently as 2018 — “long after” Epstein had “spent time in jail for state-level offenses related to his preying on young girls,” The Independent reported.


READ MORE: ‘Extraordinary Presidential Power’: Trump Is Urged to Declare Emergency Over Voting

 

Image via Reuters

 

 

Continue Reading

News

‘Theatre of the Absurd’: Melania Trump Presiding Over UN Security Council Sparks Uproar

Published

on

Melania Trump will preside over the United Nations Security Council next week — a decision igniting backlash before it begins.

“First Lady Melania Trump is set to make history at the United Nations, taking the gavel as the United States assumes the Security Council Presidency to emphasize education’s role in advancing tolerance and world peace,” a press release from the Office of the First Lady reads.

“Mrs. Trump’s leadership will mark the first time a sitting U.S. First Lady presides over the Security Council as members consider education, technology, peace, and security.”

An opinion piece at The New Republic says, “While the first lady has shown an interest in children’s welfare, particularly in Russia’s war on Ukraine, it’s hard to imagine her address as any more than a symbolic gesture that will look good in a social media post.”

READ MORE: ‘Extraordinary Presidential Power’: Trump Is Urged to Declare Emergency Over Voting

U.S. Ambassador to the UN, Mike Waltz, wrote: We are thrilled to have @Flotus gavel in the US Presidency of the Security Council.”

Critics online are blasting the decision.

“Just when you thought they couldn’t disrespect professional, career U.S. diplomats, American diplomacy or international organizations more- they produce this grotesque theatre of the absurd,” wrote former U.S. Ambassador to Jamaica, Luis Moreno.

Associate professor of History Thomas Småberg commented, “I’m a social network scholar with a focus on the Middle Ages and Trump’s uses of family, friends and followers is straight out of medieval aristocracy. It’s so interesting to [see] his abuse of presidential power and his disregard for republicans.”

READ MORE: Florida Bill Spurs Political Persecution and Surveillance Fears — Sponsor Says ‘Trust Me’

 

Image via Reuters

 

Continue Reading

Trending

Copyright © 2020 AlterNet Media.