|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
Thread ▼ Details |
|
|
Author | Topic: Bill Nye vs. Ken Ham | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
PaulK Member Posts: 17822 Joined: Member Rating: 2.2
|
Under the terms of the offer, if they hadn't sold all the bonds they'd have to refund the money.
And they couldn't do that. As their greatest prophet said. "Never give a sucker an even break".
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
PaulK Member Posts: 17822 Joined: Member Rating: 2.2 |
quote: The crazy things that you make up. No, just calling your business Christian does NOT exempt you from taxes. For-profit enterprises - and Ark Encounter was set up as a for-profit enterprise - pay taxes. So unless you're shocked by Ken Ham deciding to do things that way, your complaint has no basis in reality.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
PaulK Member Posts: 17822 Joined: Member Rating: 2.2 |
quote: AiG has 501(c) status. They chose to set up a nominally separate for-profit organisation to build the Ark Park. This is the organisation that is trying to claim the tax incentives and ignore the laws against discrimination.
quote: That could be the case. We do know that AiG had to buy quite a number of the junk bonds issued to finance the building.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
PaulK Member Posts: 17822 Joined: Member Rating: 2.2
|
quote: Ark Encounter is nominally separate from AiG, and is organised as a for-profit enterprise. Now it is pretty obvious that the Ark Encounter is all about promoting sectarian religious views and that they were offered the exemptions despite that. So it's hard to say that there's any actual religious discrimination against them. The problem only started when Ark Encounter engaged in obvious religious discrimination in their hiring practices as the
Lexington Herald-Leader reports. And might I ask why you think that listening only to AiG's claims is going to give you a fair assessment of the situation ? Do you really think that they would openly admit that the lawsuit is baseless ?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
PaulK Member Posts: 17822 Joined: Member Rating: 2.2 |
quote: The only real question is WHY AiG is launching this meritless lawsuit. Have they really fooled themselves into believing their own propaganda, or do they hope to use it is a fund-raising exercise.
quote: Well there are questions about the study on expected visitor numbers, so there is a possibility of subterfuge even there. But they were awarded the tax exemptions until they started posting discriminatory job adverts.
quote: And AiG do just that with no problems at all. This isn't about AiG, it's about the for-profit Ark Encounter company which only exists to build and run the theme park. This is not some obscure detail it's a central - and well-known fact of the case. If AiG have been blurring that distinction then they aren't being honest about it.
quote: It's because the theme park decided to hire only Christians. It all started with a job advert for a Computer-Aided Design technician that required applicants to identify their Church membership, state their belief on the age of the Earth, provide a Salvation Testimony, a Creation Belief Statement and agree to the AiG Statement of Faith.
source Now I guess that you could explain all that away by saying that they accidentally used a form intended for AiG, and not for the theme park.But AiG themselves have ruled out that defence, and the current line is that they can do all that for any job with Ark Encounter.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
PaulK Member Posts: 17822 Joined: Member Rating: 2.2 |
quote: I've been following this story for some time. I've yet to hear of any honest justification for the claims of religious discrimination, and you haven't either.
quote: And none of those guesses can justify the lawsuit. Ham has had months to rethink, and chose to stay on course and file a lawsuit instead. He hasn't been prevented from hiring only Christians either. He has just lost tax exemptions after intentionally, knowingly and openly going against the conditions attached. The conditions are not in themselves religiously discriminatory either - anyone who refused to hire Christians to work in a for-profit enterprise would be disqualified under the same regulations. No, you need to offer evidence of actual religious discrimination to justify Ham's lawsuit.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
PaulK Member Posts: 17822 Joined: Member Rating: 2.2 |
Does it really matter - at this stage - whether he has a "good" reason for discriminating ?
Even if he does, it doesn't mean that he has a sound basis for his lawsuit. Can you tell me HOW he is being discriminated against because of his religion ? Or did the lawyer forget to mention that ?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
PaulK Member Posts: 17822 Joined: Member Rating: 2.2 |
quote: And he's going to court with THAT ? It looks more and more like a publicity stunt.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
PaulK Member Posts: 17822 Joined: Member Rating: 2.2 |
Interesting how he neglects to mention that discrimination issue. When it's the real reason that he isn't getting the incentives.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
PaulK Member Posts: 17822 Joined: Member Rating: 2.2 |
Of course it doesn't matter who complained. What matters is the reason for denying the exemptions.
According to this article the State only wants a written assurance that the Ark Encounter will obey Federal employment law. Not unreasonable after they've already tried to break it. And AiG refuse to do that.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
PaulK Member Posts: 17822 Joined: Member Rating: 2.2 |
quote: But on the evidence so far, they can't. All the state needs is a valid reason to deny the exemptions, and it seems that they have one.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
PaulK Member Posts: 17822 Joined: Member Rating: 2.2 |
But on what grounds? The reason looks pretty good.
It would be interesting to see the state regulations on these tax exemptions - because a boilerplate requirement to follow all applicable laws would sink the AiG case.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
PaulK Member Posts: 17822 Joined: Member Rating: 2.2 |
Is it even possible to be pro-First Amendment without coming into conflict with the Religious Right? I don't see how.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
PaulK Member Posts: 17822 Joined: Member Rating: 2.2
|
quote: The First Amendment has never given anyone carte blanche to break the law by claiming a religious justification. It was never intended to. And I note that the Oregon bakers were DISOBEYING the Bible anyway... Really you shouldn't pontificate on things that you don't understand. Which includes pretty much everything, I'm afraid. I do understand that you're upset that people refuse to obey you, dare to criticise you, even commit the "sin" of telling truths that you don't like. But the fact that you are upset about these things rather indicates that the problem is with you.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
PaulK Member Posts: 17822 Joined: Member Rating: 2.2 |
quote: In FACT, Faith, you've never come up with a Biblical justification for refusing to provide a cake for a gay wedding. The laws are NOT new, the only change is to extend their protection to gays. And you accepted that the laws are Constitutional even when in conflict with religious belief. So you've got no honest basis for complaint there either. And in reality I was quite willing to have a reasonable discussion of the rights and wrongs of the law. Which in your mind justifies calling me a "Nazi" Really, rant and rave and bully all you like. It won't help you against the truth.
quote: Sucking up to your master won't help either.
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024