|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
Thread ▼ Details |
|
|
Author | Topic: Bill Nye vs. Ken Ham | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Faith  Suspended Member (Idle past 1444 days) Posts: 35298 From: Nevada, USA Joined: |
Guess I wasn't very clear. The admonition to obey the state holds as long as there is no conflict with other commands of God, where the principle "We should obey God rather than man" applies. Hiring Christians is a borderline issue I think, not sure how it should be resolved.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Faith  Suspended Member (Idle past 1444 days) Posts: 35298 From: Nevada, USA Joined: |
Now I've listened to a discussion between Ham and his lawyer on the subject here and get a better idea of what it's about. Apparently one of the reasons they chose to build their Ark Park in Kentucky was the tax incentive program that would rebate sales taxes they collect as the park is operating. They were accepted for this rebate as a projected tourist attraction that is expected to bring in quite a bit of revenue for the state, and then the state changed their mind based on some idea that since they want to hire only people who share their understanding of the ark they are disqualified. The lawyer says that's a violation of the law that allows any organization to hire in accord with their viewpoint to preserve their identity.
Here's the video of that discussion:
AiG to File Discrimination Suit against Kentucky
| Answers in Genesis
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Dr Adequate Member (Idle past 284 days) Posts: 16113 Joined: |
Guess I wasn't very clear. The admonition to obey the state holds as long as there is no conflict with other commands of God, where the principle "We should obey God rather than man" applies. Hiring Christians is a borderline issue I think, not sure how it should be resolved. Look, unless God told Ken Ham to build the Ark ... but even if he did, he can go right ahead and build the Ark. But he needn't expect any special favors. Did God command him to get tax rebates? No? Well then.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Faith  Suspended Member (Idle past 1444 days) Posts: 35298 From: Nevada, USA Joined: |
Please see post above. It's about something they qualified for as any tourist attraction might, for a rebate offered by the state to any such tourist attraction that brings money into the state. They qualified and then they were disqualified on religious grounds, which is the state's wrongly discriminating against them.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Asgara Member (Idle past 2302 days) Posts: 1783 From: Wisconsin, USA Joined: |
That DOES disqualify them. If they are a religious organization they can hire or not hire based on the applicants' beliefs. If they are NOT a religious organization and want the tax rebates that the state is offering then they can't discriminate in their hiring practices.
The theme park was not registered as a religious organization.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Faith  Suspended Member (Idle past 1444 days) Posts: 35298 From: Nevada, USA Joined: |
That's religious discrimination against them according to the argument of the lawyer.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Asgara Member (Idle past 2302 days) Posts: 1783 From: Wisconsin, USA Joined: |
It isn't discriminatory. He wanted his cake and to eat it too. If he wants to register as a for profit company and claim state paid tax incentives he has to follow the laws that govern all organizations that receive government money.
If he wanted to be discriminatory in his hiring practices he should have created a religious organization.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Faith  Suspended Member (Idle past 1444 days) Posts: 35298 From: Nevada, USA Joined: |
You are listening to some source that disagrees with my source. We'll have to wait and see what the court says.
I think the government pulled a bait and switch on him from the sound of it. He DID apply as a for-profit tourist attraction as any other such attraction would and qualified for the rebate on that basis. The project is under AIG which hires only Christians, which ought to be well known.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Faith  Suspended Member (Idle past 1444 days) Posts: 35298 From: Nevada, USA Joined: |
From Family Research Council:
v "The state had given AiG the thumbs up on its application last fall, which triggered some outcry from anti-faith groups. Almost immediately, they swooped into Kentucky and started making noise about the rebate, demanding that it be retracted. Why? Because AiG dares to hire people who share their beliefs on creation. And as a religious organization, that's entirely within both state and federal law. Do we force animal rights groups to hire hunters? No. Or Muslim groceries to hire pig farmers? Of course not. So why is Ham's group being targeted? "
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Asgara Member (Idle past 2302 days) Posts: 1783 From: Wisconsin, USA Joined: |
The source you list seems to be his lawyer. That is a lawyer's job. Murderers' lawyers claim their innocence.
AIG is a religious organization. It has totally different hiring laws imposed on it than a for-profit organization asking for government money. If the rebate hadn't been okayed solely because of AIG's involvement then it WOULD be discrimination. But as it stands the theme park has to follow secular organization tax and hiring laws.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Faith  Suspended Member (Idle past 1444 days) Posts: 35298 From: Nevada, USA Joined: |
Yes, I said it was his lawyer, the point is to consider what the lawyer says about the law.
However, perhaps the courts will rule against Ham and in that case my argument is that the law is wrong. It makes no sense whatever to require a religious organization to hire people who don't share their beliefs and I would think such a requirement would be clearly recognized as discriminatory by reasonable people. Edited by Faith, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Asgara Member (Idle past 2302 days) Posts: 1783 From: Wisconsin, USA Joined: |
Then I guess he should have registered the theme park AS a religious organization.
He didn't because he wanted that rebate.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Faith  Suspended Member (Idle past 1444 days) Posts: 35298 From: Nevada, USA Joined: |
Perhaps you are right about that as his strategy although it's hard to imagine that anyone wouldn't know AIG is a religious organization and raise any relevant questions in advance. I'd still argue that as a tourist attraction that will no doubt enrich the state enormously that its being a religious organization with its own hiring rules should not disqualify it.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
herebedragons Member (Idle past 857 days) Posts: 1517 From: Michigan Joined:
|
It makes no sense whatever to require a religious organization to hire people who don't share their beliefs Religious organizations are NOT required to hire people who do not share their beliefs. That is religious organizations that do not accept public money. Once you accept public money, whether a religious organization or not, you cannot discriminate. I attended a local Christian liberal arts university. At one time, you had to sign a personal confession of faith to either attend as a student or work as an employee - whether faculty or staff. However, at that time they did not receive federal money; for example, you could not get a Pell Grant while attending there. Then about the same time they made the transition from a college to a university, they began accepting federal money. After that point they could no longer require a statement of faith. What they did was to declare their mission - something to the effect of "providing a Christian liberal arts education and helping students make their faith relevant in our world." Something to that effect. So in order to work there you had to sign a statement that you would agree to support the university in their mission and that you would abstain from behavior that was deemed inappropriate; you know, the 20 commandments. That's it. You didn't have to be a Christian - you could be Muslim, atheist, whatever, as long as you agree to support the mission and have "good" behavior. That's all Ark Park needed to do. Obviously they shouldn't have to hire someone who would say "Now over here you can see this completely ridiculous recreation of a human riding a dinosaur, which we all know is utterly absurd." But if you accept public money you cannot exclude someone for working for you because of their association with a particular religion or ethnic group, and assorted other things. That's the law. Of course Ham and his lawyer are going to read that law differently... that's what they do... HBDWhoever calls me ignorant shares my own opinion. Sorrowfully and tacitly I recognize my ignorance, when I consider how much I lack of what my mind in its craving for knowledge is sighing for... I console myself with the consideration that this belongs to our common nature. - Francesco Petrarca "Nothing is easier than to persuade people who want to be persuaded and already believe." - another Petrarca gem. Ignorance is a most formidable opponent rivaled only by arrogance; but when the two join forces, one is all but invincible.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Dr Adequate Member (Idle past 284 days) Posts: 16113 Joined: |
And as a religious organization, that's entirely within both state and federal law. Yes, it's within state and federal law. But then they don't get the tax breaks they want. That's also the law.
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024