Creationist Ken Ham Thinks Atheists Oppose His Noah’s Ark Theme Park Because We’re Anti-Christian

[beam me up scottie]

Creationist Ken Ham Thinks Atheists Oppose His Noah’s Ark Theme Park Because We’re Anti-Christian
March 15, 2016 by: Hemant Mehta

Ken Ham knows why atheist bloggers are so angry about Ark Encounter, his Noah’s Ark theme park set to open this summer.

It’s not because we think they’re getting a tax break despite their preferential Christian hiring. It’s not because they’re promoting nonsense that has no basis in science. And it’s not because the surrounding community is going to be screwed over as a result of the theme park.

It’s because we hate Christianity.

Arkophobia hit an all-time high the week of January 25. That’s when a federal judge issued a major ruling that gave a huge win to Answers in Genesis in our religious freedom lawsuit against the State of Kentucky and the actions of the previous governor, Steve Beshear.
…
Well, that federal decision was too much for the secularist/atheist bloggers. That’s when Arkophobia was at its height. Many secularists were already livid that a Christian organization is building such a massive tourist facility that will have a huge impact in the culture as it proclaims a Christian message! They just can’t stand it! Their hatred against Christianity was so clear after the ruling.

Secularists oppose the Ark because they are afraid of the Ark’s goal: to proclaim the everlasting gospel.
It’s all just part of his persecution fantasy.
We’re not afraid of Christians preaching. If that were true, we’d be protesting the existence of every church in America. We don’t.

And I don’t think anyone believes the Ark will “have a huge impact in the culture.” It’ll be entertaining for a couple of days when it opens, it’s be ridiculed for weeks as visitors point out all the “facts” that are contradicted by what we know about science, and then it’ll be forgotten by the general public.

Sure, some fundamentalists will continue to visit it. But the novelty will eventually wear off.

No one has “Arkophobia.”

The only thing we’re scared of is that some children will grow up with a warped view of what science is (and how it works) because they’ve been lied to by Ham. It doesn’t matter if it’s through his books, the Creation Museum, or Ark Encounter. It’s all the same bullshit story, and those kids deserve to know that just about every real, in-the-field working scientist don’t accept a word of what Ham is selling

http://www.patheos.com/blogs/friendlyatheist/2016/03/15/creationist-ken-ham-thinks-atheists-oppose-his-noahs-ark-theme-park-because-were-anti-christian

Any time Christian bigots and other oppressed majorities get pushback on their agenda they label it a phobia. By redefining criticism as bigotry they are able to portray themselves as the victims.

Arkophobia is about as genuine as theophobia and heterophobia - more words invented by morons who think Christians are a persecuted minority in this country.

[mr blur]

1. ah, Ken Ham, the thinking person's favourite moron!

[beam me up scottie]

3. I love those cards.

[skepticscott]

8. Then of course, there's the moron's favorite moron

who we don't have to look that far for.

[Iggo]

2. Ken Ham thinks his god came to earth masquerading as his own son...

...begged himself not to kill himself, was refused by himself, caused himself to be crucified unto death, and came back to life three days later.

So we've established that Ken Ham will believe anything.

[beam me up scottie]

4. LOL!

Jesus rode a dinosaur, it's true! I saw it at the Creation Museum! And baby dinos were on the ark:

[progressoid]

9. So...

If the dinosaurs survived the flood. What actually killed them?

Oh, silly me. I just realized it was either God or Satan that done it.

[beam me up scottie]

12. That's easy:

This one is funny too:

[whatthehey]

13. Come now, you are missing the point entirely

He had to do that to save creatures he made from a Hell he made for them, which he desperately, and omnipotently, wants to do, but can't unless they are nice to him in absentia (even though he's omnipresent), and for which purpose he needs us to live on Earth for a few decades before the trillions of aeons in Heaven or Hell to see if we will love him enough, even though he is transcendent, atemporal and omniscient.

It makes much more sense when you think about it that way.

[Iggo]

14. You're right of course. It's all clear now.

[Curmudgeoness]

5. Well, speaking strictly for myself,

I am learning to hate some Christians, so he may not be entirely wrong...and it is his sort of Christians who disgust me.

He just doesn't get it that we don't give a shit what he does with his own money, or the money of his followers. Too bad that he isn't willing to pay for this himself, as well as any taxes that anyone else pays. Too bad that he doesn't see how full of shit he is too.

[beam me up scottie]

6. Do what I do when I encounter an asshole, tell them to have a nice day now!

Ham is a typical fundy, he wants to have it both ways, all the privileges of being an educational institution with none of the responsibilities.

[Curmudgeoness]

7. I am not that evolved yet.

I still prefer the "fuck you" to people like this.

[AlbertCat]

15. I am not that evolved yet.

I usually say "Oh, grow up!"

[DetlefK]

10. Don't be silly. We hate all religions equally!

[beam me up scottie]

11. Indeed. Many people think anti-theists hate religious people.

Some theists and apologists deliberately perpetuate that stereotype because it allows them to portray themselves as victims.

I like Rational Wiki's definition:

Antitheism, also known pejoratively as "militant atheism" (despite having nothing to do with militancy) is the belief that theism and religion are harmful to society and people, and that even if theistic beliefs were true, they would be undesirable. Antitheism, which is often characterized as outspoken opposition to theism and religion, asserts that religious and especially theistic beliefs are harmful and should be discarded in favor of humanism, rationalism, science and other alternatives.

Antitheistic positions are often erroneously confused for (or strawmanned into) rallying for various persecutory conspiracies against the faithful, including "seeking out and destroying all religion", "wanting to make faith illegal", "forcing the religion of atheism onto everyone" (a suggestion that is not even wrong), and numerous other unfounded fears from the faithful and their apologists.

http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Antitheism

[Freelancer]

16. If you are a church, you shouldn't be able to get insurance

When an insurance company pays a claim to a church, it pays from a pool of money collected from believers and non-believers alike. Taking money from non believers and handing it to a church is an act of tacit support. Giving support to a religion without people's knowledge is probably illegal.

There's probably something in the boilerplate insurance contract that's meant to insulate the company from legal exposure to this problem. Still, they could be required to disclose just where collected premium money is going. Then you'd have baptists not wanting to give their insurance money to the Catholics, who don't want to prop up the snake handlers, and so on. That could make the business of religion a little more complicated ... and expensive.

Maybe it wouldn't make a difference, but it's an approach to go after these theist businesses with that I don't recall being pursued before.