Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Archive for the ‘creationism’ Category

I have to say that I am very dismayed that Ken Ham of Answers in Genesis did not clarify what his stance is on the Roman Catholic Church in the article below. Especially seeing how the official position of the Roman Catholic Church on creation is that God performed creation through evolution and natural selection! Which is diametrically opposed to what Ken Ham, Answers in Genesis, and the Creation Museum state as one of their foundational beliefs: A literal 6 day creation. And they contend that to accept evolution is a doorway to further apostasy!

Not to mention that the current Pope of the Roman Catholic church is leaning very heavily in the direction of giving a nod of approval to Homosexuality!

There is no doubt that this court ruling sets a very bad precedent for “Religious” organizations. However Christian organizations have to be very careful with articles such as this, as it can appear by their silence in regards to the Roman Catholic Church that they are in fact giving their approval of the Roman Catholic Organization as a valid expression of the Christian Faith!

So I post this article for two reasons:

  1. To bring attention to the dangerous precedent that this court case sets
  2. To show how Christians should NOT inadvertently be seeming to give a silent approval of an apostate and despicable man made organization!

From Answers in Genesis:

There was a time when religious groups and ministries could hire without fear only those who supported their mission and core beliefs, but that day is quickly disappearing. Recently in Massachusetts a landmark decision—the first of its kind—has just been made adding an even greater threat to religious liberty: a Roman Catholic school is effectively being forced to hire practicing homosexuals despite the school’s sincerely held religious beliefs.

Man in a Same-Sex Marriage Applied for Position at Catholic School

According to a Massachusetts court, a Catholic preparatory school for girls, whose mission is “the education of young women rooted in gospel values and the teachings of the Catholic church,” was looking to hire a food services director in 2013. School policies have always required that employees must be Catholic and are considered “ministers of the mission.”

A man named Matthew Barrett applied for the position. During one of his interviews he was told that all employees are expected to model Catholic teachings and values and he “responded affirmatively” to being able to do that. The school then offered him employment and he accepted.

Later, however, Barrett filled out a new employee form and listed his “husband” as an emergency contact. The school scheduled another meeting where they told Barrett that they could not hire someone in a same-sex marriage because that’s inconsistent with the teachings of the Catholic Church—teachings he was expected to uphold as an employee.

Court Ruled Against the School

Barrett filed a lawsuit to challenge the school policy, and last month a judge ruled in his favor stating that the school had acted contrary to Massachusetts law by discriminating against Barrett based on his sexual orientation. The judge stated that Barrett had “suffered denial of employment, that the reason for denial was his sexual orientation, and that he suffered harm as a result.”

Apparently, because the school accepts students of all faiths and because a food services director does not accord with the state’s definition of a minister of the gospel, the school does not get a religious exemption from the non-discrimination law.

It doesn’t matter that the Catholic church has always opposed same-sex “marriage” and that the school’s employees are expected to support Catholic teachings. A court has now ruled that the school must hire someone who blatantly disagrees with its core beliefs.

Religious Liberty Is Quickly Disappearing in the US

This is ridiculous! How is a religious ministry supposed to present a cohesive message if it can’t reject applicants who don’t agree with its sincerely held religious beliefs? Would an atheist group be treated the same way and be forced to hire a Bible believing Christian for its organization?

We have warned many times that such rulings as this would be forthcoming—this is one of the first. This nation in many ways (including through the court system) has determined that persons engaged in homosexual behavior should be elevated to a protected legal class and everyone must be forced to agree and comply, regardless of any religious conviction to the contrary. Religious convictions, particularly those of Christians, are increasingly being forced out of the public square. Yes, Christian discrimination and persecution is here—and it will continue to increase in the present spiritual climate.

Religious liberty is quickly disappearing in the US. It shouldn’t come as any surprise that since the Supreme Court of the United States decision to legalize same-sex “marriage” in 2015, those who oppose this redefinition of marriage are coming under attack. As our culture continues to drift further from biblical values, we can only expect battles like this to increasingly be fought. As Christians, we need to be bold in standing for God’s Word and biblical morality in a culture that is growing more and more hostile to moral absolutes drawn from God’s Word. We are a shining light in this dark world. We must continue to share the good news of Jesus Christ to people even as our religious liberty continues to fade.

Please pray for AiG and Ark Encounter as we fight our own religious freedom battle here in Kentucky. Wake up America—the First Amendment of the Constitution, and the “first freedom” listed therein, is under unprecedented attack:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances. (Emphasis added)

Sadly, the Massachusetts court did not even pay lip service to the Constitution!

This essential prohibition against government infringement upon religious exercise applies equally to the state by virtue of the 14th Amendment, which reads in relevant part:

No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws. (Emphasis added)

Moreover, the Massachusetts court totally ignored the specific exception under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which allows religious organizations to exercise religious preferences in hiring. Federal law recognizes that such preferences are necessary in order for a ministry or other religious organization to follow its core religious beliefs and effectively maintain its religious identity. To hold otherwise amounts to unlawful discrimination against the religious entity and its religious beliefs, and ignores the application of the Constitution and federal statutory law, which are expressly designed to protect these precious religious freedoms.

Thanks for stopping by and thanks for praying,
Ken

Read Full Post »

from Worldview Weekend:

One result of our culture’s post-modernism is its entirely modern love affair with its own view ofscience.

Once-upon-a-time, the word science referred to the scientific process: verifiable propositions, experimental procedures, and reproducible observations.

And today? Science may still mean that in the dictionary, but in popular culture? Not so much.

Instead, the concept of science stands in for anti-supernaturalism with a political agenda—which I assume has probably always been the case to some extent. But today’s science seems marked by a very unscientific illogical and contradictory nature exceeded only by its own level of dogma.

Some examples: The pro-abortion movement claims that science does not allow it to say that a baby in the womb is human life. Of course the baby is human, and is alive, but simply those observations are deemed “unscientific.” In fact, after Senator Marco Rubio was foolish enough to use the antiquated concept of science in this statement:

“Science is settled, human life begins at conception”

The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists released a statement saying that they could not agree with Rubio, because they “approach everything from a scientific perspective.” They were fine saying that pregnancy begins with implantation, but the science is just not settled on if pregnancy and life are the same thing. Its not that they haven’t done the right research, but rather they can’t comment on the connection between human life and pregnancy because they approach everything from a “scientific perspective” (one blogger described this as “being super confused about where babies come from”).

Meanwhile, there is this picture of a baby born at 24-weeks. The baby did not survive:

'She's a human not a foetus': Mother wants to challenge abortion laws after giving birth at 24 weeks

No word on the scientific perspective on this.

Another example: yesterday AOL news used this headline: “Global warming likely to cause colder winters.” The lead said, of course, that “Scientists now believe that global warming is to blame for extreme cold snaps in North America.” If scientists say so.

Which leads to the news this month that polar ice is actually increasing, scientists say. Which is good news according to some scientists, but bad news according to others—after all, it could break out into “global cooling” (the actual phrase used, without irony, in the International Science Times, and attributed to “scientists”).

Note the irony that this all comes seven years after “the science was settled” and the polar ice caps would likely disappear by the year 2014. Well then.

Non-Christians I know (and many Christians too) often wonder why pastors who may be otherwise respectable suddenly sound like raving, backwards luddites when it comes to “science.”

Why does it have to be the Christians who bring up the fabricated science and outright lies—remember the hockey stick graphs!—behind global warming?

One reason is because the same people who say science is settled on the global warming—or possibly cooling—also dogmatically say they know how old the earth is. They are as confident in our shared ancestry with monkeys as they are in the original big-bang—but have no idea if a fetus is human life. By the way, are those pesky ice caps still around? I thought the science was settled?

So I don’t mind being the backwards, young-earth, six-day-creationist. I can compare my world view to the dogma and self-proclaimed intellectual superiority of science with confidence.

Tyson can tell his 2.41 million twitter followers (!) that religious people have no place in any authority because they lack an objective reality. My retort: his form of science is confused about where babies come from, fabricates its findings, and ultimately ends up denying the creator for the sake of creation. That track record hardly counts as being founded in objective reality.

Read Full Post »

from Got Questions:

Science is defined as “the observation, identification, description, experimental investigation, and theoretical explanation of phenomena.” Science is a method that mankind can use to gain a greater understanding of the natural universe. It is a search for knowledge through observation. Advances in science demonstrate the reach of human logic and imagination. However, a Christian’s belief in science should never be like our belief in God. A Christian can have faith in God and respect for science, as long as we remember which is perfect and which is not.

Our belief in God is a belief of faith. We have faith in His Son for salvation, faith in His Word for instruction, and faith in His Holy Spirit for guidance. Our faith in God should be absolute, since when we put our faith in God, we depend on a perfect, omnipotent, omniscient Creator. Our belief in science should be intellectual and nothing more. We can count on science to do many great things, but we can also count on science to make mistakes. If we put faith in science, we depend on imperfect, sinful, limited, mortal men. Science throughout history has been wrong about many things, such as the shape of the earth, powered flight, vaccines, blood transfusions, and even reproduction. God is never wrong.

Truth is nothing to fear, so there is no reason for a Christian to fear good science. Learning more about the way God constructed our universe helps all of mankind appreciate the wonder of creation. Expanding our knowledge helps us to combat disease, ignorance, and misunderstanding. However, there is danger when scientists hold their faith in human logic above faith in our Creator. These persons are no different from anyone devoted to a religion; they have chosen faith in man and will find facts to defend that faith.

Still, the most rational scientists, even those who refuse to believe in God, admit to a lack of completeness in our understanding of the universe. They will admit that neither God nor the Bible can be proved or disproved by science, just as many of their favorite theories ultimately cannot be proved or disproved. Science is meant to be a truly neutral discipline, seeking only the truth, not furtherance of an agenda.

Much of science supports the existence and work of God. Psalm 19:1 says, “The heavens declare the glory of God; the skies proclaim the work of His hands.” As modern science discovers more about the universe, we find more evidence of creation. The amazing complexity and replication of DNA, the intricate and interlocking laws of physics, and the absolute harmony of conditions and chemistry here on earth all serve to support the message of the Bible. A Christian should embrace science that seeks the truth, but reject the “priests of science” who put human knowledge above God.

Read Full Post »

from Crossroads:

“…by Him [Jesus] all things were created that are in heaven and that are on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or principalities or powers. All things were created through Him and for Him. And He is before all things, and in Him all things consist. “ Colossians 1:16-17

“…since the creation of the world His invisible attributes are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made . . . although they knew God, they did not glorify Him as God, nor were thankful, but became futile in their thoughts… Professing to be wise, they became fools…” Romans 1:20-2

There was a time in America, when people flocked to Bible-based churches to hear God’s encouraging Word and follow His Way. Back then, God’s timeless Truth brought peace, hope, faith and amazing wonder. But times have changed! Today it’s hard to find a church that doesn’t compromise the Bible and bend it to fit human inclinations and unbiblical fads.

Each year, fewer pastors are prepared to base their teaching on the victorious Word of our Lord — the true Creator of the world. Instead, they simply dismiss the less popular parts of the Bible such as the first chapters of Genesis. After all, a “short earth” makes little sense to those who replace God with human scripts for a universe stretching millions of years into the past.

Many, like the famous evolutionist Richard Dawkins, simply hope one day to discover a higher intelligence that can solve the puzzles that continue to perplex even the most renowned atheistic evolutionists.

Ben Stein Exposes British Evolutionist, Richard Dawkins

Back in 2008, Jewish author Ben Stein interviewed the prominent British atheist and author, Richard Dawkins. Please watch this short excerpt from the much longer DVD titled Expelled: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=trUUv_ZDoMo (You can order the full-length video from Amazon and/or watch the short YouTube here)

As you will see, Dawkins simply could not make sense of the evolutionary speculations on which he had built his worldwide fame and fortune. Notice his grandiose claims and flawed explanations. He was totally unable to validate his own assertion that evolution is a proven reality. After all, an atheist — especially a world famous atheist author — cannot accept a creationist’s faith in God’s mighty work without losing credibility!

After watching the full length video back in 2008, Dinesh D’Souza wrote an article exposing Dawkins ignorant and irrational speculations. Here are some excerpts:

“So Stein puts to Dawkins a simple question, ‘How did life begin?’ One would think that this is a question that could easily be answered. Dawkins, however, frankly admits that he has no idea. One might expect Dawkins to invoke evolution as the all-purpose explanation. Evolution, however, only explains transitions from one life form to another. Evolution has no explanation for how life got started in the first place. Darwin was very clear about this.

“In order for evolution to take place, there had to be a living cell. The difficulty for atheists is that even this original cell is a work of labyrinthine complexity. Franklin Harold writes in The Way of the Cell that even the simplest cells are more ingeniously complicated than man’s most elaborate inventions….

“[This] absurdity was recognized more than a decade ago by Francis Crick, co-discoverer of the DNA double helix. Yet Crick is a committed atheist. Unwilling to consider the possibility of divine or supernatural creation, Crick suggested that maybe aliens brought life to earth from another planet. And this is precisely the suggestion that Richard Dawkins makes in his response to Ben Stein. Perhaps, he notes, life was delivered to our planet by highly-evolved aliens. Let’s call this the “ET” explanation.

“Stein brilliantly responds that he had no idea Richard Dawkins believes in intelligent design! And indeed Dawkins does seem to be saying that alien intelligence is responsible for life arriving on earth….

“Basically Dawkins is surrendering on the claim that evolution can account for the origins of life. It can’t. The issue now is simply whether a natural intelligence (ET) or a supernatural intelligence (God) created life. Dawkins can’t bear the supernatural explanation and so he opts for ET. But doesn’t it take as much, or more, faith to believe in extraterrestrial biology majors depositing life on earth than it does to believe in a transcendent creator?

“All he can do is hope there is another ‘god’ or ‘intelligence’ somewhere who might have set evolution in motion.”[1]

Did you catch that message? Both Dawkins and Crick agree that life must have begun with some kind of living cell. But they can’t explain how that essential and foundational living cell came about! And so, in desperate search for an answer, they turn to a vague hope of extraterrestrial life still to be discovered. Since both are determined atheists, they refuse to believe in our God — the actual Creator of all life!

“Ben Stein Vs. Sputtering Atheists”

On April 18, 2008, Brent Bozell — founder and president of the Media Research Center, the Conservative Communications Center, and the Cybercast News Service — presented his review of Expelled. He began by exposing the standard bias and hostility of evolutionists toward those who reject evolution.

“It is a reality of PC liberalism: There is only one credible side to an issue, and any dissent is not only rejected, it is scorned. Global warming. Gay ‘rights.’ Abortion ‘rights.’…

PC liberalism’s power centers are the news media, the entertainment industry and academia, and all are in the clutches of an unmistakable hypocrisy: Theirs is an ideology that preaches the freedom of thought and expression at every opportunity, yet practices absolute intolerance toward dissension. Evolution is another one of those one-sided debates….

“Ben Stein’s extraordinary presentation documents how the worlds of science and academia not only crush debate on the origins of life, but also crush the careers of professors who dare to question the Darwinian hypothesis of evolution and natural selection.

“Stein asks a simple question: What if the universe began with an intelligent designer, a designer named God? He assembles a stable of academics — experts all — who dared to question Darwinist assumptions and found themselves “expelled” from intellectual discourse as a result. They include evolutionary biologist Richard Sternberg (sandbagged at the Smithsonian), biology professor Caroline Crocker (drummed out of George Mason University), and astrophysicist Guillermo Gonzalez (blackballed at Iowa State University).

“That’s disturbing enough, but what Stein does next is truly shocking. He allows the principal advocates of Darwinism to speak their minds. These are experts with national reputations, regular welcomed guests on network television and the like. But the public knows them only by their careful seven-second soundbites. Stein engages them in conversation. They speak their minds. They become sputtering ranters, openly championing their sheer hatred of religion.

“PC liberalism has showered accolades on atheist author Richard Dawkins’ best-selling book “The God Delusion.” But when Stein suggests to Dawkins that he’s been critical of the Old Testament God, Dawkins protests — not that Stein is wrong, but that he’s being too mild. He then reads from this jaw-dropping paragraph of his book:

“The God of the Old Testament is arguably the most unpleasant character in all fiction: jealous and proud of it; a petty, unjust, unforgiving control freak; a vindictive, bloodthirsty ethnic cleanser; a misogynistic, homophobic, racist, infanticidal, genocidal, filicidal, pestilential, megalomaniacal, sadomasochistic, capriciously malevolent bully.”

“It’s understood that God had nothing to do with the origins of life on Earth. What, then, is the alternate explanation? Stein asks these experts… One theorizes that life began somehow on the backs of crystals. Another states electric sparks from a lightning storm created organic matter (out of nothing). Another declares that life was brought to Earth by aliens. Anything but God.

“The most controversial part of the film follows Stein to the Dachau concentration camp, underlining how Darwin’s theories of natural selection led to the eugenics movement, embraced by Adolf Hitler.” . . . . .

read the full article here.

Read Full Post »

Ken Ham is RIGHT to speak out against BioLogos.

The following quote is from the BioLogos website:

Theistic Evolution, therefore, is the belief that evolution is how God created life. Because the term evolution is sometimes associated with atheism, a better term for the belief in a God who chose to create the world by way of evolution is BioLogos.

from Worldview Weekend:

Answers in Genesis, recognized as one of the strongest advocates for homeschooling in America, has been kicked out of two homeschool conventions where AiG President Ken Ham had been scheduled to speak. In addition, AiG as an exhibitor has also been expelled. One of the conferences is being held in our “backyard”: at the Cincinnati Convention Center.

So why has AiG been disinvited from the “Great Homeschool Conventions” (March 31–April 2 in Cincinnati) and also near Philadelphia (June 23–25)? Have the organizers accused AiG of promoting anti-biblical teaching and thus have voided its contract with us?

In an email to Ken Ham, the leader of this homeschool group wrote to us (just after midnight last night) to announce its decision. Sadly, the leader of this group did not personally call Ken or anyone at AiG first, nor did anyone on his board, to make sure they got the full background. Just as a common courtesy, not to speak of biblical guidelines (such as Proverbs 18:13; Matthew 18:15–17; etc.), one would expect that one of its leaders would at least have spoken to us before rescinding our agreement.

We are quoting the entire email so we don’t misrepresent in any way the group’s claimed motivations:

After much prayer and deliberation over the weekend, Great Homeschool Convention’s Advisory Board has unanimously decided to disinvite Ken and AIG from all future conventions, including the Cincinnati convention next week. The Board believes this to be the Lord’s will for our convention and searched the Scriptures for the mind of the Lord and the leadership of the Holy Spirit before arriving at this decision. The Board believes that Ken’s public criticism of the convention itself and other speakers at our convention require him to surrender the spiritual privilege of addressing our homeschool audience.Please know that our Board is 100% young earth and we largely share AIG’s perspective from a scientific standpoint. That is why Ken was originally invited and treated so graciously and extremely generously in Memphis and Greenville (far beyond what we do for other speakers or their ministries). Our expression of sacrifice and extraordinary kindness towards Ken and AIG has been returned to us and our attendees with Ken publicly attacking our conventions and other speakers. Our Board believes Ken’s comments to be unnecessary, ungodly, and mean-spirited statements that are divisive at best and defamatory at worst.

One of the core values of our convention is that we believe that good people can disagree and still be good people. We believe that Christians do not need to personally question the integrity, the intelligence, or the salvation of other Christians when debating Biblical issues. Ken has obviously felt led to publicly attack our conventions and a number of our speakers. We believe that what Ken has said and done is unChristian and sinful. A number of attendees are demanding explanations from our board and we must respond to them.

We believe that Dr. Ham is very intelligent and deliberate and that he decided that publicly slandering our conventions and defaming a number of our speakers is what he wanted to do. Whereas Ken chooses to conduct himself in a way that we believe to be unscriptural, we cannot countenance that spirit as we believe it would not honor the Savior whom we serve.

A public statement will be prepared for distribution at the convention explaining our Board’s decision. Anyone who inquires regarding Dr. Ham or AIG will be referred to that statement. We have no intention to defame or publicly slander Dr. Ham, the Creation Museum, or the work of AIG. Our Board would respectfully request that Dr. Ham and AIG prayerfully consider doing the same. Our Board takes seriously the admonition of Jesus in John 13:35, “By this shall all men know that ye are My disciples, if ye have love one to another.”

Sincerely,

Brennan Dean
Great Homeschool Conventions, Inc.

These are serious accusations. Are we really guilty of “public criticism of the convention itself and other speakers at our convention” that require Ken Ham “to surrender the spiritual privilege of addressing [their] homeschool audience”?

While Ken was highly critical of the compromises and teachings of one of the presenters at a previous convention that was organized by Mr. Dean, he certainly did not question anyone’s intelligence or salvation.

We won’t dwell much into the fact that another speaker, Dr. Jay Wile, made personal attacks on Ken on his blog before the convention, and his attack was supported by two other speakers, John Stonestreet and Susan Wise Bauer. Maybe Mr. Dean has talked with them already.

Ken did write Facebook and blog items sharing his concerns about the teaching of one of the speakers at the homeschool convention-Dr. Peter Enns. For a long time now, Ken has been alerting audiences to what Dr. Enns believes and teaches. Since he was there at the convention to promote a Bible curriculum to homeschoolers, Ken could not in good conscience speak without warning people about him. Also, the conference organizers were aware back in November that we would be talking about the beliefs of BioLogos at upcoming conventions. Because Dr. Enns of BioLogos was speaking at Mr. Dean’s conventions to promote a Bible curriculum to homeschoolers, which we consider very dangerous to the spiritual upbringing of kids, we wanted to make sure that people knew what he believed. . . .

read the full article here.

Read Full Post »

from Got Questions:

Science is defined as “the observation, identification, description, experimental investigation, and theoretical explanation of phenomena.” Science is a method that mankind can use to gain a greater understanding of the natural universe. It is a search for knowledge through observation. Advances in science demonstrate the reach of human logic and imagination. However, a Christian’s belief in science should never be like our belief in God. A Christian can have faith in God and respect for science, as long as we remember which is perfect and which is not.

Our belief in God is a belief of faith. We have faith in His Son for salvation, faith in His Word for instruction, and faith in His Holy Spirit for guidance. Our faith in God should be absolute, since when we put our faith in God, we depend on a perfect, omnipotent, omniscient Creator. Our belief in science should be intellectual and nothing more. We can count on science to do many great things, but we can also count on science to make mistakes. If we put faith in science, we depend on imperfect, sinful, limited, mortal men. Science throughout history has been wrong about many things, such as the shape of the earth, powered flight, vaccines, blood transfusions, and even reproduction. God is never wrong.

Truth is nothing to fear, so there is no reason for a Christian to fear good science. Learning more about the way God constructed our universe helps all of mankind appreciate the wonder of creation. Expanding our knowledge helps us to combat disease, ignorance, and misunderstanding. However, there is danger when scientists hold their faith in human logic above faith in our Creator. These persons are no different from anyone devoted to a religion; they have chosen faith in man and will find facts to defend that faith.

Still, the most rational scientists, even those who refuse to believe in God, admit to a lack of completeness in our understanding of the universe. They will admit that neither God nor the Bible can be proved or disproved by science, just as many of their favorite theories ultimately cannot be proved or disproved. Science is meant to be a truly neutral discipline, seeking only the truth, not furtherance of an agenda.

Much of science supports the existence and work of God. Psalm 19:1 says, “The heavens declare the glory of God; the skies proclaim the work of His hands.” As modern science discovers more about the universe, we find more evidence of creation. The amazing complexity and replication of DNA, the intricate and interlocking laws of physics, and the absolute harmony of conditions and chemistry here on earth all serve to support the message of the Bible. A Christian should embrace science that seeks the truth, but reject the “priests of science” who put human knowledge above God.

Read Full Post »

You will see alot more of these types of incidents where Christian businesses are “set up” for “discirmination lawsuits” by denying services to same sex couples.

from The Washington Post:

A progressive blogger and another man who tried to go to a special event at Kentucky’s Creation Museum said they were denied admission because they told security that they were a same-sex couple.

The men bought tickets online for a Date Night event on Feb. 11 at the privately funded Petersburg museum, which shows visitors a literal interpretation of the Bible depicting how the world was created in six days about 6,000 to 10,000 years ago.

Both museum officials and the men denied admission agree that they weren’t let in and not reimbursed the $71.90 cost for the tickets. They differ on whether it was clear beforehand that men without female companions would be turned away.

The event included dinner, musical performances and a talk from museum founder Ken Ham about love and the biblical view of marriage.

One of the men who was denied admission, Joe Sonka, is the writer of a blog called Barefoot and Progressive. He has previously criticized the museum and its founder, as well as the idea of giving public tax breaks for a proposed theme park the museum’s backers want to build based on the biblical story of Noah’s ark.

Sonka wrote in an e-mail to The Associated Press that neither he nor the other man denied entry is gay. He said he was curious to hear the museum’s founder speak and if they would admit a same-sex couple.

Museum spokesman Mark Looy told The Kentucky Enquirer that the promotional material for the Date Night made it clear the event was for heterosexual couples only.

“The message was one of Christian marriage, which the Bible teaches is between a man and a woman,” Looy told the newspaper. He noted that the museum welcomes all visitors during regular hours. Sonka said he has visited the museum twice before without incident.

Looy defended the decision not to allow the two men in and cited a blog post that Sonka wrote in January, encouraging readers to raise money to send a “flamboyantly gay” couple to the event.

“We are not going to allow anyone to come to a private event and be disruptive,” Looy told the newspaper. “It’s not fair to the other people who also paid to attend the event. We welcome anyone to come to the Creation Museum during regular business hours because we want all people to be exposed to our message.”

Sonka responded that the blog post was sarcastic, like much of his blog writing. He noted that he did not bring a flamboyantly gay couple to the event.

Jonathan Meador, a staff writer for the Louisville alternative newspaper LEO Weekly, was also involved in the dispute and wrote a story about what happened outside the museum. He told the Enquirer that the museum’s website did not say it would deny men without female dates when promoting Date Night.

The dispute started when Meador, a female guest and a third man approached security. The third man told security he was waiting for a friend, who was Sonka.

Meador said the man told security personnel his friend was a man, prompting museum officials to deny him admission. Meador and his date were allowed in.

Meador said museum officials didn’t break any laws, but feels they should have at least refunded the cost of admission.

Read Full Post »

Older Posts »

%d bloggers like this: