This site is not maintained. Click here for the new website of Richard Dawkins.


← Ken Ham vs. Rev. Barry Lynn Over Tax Funded Bible Theme Park

Ohnhai's Avatar Jump to comment 20 by Ohnhai

Comment 10 by Riley :

Ken Ham in this case is right. The government needs to be neutral. If a Mickey Mouse based theme park would have qualified for government subsidies as part of a state program intended to attract tourism and business development (i.e. tax revenue and jobs), then so too should a Noah's Ark based theme park.

Miss the point much? The ark park is dedicated to a single and narrow religious point of view and directly preaching it. For the govt to help fund this in anyway is a direct violation of the establishment clause. Any Mouse House Park is primarily designed to sell Disney products. Huge difference.

and as to the jobs revenue and tax that the park is supposed to bring in are inventions of the note very at all report that Kenny boy is so keen to throw around.

Sun, 30 Jan 2011 03:46:10 UTC | #585828