When I first heard about Christianburg Va's plan to host a three-day trip to the monument to little kennie ham's ego (the Creation 'museum' and ark park) I had two immediate thoughts: When was the backlash going to happen and what little kennie was going to have to say about it. The first happened, the second is probably being written now. If it's not yet being written, I am sure little kennie's blood pressure is on the rise.
The Freedom From Religion Foundation (FFRF), who we have written about before, sent a letter to Christianburg's Park and Recreation Dept and they [the department] realized the error of their ways and cancelled the trip. I am surprised it happened so quickly. In my opinion what happened is that whoever was managing that trip hadn't considered the fact that it was a trip to a religious ministry, not an educational or entertainment attraction, as much as little kennie tries to market it that way.. So they changed their minds rather quickly. So far, things are proceeding as I think they should and, dare I say it, legally. Government organizations should not be sponsoring such trips and doing so can open you up for legal action. Gladly it only required a reminder before correcting their error.
Now, the fun starts. What will kennie say? Anyone else have an opinion? You know what I am going to say -- Little kennie is going to play the martyr card and offer this up at yet another example of his Christian Persecution Complex. Yes, kennie, the whole world is against you because they won't do everything you demand. Regardless of the fact a city planning such a trip violates the Constitution (Lemon Test) doesn't matter to you. I'm sure you'll be able to use this and squeeze more money out of your Hamians.
I know that makes me sound like I don't think little kennie is in this for the glory of a God . . . but can anyone really tell the difference between some a megachurch mogel, a televangelist preaching the 'prosperity gospel', and kennie building his ego-driven edifices? If you don't think his ego isn't involved, you might to read the Bible and see how little kennie keeps 'interpreting' it while claiming Biblical literalism and inerrancy. The irony is looking at what kennie does and what he says, the gap between them is not-very-surprisingly wide.
Private groups can do what they like, but public organizations -- like city departments and public schools -- shouldn't be doing certain things, and this was one of them. Yes, kennie, I know you seem to think the Constitution should be re-written to make everything you do legal, but that's not what the law says, nor is it -- in my opinion -- in keeping the spirit of the drafters of the Constitution. You aren't being persecuted, you are being limited by the law and I know how much that rankles you. We discussed some of this before in "How Can You Tell When your Religious Liberties are being Violated?", including this graphic:
Little kennie reminds me of one of my neighbors during the late 60's and early 70's. He was dead set against any form of civil rights for . . well . . . people that weren't exactly like him. One of his constant complaints were how people like him were being persecuted by women and other men not like him because of the civil rights movement. Was he actually being persecuted? No, civil rights was about leveling the playing field and living up to the Constitution's promise about equality. Just because you don't like something that's going on, doesn't mean you are being persecuted!
Was Kim Davis being persecuted because she went to jail for being a Christian? No, she went to jail for refusing to do her job, her religion was her excuse and also her get-out-of-jail card because pf pandering politicians! Was that baker in Co persecuted for being a Christian? No, he was prosecuted, and lost, for refusing to provide certain specific business services to a gay couple. It's not persecution, it's leveling the playing field that for decades Christians have enjoyed special rights. Losing those 'special' rights isn't persecution, no matter how painful it might feel.
You might disagree with me that Christians have had a lot of special privileges, but think it through. Blue Laws enforced a religious decree from which religion? How about the addition of 'Under God' to the Pledge Of Allegiance, don at the urging of who? the Knights of Columbus, one of the largest fraternal Catholic organizations in the world. You can look for, and easily find many, many examples of Christian religion being dominant in everyday American life, whether you support that religion or not. When was the last time you saw a Muslim theologian giving a benediction at a public event? OK, maybe the question is when was the first time?
Many of the actions to reduce that dominance and establish the equality so desired by the framers of the Constitution is frequently characterized as 'persecution'. As I see it, Christians do not want to lose their special status and they wish to continue to be able to use their religion to discriminate against anyone who isn't part of their religion. Case in point are the state bills being introduced specifically designed to permit religious discrimination, like Indiana's (signed by the new VP when he was the Governor).
I have said it many times, the government should not be a tool of any special interest, including religion. That might seem a pie-in-the-sky wish, certainly considering the current government leadership, or lack therein, but that's how I feel. You cannot write a law that has any form of discrimination at its heart.