Answers in Genesis, Inc. is an Equal Opportunity/ Affirmative Action employer. We provide equal employment opportunities to all qualified employees and applicants for employment without regard to race, religion, sex, age, marital status, national origin, sexual orientation, citizenship status, veteran status, disability or any other legally protected status. We prohibit discrimination in decisions concerning recruitment, hiring, compensation, benefits, training, termination, promotions, or any other condition of employment or career development.
That is good, because Ark Encounter is a for-profit corporation, but farther into the job application, I encountered
Huh? Church membership? Salvation testimony? Statement of faith? Equal Opportunity? Affirmative Action? AIG's claim to be an Equal Opportunity employer is probably a response to a letter by the geologist Daniel Phelps to the Lexington Herald-Leader, a critical editorial in that paper, and a press release in which Americans United charges that the Ark Park (a for-profit corporation, remember) engages in religious discrimination.
The Herald-Leader editorial opposed state aid for the Ark Park, and AIG has apparently responded by saying that it is an Equal Opportunity employer, when it plainly intends to discriminate on the basis of religion. Forgive me, but these people give disingenuous a bad name. Do they think that the Kentucky Tourism Development Finance Authority is a bunch of idiots?
65 Comments
Henry J · 5 September 2014
o they think that the Kentucky Tourism Development Finance Authority is a bunch of idiots?
Might be a case of projection.
TomS · 5 September 2014
IANAL, but my understanding is that a religious organization is permitted consider religion in hiring.
TomS said:
IANAL, but my understanding is that a religious organization is permitted consider religion in hiring.
Sometimes true, but often the religious restriction has to bear some rational relationship to the "mission".
For instance, an employment-law judge might allow a Catholic college to 'legitimately' fire an unmarried professor who became pregnant, on the basis that it's a serious sin and she works directly with students. The same judge would likely have a harder time with the same college firing a cook because they married a Hindu.
But that's kind of beside the point.
The big question isn't "can a religious organization is permitted consider religion in hiring" but rather "Should a religious organization get $18 million in public money to build a religious theme park?".
stevaroni · 6 September 2014
Robert Byers said:
Oh come on. I don't know their hiring practices bUT surely it must be people who agree with Genesis as true. How could it be others then Christians.? i gues Muslims Jews etc but indeed this is a evangelical operation.
.... And... right on cue, Beyers makes my point for me.
If this is indeed "an evangelical operation" then it's a pretty big stretch that they can be the direct beneficiary of public funds, any more than, say, an islamic group should get public funds to build "Muslim World - The Allah Experience".
I suspect that even you agree with that example, Beyers.
The most baffling part of all this is why AiG is choosing now pick this particular fight.
While I'm sure Ham relishes the opportunity to publicly argue the point that he should be allowed to not have any pesky unbelievers around heathening up his new place, it's tactically really fucking stupid to draw this kind of attention when you're still bellying up to the public teat, making delicate deals to suckle up 8 figures in municipal bond money.
Dave Luckett · 6 September 2014
AiG is an evangelical Christian thing, as Byers puts it - which is exactly why it shouldn't be receiving any form of State assistance. But since it does receive State assistance in the form of tax breaks, loans, bond issue guarantees and roadworks to facilitate its operations, the very least that can be asked is that it obeys the law and does not discriminate against people not of its own religion.
That, of course, isn't going to happen. AiG will indulge its bigotry overtly if it can get away with it, or covertly if it can't, and, in that case, will lie about it.
Byers, of course, has no idea why his religion shouldn't be supported by the State in the first place, so the rest makes no sense to him at all.
harold · 6 September 2014
Do they think that the Kentucky Tourism Development Finance Authority is a bunch of idiots?
No, they think that they're a bunch of bigots who support the true nature of AIG. Which is probably correct.
TomS · 6 September 2014
There are universities with ties to a particular church. Should they not be permitted to receive federal research grants? Should they not be permitted to have ROTC? (For USAns, these are training programs for college students to become military officers.)
callahanpb · 6 September 2014
Independent of whether religious requirements are allowed in this case, it does seemed to contradict the Equal Opportunity/Affirmative Action boilerplate in the popup (which I just verified for myself). How do they explain that?
I am pretty sure that would not just ask information that they do not to use in hiring, because it opens them up to discrimination lawsuits.
TomS · 6 September 2014
callahanpb said:
Independent of whether religious requirements are allowed in this case, it does seemed to contradict the Equal Opportunity/Affirmative Action boilerplate in the popup (which I just verified for myself). How do they explain that?
I am pretty sure that would not just ask information that they do not to use in hiring, because it opens them up to discrimination lawsuits.
That (why they do not change the boilerplate if they do ask about religion) I agree.
Matt Young · 6 September 2014
What matters, I think, is the distinction between for-profits and religious nonprofits. A religious college, for example, may require all its employees to belong to a certain church. AIG probably is allowed to discriminate on the basis of religion but not the other categories. Ark Encounter, being a for-profit corporation, is not allowed to discriminate on the basis of religion. The position I investigated said CAD Technician Ark Encounter. I wonder whether they plan to launder the Ark Encounter positions by making the employees technically employees of AIG and then "renting" them to Ark Encounter. I doubt that would work for very long.
"Our work at Ark Encounter is not just a job, it is also a ministry. Our employees work together as a team to serve each other to produce the best solutions for our design requirements. Our purpose through the Ark Encounter is to serve and glorify the Lord with our God-given talents with the goal of edifying believers and evangelizing the lost."
(Italics & underline added)
So, a for-profit "ministry" whose purpose is to evangelize, eh? The ACLU should be jumping on that one...
I don't think Ham and AIG can lie their way out of this one, but it will be interesting to see them try.
https://me.yahoo.com/a/JxVN0eQFqtmgoY7wC1cZM44ET_iAanxHQmLgYgX_Zhn8#57cad · 6 September 2014
Sinners need to be drowned, and wouldn't be good employees afterward.
"Our work at Ark Encounter is not just a job, it is also a ministry. Our employees work together as a team to serve each other to produce the best solutions for our design requirements. Our purpose through the Ark Encounter is to serve and glorify the Lord with our God-given talents with the goal of edifying believers and evangelizing the lost."
(Italics & underline added)
So, a for-profit "ministry" whose purpose is to evangelize, eh? The ACLU should be jumping on that one...
I don't think Ham and AIG can lie their way out of this one, but it will be interesting to see them try.
"Evangelizing the lost" has that strong stench of smug religious bigotry.
"Our work at Ark Encounter is not just a job, it is also a ministry. Our employees work together as a team to serve each other to produce the best solutions for our design requirements. Our purpose through the Ark Encounter is to serve and glorify the Lord with our God-given talents with the goal of edifying believers and evangelizing the lost."
(Italics & underline added)
So, a for-profit "ministry" whose purpose is to evangelize, eh? The ACLU should be jumping on that one...
I don't think Ham and AIG can lie their way out of this one, but it will be interesting to see them try.
While I agree (very strongly) that there needs to be a case made that what they're doing is blatantly illegal, there is the problem of standing. ACLU, CU, FFRF, etc. need to find someone who is actually harmed in order to start a case.
That said, perhaps a complaint to a relevant EEOC would have some traction. Since AIG/Ark Encountered is doing business across state lines, the Federal EEOC might be the best venue, which would have the added advantage of much lower risk of "wink and nod" response than a state EEOC might try.
Henry J · 6 September 2014
One complication in trying to find somebody that was harmed is that somebody who wasn't already in that religion probably wouldn't want to work there; it would probably be only if they were unemployed with no prospects anywhere else, not even a fast food place.
Henry
harold · 6 September 2014
TomS said:
There are universities with ties to a particular church. Should they not be permitted to receive federal research grants? Should they not be permitted to have ROTC? (For USAns, these are training programs for college students to become military officers.)
They should not receive federal funds if they discriminate in hiring or admissions.
You don't have to be Catholic to go to, or to teach at, Georgetown.
Unfortunately, federal student aid is given to students who choose to attend institutions like Liberty University, which does amount to taxpayer subsidy of discrimination.
W. H. Heydt · 6 September 2014
Henry J said:
One complication in trying to find somebody that was harmed is that somebody who wasn't already in that religion probably wouldn't want to work there; it would probably be only if they were unemployed with no prospects anywhere else, not even a fast food place.
Henry
Not necessarily. Look at the case that is winding down where Apple, Google and some other company colluded to refrain from "poaching" each others employees. People were "harmed" by not being recruited away from their current employers and by not seeing salaries go up as fast as they otherwise would have. One could, for instance, use a hiring offer from AE to try to get a raise from your current employer and if AE refuses to tender an offer because of religion, then you have been harmed. (Bear in mind, IANAL, so it is conjecture on my part that this would be a legit cause of action. Any actual lawyers--especially ones with expertise in this area--are cordially invited to weigh in, even if just to tell me that I'm wrong...or even so far off that my reasoning doesn't even rise to the level of "wrong".)
Joel · 6 September 2014
"You donât have to be Catholic to go to, or to teach at, Georgetown."
Nor at Saint Louis University, where I've worked for over 27 years. Yes, there are a lot of Roman Catholics here, and the Jesuit mission and Catholic iconography are much in evidence, but I know plenty of protestants, Jews, Muslims and atheists on the faculty and staff here. None have complained of being marginalized or discriminated against because of their beliefs.
harold · 6 September 2014
Joel said:
"You donât have to be Catholic to go to, or to teach at, Georgetown."
Nor at Saint Louis University, where I've worked for over 27 years. Yes, there are a lot of Roman Catholics here, and the Jesuit mission and Catholic iconography are much in evidence, but I know plenty of protestants, Jews, Muslims and atheists on the faculty and staff here. None have complained of being marginalized or discriminated against because of their beliefs.
I was briefly on faculty at the school of medicine at SLU many years ago. Another good example.
Helena Constantine · 6 September 2014
https://me.yahoo.com/a/JxVN0eQFqtmgoY7wC1cZM44ET_iAanxHQmLgYgX_Zhn8#57cad said:
Sinners need to be drowned, and wouldn't be good employees afterward.
See?
Glen DAvidson
You probably think that's a joke, but back in Constantine's day they would tie a millstone around a pagan's neck and then throw it into the sea, on the order of gentle Jesus meek and mild (Matth 18:6).
Doc Bill · 7 September 2014
Do they think that the Kentucky Tourism Development Finance Authority is a bunch of idiots?
I LOVE rhetorical questions!
JimboK · 7 September 2014
I was wondering, where did Noah plug in his AutoCAD workstation, printers and copiers???
stevaroni · 7 September 2014
JimboK said:
I was wondering, where did Noah plug in his AutoCAD workstation, printers and copiers???
He probably had wave generators.
After all, that's how AiG says he probably handled ventilation, via a complex system powered by waves rising and falling in a "moon pool" built for that specific purpose.
DS · 7 September 2014
Well obviously the thing to do is to find an eminently qualified person and have him (or her) apply for the job and refuse to answer any of the illegal questions, or answering them in a way sure to prejudice the application. It would be best if this could be done truthfully be someone who did not fulfill the obvious criteria implied by the questions. After a few times getting sued and having to defend their illegal hiring practices in court, there wouldn't be enough money left over to build the fake ark as a shrine to the magic flood that supposedly killed so many innocent people..
KlausH · 7 September 2014
Helena Constantine said:
https://me.yahoo.com/a/JxVN0eQFqtmgoY7wC1cZM44ET_iAanxHQmLgYgX_Zhn8#57cad said:
Sinners need to be drowned, and wouldn't be good employees afterward.
See?
Glen DAvidson
You probably think that's a joke, but back in Constantine's day they would tie a millstone around a pagan's neck and then throw it into the sea, on the order of gentle Jesus meek and mild (Matth 18:6).
I have a hard time believing that. People were very poor at the time, in general, and millstones were expensive. It is like performing modern capital punishment by putting the criminal into a semi truck and driving it off a cliff.
Ian Derthal · 7 September 2014
AiG is an evangelical Christian thing
Young Earth creationism is not evangelical Christianity.
Henry J · 7 September 2014
I was wondering, where did Noah plug in his AutoCAD workstation, printers and copiers???
Maybe he uses that burning bush as a power source. :D
Do they think that the Kentucky Tourism Development Finance Authority is a bunch of idiots?
Without detailed analysis, it might be hard to distinguish between stupidity, apathy, or conspiracy.
DS · 7 September 2014
And why does the guy have to be a CAD in the first place? Why is a character flaw a job requirement?
What?
Oh. Never mind.
Henry J · 7 September 2014
KlausH said:
It is like performing modern capital punishment by putting the criminal into a semi truck and driving it off a cliff.
That reminds me of a scene in the movie "Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom", where the bad guy tried to kill Indy by crashing one of his own airplanes while Indy (and his sidekick and girlfriend) was in it. (Good thing they left a life raft in the plane for him to use.)
stevaroni · 7 September 2014
KlausH said:
Helena Constantine said:
https://me.yahoo.com/a/JxVN0eQFqtmgoY7wC1cZM44ET_iAanxHQmLgYgX_Zhn8#57cad said:
Sinners need to be drowned, and wouldn't be good employees afterward.
See?
Glen DAvidson
in Constantine's day they would tie a millstone around a pagan's neck and then throw it into the sea
I have a hard time believing that. People were very poor at the time, in general, and millstones were expensive.
I wasn't going to mention anything, but when I first read Helen's comment the engineer in me immediately thought "Geeze - there must be a bunch of perfectly serviceable rocks around, that seems like a waste of good millstones"
On the other hand, I soon realized that you really only need one millstone, since you could tie a rope through the hole in the middle, you could pull it up after the crowd goes home and use it over and over again.
So... um... problem solved?
I guess I should probably feel bad that I have thoughts like that, it just sort of comes with the territory.
https://me.yahoo.com/a/JxVN0eQFqtmgoY7wC1cZM44ET_iAanxHQmLgYgX_Zhn8#57cad · 7 September 2014
But whoso shall offend one of these little ones which believe in me, it were better for him that a millstone were hanged about his neck, and that he were drowned in the depth of the sea. Matt. 18:6 (KJV)
That, of course, is why such a punishment would be done. And yes, I have indeed seen this text used precisely with respect to people teaching children evolutionary theory.
Two things about practicality: 1. This may have been done particularly with those who "taught" in some manner, particularly children. So not just every "sinner," but using "poetic justice" against evil pagan teachers, or some such thing. 2. Millstones do wear out, thus there may very well be an excess of junked millstones ready for the odd "teacher of evolution," or whatever the equivalent was back then.
Glen Davidson
But whoso shall offend one of these little ones which believe in me, it were better for him that a millstone were hanged about his neck, and that he were drowned in the depth of the sea. Matt. 18:6 (KJV)
That, of course, is why such a punishment would be done. And yes, I have indeed seen this text used precisely with respect to people teaching children evolutionary theory.
Glen Davidson
Unless you're an extreme literalist, the expression may be taken as very common form of hyperbole meaning "this is so bad that this other thing would be better." I wasn't aware that anyone ever took this as a suggestion for an actual punishment (but no, it would not surprise me much).
Finally, the expense of the millstone need not be contradictory if the statement is taken to mean "This is so bad that it would be worth the cost of a perfectly good millstone to get rid of such a person."
stevaroni · 7 September 2014
callahanpb said:
Finally, the expense of the millstone need not be contradictory if the statement is taken to mean "This is so bad that it would be worth the cost of a perfectly good millstone to get rid of such a person."
Well, in fairness, it doesn't say it has to be a particularly big millstone...
...or a new one.
Maybe an old, used millstone might fulfill the technical requirements....
Do millstones ever go bad? On the one hand, they're stones, so they probably last a long time. On the other hand, everything has to wear out, right?
Maybe there's somewhere you get old millstones cheap....
Rolf · 8 September 2014
Stevaroni said:
So⦠um⦠problem solved?
I guess I should probably feel bad that I have thoughts like that, it just sort of comes with the territory.
Pardon the comparison, but you probably would have been a good problem solver for AiG... ;)
eric · 8 September 2014
Henry J said:
One complication in trying to find somebody that was harmed is that somebody who wasn't already in that religion probably wouldn't want to work there; it would probably be only if they were unemployed with no prospects anywhere else, not even a fast food place.
I think the ACLU etc. might have an easy time finding a plaintiff once the park opens. As DS says, just find some local non-YEC teen who is willing to apply for summer work and not sign the religious statement.
Prior to opening, you'd have to see if they put the same sort of requirement on their contstruction workers. If they do, I can't imagine every single construction worker being YEC.
Carl Drews · 8 September 2014
callahanpb said:
I am pretty sure that would not just ask information that they do not to use in hiring, because it opens them up to discrimination lawsuits.
Right. You cannot ask all sorts of questions about religion, race, and age; and then claim that someone wasn't hired because they don't have the right version of Java on their resume. That would be like advertising "Come Sue Us!" in a big sign on the front lawn.
I am not a lawyer either, but I am certainly not the only Panda who has been through "Hire Training" as part of my job. I think someone put up the Equal Opportunity pop-up without thinking what they were doing.
DS · 8 September 2014
Carl Drews said:
callahanpb said:
I am pretty sure that would not just ask information that they do not to use in hiring, because it opens them up to discrimination lawsuits.
Right. You cannot ask all sorts of questions about religion, race, and age; and then claim that someone wasn't hired because they don't have the right version of Java on their resume. That would be like advertising "Come Sue Us!" in a big sign on the front lawn.
I am not a lawyer either, but I am certainly not the only Panda who has been through "Hire Training" as part of my job. I think someone put up the Equal Opportunity pop-up without thinking what they were doing.
I agree. But then again, maybe they are so stupid that they thought it was "confirmative" action instead of affirmative action. You know, confirm that the guy believes the same ridiculous things that you do before hiring him. Or more likely, they thought that affirmative action referred only to discrimination based on race and they thought they could easily hide that aspect of their hiring procedure.
But whoso shall offend one of these little ones which believe in me, it were better for him that a millstone were hanged about his neck, and that he were drowned in the depth of the sea. Matt. 18:6 (KJV)
That, of course, is why such a punishment would be done. And yes, I have indeed seen this text used precisely with respect to people teaching children evolutionary theory.
Two things about practicality: 1. This may have been done particularly with those who "taught" in some manner, particularly children. So not just every "sinner," but using "poetic justice" against evil pagan teachers, or some such thing. 2. Millstones do wear out, thus there may very well be an excess of junked millstones ready for the odd "teacher of evolution," or whatever the equivalent was back then.
Glen Davidson
Millstones do not really wear out. They get reconditioned if the top is too rounded. The top is flattened and new grooves are cut. Millstones are used until the become weak enough to shatter.
Just Bob · 8 September 2014
KlausH said:
Millstones do not really wear out. They get reconditioned if the top is too rounded. The top is flattened and new grooves are cut. Millstones are used until the become weak enough to shatter.
OK, so we have a bunch of used, ready-to-shatter millstones lying around. They ought to do the trick.
But the metaphor used by Jesus is clearly just that: a metaphor. He isn't suggesting that someone should do that, or that anyone ever did. He just says one would be better off having that done than "offend" a "little one".
callahanpb · 8 September 2014
I agree. Figurative language also includes imagery. If you just said "bag of rocks" or "some kind of heavy weight" it would not create a very specific mental image of a millstone, which would have probably been more familiar at the time than today. It is also probably significant that it has a hole, suggesting how the rope could be tied.
j. biggs · 8 September 2014
stevaroni said:
Maybe there's somewhere you get old millstones cheap....
Cragslist?
diogeneslamp0 · 8 September 2014
Just Bob said:
KlausH said
Millstones do not really wear out. They get reconditioned if the top is too rounded. The top is flattened and new grooves are cut. Millstones are used until the become weak enough to shatter.
OK, so we have a bunch of used, ready-to-shatter millstones lying around. They ought to do the trick.
But the metaphor used by Jesus is clearly just that: a metaphor. He isn't suggesting that someone should do that, or that anyone ever did. He just says one would be better off having that done than "offend" a "little one".
I don't care if Jesus intended it as a figure of speech. It's still a stupid thing for anybody to say.
https://me.yahoo.com/a/JxVN0eQFqtmgoY7wC1cZM44ET_iAanxHQmLgYgX_Zhn8#57cad · 8 September 2014
Just Bob said:
KlausH said:
Millstones do not really wear out. They get reconditioned if the top is too rounded. The top is flattened and new grooves are cut. Millstones are used until the become weak enough to shatter.
OK, so we have a bunch of used, ready-to-shatter millstones lying around. They ought to do the trick.
But the metaphor used by Jesus is clearly just that: a metaphor. He isn't suggesting that someone should do that, or that anyone ever did. He just says one would be better off having that done than "offend" a "little one".
I called it "poetic justice," in quotes, since that's not what "poetic justice" typically means.
The point is not that they were literalists in using millstones about the neck, it's obviously that they were making a statement, "making the punishment fit the crime," so to speak. Teach "evil untruths" (I don't know this, it just seems likely targets would be teachers of some sort) and we're going to make an example of you. It's "better for you" anyway--iow, our rules hold now, you'll see.
There were a lot of creative executions in the past, in attempts to increase suffering, or to somehow drive home a point symbolically to the people. Turkish representatives wouldn't take off their turbans (or whatever) in Vlad Dracul's presence, as he required, so he had their headwear nailed to their heads. Not because he was a literalist regarding their beliefs, but because it gave them what was "required," turbans "permanently" nailed to their heads.
Apparently Klaus is troubled by my saying that millstones wear out, when in fact they, you know, wear out--but in a specific manner. Knives don't wear out, they get resharpened, possibly reground, until the blade gets ground down too far to serve their use, but that's not worn out, it's just something else. Uh, wut?
Glen Davidson
Henry J · 8 September 2014
Knives donât wear out, they get resharpened, possibly reground, until the blade gets ground down too far to serve their use, but thatâs not worn out, itâs just something else. Uh, wut?
One obvious punchline to that would be "Entropy?" :D
tedhohio · 10 September 2014
Doesn't posting that you don't discriminate and then asking questions designed to discriminate . . . isn't that lying? Now according to my understanding of kennie's religious beliefs, isn't that a sin? Well it is, but that didn't bother kennie before (Turnabout is fair play!) since lying for Jesus apparently an acceptable tactic.
KlausH said:
Millstones do not really wear out. They get reconditioned if the top is too rounded. The top is flattened and new grooves are cut. Millstones are used until the become weak enough to shatter.
OK, so we have a bunch of used, ready-to-shatter millstones lying around. They ought to do the trick.
But the metaphor used by Jesus is clearly just that: a metaphor. He isn't suggesting that someone should do that, or that anyone ever did. He just says one would be better off having that done than "offend" a "little one".
I called it "poetic justice," in quotes, since that's not what "poetic justice" typically means.
The point is not that they were literalists in using millstones about the neck, it's obviously that they were making a statement, "making the punishment fit the crime," so to speak. Teach "evil untruths" (I don't know this, it just seems likely targets would be teachers of some sort) and we're going to make an example of you. It's "better for you" anyway--iow, our rules hold now, you'll see.
There were a lot of creative executions in the past, in attempts to increase suffering, or to somehow drive home a point symbolically to the people. Turkish representatives wouldn't take off their turbans (or whatever) in Vlad Dracul's presence, as he required, so he had their headwear nailed to their heads. Not because he was a literalist regarding their beliefs, but because it gave them what was "required," turbans "permanently" nailed to their heads.
Apparently Klaus is troubled by my saying that millstones wear out, when in fact they, you know, wear out--but in a specific manner. Knives don't wear out, they get resharpened, possibly reground, until the blade gets ground down too far to serve their use, but that's not worn out, it's just something else. Uh, wut?
Glen Davidson
No, I said they are used until they break. They do not wear out.
https://me.yahoo.com/a/JxVN0eQFqtmgoY7wC1cZM44ET_iAanxHQmLgYgX_Zhn8#57cad · 10 September 2014
KlausH said:
Millstones do not really wear out. They get reconditioned if the top is too rounded. The top is flattened and new grooves are cut. Millstones are used until the become weak enough to shatter.
OK, so we have a bunch of used, ready-to-shatter millstones lying around. They ought to do the trick.
But the metaphor used by Jesus is clearly just that: a metaphor. He isn't suggesting that someone should do that, or that anyone ever did. He just says one would be better off having that done than "offend" a "little one".
I called it "poetic justice," in quotes, since that's not what "poetic justice" typically means.
The point is not that they were literalists in using millstones about the neck, it's obviously that they were making a statement, "making the punishment fit the crime," so to speak. Teach "evil untruths" (I don't know this, it just seems likely targets would be teachers of some sort) and we're going to make an example of you. It's "better for you" anyway--iow, our rules hold now, you'll see.
There were a lot of creative executions in the past, in attempts to increase suffering, or to somehow drive home a point symbolically to the people. Turkish representatives wouldn't take off their turbans (or whatever) in Vlad Dracul's presence, as he required, so he had their headwear nailed to their heads. Not because he was a literalist regarding their beliefs, but because it gave them what was "required," turbans "permanently" nailed to their heads.
Apparently Klaus is troubled by my saying that millstones wear out, when in fact they, you know, wear out--but in a specific manner. Knives don't wear out, they get resharpened, possibly reground, until the blade gets ground down too far to serve their use, but that's not worn out, it's just something else. Uh, wut?
Glen Davidson
No, I said they are used until they break. They do not wear out.
Well, they don't use them until they break, you moron.
Maybe you would. Intelligent people don't let them break and ruin things when they're worn out.
Glen Davidson
Just Bob · 10 September 2014
Worn to the point of imminent breakage I would call 'worn out'. As in "Time to replace it, before it breaks on us and we have a worse problem." Of course you could keep using it until it does break, and then it would be 'worn so much that it broke'. If that doesn't define 'worn out', I don't know what would.
Helena Constantine · 10 September 2014
KlausH said:
Helena Constantine said:
https://me.yahoo.com/a/JxVN0eQFqtmgoY7wC1cZM44ET_iAanxHQmLgYgX_Zhn8#57cad said:
Sinners need to be drowned, and wouldn't be good employees afterward.
See?
Glen DAvidson
You probably think that's a joke, but back in Constantine's day they would tie a millstone around a pagan's neck and then throw it into the sea, on the order of gentle Jesus meek and mild (Matth 18:6).
I have a hard time believing that. People were very poor at the time, in general, and millstones were expensive. It is like performing modern capital punishment by putting the criminal into a semi truck and driving it off a cliff.
The Christian rhetorician Lactantius (he was tutor to one of Constantine's sons before Constantine decided to kill him), boasts about. Though it was mostly limited to people like judges, provincial governors, a d the like.
What happened to the website by the way, denial of service attack by AiG?
Helena Constantine · 10 September 2014
KlausH said:
Helena Constantine said:
https://me.yahoo.com/a/JxVN0eQFqtmgoY7wC1cZM44ET_iAanxHQmLgYgX_Zhn8#57cad said:
Sinners need to be drowned, and wouldn't be good employees afterward.
See?
Glen DAvidson
You probably think that's a joke, but back in Constantine's day they would tie a millstone around a pagan's neck and then throw it into the sea, on the order of gentle Jesus meek and mild (Matth 18:6).
I have a hard time believing that. People were very poor at the time, in general, and millstones were expensive. It is like performing modern capital punishment by putting the criminal into a semi truck and driving it off a cliff.
The Christian rhetorician Lactantius (he was tutor to one of Constantine's sons before Constantine decided to kill him), boasts about. Though it was mostly limited to people like judges, provincial governors, a d the like.
What happened to the website by the way, denial of service attack by AiG?
Pierce R. Butler · 10 September 2014
Helena Constantine said:
The Christian rhetorician Lactantius (he was tutor to one of Constantine's sons before Constantine decided to kill him), boasts about. Though it was mostly limited to people like judges, provincial governors, a d the like.
This seems a bit anachronistic: Christian emperors didn't get serious about persecuting pagans until Theodosius, several decades after Constantine.
All I could find with a quick search is a text attributed to Lactantius decrying Diocletian's anti-Christian purge:
And now Diocletian raged, not only against his own domestics, but indiscriminately against all... Presbyters and other officers of the Church were seized, without evidence by witnesses or confession, condemned, and together with their families led to execution. In burning alive, no distinction of sex or age was regarded; and because of their great multitude, they were not burnt one after another, but a herd of them were encircled with the same fire; and servants, having millstones tied about their necks, were cast into the sea.
fnxtr · 10 September 2014
Really? You guys are fighting over what happens to old millstones? Oooookayyyy....
stevaroni · 10 September 2014
fnxtr said:
Really? You guys are fighting over what happens to old millstones? Oooookayyyy....
I think they gather moss or something like that....
Kevin B · 11 September 2014
stevaroni said:
fnxtr said:
Really? You guys are fighting over what happens to old millstones? Oooookayyyy....
I think they gather moss or something like that....
Are you confusing Cardinal Ximenez with Mick Jagger?
stevaroni · 11 September 2014
Kevin B said:
Are you confusing Cardinal Ximenez with Mick Jagger?
You can't always get what you want when you expect the Spanish Inquisition?
Or....
Please allow me to introduce myself - I'm a man of wealth, and faith.
or... better yet...
Wild horses - couldn't tear me in two.
Oh dear. I fear where this id going to go in the next two days or so.
Matt Young · 12 September 2014
AIG now says
Answers in Genesis is an equal opportunity employer and we do not discriminate on the basis of race, color, sex, age, national origin, disability, veteran status, or any other classification protected by federal, state or local law (to the extent applicable to religious organizations and/or employers). The information below will only be utilized in the compilation of data for affirmative action reporting as required.
They correctly imply that as a religious nonprofit they may discriminate in favor of their coreligionists but not against any other protected class.
Which reminds me that I had intended to make that point clear -- but the Ark Park, being a for-profit corporation, may not so discriminate. Why then do they advertise a position related to the Ark Park as employment with AIG? Do they plan to make all Ark Park workers technically employees of AIG so that they can pass a litmus test? If so, how will that work? There still seems to be something fishy about advertising for CAD Technician Designer, Ark Encounter [my italics], on the AIG website.
stevaroni · 12 September 2014
Matt Young said:
AIG now says...
... The information below will only be utilized in the compilation of data for affirmative action reporting as required.
Um... yeah.
Because I remember whenever I had employees having to fill out those forms with all those check boxes for how many women, Pacific islanders, and Godless heathens I had on staff to fulfill my affirmative action quotas.
FL · 22 September 2014
Ian Derthal said in response to:
AiG is an evangelical Christian thing
Young Earth creationism is not evangelical Christianity.
Biblical young-earth creationism IS totally foundational to evangelical Christianity, indeed to Christianity period.
But having said that, I think YECs would easily agree that "evangelical Christianity" encompasses much more than just YEC.
FL
DS · 22 September 2014
YEC is total crap and most christians know it. Just like most real christians know that AIG lied about affirmative action.
Just Bob · 22 September 2014
I REALLY would like to see a couple of numbers from FL. Just ballpark figures would do.
What percent of all the people who call themselves 'Christian' (regardless of whether FL considers them real Christians or not) are real, 'saved', heaven-bound Christians? That is, people who believe and/or do all the right things to get themselves into Heaven, and don't do or believe any wrong things that will send them to Hell (like not buying the PSA version of salvation, or accepting that Genesis 1 & 2 are probably not historical, or the Flood was not a real event).
How many true, real, bona fide, saved-as-of-right-now, guaranteed-Heaven-if-they-die-this-minute Christians are there?
The bigger the number, then the more people he's trying to include who do NOT believe everything that FL seems to think are required for admission to heaven.
How about it, FL? What number (or percent) of us (all of humanity) are good-enough-for-heaven Christians? What number (or percent) of people who call themselves Christians qualify?
DS · 22 September 2014
That's easy, Floyd is the only true christian, just like Ray is the only true creationist. Byers is probably the only member of his set as well, we just don't know what to call it.
DS · 22 September 2014
http://www.theclergyletterproject.org/
TomS · 22 September 2014
The real toughie is whether Paul the Apostle was a Christian. Did he insist on a literal interpretation of an inerrant Scripture? Did he even know of all of the Bible? Did he care about the age of the Earth?
Just Bob · 22 September 2014
Anything Paul (supposedly) said, FL agrees with 100% -- even if he has to twist the meaning until it squeals so he can agree with it.
Anything Paul DIDN'T say, FL's default assumption is that of course Paul would agree 100% with whatever FL says.
65 Comments
Henry J · 5 September 2014
TomS · 5 September 2014
IANAL, but my understanding is that a religious organization is permitted consider religion in hiring.
Robert Byers · 5 September 2014
This comment has been moved to The Bathroom Wall.
stevaroni · 6 September 2014
stevaroni · 6 September 2014
Dave Luckett · 6 September 2014
AiG is an evangelical Christian thing, as Byers puts it - which is exactly why it shouldn't be receiving any form of State assistance. But since it does receive State assistance in the form of tax breaks, loans, bond issue guarantees and roadworks to facilitate its operations, the very least that can be asked is that it obeys the law and does not discriminate against people not of its own religion.
That, of course, isn't going to happen. AiG will indulge its bigotry overtly if it can get away with it, or covertly if it can't, and, in that case, will lie about it.
Byers, of course, has no idea why his religion shouldn't be supported by the State in the first place, so the rest makes no sense to him at all.
harold · 6 September 2014
TomS · 6 September 2014
There are universities with ties to a particular church. Should they not be permitted to receive federal research grants? Should they not be permitted to have ROTC? (For USAns, these are training programs for college students to become military officers.)
callahanpb · 6 September 2014
Independent of whether religious requirements are allowed in this case, it does seemed to contradict the Equal Opportunity/Affirmative Action boilerplate in the popup (which I just verified for myself). How do they explain that?
I am pretty sure that would not just ask information that they do not to use in hiring, because it opens them up to discrimination lawsuits.
TomS · 6 September 2014
Matt Young · 6 September 2014
What matters, I think, is the distinction between for-profits and religious nonprofits. A religious college, for example, may require all its employees to belong to a certain church. AIG probably is allowed to discriminate on the basis of religion but not the other categories. Ark Encounter, being a for-profit corporation, is not allowed to discriminate on the basis of religion. The position I investigated said CAD Technician Ark Encounter. I wonder whether they plan to launder the Ark Encounter positions by making the employees technically employees of AIG and then "renting" them to Ark Encounter. I doubt that would work for very long.
JimboK · 6 September 2014
https://me.yahoo.com/a/JxVN0eQFqtmgoY7wC1cZM44ET_iAanxHQmLgYgX_Zhn8#57cad · 6 September 2014
Sinners need to be drowned, and wouldn't be good employees afterward.
See?
Glen DAvidson
Mike Elzinga · 6 September 2014
W. H. Heydt · 6 September 2014
Henry J · 6 September 2014
One complication in trying to find somebody that was harmed is that somebody who wasn't already in that religion probably wouldn't want to work there; it would probably be only if they were unemployed with no prospects anywhere else, not even a fast food place.
Henry
harold · 6 September 2014
W. H. Heydt · 6 September 2014
Joel · 6 September 2014
"You donât have to be Catholic to go to, or to teach at, Georgetown."
Nor at Saint Louis University, where I've worked for over 27 years. Yes, there are a lot of Roman Catholics here, and the Jesuit mission and Catholic iconography are much in evidence, but I know plenty of protestants, Jews, Muslims and atheists on the faculty and staff here. None have complained of being marginalized or discriminated against because of their beliefs.
harold · 6 September 2014
Helena Constantine · 6 September 2014
Doc Bill · 7 September 2014
JimboK · 7 September 2014
I was wondering, where did Noah plug in his AutoCAD workstation, printers and copiers???
stevaroni · 7 September 2014
DS · 7 September 2014
Well obviously the thing to do is to find an eminently qualified person and have him (or her) apply for the job and refuse to answer any of the illegal questions, or answering them in a way sure to prejudice the application. It would be best if this could be done truthfully be someone who did not fulfill the obvious criteria implied by the questions. After a few times getting sued and having to defend their illegal hiring practices in court, there wouldn't be enough money left over to build the fake ark as a shrine to the magic flood that supposedly killed so many innocent people..
KlausH · 7 September 2014
Ian Derthal · 7 September 2014
Henry J · 7 September 2014
DS · 7 September 2014
And why does the guy have to be a CAD in the first place? Why is a character flaw a job requirement?
What?
Oh. Never mind.
Henry J · 7 September 2014
stevaroni · 7 September 2014
https://me.yahoo.com/a/JxVN0eQFqtmgoY7wC1cZM44ET_iAanxHQmLgYgX_Zhn8#57cad · 7 September 2014
callahanpb · 7 September 2014
stevaroni · 7 September 2014
Rolf · 8 September 2014
eric · 8 September 2014
Carl Drews · 8 September 2014
DS · 8 September 2014
KlausH · 8 September 2014
Just Bob · 8 September 2014
callahanpb · 8 September 2014
I agree. Figurative language also includes imagery. If you just said "bag of rocks" or "some kind of heavy weight" it would not create a very specific mental image of a millstone, which would have probably been more familiar at the time than today. It is also probably significant that it has a hole, suggesting how the rope could be tied.
j. biggs · 8 September 2014
diogeneslamp0 · 8 September 2014
https://me.yahoo.com/a/JxVN0eQFqtmgoY7wC1cZM44ET_iAanxHQmLgYgX_Zhn8#57cad · 8 September 2014
Henry J · 8 September 2014
tedhohio · 10 September 2014
Doesn't posting that you don't discriminate and then asking questions designed to discriminate . . . isn't that lying? Now according to my understanding of kennie's religious beliefs, isn't that a sin? Well it is, but that didn't bother kennie before (Turnabout is fair play!) since lying for Jesus apparently an acceptable tactic.
KlausH · 10 September 2014
https://me.yahoo.com/a/JxVN0eQFqtmgoY7wC1cZM44ET_iAanxHQmLgYgX_Zhn8#57cad · 10 September 2014
Just Bob · 10 September 2014
Worn to the point of imminent breakage I would call 'worn out'. As in "Time to replace it, before it breaks on us and we have a worse problem." Of course you could keep using it until it does break, and then it would be 'worn so much that it broke'. If that doesn't define 'worn out', I don't know what would.
Helena Constantine · 10 September 2014
Helena Constantine · 10 September 2014
Pierce R. Butler · 10 September 2014
fnxtr · 10 September 2014
Really? You guys are fighting over what happens to old millstones? Oooookayyyy....
stevaroni · 10 September 2014
Kevin B · 11 September 2014
stevaroni · 11 September 2014
Matt Young · 12 September 2014
stevaroni · 12 September 2014
FL · 22 September 2014
DS · 22 September 2014
YEC is total crap and most christians know it. Just like most real christians know that AIG lied about affirmative action.
Just Bob · 22 September 2014
I REALLY would like to see a couple of numbers from FL. Just ballpark figures would do.
What percent of all the people who call themselves 'Christian' (regardless of whether FL considers them real Christians or not) are real, 'saved', heaven-bound Christians? That is, people who believe and/or do all the right things to get themselves into Heaven, and don't do or believe any wrong things that will send them to Hell (like not buying the PSA version of salvation, or accepting that Genesis 1 & 2 are probably not historical, or the Flood was not a real event).
How many true, real, bona fide, saved-as-of-right-now, guaranteed-Heaven-if-they-die-this-minute Christians are there?
The bigger the number, then the more people he's trying to include who do NOT believe everything that FL seems to think are required for admission to heaven.
How about it, FL? What number (or percent) of us (all of humanity) are good-enough-for-heaven Christians? What number (or percent) of people who call themselves Christians qualify?
DS · 22 September 2014
That's easy, Floyd is the only true christian, just like Ray is the only true creationist. Byers is probably the only member of his set as well, we just don't know what to call it.
DS · 22 September 2014
http://www.theclergyletterproject.org/
TomS · 22 September 2014
The real toughie is whether Paul the Apostle was a Christian. Did he insist on a literal interpretation of an inerrant Scripture? Did he even know of all of the Bible? Did he care about the age of the Earth?
Just Bob · 22 September 2014
Anything Paul (supposedly) said, FL agrees with 100% -- even if he has to twist the meaning until it squeals so he can agree with it.
Anything Paul DIDN'T say, FL's default assumption is that of course Paul would agree 100% with whatever FL says.