The Creationists Who Own The Ark Encounter Sold It Back To Themselves. For $10. To Avoid Taxes.

Submitted by: oobaka 3 months ago in News & Politics


Christians are trying to get out of paying their taxes again...

An excerpt from The Lexington-Herald: On June 29, Williamstown city attorney Jeffrey Shipp sent a letter to the biblical amusement park Ark Encounter, rejecting its request to be exempted from a new safety tax because its is a religious organization.

Shipp said it was clear that Ark Encounter is a for-profit entity, which is how it has been listed with the Kentucky secretary of state’s office since 2011.

But the day before, Ark Encounter LLC sold its main parcel of land — the one with the large-scale Noah’s Ark — for $10 to its nonprofit affiliate, Crosswater Canyon. Although the property is worth $48 million according to the Grant County property valuation administrator, the deed says its value is only $18.5 million.

Aren't those religious folk wonderful? Also, they want the gay rainbow back...

Ken Ham, the guy who thought up and built the Ark Experience is bathing his big boat in multi-colored lights to "take back the rainbow" because he's not happy that the rainbow has an association with the gays. 

"The Ark is lit permanently at night with a rainbow to remind the world that God owns it and He decreed it's a sign of His covenant with man after the Flood — Christians need to take back the rainbow as we do at the Ark Encounter," Ham said in a Facebook post.

Additional reporting: fancylad
There are 151 comments:
Female 107
omfg.

I give no shits about their religious ideas. Let em have at it, but.... their social behavior is about as retarded as people think i am, before i actually say intelligent things and offend them.
0
Reply
Male 3,410
Ham.
0
Reply
Male 941
rumham Bacon.
0
Reply
Male 9,769
There are an estimated 6.5 million distinct species of life on Earth.

If you believe two of each of them lived for 40 days on a boat that some guy and his family built then I have some ocean-front property in southern Arizona to sell you.

There are 3 species of elephant (was the wooly mammoth on the ark too?) The six elephants, JUST the six elephants would need around 100,000 pounds of food for the trip.

The level of ignorance that it must take to ignore that much logic is astounding to me.
-1
Reply
Male 941
holygod Ken Ham has a book that explains a lot of this.  Whether its right or accurate of course is up for debate.  I think its worth a read just because it at least explains where he is coming from, and whether or not you agree with him after that is entirely up to you.  I read it because I am a skeptic of many things, and I like to see the whole of the different angles on matters.  I know you'll probably dismiss this suggestion as a waste of time, and that's fine, of course.  I found it interesting.  I haven't taken any time to try to disprove any of his arguments, simply because I think its just going to come down to people arguing both sides of it.  But I also don't just accept everything he says either.

One thing I did find interesting which I had never really thought of before, was that if you take elephants for example, since you mentioned them, IF the story were true, Noah would not have taken 6 fully grown elephants, but the youth elephants.  Much smaller bodies, much less food and waste.  I'm not saying that its true, but just an angle I had never thought of.  

The book is called The Lie.  I'm not suggesting you read it to change your mind on the subject--especially considering that I myself am unconvinced--more just to maybe see  beyond the assumptions that we have of the religious fanatics.  Because whether we agree with them or not, there are scientists that believe there is solid evidence contrary to the popularly accepted ideas.
0
Reply
Male 9,769
cjeffblanchr I'm all for reading about the other side. I'm also all for any explanation that isn't simply "mysterious ways". A baby elephant still eats around 200 pounds of food a day. So that's STILL 50,000 pounds. However, it does make it better I guess.

1. How does he explain the vast number of species?
2. How does he explain how animals from other continents were able to get to the ark?
3. How does he explain all the plant life that would have needed to be on the ark and how it would have needed sunlight?
4. How does he explain how different animals that require very different temperatures / humidity levels / climates to survive coexisting on a boat?
5. How does he explain where a billion cubic miles of water came from in 40 days and then where it went?

I don't doubt that there may have been a big boat and that people might have gathered all the animals in the area and put them on the boat. There might have even been a flood of the nearby river. Pass that story around like a game of telephone for 2,000 years and we get this. I've heard scientists say that is evidence of THAT. Are you telling me there are scientists who believe the literal story of the ark? The entire world flooding and two of every animal on a boat? WHO?
-1
Reply
Male 941
holygod I don't have the book right now, but I'll try to answer those questions as best as I can recall.  Just remember, I'm not really defending these claims, just relaying them to you from what I recall.  And again, I may not even get all of the details on his explanations dead on, but generally, I think I'm pretty close.

1:  There were not nearly as many species of animals.  Biblically there are "kinds" rather than species, which is in the text.  It was two of every kind.  This means that there wouldn't have had to have been two lions, two tigers, two panthers, two jaguars, etc.  There were probably two large cats, male and female, from which all large cats of today branched off.  This would be much like all the dog breeds we have today that came from wolfs.  Thus was the same with many animals.  So, if I recall correctly, and I might be off a bit on the numbers, that there were something like 16,000 "kinds" that had to be on the ark, rather than the millions of species we have today.  This idea isn't entirely far off from evolution, except that he does not believe that one kind can change into another kind.

2:  There were no vast oceans in the days before the flood.  All the land masses were together.  

3:  All I recall in regard to plants was him saying the because there was room on the ark for the number of kinds that would have been necessary, there would have been more than enough room for all the food needed.  I think he also suggested the possibility that animals could have been put into a kind of supernatural stasis, but this was just speculation as he admits.  Kind of a hibernation where they would not have been in need of food or evacuation.

4:  I don't recall him addressing this, but if he did, it was probably along the same lines of supernatural intervention.

5:  I'm having trouble remembering his view on this because I've heard numerous idea from others who explained this.  I'm guessing though that it was along the line of the fountains of the deep that were unleashed, so the water was below the surface of the earth, and when the flood waters receded, they went back.

Now we run into a problem though, because there are in fact Christian scientists who believe in a literal flood.  I'll list there names in a minute.  But see, I've seen where non-Christian scientists dismiss them as unreliable or uncreditable for whatever reason.  But usually that's by those who don't believe it.  So then, if they are real scientists with degrees, who are we to believe?  Of course people are generally going to take the views of those who agree with them, and maybe dismiss the others as idiots, but I don't really think that's reasonable.  If we're going to take the words of once scientist as truth because they have all the letters after their names, its not reasonable to dismiss others who also have their degrees just because we disagree with them.

So, take it for what you will, but there are those who are believers.  Most of those I list below I believe are associated with "Answers in Genesis", the ICR and/or Ken Ham.  Just to say beforehand, I have not done any research into any of them, so I cannot validate any of their credentials.  My intention in reading anything by them has been to keep my mind open to new ideas.  

Dr. Jason Lisle--Astrophysicist
Dr. Andrew Fabich--Microbiologist
Dr. Danny R. Faulkner--Physicist and Astronomer
Dr. Gary Parker--Biologist

A quick google search should turn up some info on them.


0
Reply
Male 554
holygod His ark was obviously more of a Sci Fi Ark, and he had all of his critters in zygote form, which he then grew and released following the flood.  :P
0
Reply
Male 5,475
God owns the rainbow.
0
Reply
Male 9,769
monkwarrior God owns gay people too. We are all god's children.
1
Reply
Male 5,475
holygod exactly, you should get to know Him.
1
Reply
Male 3,410
monkwarrior i thought he only talked to you and you were his earthly vessel
0
Reply
Male 5,475
rumham sounds like your vortex twisted your reasoning.
0
Reply
Male 40,772
If this is illegal? They should be charged.
If not? Then they are indeed being attacked for their religion. Simple really.
A follow-up on this would be very interesting!

FYI: Muslims believe in the literal Noah story too... but they also believe in Evolution so there's that eh? :-)
-1
Reply
Male 9,769
5cats That goes back to what I've tried to explain to you. Muslims, Jews, and Christians all believe in the Old Testament. Same book. Same stories. Same god.
-1
Reply
Male 15,271
Matthew 22:21 Jesus said "Render into Caesar the things that are Caesar's; except the church and people masquerading as the church. They can do as they please."
-1
Reply
Male 9,769
There are an estimated 1,500,000+ species of beetles. 
If they are, on average 2.5in^2, and you took 2 of every one and set them end to end, side to side like tile they would cover an entire football field.
Oh ya, the ark totally happened.
-1
Reply
Male 368
holygod I think this is the same Ark exhibit that has dinosaurs in it too.  DINOSAURS!  In an ark 40 cubits by 40 cubits with two each of all the other animals on earth.  No running water, no sanitary waste disposal system.  Can you imagine the smell?  I'll bet that after three days, the entire thing would've exploded if anyone tried to light up a cigarette... excuse me... a pipe.  Cigarettes weren't invented back then.  
1
Reply
Male 941
skeeter01 Don't forget that half the animals were female, and we all know that girls don't fart, so that cuts it in half right there. :)
1
Reply
Male 368
cjeffblanchr very true... though speaking for myself, I more than make up for my wife's deficit... and probably my daughter's too.  
0
Reply
Male 5,475
holygod fallacies won't ever make you wise.
-1
Reply
Male 9,769
monkwarrior Those aren't fallacies. Those are facts.
0
Reply
Male 5,475
holygod again, your fallacies won't ever make you wise.  Your fallacies are appeal to ignorance, and personal incredulity.
0
Reply
Male 9,769
monkwarrior Again, not fallacies. Facts. I understand that you have to ignore facts for your belief system to remain intact. However, you don't get to call facts "fallacies". Sorry.
-1
Reply
Male 3,447
holygod goddammit stop it!!!  I'm drunk already with the shots...
0
Reply
Male 5,475
holygod again, "Oh ya, the ark totally happened" = fallacies, not facts.  Your fallacies are appeal to ignorance, appeal to ridicule, and personal incredulity. 
0
Reply
Male 9,769
monkwarrior Oh I agree. That IS a fallacy. Clearly it didn't happen. I assumed everyone would get my sarcasm.
-1
Reply
Male 5,475
holygod more fallacies?  again, you won't become wise with them.
0
Reply
Male 9,769
monkwarrior I was agreeing with you. You said my statement that the ark happened was a fallacy. I agree. It is.
0
Reply
Male 5,475
holygod Might fool yourself, not being wise, but you won't fool others who are. Your appeal to ignorance is that your statement was an appeal to ridicule.
0
Reply
Male 9,769
monkwarrior "Wise" is believing a 4,000 year old creation myth passed down from generation to generation by illiterate nomads with no basis in reality whatsoever? You and I have a VERY different definition of what "wise" is. The hindus believed the Earth was on the back of a giant turtle. By your definition that makes them "wise".
0
Reply
Male 5,475
holygod Wise is not relying on fallacies, as you continually do on the topic of faiths or religion.  Also as you continue to do here when you are caught red handed and exposed.
-2
Reply
Male 9,769
monkwarrior LOL. I'm talking about biology, math, and physics. Not faith or religion. It is impossible for the number of plants and animals on Earth to live on a boat. If you think its possible, that's great.
-1
Reply
Male 5,475
holygod So it's impossible because of the fallacies you depend on?  Again, this is why fallacies won't make you wise.
1
Reply
Male 9,769
monkwarrior Fallacies I depend on? Like volume equations? Or simple biology? You've said "fallacy" like 20 times without pointing out what is a fallacy in your opinion or why it is. If you think just repeating "fallacy" is some sort of counter to an argument then that is a fallacy.
0
Reply
Male 5,475
holygod Appeal to ignorance.  Appeal to ridicule.  Ad-homimen.  Personal incredulity.  You simply don't want to correct your errors in logic, which continues to show and prove my point that your fallacies won't make you wise.  Continue if you want, but your engines are out again dude.  Crash and burn version umpteen?
0
Reply
Male 9,769
monkwarrior OK. You win. I'm not debating all night with someone so completely delusional. Go ahead and believe in a ridiculous fairy tale absurd enough for my 8 year old to call bullshit on. Also believe repeating phrase you clearly don't understand makes you appear smart and believe that you are winning or have ever won a debate with me. Believe whatever you want.
0
Reply
Male 5,475
holygod Yes, insult that plane that taxed your engines causing you to crash and burn.  Insult that plane that's still flying with all your might.  Ignore the fact that because you thought you could buzz it and then not blow your engines out.  That bad plane, it's all that bad planes fault, call it bad names, take a nap and then feel better when you wake up.  Heres some cupcakes, feel better soon

1
Reply
Male 3,447
monkwarrior SHOTS!!!

0
Reply
Male 5,475
1
Reply
Male 3,447
monkwarrior everyday until "fallacies" today...
0
Reply
Male 5,475
kalron27 still letting others influence your life, hey?
1
Reply
Male 3,447
monkwarrior ask your guy jesus...
0
Reply
Male 5,475
kalron27 yes He influences people's lives in a a good way, but obviously i meant in a negative way.  "i overcame challenges because of his words" is a huge difference from "i can't cope with the text of others so i drink".
1
Reply
Male 3,447
monkwarrior thanks for judging again...and being antisocial.  It's fun times to be jovial and socialize.  Sometimes drinking is part of that.  Hence why Yeshua turned water into wine.

How about you and I do a shot to Yeshua and his social achievements?  I'm being serious.
0
Reply
Male 5,475
kalron27 The point was, if what someone has to say makes you drink, that's your problem, not theirs.
1
Reply
Male 9,769
monkwarrior You have an obvious problem taking things literally.
0
Reply
Male 5,475
holygod maybe you ought to focus on your own problem of fallacies?
1
Reply
Male 9,769
monkwarrior Perception. Unless you have someway of proving what i say is a fallacy than its just, like, your opinion man.
1
Reply
Male 3,447
monkwarrior Sometimes I drink to health, sometimes I drink to death, sometimes I drink to something that makes me laugh, sometimes I offer drinks as a peace offering...

...you are oblivious to other cultures completely...including your own and what Yeshua would drink to.

Water into Wine for Celebration...bitches...

0
Reply
Male 5,475
kalron27 still your loss if someone's text makes you drink.  It's the sign of a weak mind.
1
Reply
Male 9,769
monkwarrior A sign of a weak mind is believing what you are told to believe and abandoning any critical thought process.
0
Reply
Male 3,447
monkwarrior oh you misunderstand...

...I am not drinking because of you, I am drinking in spite of you.

I'll take the definition of "bitter ill will" because I am drinking some strong IPA tonight...and enjoying it despite your suggested disdain toward me.
0
Reply
Male 5,475
kalron27 The disdain you perceive is simply what you are projecting.  I'm a reflector, so if you don't want to see it don't use it. Its quite simple.
0
Reply
Male 3,447
monkwarrior Reflection is not what your "jesus" taught.  Rather deflection in turning the other cheek...something you need to practice.
0
Reply
Male 5,475
kalron27 Preaching something you don't live by?  In an age like today where people say foolish things like you have been saying here, requires the ability to reflect the foolishness in a way so that the sender sees their own error.  I'm quite able to take correction, however it appears you are not.  Grasp as much as you like, but we both know you have no chance here.
-1
Reply
Male 3,447
monkwarrior gotta have that last comment, and make them digs deep.  

Again, great job in judging me...you have no concept of what I "live by".
1
Reply
Male 3,410
kalron27 yes he must be the final say on anything. and he is never wrong. and if he is he uses circular bs talk to make it seem like he is right. 
1
Reply
Male 5,475
rumham trolls of feather flock together
0
Reply
Male 5,475
kalron27 Your words are quite telling.
0
Reply
Male 3,410
1
Reply
Male 8,560
holygod But, if you take an average size of 2.5"l x 1"w x 0.5"t, you can fit over 1,500,000 species in a cube 10.3 feet on a side.

Not saying that's what happened, just working out the math.
0
Reply
Male 9,769
megrendel While your math is correct, you are forgetting there is two of each one.

2.5"x1"x.5"x1,500,000x2=3,750,000in^3

A cube 13 feet on each side

I'm sure every single one of those beetles would have lived in a giant cube with nowhere to move for 40 days. What did they eat exactly?

-1
Reply
Male 3,447
holygod SCIENCE!
0
Reply
Male 682
holygod They turn cannibalistic
1
Reply
Male 8,560
holygod Damn, it's always the simple mistake that gets me.

(Luckily I had a teacher that would give you partial points if you got the process right but made simple error.)
2
Reply
Male 3,447
megrendel I agree...I make math mistakes all of the time...even in my elder years...
0
Reply
Male 9,769
megrendel My favorite teacher ever was my geometry teacher in 9th grade. I complained once that homework when you know how to do it was just busy work. She made a deal with me that I didn't have to do any homework and if I got an A on the chapter test she would give me an A for the homework, but if I got less than an A I had to go back and do all the homework for that chapter over the weekend. Best teacher ever.
1
Reply
Male 8,560
There's a real simple question: Is it legal?
  • If it is, then there's nothing you can do except try to change the law. (or are you going to persecute someone for foll
  • If it isn't, then you can prosecute. 
1
Reply
Male 3,447
megrendel this is also true...
0
Reply
Male 1,416
So, religious AND good businessmen? God would approve!
1
Reply
Male 1,739
Thanks for the fantastic job at editing my post, Fancy.
0
Reply
Male 40,772
oobaka Fancy often does an excellent job of it! Mostly... lolz!
Well, that's pretty good ya? He takes the time and effort to help us look better.
-1
Reply
Male 20,917
oobaka No prob, I just take the diamonds you guys give me and polish 'em -- it's a facinating story on how fucking corrupt organized religion is. Church and faith has so much potential for people who believe in it, but it gets ruined when money gets involved. 
0
Reply
Male 341
fancylad is the best! 
1
Reply
Male 554
We should simplify things and just tax them all like corporations.  Just ask the faithful, all the religions except for theirs is wrong.   :P
1
Reply
Male 5,475
muert sure, tax them and give religions more representation in the government for the taxes they pay.  
1
Reply
Male 554
monkwarrior They already have sufficient representation through their congregations.  Besides, this would simplify the tax code.   >:D
0
Reply
Male 5,475
0
Reply
Male 3,447
monkwarrior NOPE...separation of church and state...

Besides, they already hold key lobby points in government...and don't pay taxes...skirting the law from both ends.

Ever heard of a southern split roast?
0
Reply
Male 5,475
kalron27 wrong.  As soon as the government decides to tax, the separation of church and state will end, and it will signify that they agree that the church and state are together.  Then due to the taxes paid by religious organizations, they will hold even greater sway over the government laws than they do now.
0
Reply
Male 3,447
monkwarrior stick to your own country.  The "church" is already skirting the law in the US.  Taxing them is only equal and right.  Allowing further influence within government is bullshit.
0
Reply
Male 5,475
kalron27 it'll happen if you want to tax them and in essence end the 'separation of church and state'.  here's just one article on the topic
0
Reply
Male 3,447
monkwarrior you have no clue what you are talking about because you are bias toward the church...
0
Reply
Male 5,475
kalron27 actually you have no clue what you're talking about as the article shows.

Tax churches, go on.  You'll bind church and state as one entity.  You won't like it one bit then, and i'll be laughing the whole time at the shortsightedness of it.
0
Reply
Male 3,447
monkwarrior You like being the last comment don't you...go on...comment again...you can have it and feel superior...
0
Reply
Male 5,475
kalron27 not at all, i am quite content not being the last comment, but if you want to make ridiculous claims and try to make them stick i'll continue to point them out.  It only hurts you.  You should learn to recognize when an argument is not worth your time or effort.  People like me will simply drain you, as they can to the depths of hell and back, so arguments like yours are like shooting fish in a barrel.
0
Reply
Male 9,769
monkwarrior 
"i am quite content not being the last comment"
*makes the last comment*

1
Reply
Male 5,475
holygod and your ad-hominem helps you.. how?
0
Reply
Male 4,950
monkwarrior Pardon the interruption, but I have a basic question, Monk. Do you believe the story of Noah's ark is historical fact?
0
Reply
Male 5,475
squrlz4ever what i believe is irrelevant to the discussion of a) taxation of churches , b)holygod 's fallacies.  What do you think the answer to your interruption will achieve but c) expose your own fallacies (yes i can see your baiting).
0
Reply
Male 4,950
monkwarrior It was a simple question asked for no other reason than I was wondering what you believe. *sigh*
0
Reply
Male 5,475
squrlz4ever Yet still a question asked at an inappropriate section of a thread.
0
Reply
Male 4,950
monkwarrior Well, my apologies. What section would be more appropriate? Shall I take a number? Or do you have a press agent I should be in contact with here?
0
Reply
Male 9,769
squrlz4ever don't waste your time trying to have a logical discussion with him. It's clearly impossible. 

Yes, he believes the bible literally verbatim, including noah''s ark.
0
Reply
Male 4,950
holygod It's kind of a curious situation, isn't it? I mean, if a believer were to hold to his beliefs and argue from the standpoint of faith, that works. But these conversations with Monk always seems to get bogged down in ad-hominem this and fallacy that. Ultimately, very little exchanging of ideas or information takes place.
0
Reply
Male 9,769
squrlz4ever Ya. He's totally full of shit. I think he actually thinks he's proving points too. Its pretty nuts.

Dunning-Kruger effect incarnate. 
0
Reply
Male 5,475
squrlz4ever obviously not when it is irrelevant to this sub-discussion of a) taxation of churches and b) holygod 's fallacies
0
Reply
Male 4,950
monkwarrior Soooo... I guess this means you're not answering. Well, thanks anyway.
0
Reply
Male 5,475
squrlz4ever maybe if you try again at an appropriate spot.
0
Reply
Male 9,769
monkwarrior My comment was directed at your words and not you in any way. The fact that you just said that proves quite clearly that you don't even know what "ad-hominem" means.
1
Reply
Male 5,475
holygod clearly you don't know what it is, attacking my character attempting to discredit the point that was made.  Still not seeing how fallacies don't make you wise?
-1
Reply
Male 9,769
monkwarrior I in no way attacked your character. You said you didn't need to do something WHILE doing it. It's just amusing. I pointed out your actions but said nothing about your character. 
Copying and pasting the definition of things doesn't do much for you when you so clearly don't understand them.

I'm guessing someone said "logical fallacy" to you once in a debate and you thought that made them sound really smart so you looked up what they were and bookmarked the page. Now when you don't have anything to counter with in a debate, which is pretty much always, you just copy and paste one of them in. 

You think it makes you sound smart or that it wins the argument for you. In reality it has just turned you into a running joke for the rest of us.

You think Noah's ark happened literally. You think we have never been to the moon. You think the Earth might be flat. Please don't think anyone on here thinks you are smart. That is a huge fallacy.
0
Reply
Male 5,475
holygod of course you didn't pull an ad-hominem in your own eyes, even though in reality you did.  Here's some more cupcakes  feel better soon.
0
Reply
Male 4,950
monkwarrior Oooooh... cupcakes!  @[email protected]
1
Reply
Male 3,410
squrlz4ever do you see why i coined the term derp vortex in regards to any conversation with monkwarrior. hes created 2 derp vortexes in one post. you have to walk away and let him "win" or as he says you have to "run away" from his amazing intelligence
1
Reply
Male 4,950
rumham I definitely see why you coined the term. It aptly describes what happens whenever anyone tries to discuss something with him.
0
Reply
Male 3,410
squrlz4ever how many times can the guy use the word fallacy or fallacies. its beyond hilarious. holy god had it right this guy heard a term and was blown away by it. now hes uses it.. we need a race between monk and 5cats.. monk says fallacy 5cats says fuck cunt/ WHO will win in the race for amazing conversation skillz
0
Reply
Male 4,950
rumham *chortle* Battle of the Titans!

My two cents on the Monk thing. He's trying to do the impossible--namely, to prove by evidence a logical reason for faith. That can't be done. Period. I've been fortunate to take classes taught by two Anglican priests, both with doctorates, one from Princeton. Both of them would scoff at the idea of logically proving religious faith. It misses the whole point, for cryin' out loud. Faith is a calling, a response to the Holy Spirit (as believers would have it). It's not some ... business decision that you work out on a spreadsheet somehow. "Well, X is the evidence needed to prove Y, which therefore necessitates the existence of Z, and therefore I cannot escape the conclusion that I must be a Christian. Logic demands it!"

Garbage.

Because he doesn't seem to grasp that faith is... well, a matter of faith, he enters into these logical debates, which are unwinnable. So to get around the inevitable defeat (in a contest he should never have entered), he skews the contest by calling out "ad-hominem attack!" and "logical fallacy!" non-stop. Or by posting cupcake GIFs.

I mean, I like cupcakes as much as anyone, but the whole thing is a little ridiculous.
0
Reply
Male 3,410
squrlz4ever the fallacy drinking game. and the derp vortex. if i was monk i would be happy and patent those two ideas to his bible study on wednesday night. plus i read this post while having spiced rum. which is my weakness.
0
Reply
Male 4,950
rumham LOL. Are you sailing with Capt. Morgan tonight?

Hey, I have a pirate joke. 

Q: How much did the pirate pay to get his ears pierced?
A: A buccaneer.
0
Reply
Male 3,410
squrlz4ever calico jack
0
Reply
Male 4,950
rumham Arrrr, matey! And with that, I'm off to get a G&T nightcap and hit the hay. Have a good one!

1
Reply
Male 3,410
0
Reply
Male 3,410
squrlz4ever i've met many intellectual christians. but he seems to be so shallow and brittle  and touchy. and yeah he wants the last word as if thats a win. i dont' get it but.
blame canada?
0
Reply
Male 4,950
rumham It was only recently that I learned he was Canadian. Every time I asked him, he refused to tell me. Just like in this thread he refused to tell me if he takes the story of Noah's Ark literally. ~shrug~ I can't blame Canada. Some of my favorite IABers are from up there: Punko and NormalFreak2, to name a couple.
0
Reply
Male 3,410
squrlz4ever yeh. i wasnt casting shade at canada. just saying all that clean air breeds the occasional weirdo. kinda like in america all the horseshit that we duck and avoid everyday, some people get hit by it. but we are all people. and in person im sure 5cats wouldnt call us cunts or tell me to kill myself. so why can't we be who we are. regradless of the forum. i've always tried to do such. and it comes off as stupid and silly sometimes but yeah who cares. life is weird and stupid and silly
0
Reply
Male 1,871
OK, serious comment here on the real issue.  Tax evasion is not cool.  

If the government allows this sale to go through, I'm selling the house to my kid for a dollar and filing bankruptcy on the mortgage.

Is this one of those times where we just say "Don't hate the playa, hate the game" or will some of us get off our asses and force the government to fix the rules?

And sorry my homosexual friends, the rainbow had meaning before you started using it.  Now can we all just get along for a while?

-1
Reply
Male 3,410
insaneai ok serious comment. creamed corn or frozen corn.
0
Reply
Male 1,871
rumham Depends on the meal.  I like creamed corn with salisbury steak but usually go for frozen or fresh corn with everything else.

Although if Jimmy cracks it, I don't care.
0
Reply
451
And sorry my homosexual friends, the rainbow had meaning before you started using it.  Now can we all just get along for a while?

insaneai Just like that rainbow in the pic, you're projecting.
0
Reply
Male 3,410
barry9a are you holding up a mirror 
0
Reply
Male 1,871
barry9a Put some effort in to it next time.
-1
Reply
Male 3,492
insaneai I have never seen a homosexual say that non-gay people should not wear rainbow colored items.

If you want to wear a rainbow shirt, go for it.
1
Reply
Male 1,871
daegog as a follow up on the rainbow shirt bit. I've recently added a lavender shirt to my rotation.  My wife bought it for me so I wore it out of respect, eventually I learned to like it.  I refuse to wear pink before I go gray.
0
Reply
Male 4,950
insaneai Serious question, InsaneAI. Wasn't your gender on here listed as Female a few days ago? What's going on? I had just gotten used to hearing your voice as a woman's, and now you're back to being a man. Too confuzzling!
0
Reply
Male 1,871
squrlz4ever I was also 70+ woman.  I was actually so frustrated that I was trying to delete my account and walk away from the site.  I'm slowly fixing details.  
0
Reply
Male 1,871
daegog I've never told anyone they can't wear rainbow colored items so I'm kinda lost.  If I ever choose to wear a rainbow shirt and someone calls me out for it, I'll point them to this thread as proof of having permission.
0
Reply
Male 3,684
insaneai the swastika had a different meaning before the nazis adopted it.
1
Reply
Male 40,772
robthelurker It is still in use around the world, you should think a little bit before saying foolish things...
Context: a very useful word eh?
-2
Reply
Male 1,871
robthelurker It is a symbol of power in a specific Indian culture,  please forgive me for not looking up the exact sect.  I was aware that this symbol was bastardized by the Nazi party.
-1
Reply
Male 7,942
Remember Jesus's saying Give/Render unto Ceaser nothing, and Give/Render unto God what is God's....Oh here we go with ignore the parts of the Bible that you don't like or agree with. 


0
Reply
Male 140
normalfreak2 True, money is a made up construct that people put their faith in, like a magic talisman. 
0
Reply
Male 5,027
Ark Encounter would be a good name for a gay bar. Maybe he can open that too when he is caught with a rent boy.
2
Reply
Male 860
markust123 especially if you read what happened to Noah after the flood ended.
0
Reply
Male 9,769
markust123 You should open one right next door and call it "Mark Encounter" and project the exact same rainbow lights on it at night. I'm not gay, but I would DEFINITELY come have a drink there.
-1
Reply
Male 20,917
markust123 I was thinking we're going to find out he's into guys, very soon. The adamant Christians always have skeletons in their closet.
0
Reply
Male 216
This is fucking tax evasion.
1
Reply
Male 140
prichards114  You do know that the "federal" reserve is a private business that creates money from nothing, at interest, and that it amounts to a ponzi scheme, right?
0
Reply
Male 7,942
prichards114 No this is called being an oppressed Christian in the United States of America!
0
Reply
Male 1,871
Fuck those crazy moslems.  Always trying to blow shit up, starting wars and throwing faggots off of buildings.

-does that seem a bit hateful?  Maybe a bit off the deep end?  Is it acceptable to you, my fellow I-A-B commenters?  I would think not.  

Now read the introduction again.  If you don't get the point, please don't bother responding.
-2
Reply
Male 860
insaneai I agree with you.  It shouldn't focus on the Christian aspect, it should focus on the organized religion bit.  The faith isn't the problem, its the organization that runs it.

I'd add a notation to which bat-shit crazy fundamentalist version of Christianity these guys are part of, though.

Sadly, religious organizations were given charitable status because were able to establish that they distributed the vast majority of what they collected.  Sadly, many charities don't exceed 25% of the donations get distributed as 75% gets swallowed up in operating costs, salaries, insurance, property, and transfers to national headquarters.

Established organized religions have been incredibly rich land holders, and wield incredible political power. 

Religious and charitable organizations should not be able to lobby government, pass any funds to political causes, or politicians EVER.

If they cannot maintain their silent, community support role, then from then on they are taxed as any other corporation, including a review of the value of all assets, including buildings and land.  I'd even throw in the hammer that using terms like "church of" "temple" "mosque" etc., be legally protected to those organizations that maintain their charitable status.  If your leaders can't stay out of politics, then they lose their ability to call themselves any of the reserved religious names.  Can you imagine if the Catholic Church lost the ability to use the term "Church" in any way?  That'd keep them out of politics.
0
Reply
Male 40,772
punko 25% is WAY better than the Clinton Foundation's output to charities...
-1
Reply
Male 9,769
5cats I don't know if you don't get this or if you just like repeating misinformation. The Clinton Foundation did not donate much money to other charities because it used the money to actually do charitable work itself.

If you actually care about reality read this: http://www.factcheck.org/2015/06/where-does-clinton-foundation-money-go/

If you'd rather continue to spread lies and misinformation that fits your skewed world view then go ahead and do that.
0
Reply
Male 1,739
holygod For fuck sake. Don't confuse 5cats with facts.
0
Reply
Male 40,772
insaneai One rule for liberals, another for everyone else...
-2
Reply
Male 860
5cats I don't understand your position here.
1
Reply
Male 40,772
punko Liberals believe it is A-OK to say various hateful and damaging things about ALL Christians, in vast generalities and blanket statements. (see: this post and dozens like it)

Yet they object to others rightfully pointing out that most terrorism in the world is carried out by Muslims (usually against fellow Muslims btw) because they (wrongly) claim this harms innocent Muslims (somehow).

One rule for Liberals to follow, a separate rule for everyone else. The DNC Motto. 
Or: Do as I say, not as I do. The mantra of liberalism.
-2
Reply
Male 3,492
One of the greatest monuments to absurdity in the modern age. BTW, are they claiming that thing is actually seaworthy?
1
Reply
Male 941
daegog They do not claim so.  They make sure to point out that it was not designed to be an exact replica, but just to show the size and scope of it.
0
Reply