As I have mentioned, FFRF fights religious intrusion in our public schools. Some are big cases, some are smaller like this one recently that upset Ken Ham.
Seems to me the old Hambone has bigger issues on his plate, given the steadily declining attendance at his Ark Encounters boondoggle. 
1 Like
FFRF wins another one. It was small but worth it as it got Ken Ham annoyed.
I wonder what Ken Ham would be saying if the the wooden sign contained a Hindu or Moslem prayer.
Meanwhile, Ham does understand his donor base. Outrage is fundamental to his revenue stream. Most will not pause to consider that religious freedom involves applying the Constitutional rules equally to all religions (and no-religions.) I think Ham is probably delighted when he comes across news stories like the Maryland cafeteria sign incident.
If I were a young student in a Detroit neighborhood with large populations of Muslim families (and a school board with many Muslims), would it be appropriate to find a wooden sign in my school cafeteria which says, “There is no god but God and Mohammed is the rasul of God.”? And would the equal time concept mean that the wall would soon be covered by signs with messages like “Jesus is Lord” and “Om Shrim Maha Lakshmlyei Swaha.” (The latter is a Hindu mantra asking the Goddess of Wealth & Prosperity for abundance.) And who on the government payroll would determine which signs were sufficiently “edifying” and not inharmonious?
Meanwhile, I’m tired of Ham’s silly claim that evolutionary biology is a “religion.” Religion involves transcendence, which by definition is not something one expects to find in a science textbook.
I suppose Ham considers the sign incident an example of “persecution.” I wonder if Ham has ever experienced any actual religious persecution. (I think Ham longs for “the good old days” when people who thought like him had sufficient political power that they could simply impose their religious messages on public spaces with total disregard for Constitutional rights.)
2 Likes
Notice this bizarre complaint in Ham’s article:
What will come next? Banning the “old English style lettering”? Yes, even that was mentioned in their letter to the school.
I read the FFRF letter and the mention of the “old English style lettering” (a kind of Gothic script) seemed like little more than a description of the sign. I suppose the designer of the original sign probably saw it as a way to add to the King James Bible motif. So perhaps the FFRF might have considered it a noteworthy detail. Ham probably has a lot of KJV-only advocates on his donor list so his complaint about this script detail was probably a smart tactic on his part—though it certainly comes across sounding silly and trite.
I wish Ham would focus on actual religious persecution taking place around the world, such as the execution of those who convert from Islam to Christianity. Complaining about a religiously-neutral cafeteria zone doesn’t seem like a priority to me.
By the way, I’m old enough to remember a teacher standing in front of our public school classroom just before lunchtime (every day) and asking for a volunteer to lead the class in prayer before we walked to the kitchen. (There was no cafeteria so we’d get our tray from the kitchen’s window and eat at our classroom desk.) Nobody gave much thought about the Constitution and I don’t recall anyone ever complaining at a PTA meeting. Looking back, I do wonder, however, what might have happened if one of the very few Roman Catholic students in the classroom had led the prayer and had mentioned Mary or St. Joseph. Surely someone in the class would have mentioned the RC “intrusion” at the dinner table that evening. (However, it was indeed common practice that we always would have a fried fish square on Friday, out of respect for RC students. Nevertheless, I don’t recall any kosher food options, though I have no idea if there might have been a Jewish student or two in that rural agricultural community. Probably not.)
2 Likes
He’s probably ecstatic every time @Patrick posts something about him here, too! Free press and fuel for the fire!! Wait, that’s ironic!! 
Patrick, maybe you should complain about him in code!!??!!
2 Likes
And then someone would claim that “all codes require an intelligent designer.”
2 Likes
Well that clearly would not be true if I designed them!!
1 Like
And it is very difficult to call the Federal Tax Code of the United States of American an intelligent design.
1 Like
There’s an argument against complexity and design for sure!