Posted on 11/25/2009 7:56:35 PM PST by GodGunsGuts
First the creation group doesn’t have a right to display their film to anyone who doesn’t want it.
Secondly, the creation group doesn’t do science, they do propaganda.
If you want to, you can watch the creation movie until you are blue in the face, and dumber than you are.
See, you have rights!
This statement shows that you lack a basic understanding of science.
I.D. currently has not testable hypothesis.
But you're violating my rights if you don't believe it's science, or that evolution is religion.
I wonder why they don’t rent a conference room at the Ramada and show it there. They have plenty of venues to exercise their free speech.
I don’t know that any criteria, other than being creationists, was applied.
Do you what criteria was applied and whether it was different from that applied to other renters?
Getting to advertise it as having been shown at a Ramada Inn just isn't the same.
They only seem to be concerned with the content of the film. It appears that another film presented by creationists was accepted, so the claim that they were denied because they are creationists is suspect.
This is a great bit of twisted logic, but it did work for the Evo's in a simular way. Check out what Evo's did in the 30's and 40's in law and school;i.e., separation of Church and State. Does Separation of Church and State really exist in the Constitution? And don't tell me that Evo's had nothing to do with it, read all the biographies of the judges and ACLU lawyers that backed and passed that decision.
Will be back tonight; celebrating Thanksgiving, have a good one too.
Who is the “they” you mention and what are the two films you are talking about?
The article speaks of one film shown in Alabama and one not shown in California.
Funds are donation or membership dues. There are quite a few restrictions on how they can make their funds and how it's spent.
Also, most 501(c) organizations will take just about any opportunity to increase income. My question is the movie isn't advertised on the website, much less anywhere other than the article.
Seems a bit of twisted logic on your part to say “the evos” did it. It ended up in the courts when Tennessee tried to make it illegal to teach evolution through the Butler Act.
Public venue = Legitimacy.
I have yet to see any creationist threads, posts, books, movies, etc that had an iota of science in them.
Right. And you violate my rights if you don’t believe in Zeus/Jupiter...
See, we can all get along.
Who is the “they” you mention and what are the two films you are talking about?
The article speaks of one film shown in Alabama and one not shown in California.
Sounds like a lack of science education on your part.
I always get a chuckle when you project onto Creationists and IDers what your side is in fact guilty of...thands for the laugh :o)
When it’s a taxpayer funded government institution, it’s called equal access. When they sign a contract and then break it, it’s breach of contract. No matter which way you slice it, the Temple of Darwin is in the wrong. And hopefully they will be made to pay...through the nose.
From the the supporting foundation about 2 years ago:
Revenue
Primary Revenue $20,731,298
Other Revenue $6,916,912
Total Revenue $27,648,210
Expenses
Program Expenses $42,973,082
Administrative Expenses $2,197,270
Fundraising Expenses $1,176,193
Total Functional Expenses $46,346,545
Payments to Affiliates $0
Excess (or Deficit) for the year $-18,698,335
Net Assets $54,646,025
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.