Jump to content
THE BROWNS BOARD

Why is the media deliberately attacking the Arc Encounter?


Recommended Posts

when the satanists in detroit put up their statue of baphomet, they paid for it themselves. Just sayin. Why should state tax payers pay for a giant waste of perfectly good trees? THe satanists realized what they wanted to do ought to be paid for by themselves.....think about that for a moment, the "satanists" got it right. Let that wash over you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

because Bill Nye the science guy is offended the state of Kentucky put some funding into this -

 

instead of adding to the GOBS of funding already put into public ed - specifically science

 

Won't the state of Kentucky get a lot of revenue off this as well by bringing in tourists who will be spending money in Kentucky?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

when the satanists in detroit put up their statue of baphomet, they paid for it themselves. Just sayin. Why should state tax payers pay for a giant waste of perfectly good trees? THe satanists realized what they wanted to do ought to be paid for by themselves.....think about that for a moment, the "satanists" got it right. Let that wash over you.

Hmmm let's see, great huge Amusement Park attracting millions of people and hundreds of millions of dollars for the state much like Kennywood Dollywood and the like vs some stupid statue ofor a buttplug demon nobody's ever heard of put up buy a bunch of Jackoffs who don't even care about it and brings in, just a second let me get my calculator, oh yes nothing....

 

Sorry Queenie, can't figure it out.

 

WSS

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Won't the state of Kentucky get a lot of revenue off this as well by bringing in tourists who will be spending money in Kentucky?

 

yes

 

- State development studies have predicted that Ark Encounter would draw hundreds of thousands of visitors and bring in a net fiscal impact of $119 million over 10 years, including sales and income taxes.

 

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2014/02/27/ark-encounter-theme-park/5881323/

 

what the state does with it is another question though....

 

meaning if there are actual taxpayer relief type give backs ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hmmm let's see, great huge Amusement Park attracting millions of people and hundreds of millions of dollars for the state much like Kennywood Dollywood and the like vs some stupid statue ofor a buttplug demon nobody's ever heard of put up buy a bunch of Jackoffs who don't even care about it and brings in, just a second let me get my calculator, oh yes nothing....

 

Sorry Queenie, can't figure it out.

 

WSS

1) a giant wooden piece of shit is going to bring in 100's of millions of dollars?

 

2) if its so profitable the private sector can put up for it, or have you conveniently yet again forgot the mechanics of the free market?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

bitch, bitch, liberal bitch. So, Cleve, you think there's a ton of support to build

a satanic tourist attraction, and do you think hundreds of thousands of families

will visit it?

 

not smart, Cleve. Just an emotional knee jerk.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

bitch, bitch, liberal bitch. So, Cleve, you think there's a ton of support to build

a satanic tourist attraction, and do you think hundreds of thousands of families

will visit it?

 

not smart, Cleve. Just an emotional knee jerk.

 

 

... that's not the point he was making

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1) a giant wooden piece of shit is going to bring in 100's of millions of dollars?

 

☆Yes☆

 

2) if its so profitable the private sector can put up for it, or have you conveniently yet again forgot the mechanics of the free market?

 

☆ Progressive Field Gund Arena First Energy stadium on and on and on. Your point?☆

 

 

 

WSS

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes even though I doubt you understand it very well but check this out little angry boy. Before you drive to Detroit to beat off at the foot of the devil statue.

 

 

http://americanhistory.si.edu/blog/religion-early-america

 

 

WSS

 

doesn't change the separation of church and state clause in the constitution. Or did you forget about the constitution?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

doesn't change the separation of church and state clause in the constitution. Or did you forget about the constitution?

 

The Constitution, little buddy, is meaningless today. Ask your little protege.

 

By the way do we tax the church or not? Are there any special Provisions for those of Faith anywhere in the US government or not?

Sorry you are bitter. Maybe you should pray on it?

;)

WSS

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The constitution is meaningless now is it? Do you ever catch these little invalid exceptions you make in your arguments and think wait a minute that doesn't make any sense......nahhh you just chug through one incomprehensible narrative after another. I mean who the fuck is my little protege? Do you just slap your keyboard sometimes and go with whatever was written?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Yeah, and I'm sure you'd find plenty of good Christians there as well. You know, spreading the good word and such.

 

Yeah, and I'm sure you'd find plenty of good some professing Christians there as well. You know, spreading the good word and such proving anyone can call themselves whatever they want but that doesn't necessarily make it so.

 

Fixed it :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The constitution is meaningless now is it? Do you ever catch these little invalid exceptions you make in your arguments and think wait a minute that doesn't make any sense......nahhh you just chug through one incomprehensible narrative after another. I mean who the fuck is my little protege? Do you just slap your keyboard sometimes and go with whatever was written?

We have already established that there are folks here, usually on the left, who think that the constitution needs to be adjusted every so often as Society changes. Am I right or wrong? The second amendment has been under Fire, to coin a phrase, for quite a while and is nowhere near what it was in the beginning. Same with any other of the Bill of Rights. Frankly Cleve I don't see you as a strict constitutionalist in the first place so it's a little odd you are fighting from that position now.

Also if you look it up the bastardization of the First Amendment where we are guaranteed that the government will not establish a state religion (as they did with the church of England) it never has, and the separation hook didn't come up until the 19th century in order to keep Spanish and French Catholics from getting too much power in the Carolinas.

 

More recently every president, I mean every president, speaks of his faith and how it guides him in ruling the country. In some cases valedictorians are punished for mentioning their faith but not the president.

Even though the draft is no longer used we didn't draft members of some religions. And we legally at least perfunctorily Don't Force religious organizations to perform abortions. Etcetera.

 

You are certainly free to protest tax breaks for Public Funding for this amusement park. I don't think you feel the same way about sporting facilities that'd make even more money for the private interests like the NFL and so forth.

 

WSS

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Liberals at least ackn the 2nd amendment but say it needs adjusted for modern weaponry. So ur basically ackn what the const says about church and state but it needs amending. Which is fine ur entitled to that opinion, but dont act like the const as is isnt perfectly clear on this issue.....just as its perfectly clear what the const says about the right to bear arms

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Liberals at least ackn the 2nd amendment but say it needs adjusted for modern weaponry. So ur basically ackn what the const says about church and state but it needs amending. Which is fine ur entitled to that opinion, but dont act like the const as is isnt perfectly clear on this issue.....just as its perfectly clear what the const says about the right to bear arms

Not really, the changes came as I said in the 19th century. The original intent of not creating a state religion had nothing to do with the elimination of any mention of religion from anything public.

That's a recent development.

As long as you understand that and we don't have to hear anybody squealing about Negroes being equal or women's right to vote.

:)

 

And at the end of the day I guess we will see if someone drags the ark encounter to the Supreme Court.

WSS

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...