UCTAA churchlight

Site Search via Google

Meditation 1219
God, morality, and Ken Ham

by: John Tyrrell

Your thoughts on this Meditation are welcome. Please sign in to the discussion forum below, or alternatively, use the contact page to provide your comments for publication.

The comments I received from Glenn Shrom this week caused me to review Meditation 792 which discusses a billboard erected by Ken Ham's Answers in Genesis.

As I pointed out then: "What this billboard is suggesting is no more than the old canard that without God, there is no morality..."

Well, Ken Ham was back in the news this week expressing the same old false argument - - that you need God for morality.

Ham was responding to the entertainer Miley Cyrus's remarks on the mythology of the Bible and on her "fluid sexuality" about which she stated:

“I am literally open to every single thing that is consenting and doesn’t involve an animal and everyone is of age. Everything that’s legal, I’m down with. Yo, I’m down with any adult—anyone over the age of 18 who is down to love me.”

So, given there was no need for him to say anything at all - - he could have entirely ignored her comments, what was Ham's response to this? He wrote critically of her on his blog.

Question for her: Why not involve an animal? On what basis does she decide that? Besides, if there’s no God and she’s just a result of evolution, then she is merely an animal anyway. And those she interacts with sexually are just animals—so why not any animals? In other words, she has decided to draw a line for some reason—but what reason? ...

Question for her: Why only those over the age of 18? On what basis did she decide that? If there’s no God, why have any age restriction? On what basis would she argue against pedophilia? Why not do whatever anyone wants to do?

Now the answer to Ham's obnoxious questions is right there in Cyrus's own words - she's open to sexual activities specifically with consenting adults. Ms. Cyrus clearly understands the moral concept that other partners have to agree to the chosen activity -- animals cannot give consent -- children do not understand the consequences sufficiently to give meaningful consent. Miley Cyrus understands this and is able to make the correct moral distinction without reference to any deity.

Ken Ham cannot. Ken Ham needs his god to tell him what to do. If Ken Ham did not think his god was telling him it was wrong to have sex with a donkey, apparently Ken Ham would go ahead and do so if he felt the urge. If Ken Ham did not think that his god was telling him it was wrong to have sex with a 6-year old child visiting his dishonest Creation Museum, apparently Ken Ham would go ahead and do so if he felt the urge. It's only Ham's belief in his understanding of his god's marching orders that keep Ken Ham from turning into a total moral degenerate.

We can only be happy tht Ken Ham is to ignorant to be aware there is no prohibition in the Bible against sex with a child.* (Leviticus fortunately does provide clear direction on animals.) Where does Ham really get his idea that sex with a child is wrong? Only from the general realization in Western society within the past couple of centuries that it is wrong. That came not from his god, not from his Bible, and certainly not from his beloved all-the-answers-are-in-there Genesis.

In my view, Ken Ham has no personal moral sense, and should not be lecturing others on their morality.

Note

* I'm quite ready to be corrected on this. Just provide chapter and verse for the passage with a clearly stated prohibition.

Have your say...

Please take a moment to share your thoughts, pro and con, on this Meditation.

comments powered by Disqus