The state of Kentucky will be voting for their new Governor in a few days. Wikipedia has an article on it: Kentucky gubernatorial election, 2015. They say:
The Kentucky gubernatorial election will take place on November 3, 2015, to elect the Governor of Kentucky. Incumbent Democratic Governor Steve Beshear is not eligible to run for re-election to a third term due to term limits established by the Kentucky Constitution.
As you know, Ken Ham (ol’ Hambo), the Australian entrepreneur who has become the ayatollah of Appalachia, carefully chose that state to be the location of his creationist ministry, Answers in Genesis (AIG), and for the mind-boggling Creation Museum. So it’s natural to expect that creationism would play some part in the race for Governor.
The candidates are: Democrat Jack Conway, Republican Matt Bevin, and Independent Drew Curtis. We know nothing about them, and we haven’t paid any attention to their campaign (except for one post several months ago — The Kentucky Governor’s Race & Ken Ham’s Ark), but our clandestine operative in Kentucky (“Bluegrass”), informed us of a questionnaire called the Kentucky Candidate Information Survey (KCIS), which was put out by the Family Trust Foundation of Kentucky. Their About page says:
The KCIS is a project of the Family Trust Foundation of Kentucky, an educational, non-profit organization founded in 1989 to serve all Kentuckians. Encouraging responsible, participatory citizenship and increasing voter participation are two of its objectives. In 1993, Family Trust established the KCIS in order to provide voters with a fair and unbiased informational publication and to inform voters where legislative and executive candidates stand in the candidate’s own words.
The questionnaire has two pages of statements and it requests the two main candidates for their responses. Only Bevin, the Republican, bothered to respond. Most of the items don’t interest us, but two of them do.
The first asks about an issue familiar to our readers — the ongoing controversy about tax benefits for Hambo’s proposed “replica” of Noah’s Ark. The last time we wrote about that was Ken Ham’s Litigation: 02 July 2015 Update. Somehow, Hambo’s ark has become an issue in the campaign. Here’s the item in the questionnaire, and Bevin’s response:
The state should proceed with its original tax incentive proposal for the Noah’s Ark theme park in Northern Kentucky.
Bevin’s response: “Strongly agree.” The only other interesting item was:
Schools should familiarize students with all sides of scientific debates on issues like evolution and global warming.
Bevin’s response: “Strongly agree.”
So there you are. Bevin is clearly a full-blown, flaming creationist. He’s slightly behind Conway in the polls, but that may not mean much. If he wins, ol’ Hambo will have a friend in the Governor’s office. Won’t that be sweet?
Copyright © 2015. The Sensuous Curmudgeon. All rights reserved.
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
The Sensuous Curmudgeon 
Being willing to extend the tax break to Hambo is worse than being a creationist.
Hmmm, reading through the “What We Believe” section of the The Family Foundation of Kentucky’s website leads me to believe that, as I suspected, any group with the term “Family” in it will be fairly focused on a warped view of Biblical teachings.
I also think that, with respect to the teaching of evolution, we’re going to start seeing a new term pop up, the term “community values”. As in “We want schools teaching community values.”
@Gary:
Which brings up a point that puzzles me. When did the Bible according to conservative Christians acquire the “family” meaning? It is difficult to find a functional (according to modern Western middle-class ideals (rather than actual practice)) family in the Bible. (Ruth being the exception.)
You have a good point. Start with Adam’s sons, one of whom murders another and is sent into exile. Move on to Abraham, one of whose sons (Jacob, later named Israel) steals the inheritance of another by taking advantage of him while he’s ill and then deceiving their father. (Not touching the politics there!) Then there’s Lot, who offers his daughters up to be gang-raped by a mob so that they will leave him and the rest of his family (and the angels-in-disguise he’s sheltering) alone. Then there’s Jacob’s son Joseph, whose brothers are jealous of their father’s favorite and so throw him into a pit and then sell him to slavers. And . . . well, I could go on, but I feel dirty already.
TomS said:
About the same time that “Leave it to Beaver” came out. It’s not about what the Bible does or doesn’t say. It’s about what people think they say. So, the Bible (whether we realize it or not) talks about white picket fences, and moms in aprons tending house and the children, while father is off at the office in his nice suit, coming home to a pipe and newspaper. Father is the master of the house, mom is submissive (that statement already has you thinking, doesn’t it?), and the kids are all squeaky clean and wonderful. There’s never a mention of gay people, or drugs (although if I recall correctly, one episode of “The Brady Bunch” covered (dah dah DAH!) smoking).
As you and Eric point out, what the Bible actually says is the antithesis of any of this, but the biggest response you’d get from the xenophobic Xians would be, “What-evs”.
Yes, the fondness for “family values” in the bible is another evidence that most of the people ranting about it have never read it (or, if the did, they scored badly on comprehension!)
I love the word ‘gubernatorial’. I understand it is an official word, but it sounds hillbilly.
guber = “peanut”
natorial = “related to swimming”
When put together in a word, they apply to the process of preparing the southern delicacy boiled peanuts. The bubbling water makes them look as if they are swimming around.