Like its subject, Ken Ham’s Ark Park (“Ark Encounter”)—a project of his creationist organization Answers in Genesis—has had a tumultuous ride. First it had trouble getting financial support from backers (something that seems to have reversed after Bill Nye’s ill-advised debate with Ham), then went back and forth about whether it would get tax breaks (that came to nothing) and then finally seemed poised to get those take breaks from the state of Kentucky.  It looked like the damn thing would be built after all, and with government support of a palpably religious project. It would be a theme park designed to purvey lies to children.

But, to my surprise, the state of Kentucky finally came to its senses, realizing that it’s a violation of the First Amendment to give tax breaks to such a project. (It’s similar to the illegal practice of the U.S. government giving ministers tax breaks on their housing allowances.) As the Louisville Courier-Journal reports (complete with a superfluous apostrophe):

A proposed Noah’s ark theme park in Northern Kentucky has been turned down for around $18 million in state tax incentives amid concerns that it will promote religion and violate the separation of church and state.

But the group behind the project — Answers in Genesis — says it is considering legal action in federal court.

The state Tourism, Arts and Heritage Cabinet said in a letter Wednesday that the Ark Encounter theme park has changed it’s [sic; doesn’t the paper have a proofreader?] position on hiring policies since it originally filed for incentives in 2010 and now intends to discriminate in hiring based on religion.

It also said the park has evolved from a tourist attraction into an extension of the ministry activities undertaken by Answers in Genesis, which promotes a literal interpretation of the Bible’s old testament and argues that the Earth is only 6,000 years old.

“State tourism tax incentives cannot be used to fund religious indoctrination or otherwise be used to advance religion,” Tourism Secretary Bob Stewart wrote in the letter. “The use of state incentives in this way violates the separation of church and state provisions of the Constitution and is therefore impermissible.”

DUH!  Didn’t they realize that in the first place? It didn’t “evolve” from anything; that was the park’s purpose from the outset.  After all, AIG’s Creation Museum in Kentucky is the same thing: an extension of ministry activities promoting a Biblical view of creation. Were state tourism tax incentives used for that, too? If so, that was just as illegal as the Ark Park.

And Answers in Genesis (AIG) isn’t making it any easier on themselves with a statement put up just yesterday on the Ark Encounter blog, which, after discussing the possibility that the remains of the Ark might still rest on Turkey’s Mount Ararat (at least they have the decency to say the evidence is “not conclusive”), AIG adds (my emphasis):

Nevertheless, the Ark Encounter will show the feasibility of this famous vessel, and we will use the biblical account of Noah, the Ark, and the Flood to share the gospel of Jesus Christ.

How much clearer can that be,  O citizens of Kentucky?

The Lexington Herald-Leader quotes further from Stewart’s letter:

In a letter dated Dec. 10, Tourism, Arts and Heritage Cabinet Secretary Bob Stewart told a lawyer for Answers in Genesis that the state could not support projects with hiring practices that discriminated based on religion.

“As you know … we have strongly supported this project, believing it to be a tourism attraction based on biblical themes that would create significant jobs for the community,” Stewart wrote to James Parsons, a Covington attorney. “However … it is readily apparent that the project has evolved from a tourist attraction to an extension of AIG’s ministry that will no longer permit the commonwealth to grant the project tourism development incentives.”

Stewart was responding to a Dec. 8 letter from Parsons that threatened a lawsuit if state officials imposed hiring conditions, which AIG officials contend were added late in the process.

What might have made the difference was a secularist organization pointing out that the Ark Encounter intended to proceed with preferential hiring based on religion:

The current problems started during the summer, when the Kentucky Tourism Development Finance Authority gave preliminary approval to an incentive package which allows a 25 percent sales tax rebate for approved tourism sites.

But state officials paused after Americans for the Separation of Church and State pointed out language in job postings for the park requiring “salvation testimony” and a “Creation belief statement.”

State officials agreed that the language would violate state rules that prohibit discrimination on the basis of religion.

A series of meetings and letters followed, including Parsons’ lengthy letter threatening a federal lawsuit because of “unconstitutional viewpoint discrimination.”

It seems to me that whether or not hiring was based on religious belief, the project itself violates the First Amendment because the government was giving a tax advantage not just to religion (as it does with ministers’ housing exemptions), but to the promotion of Christianity. And that violates the Constitution.

What surprised me even more was that the governor of Kentucky backed his cabinet secretary by issuing a statement, and he didn’t have to do that. The statement, below, will surely anger the many religionists that populate that state—the only state where posters for my evolution talks were defaced and removed. But the governor of course qualified his statement with a quasi-endorsement of the park:

Gov. Steve Beshear said he supported Stewart’s decision.

“We expect any entity that accepts state incentives not to discriminate on any basis in hiring,” Beshear said in a statement. “While the leaders of Ark Encounter had previously agreed not to discriminate in hiring based on religion, they now refuse to make that commitment, and it has become apparent that they do intend to use religious beliefs as a litmus test for hiring decisions. For that reason, we cannot proceed with the tourism incentive application for the Ark Encounter project.”

Beshear said he thought the project would move ahead.

“Ark Encounter has said publicly that the project will be built regardless of availability of state incentives,” Beshear said. “I have no doubt that the Ark Encounter will be a successful attraction, drawing visitors and creating jobs, much like the Creation Museum.”