Same sex couples denied entry to Creation Museum’s “Date Night”

After being admitted to Petersburg, Kentucky’s Creation Museum as a ticketed, paying customer seeking to witness firsthand the power and glory of their “Date Night,” it didn’t take long for the museum to show its true colors…

Three of us (myself, my girlfriend and our friend Brandon) passed the security checkpoint despite minor scrutiny. We arrived right at 6:00 p.m.; Ken Ham was just beginning his talk of love in the museum’s special effects room, and we were eager to hear it. Brandon’s “date,” Joe of Barefoot & Progressive, was late, and so the solo Brandon was the focus of much interest for the two guards, who carried the air of actual police.

“What kind of car will she be driving?” asked one of the guards. They wanted to know so they could keep strict tabs on who came into the museum.

“Oh,” I said. “His partner’s name is Joe. I think he drives one of those hybrids…”

No sooner had I uttered the word partner that the officer exchanged glances with a fellow guard, whose name badge read D. McDonald.

“Joe?” McDonald asked.

“Yeah,” I said. “Is there a problem with that?”

McDonald then informed us that the security staff had had a meeting earlier in the morning in which this very scenario was discussed. “You guys (my girlfiend and I) can go inside,” he told us, “but your friend and Joe cannot.”

When pressed on the issue, McDonald said that an “un-Christian” couple like Joe and Brandon would upset the evening for everyone, and, as proof, the museum’s website explicitly stated that couples like Joe and Brandon would not be allowed entry. (For the record, it does not)

I told McDonald that it wasn’t very Christian to exclude people, to which he rhetorically asked ”How exactly is it Christian to be gay?”

Some attempts at backtracking were made: I said there had been a misunderstanding; that I didn’t say” partner” and meant that Joe and Brandon’s girlfriends had cancelled and that, ha ha, neither Joe nor Brandon was gay, but no dice: Just the suspicion of being gay was grounds enough to refuse paying customers access to Ham’s magical speech on biblical incest and how you should love your wife for who she is because, in time, she’ll be as ugly as her mother.

Needless to say, the hypocrisy made it somewhat difficult to eat the mango-glazed chicken, courtesy of Christian catering company Funky’s.

In fact, the hypocrisy makes it somewhat difficult to fathom that two guys holding hands are frowned upon, but murderers? I’ll let Joe tell you:

… the great irony is that while two men were not allowed to attend the Creation Museum last night, guess who they are welcoming with open arms today? None other than Jeffrey Bornhoeft, a lovely fellow making his first trip out of Ohio since the time that he shot his ex-wife’s husband three times in the head 11 years ago. Jeffrey is OK though, because he’s totally not into dudes.

My girlfriend, who purchased the tickets, has already filed a complaint with the Better Business Bureau, which will get plenty of complaints once Ham’s Ark Encounter starts violating equal-opportunity laws.


  1. john67
    Posted February 12, 2011 at 2:42 pm | Permalink

    Answers in Genesis is nothing but a fraud and a sham. It is difficult to believe our governor is allowing a $35.7 million sales tax exemption as they expand the mythological Creation “Museum” into the “Ark Park”, even though their hiring practices are exclusively discriminatory.
    Jobs at Answers in Genesis and the Creation Museum: All job applicants need to supply a written statement of their testimony, a statement of what they believe regarding creation and a statement that they have read and can support the AiG statement of faith.

    Here is that “statement of faith” ALL applicants must sign agreement with:

  2. Ted Herrlich
    Posted February 12, 2011 at 11:02 pm | Permalink

    So, Kentucky Christians, you can go to the Creation ‘Museum’ and soon its other new ministry, Ark Encounters, and you can rest assured that you won’t see any gay couples — however you can run into a guy who was found not guilty by reason of insanity after shooting his ex’s husband three times on his first out-of-state visit in 11 years. Does that make you feel better?

    Ted Herrlich

  3. Jinx McHue
    Posted February 12, 2011 at 11:02 pm | Permalink

    Yeah, I think the BBB has better things to do than kowtow to the petty complaints of a group of jerks who deliberately set out to make trouble for a private business.

  4. Andrea
    Posted February 12, 2011 at 11:34 pm | Permalink

    So you bought the tickets for all four of you? Yes! The BBB is a good idea. The museum is a business that took your money and didn’t give you the product you purchased OR a refund. Dispute the charge with your credit card company as well.

  5. Slackjaw
    Posted February 13, 2011 at 12:05 am | Permalink

    I agree with Jinx. If only those uppity gays wouldn’t make a chose to defy Jesus, then private businesses wouldn’t be compelled to illegally discriminate against them!

  6. cairnhowff
    Posted February 13, 2011 at 12:39 am | Permalink

    If they called it the Creation Club…and only members and their guests could enter…then it would be private and they could discriminate in any way they like. But to call it the Creation Museum, and be open to the public and take public tax dollars…they are not private and they may not discriminate….bye bye all legal standing as a non-profit…hello taxable income as a private club.

  7. Anonymous
    Posted February 13, 2011 at 1:15 am | Permalink

    Slackjaw, I have figured out your true identity! That’s right TROLLIE MCTROLLERSON! Where were you on the early morning of Feb. 13? Trolling? I thought so. Anyway, it’s Kansas. What do you expect?

  8. Jinx McHue
    Posted February 13, 2011 at 1:45 am | Permalink

    “private businesses wouldn’t be compelled to illegally discriminate against them”

    Businesses have a right to refuse services to whomever they wish. Don’t like it? Move out of the country. Honestly, if this was a pro-homosexual business and Fred Phelps and his merry band of nincompoops came traipsing in, you (and I, for what it’s worth) would have no problem with the business refusing them service.

  9. Jinx McHue
    Posted February 13, 2011 at 1:49 am | Permalink

    You know, I get the strong feeling that we’re not being told the whole story here. I have to wonder under what false pretenses these people registered in advance for the event. I’m sure if they had registered under “Brandon and Joe,” red flags would’ve been raised before they even completed payment.

  10. BlueEyedVideot
    Posted February 13, 2011 at 2:19 am | Permalink

    What kind of a lover would take a date to a “date night” at a phony museum in the first place?

    I chuckle at the supposedly Christian event held in honor of a pagan minor deity and fertility symbol.

    Would you like eggs with your Ham?

  11. A. Nuran
    Posted February 13, 2011 at 3:19 am | Permalink

    What the apologists here can’t seem to understand is that jmeador and company paid their fees and were denied both the service and a refund. It doesn’t have anything to do with Invisible Sky Friend Jeebus or what they do with their private parts. The goniffs at the Creation Museum kept their money and gave neither the contracted services nor a refund.

    They are criminal scum and deserve to be prosecuted for their theft.

    Or doesn’t that apply when the criminals are Our Sort and the victims are *shudder* sodomites?

  12. H.H.
    Posted February 13, 2011 at 3:50 am | Permalink

    Jinx McHue, businesses are not allowed to legally discriminate against whomever they want, especially after they’ve already taken their money. So it’s you who must leave the country if you don’t like our laws, dumbass.

    And secondly, why would they have to “register” for tickets? I’ve bought many tickets to all kinds of speaking events in my life. Not once have I been asked the names of the people I intended to bring, nor been grilled by guards once I arrived. No, this sort of paranoid militancy is more typical of how that other Christian group the KKK behave.

  13. joe poca
    Posted February 13, 2011 at 5:10 am | Permalink

    it is not a private business if they are begging for state funds. it is discrimination whether public or private and the secular society should bankrupt them through the courts.

  14. Ryan
    Posted February 13, 2011 at 5:14 am | Permalink

    to the bigot above: how is simply being gay causing trouble? I doubt these folks were going to make a scene. It seems they were interested in attending for whatever reason (personally, I’d rather not visit a den of unwashed hypocrites, but that’s me). Yes, they are a private business, but they are going to be receiving tax money for that hilarious fantasy theme park they are building to miseducate the populace. They then, by law, cannot discriminate. I have found the BBB to be pretty much worthless to complain to, after all they have no power to do anything. I hope that one the fantasy theme park opens they get the bejeezus sued out of them for discrimination. They have already posted jobs for the thing and the site states:

    “All job applicants need to supply a written statement of their testimony, a statement of what they believe regarding creation and a statement that they have read and can support the AiG statement of faith (”

    I smell lawsuits :)

    If you have a problem with that I venture to say you have a problem with the US Constitution, T. Jefferson and J. Madison.

  15. joe poca
    Posted February 13, 2011 at 5:16 am | Permalink

    p.s. someone created homosexuals, they didn’t just evolve themselves upon the planet out of thin air did they? oh… i forgot that its the “created out of thin air” museum for minds that are empty except for thin air.

  16. joe poca
    Posted February 13, 2011 at 5:22 am | Permalink

    @Ryan: I hope that you were referring to god and not the my post.

    The secular public:
    A: needs to start carding for christians and give them denial of service.

    B: ensue judicial means and clean out the coffers of any public and jesus money that their discriminatory selves might be holding.

  17. AV
    Posted February 13, 2011 at 5:32 am | Permalink

    The next time make a joint event with a lesbian club. You all go in as “christian” couples and on a given signal or time you change places to your real partners. Off coarse act normal polite, eat and have fun. Then they have to make themself jerks going round between the tables making a scene kicking out people, or just accepting they have been pwned.

  18. PsyGremlin
    Posted February 13, 2011 at 5:44 am | Permalink

    @Jinx. “Businesses have a right to refuse services to whomever they wish.” Wow, what fascist utopia do you live in Jinxy? You might RoAR might exclude a drunk guy from entering the establishment, or a hare krshna from selling you vegan cookbook, but a business cannot refuse a service based on race, creed, sexual orientation, etc. Unless it’s a business run by mindless bigots… of wait… it’s fundamentalists. Same difference.

    Good to see you’re still in top form Jinxy baby.

  19. Ryan
    Posted February 13, 2011 at 6:58 am | Permalink

    Oh, no I wasn’t referring to your post. I meant the first post on here, the one that called these folks a “group of jerks”. It took me a second to get what you mean by referring to “god”, lol.

    In general:
    I went to a Diversity Day once here in Tulsa, OK and of course there were the religious people there with their horrible signs and all. I kind of stood over there watching them and a preacher was there speaking with some of the gay people. He wanted to come into the park and discuss his views with others. The police didn’t want to let him, as he had been asked to leave the year or so before for harassment. Even then I thought it was wrong of them to keep him out as it was a public event and he hadn’t harassed anyone at that point. I managed to talk the police into letting him come into the park. See, I believe that what I believe can withstand anything the other side throws at me, so I welcome to he dissensions. It speaks a lot of AiG that they don’t allow even the whiff of it at their functions, if merely the sight of two men dining together can disrupt their evening. So, I take it that their position isn’t very defensible and they know it.

  20. Teshi
    Posted February 13, 2011 at 7:00 am | Permalink

    Hey, break out the Bible verses, ’cause I don’t think that these people have read their Bibles.

    Luke 19:1-10…

    Jesus entered Jericho and was passing through. 2 A man was there by the name of Zacchaeus; he was a chief tax collector and was wealthy. 3 He wanted to see who Jesus was, but because he was short he could not see over the crowd. 4 So he ran ahead and climbed a sycamore-fig tree to see him, since Jesus was coming that way.

    5 When Jesus reached the spot, he looked up and said to him, “Zacchaeus, come down immediately. I must stay at your house today.” 6 So he came down at once and welcomed him gladly.

    7 All the people saw this and began to mutter, “He has gone to be the guest of a sinner.”

    8 But Zacchaeus stood up and said to the Lord, “Look, Lord! Here and now I give half of my possessions to the poor, and if I have cheated anybody out of anything, I will pay back four times the amount.”

    9 Jesus said to him, “Today salvation has come to this house, because this man, too, is a son of Abraham. 10 For the Son of Man came to seek and to save the lost.”

    Okay, so Z de-sins himself, but if these people actually believe that it is possible to de-homosexualize yourself, they should be doing exactly what Zacchaeus did: welcoming them and eating with them.

    The irony is brilliantly illustrative and next time you should go prepared with the story of Zacchaeus.

  21. Teshi
    Posted February 13, 2011 at 7:01 am | Permalink

    Sorry, I meant, “doing exactly what Jesus did for Zacchaeus: welcoming him and eating with him”

  22. Dornier Pfeil
    Posted February 13, 2011 at 2:04 pm | Permalink

    I am sure all of you who think the kreation kooks are not allowed to discriminate can produce the Kentucky state and Federal laws banning discrimination in a public accommodation based on sexual orientation. Right? Of course the theft of money should be prosecuted to the fullest. Skip the BBB; go straight to court.

  23. Matt Algren
    Posted February 13, 2011 at 2:08 pm | Permalink

    I wish it weren’t do, but what this business did is 100% legal in 29 states, including Kentucky. Lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender people (and straight people, for that matter) are not protected by the federal Civil Rights Act of 1964, and Kentucky has no state non-discrimination law in place.

    Don’t know if they receive federal funds, but I don’t think that would make a difference, either.

  24. Scote
    Posted February 13, 2011 at 2:16 pm | Permalink

    “Jinx McHue
    Posted February 12, 2011 at 11:02 pm | Permalink

    Yeah, I think the BBB has better things to do than kowtow to the petty complaints of a group of jerks who deliberately set out to make trouble for a private business.”

    Oops. See what you did there? You affirmed that the Creation Museum is a **business**, and businesses are not allowed to illegally discriminated against protected classes. I’m guessing that you, Jinx, pine for the day when business could legally discriminate against those uppity black people who had the gall to think they should be able to sit in the same seats and eat in the same restaurants as black people.

    Meanwhile, homosexuality is generally not a protected class in many, perhaps most, US states, so the Creation Museum may legally be able to discriminate against gays. Good thing for Jesus that Ken Ham wasn’t around when Jesus met with **12 other men** for the last supper. Ken Ham would have kicked them all out as being gay and un-christian, but then many Christians–especially Ken Ham–aren’t known for their consistency or their intellectual honesty.

  25. Scote
    Posted February 13, 2011 at 2:18 pm | Permalink


    Should read: “in the same restaurants as white people.”

    Anyway, what Ken Ham did may be legal, but it certainly shows Ken Ham to be the unloving, discriminatory hypocrite that he is.

  26. Steve Magruder
    Posted February 13, 2011 at 3:04 pm | Permalink

    Just because a business has a right to exclude particular customers doesn’t make it right. In fact, it’s downright rotten to the core, and even though this enterprise may continue in business doing these things, interested parties continuing to highlight these discriminatory practices may eventually put a dent in the company’s profits.

    Those discriminated against never shut up, nor should they.

    Also, there’s really no such thing as a private business if it is public-facing and normally allows the general public on its premises. “Private” refers to ownership, and business owners do not enjoy super rights.

  27. Steve Magruder
    Posted February 13, 2011 at 3:11 pm | Permalink

    Also, as some have suggested, this goes beyond discrimination. A financial fraud occurred when money wasn’t refunded, and this can be dealt with through the BBB and the Attorney General.

  28. Chas
    Posted February 13, 2011 at 4:31 pm | Permalink

    The local gay community should organize a tour of the museum. Be on their best behavior and dressed in business casual, (no T-shirts or anything with slogans) and quietly tour the facility en masse while holding hands with their partners.

  29. AnarchoCapitalist
    Posted February 13, 2011 at 6:04 pm | Permalink

    Look, dipwad, it’s private property and a private business. The idea that you and your gay buds decided to turn up here in the first place absolutely reeks to high heaven (or to Barney Frank’s office, if you’re an athiest) of some half-assed slacktivism/publicity whore crap.

    News flash: You don’t get to decide what people like. A LOT of people don’t like you. They tend to congregate on property and in places that are owned by people and organizations hostile to you. I don’t like you, and you don’t get to come to MY house either, nor is it your “right” to demand it.

    To say that you didn’t obtain those tickets with fraudulent or deceptive intent, regardless of your cutely coy wording is nothing but the kind of blatant scumbaggery that we’ve come to expect from maggots who just MUST have it their way, and smacks of the same logic the Nazis would use to show up uniformed at a World Jewish Congress meeting and demand entrance.

    So here’s the headline, fruitcup: Get the fuck over it.

    Go protest about anti-gay-marriage laws – that’s a State function that’s not anyone else’s business and should be eliminated as at least discriminatory or, even more disgusting, as State over-reaching into private business. You got my support all day on that one.

    But you showing up on private property with the obvious intent to stir shit because you want to make a point that you’re OH-pressed is just exactly the kind of goofy crap that pisses people (including me) off enough to think up new ways to screw with you.

    Fucking moron.

  30. Jinx McHue
    Posted February 13, 2011 at 7:10 pm | Permalink

    Congrats to H.H. and Scrote for playing the race card! Now, someone bring up Hitler and the Nazis! Quick! Godwin’s Law demands fulfillment!

  31. America, Fuck Yeah
    Posted February 13, 2011 at 7:25 pm | Permalink

    @27: AnarchoCapitalist, forget your meds today? Wacky repeated impotent jabs at gays perceived masculinity aside, your analogy that you get to invite who you want into your house doesn’t work unless you, too, charge $71 dollars to enter your house.

    And then not refund it after accepting payment and denying entry.

    Jesus Christ, why do so many morons post on here?

    By the way, “AnarchoCapitalist” pegs you immediately as a child. Well done!

  32. neologism
    Posted February 13, 2011 at 7:34 pm | Permalink

    Let’s try this hypothetical. I own a cafeteria in Greensboro, North Carolina. A young Negro man walks into my business, politely orders a sandwich and pays for it, then goes to sit down at the lunch counter and starts reading his Bible while waiting for me to prepare his meal. I kick him out because I don’t like Christians acting all sanctimonious in my cafe — it’s disruptive! I also refuse to give him a refund for the sandwich he hasn’t eaten yet.

    I wouldn’t actually do this, because IT WOULD BE ILLEGAL. It is illegal to refuse public accommodation based on religion, and has been since the 1960s when the Civil Rights Act became law.

    However, in most states in the USA it remains perfectly legal for businesses to discriminate against gay people, whether or not they are being “disruptive” by their mere presence. But, since it seems that the museum guards kicked out these paying attendees because the museum is a Christian organization which asserts that gay identity is incompatible with Christian values, then it appears there might be a religious discrimination lawsuit waiting to happen here.

    I’m not a lawyer, so I’ll just say that I think it’s wrong for a business that discriminates against people based on religion or sexual orientation to enjoy the benefits of non-profit status, and to receive state funding and tax breaks. Not to mention the cultural prestige of calling itself a “Museum”, as if it were in the business of promoting scientific research and knowledge for the benefit of the public. Churches are entitled to refuse entry to anyone they want (even if they hypocritically claim to follow the teachings of Christ, who welcomed everyone), but not public museums.

  33. Misha Thompson
    Posted February 13, 2011 at 9:39 pm | Permalink

    But they’re NOT a private business if they are non-profit or receiving state or federal funds. If they are, they should not be able to bar anyone from attending their event on religious grounds, namely that the attendee “obviously” wasn’t “Christian” because they were gay.

    Some LBGTs are Christian, and are accepted by Christian churches with open arms. By the same token, if our attendees were Agnostic or Atheist and gay, they can’t hold that against them, either. The guard was acting in prejudice against those persons POTENTIAL religion. They assumed they were not Christian, and barred entry. They have every right to press the issue, and get the museum’s non-taxed status pulled. LBGTs as a minority may not be protected civilly in most states, but their faith (or non-faith) always IS protected in cases where a facility is taking federal funding. They discriminated on grounds on religion, pure and simple. They cannot ASSUME you are not Christian b/c you are gay, and even if you are NOT Christian, they cannot deny you entry.

  34. Jim
    Posted February 13, 2011 at 10:19 pm | Permalink

    Call the ACLU!


  35. John in Cincy
    Posted February 13, 2011 at 10:41 pm | Permalink

    Ken Ham is not even a U.S. citizen… and he left a very messy financial situation back in Australia with his previous religious sect…

    It is all about control and messing with minds that don’t want to think for themselves.

  36. Joshua Burkhart
    Posted February 14, 2011 at 2:46 am | Permalink

    I wanna throw this out for you all that didn’t know this. There is no law that protects LBGT current out the reaches of three regions and the Creation Museum is on the outskirts of Covington not technically in Covington. The laws only protect Covington, Lexington/ Fayette County, and Louisville, Ky. Its a very sad truth that in this day and age that it can be done. But anywhere else outside of those regions, they are free to discriminate. That being 75% of Kentucky, I believe that includes the Creation Museum.

    Also Wednesday February 24 there are activists who are going up to lobby and try to get the whole state of Kentucky covered by anti-discrimination law. Please understand that it is important that we let the people in Frankfort know how truly important all this really is.

    Please if you can come and support the cause. If you can’t then at least call Frankfort and let them know you are tired of the discrimination of LGBT people and that its time for a change.

    Thank you and I hope to see some of you there.

  37. Bob Moore
    Posted February 14, 2011 at 3:21 am | Permalink

    This anarcho-fuckhead is so full of anger, one wonders if he has been raped at some point. Normal healthy adults do not fly into rages against other peaceful people.
    There are laws against being a non-profit and calling yourself a regular business. There must be tax issues here.??
    It is hard for me to hear that there is still so much hostility to gays.

    Jesus said, “love ye one another”. He didn’t say, “unless they are gay.”

  38. (LK)
    Posted February 14, 2011 at 4:02 am | Permalink


    So having a beef with someone makes it okay to keep someone’s money and not give them what they paid for?

    Okay, so, say I dislike people who cuss others out in public. I now have every right to keep about 70 bucks of your money, right?

    I look forward to defrauding people like yourself in this dream world of yours. You’ll be smiling while I screw you, because you got your way, right? Riiiight?

  39. CourtroomWolf
    Posted February 14, 2011 at 4:36 am | Permalink

    It’s not only discrimination, which may or may not be legal, but flat out fraud not to refund the tickets because they might be gay. Defending the creation “museum” is to say it’s OK to scam anyone you suspect might be a member of a group you dislike. If the shoe was on the other foot, I don’t think they’d buy the excuse that it’s OK to steal their money because they might be a bigot.

  40. Joshua Burkhart
    Posted February 14, 2011 at 5:01 am | Permalink

    The only thing I am doing is letting it be known that it was within the law to discriminate. I personally accept all people. I think it’s filthy and down right disgusting what they did but it did happen Now I’m pretty sure that all they will have to do is take it up with the manager after they had already paid and let them know about the incident since it has because publicized in the LEO.Now someone should contact the media on their behalf. This should be on the news. This should get coverage. This would be a great way for us to pass a bill so that no one can be discriminated against of the LGBT persuasion in the state of Kentucky. Maybe it is some of the motivation that the movement needs. This is a very serious issue that needs to be addressed as soon as possible.

  41. SteveInMI
    Posted February 14, 2011 at 8:39 am | Permalink

    The legal issue in this case is a tricky one.

    It is illegal to discriminate in public accomodation on certain specific ground, because there are state and federal laws that prohibit illegal discrimination. The ground vary from state to state, but generally include race, religion, national origin, sex (not gender), and often things like marital status, veteran status, etc. (again, depends on the state and the situation).

    DISCRIMINATION ON THE BASIS OF SEXUAL ORIENTATION IS NOT ILLEGAL is most states, counties, and cities. It is not illegal on a federal level in the U.S. (Full disclosure: I believe in equality, and I wish it WERE illegal. But right now and today, it is not.)

    HOWEVER, discrimination on the basis of sex *is* illegal in most cases. The creation “museum” is not breaking the law by rejecting gay people, but they *are* breaking the law by rejecting Joe for being male. Sadly, there is not much case law on this. I am not a lawyer, but my reading of the law here says that the creation “museum”‘s actions here should make them subject to prosecution on the grounds of illegal discrimination.

    And remember, there is probably no explicit legal protection where you live for same-sex couples, or for gay, lesbian, or bisexual people. In most places in the United States, they can be fired from their jobs, denied housing, banking services, government services, or just about anything else – LEGALLY – on grounds that they’re gay. If you believe in equality and dignity, you should work to get those laws corrected.

  42. Kathryn
    Posted February 14, 2011 at 12:33 pm | Permalink

    It is true that the GLBT community isn’t a legally protected class, isn’t discrimination based on religious affiliation illegal? Based on the language you’re reporting (“How exactly is it Christian to be gay?”) it seems like a case could be made that you guys were discriminated against not just because of perceived sexuality, but because of perceived religious affiliation as well.

    Any word on further recourse?

  43. Jnick
    Posted February 14, 2011 at 8:19 pm | Permalink

    Wow, AnarchoCapitalist. Thanks for clarifying your maturity level. You just moved the whole pro/anti-gay argument needle a full 10 points to the gay side. Such profanity, hatred and vitriol do nothing but make you look like a total loser and imbecile. To prove my point Maryland Sen. James Brochin changed his vote to “in favor” of gay marriage because of people like you… Jesus would so punch you in the neck!

  44. Arthur Taylor
    Posted February 15, 2011 at 8:09 am | Permalink

    Jinx my boy, you are wrong on so many levels. Also you are a troll. All men are created equal, and if you don’t like that, well git ‘er dun and leave this country you plainly don’t understand.

    Nothing so loathsome as a “Love it or Leave it” American neo-con snot. Sorry about the ad-homs but I can’t be bothered to make the effort to form an argument in the face of your idiocy and bigotry.

  45. Sandra Moon
    Posted February 15, 2011 at 9:59 am | Permalink

    Just wanted to get it out there that not all Christians are lgbt-hating fundamentalists. There are a lot of Christians who advocate for their lgbt sisters and brothers, who believe that evolution is not contrary to their faith, and who believe that all people were created in the divine image. Teshi–I appreciate your attempt to provide a biblical example of acceptance, but I think to compare homosexuality to sin is wrong and a view in our society that is very harmful to lgbt rights.

  46. Sondrah
    Posted February 15, 2011 at 11:55 am | Permalink

    You all should read this before bashing the Creation Museum for their actions. I am not a creationist, but I believe they acted professionally and were correct in their decision. They were expecting Joe because he blogged about his intent to disrupt the night a month ago – that is why they didn’t allow his partner entry – Joe didn’t even get out of his car.

  47. preachr34
    Posted February 15, 2011 at 12:11 pm | Permalink

  48. Kamaeq
    Posted February 15, 2011 at 1:39 pm | Permalink

    Rant, ramp and rave all over the “fraud”, but if you came with the express purpose of disrupting the event, then I’d find it real interesting on how you think anything will get done no matter how many shrill complaints get made to how many agencies. Joe Sonka already admitted that is what he was going to be there for. Busted.

    Especially if the story on the AiG site is true and the “rejected” male couple weren’t homosexual, which means that your only purpose was to come in to disrupt the enjoyment of other “paying customers”.

    Pick your favorite restaurant, take all your friends and family there for a special event. Then let the management allow someone in who plans to disrupt the place, ruining the night that everyone had planned. It doesn’t matter about race, creed, color, sex, etc. You’d be whining your tails off then about how the management should have done something. Especially if the management had advanced warning from public threats by specific individuals. Anyone with a clue realizes this.

    So why don’t you quit trying to make this sound like a whiny gay thing; it reinforces stereotypes. I’m not sure how you can avoid a whiny loser stereotype, but that applies regardless of race, religion, color, sex, etc.

  49. AnarcoCapitalist
    Posted February 15, 2011 at 1:41 pm | Permalink

    Jnick sez:
    “Wow, AnarchoCapitalist. Thanks for clarifying your maturity level. You just moved the whole pro/anti-gay argument needle a full 10 points to the gay side.”

    Why would I care? Fruits are of no interest to me one way or the other. Re-read; all I care about in this frilly little snot fit is private property rights.

    “Such profanity, hatred and vitriol do nothing but make you look like a total loser and imbecile. ”

    Uhmm…ok. Yeah, that’s what passes for logic around here, right enough.

    “To prove my point Maryland Sen. James Brochin changed his vote to “in favor” of gay marriage because of people like you”

    Again, why would I care? I’m in favor of States recognizing gay marriages or, more to the point, that the State has no business regulating marriage at all between competent adults.

    I have been since before anyone else realized it was an issue, as far as I know. Bottom line: It’s no business of mine OR the State’s to have a say one way or the other. I actually said that in my previous post, but you’ve got your feather boa all in a knot about the fact that I don’t like you, and missed it.

    “Jesus would so punch you in the neck!”

    Jesus can bite me. The only thing I can think of worse than some special-interest group of butt-bunnies telling me what I can do with my own property is a bunch of Bible Bangers telling me that the magic light in the sky gets first dibs on telling me how to live and which part of a pig I can eat before being ritually cleansed by Miracle Water.

    To clarify, I think the “Creation Museum” is a collection of fantastically boring fairy tales dressed up as science by a bunch of slope-headed slackjaws and their brain-damaged followers who have no concept of how the real world works. But it’s their property, so I don’t give a shit, and I’m sure as shit not standing in line with my fraudulently-obtained ticket so I can get in and make a “statement” about it..

    So, take your nancy little ass back across the street and engage in whatever perversions you,think necessary to make your daddy feel bad for the way he treated you all these years… you’ll get no argument from me.

    But try to force someone else to give up their rights in order for you to pretend to be acknowledged as an equal by people who don’t, and I’ll be standing there to fight you every fucking day.

  50. Jinx McHue
    Posted February 15, 2011 at 2:09 pm | Permalink

    So since this really wasn’t a gay couple, but two men lying about themselves in order to attempt a disruptive stunt, they really have no legal standing for pursuing any sort of lawsuit and complaints to the BBB are unfounded.

  51. amy
    Posted February 15, 2011 at 3:14 pm | Permalink

    i find it a shame that those same people that scream about intolerance and want to be left in peace to do what they want…. cant seem to return the favor.

    it was completely twisted as to what happened that night and the intentions of joe… yet look at all the ugliness that everyone is spewing in reaction.

    this isnt what Jesus and Christianity is about.

    may you all have a God filled and blessed day.

  52. amy
    Posted February 15, 2011 at 3:17 pm | Permalink

    joe wanted to make it horrible for others that were tending their own bussiness and not trying to tend his… yet he thought that it was ok to try to do something so ugly to innocent people.

    How sad for him that he has such a mean streak inside.

  53. Kassie
    Posted February 15, 2011 at 4:05 pm | Permalink

    The true story of what happened is here

  54. Jinx McHue
    Posted February 15, 2011 at 5:24 pm | Permalink

    Wow. I was right in post #7. The whole story wasn’t being told here or anywhere else outside of AiG.

  55. Ted
    Posted February 16, 2011 at 11:18 pm | Permalink

    What an odd article. The person that was late made a vague statement on their blog about doing something they knew the Creation Museum would hate. The Museum was aware of it, feared they planned to be disruptive and barred them entry. Clumsy journalism, at best. Next time, use a good ol’ nom de plume. Did any in the group actually want to be there to enjoy the evening? Were you going as a goof, or looking to see what was going on as reporters? Oops. I mean… “bloggers.”

  56. RKG
    Posted February 17, 2011 at 12:15 am | Permalink

    Hey A. Nuran, I agree they should have their money refunded, but let’s be clear. If I’m having a party (business, meeting, function, etc), you slip thru the ropes, I don’t like your face, guess what, you are not welcome. I don’t have to explain a damn thing. It’s my party and you are dis-invited, take your money and leave. You think I’m going to allow any possible disturbance (making guests uncomfortable) at MY PARTY?

  57. Harold
    Posted February 20, 2011 at 1:45 pm | Permalink

    For the record, “Funky’s” isn’t a “Christian catering company,” whatever the hell “Christian catering company” is supposed to mean. It’s a popular caterer in Cincinnati, and has no religious affiliation.

  58. Benjamin
    Posted February 22, 2011 at 3:41 am | Permalink

    Wow guys! Get a freaking life! I bet some of you losers protest at funerals and lame crap like that. Seriously, really read the bible and learn what it means to be a Christian, because many of you think you are, but have no clue what it really means…

    Here’s a little website to help get you guys started:

  59. Tony
    Posted February 22, 2011 at 1:48 pm | Permalink

    fyi sodomites applied for a minority status in america but they do not meet the requirements ~ one of which is they must be born that way. Sodomy is a deviant practice not an immutable characteristic like color of skin. these pushy fags were just trying to make trouble like they always do!

  60. Anonymous
    Posted March 2, 2011 at 1:40 am | Permalink

    In Canada you’d be able to sue and win.

  61. mordicai
    Posted March 2, 2011 at 9:31 am | Permalink

    It is amazing watching all the intolerance & inability to parse anti-discrimination law at play in the comments section. Ethically, it is appalling that bigotry & exclusion is the norm in certain parts of the world. Ethically, that is– you can have your private KKK club if you want, though I retain my first amendment right to tell you that you are awful. Legally, once you start involving yourself in taxes & public aid, you lose the “right” to discriminate.

  62. Jay McHue
    Posted May 25, 2012 at 11:29 pm | Permalink

    So how’s that complaint to the BBB and the ACLU lawsuit working out for you?

    *crickets chirp LOUDLY for several minutes*

    Yeah, that’s what I thought.

    Posted December 18, 2012 at 2:01 am | Permalink

    This particular article Same sex couples denied entry
    to Creation Museum

  64. Leia
    Posted December 29, 2012 at 10:14 pm | Permalink

    Hi, i feel that i noticed you visited my website so i came to go back the prefer?
    .I am attempting to find things to enhance my site!
    I assume its ok to make use of a few of your ideas!!

  65. criar p঩na facebook blog
    Posted March 29, 2013 at 5:20 am | Permalink

    I’m amazed, I have to admit. Seldom do I encounter a blog that’s
    both educative and entertaining, and without a doubt, you’ve hit the nail on the head. The problem is something which not enough people are speaking intelligently about. Now i’m very happy that I came across this during my search for something relating to this.

  66. women11s birkenstock sandals
    Posted October 28, 2013 at 8:21 am | Permalink

    Welcome to our website, This is a professional website which you can trust.Our Birkenstock Online store have been speacialized in wholesaling and retailing birkenstock for cheap for many years. We offer Birkenstock Sale with fast shipping. Our birkenstock outlet is sure that you will be satisfied with birkenstock. Because the shoes are not only cheap, but also with top quality. What’s more,there are many latest styles for your choice. Buy now! All the fashionable sandals clogs are at a big discount. You will be find that you will be more elegant and confidence. Besides,Birkenstock Sandal could make you become the focus in public. Come on,a best opportunity knocks but once.

    Posted May 31, 2014 at 6:02 pm | Permalink

    Good day I am so happy I found your blog, I really found you
    by accident, while I was searching on Yahoo for
    something else, Anyways I am here now and would just like to say thanks for a marvelous post and a all round interesting blog (I also love the
    theme/design), I don’t have time to go through it all at the minute but I have book-marked it and also included your RSS feeds, so when I have time I will be
    back to read much more, Please do keep up the awesome work.

  68. entrepreneur magazine
    Posted June 15, 2014 at 7:24 pm | Permalink

    At on this occasion he is serving as CEO with the famed Internet Marketing Center.
    Many of those merchants give you sales materials at
    no cost. Smart phone’s growth has helped inside the increase of mobile
    internet use popularity.

  69. Jessica
    Posted July 22, 2014 at 12:55 am | Permalink

    Only problem with this post, is that it is a lie. The Creation Museum doesn’t care if people are homosexual or not. The only time they ever kicked out a “couple” was when two straight men were bragging online how they were going to go in acting extra flamboyant and try to disrupt people’s evening. The museum knew their names, since they didn’t keep them private. They were not allowed in. Was that your friends? If so, then good. People paid a lot of money to enjoy themselves and didn’t need it ruined because of a couple of jerks. You don’t have to like the Christian faith, but why spread lies?

10 Trackbacks

  1. [...] This post was mentioned on Twitter by omg pkj and Phillip M. Bailey, LeoWeekly. LeoWeekly said: FatLip: Same sex couples denied entry to @CreationMuseum's “Date Night” #Kentucky #LGBT [...]

  2. [...] This post was mentioned on Twitter by Tom Reinard and ericorbit, Jessie Schartung. Jessie Schartung said: Same sex couples denied entry [...]

  3. [...] the events about “love”, Ham had security goons posted all over the place. That led to some problems. Three of us (myself, my girlfriend and our friend Brandon) passed the security checkpoint despite [...]

  4. [...] And then this: Same sex couples denied entry to Creation Museum’s “Date Night” [...]

  5. By Late Night Sweet Cheeks « Sky Dancing on February 14, 2011 at 11:54 pm

    [...] specific topic apparently necessitated a high-level all-hands security force meeting earlier in the [...]

  6. [...] Surprise. The Creationist Museum does not allow same sex couples to enjoy their dioramas of lies. This same outfit is running the new Noah’s Ark Theme Park. Since they are receiving public [...]

  7. By Creation Museum Denies Entry to Gay Couple on November 30, 2013 at 2:21 pm

    […] A party of three (one male/female couple and one man, Brandon) arrived at the Creation Museum’s “Date Night&#8221. Event, as the event was beginning. they'd purchased tickets in advance. A fourth member of the party (Joe) hadn’t yet arrived. A security guard asked to know what Brandon’s date’s car looked like to verify his identity when he arrived. When Brandon informed the guard that his date was another man the guard became snide and said, “You guys (my girlfiend and I) can go inside but your friend and Joe can't.“ […]

  8. By home cctv reviews on September 8, 2014 at 1:07 am

    home cctv reviews

    Same sex couples denied entry to Creation Museum’s “Date Night” – FatLip

  9. By car accident pasadena ca on September 25, 2014 at 4:39 am

    car accident pasadena ca

    Same sex couples denied entry to Creation Museum’s “Date Night” – FatLip

  10. By understanding hair loss on October 6, 2014 at 2:20 am

    understanding hair loss

    Same sex couples denied entry to Creation Museum’s “Date Night” – FatLip