An old adage about fundamentalists is that they’re deathly afraid someone, somewhere is having fun. Nowhere is that more true than lead creationist and chief fundie Ken Ham who recently published a screed blasting the “wicked” behavior of Miley Cyrus and warning that God might seek retribution against her.
To begin with, she attacked the idea of a literal Genesis, calling it “f*cking insane.” However, Ham didn’t stop there, attacking her openness about sex and her decision to show off her breasts in a Paper photo shoot as well, as well.
Ken Ham, creationist
Ken Ham is one of the chief creationists; Ham runs the so-called “Creation Museum” in Kentucky as well as the online site, “Answers in Genesis.”
Ham has made headlines a couple of times in recent months, perhaps none with as much infamy as his decision to headline an event sponsored by Michael Peroutka last year. Peroutka is a well-known white supremacist and associate of the League of the South, whose organization donated a dinosaur skeleton to Ham’s museum.
To say that Ham keeps questionable company is certainly applicable; the man is no saint.
“The origin of clothing is in Genesis”
Writing in his rant, Ham asks, “What parent would want their child looking up to someone like this today who… shakes her fist at God and promotes sexual perversion?” He continues, saying that he won’t “direct people to that pagan magazine,” but noting that “the origin of clothing is in Genesis.”
Ham did call attention to Fox News’ coverage of the interview — of course paying attention to the fact that Cyrus “swore” throughout.
In reference to Noah’s Ark, Cyrus said that it was “f*cking insane” and added “We’ve outgrown that fairy tale, like we’ve outgrown f*cking Santa and the tooth fairy.”
Ham cautions his audience, telling them, “The same expletive was used a number of times in the interview” and, “As you read what she reportedly said, it becomes very obvious that it’s not just the biblical accounts of the Ark and Flood in Genesis she is dismissing, but she is rejecting our Ark of salvation—Jesus Christ.”
Ham notes that her “rebellion against God is clear,” and then quotes Cyrus on her sexual preferences — which is pretty much anything that’s legal, adding that she’s “down with any adult—anyone over the age of 18 who is down to love me. I don’t relate to being boy or girl, and I don’t have to have my partner relate to boy or girl.”
“Question for her,” Ham writes:
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? It’s actually because in her heart she knows God exists (Romans 1), she knows she is different from the animals as she is made in God’s image (Genesis 1)—and she has a conscience (as seared as it is because of her sinful rebellion) because the law is written on our hearts (Romans 2).
Because Ham, like most right-wingers, doesn’t understand how consent works, he also asks, “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?”
Ham ends by noting that Cyrus’ attitude towards God is one of the reasons why he’s working on his “ark adventure,” and closes by saying:
The message God gave to Israel is also a message for Miley Cyrus and all who reject Him: ‘I have no pleasure in the death of the wicked, but that the wicked turn from his way and live. Turn, turn from your evil ways!’
If God took no pleasure in the wicked, he wouldn’t punish them. This reminds me of the abuser who says, “Look, I don’t like it when you force me to hit you, but you keep making me hit you.”
Featured image via danthropolgy