Originally posted by IdahoAmber
I really don't see why the whole tax thing is such a huge deal.
Because it is utterly the worst possible lie possible. If he lied in these circumstances it is hard to imagine ANY circumstances which he would not be willing to lie.
In American society the place where one is under the greatest
obligation to tell the truth is in a court of law. Indeed if our country is to have either a fair or an effective judicial system it must be able to demand that those under oath in a court of law speak the truth as they understand it. Anyone under oath (or affirmation) must give the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.
What makes it even worse is the circumstances in which the lie was made. It is certainly very understandible (though not justifiable) that someone will lie under oath to avoid being executed or spending a good chunk of their life in jail. It is also understandable (though again utterly unjustifiable) to lie under oath to avoid severe personal embarassment. Why did Hovind, in this case, lie? He lied so he could avoid his civic responsiblity and legal oblication to pay his taxes. Furthermore he knowingly tried to misuse the bankruptsy court in order to evade paying taxes. That court, BTW, is paid for by my taxes. (Also consider how overloaded judicial dockets are these days: his false suit almost certainly delayed justice for others.)
I pay my taxes and file, to the best of my ability, accurate returns. I would do so even if the remote possiblity of being audited did not exist. That this man would lie in court in order not to pay is very disgusting to me, especially for someone one who talks so must about being moral. From this alone and not from any view he has about creation/evolution would result in an absolutely low assessment of his character. The next time you use a road consider that it was built using tax dollars -- tax dollars Hovind tried not to pay. The next time you see a police or fireman consider they can exist only via taxes. Consider that the soldiers who risk their lives for us are supported by taxes. How about the many medical and scientific breakthroughs that are paid for by taxes? How about the education of children especially of families who could not afford to educate them if it was not provided to them? How about parks?
In short, Hovind deserves to spend some time in something that taxpayers also pay for: a jail cell. And I will support the same for any evolutionist who has done the same.
So irregardless of anything about creation/evolution it is established that Hovind willing to lie even in where he has the greatest legal and moral responsiblity to tell the truth. This alone would make anything he said, unless independently verified, exist under a cloud of doubt. That he has a financial interest in creationism does not help either. But all that not withstanding, we have indisputable evidence that Hovind does make many false statements in the creation/evolution debate. The number and severity of these falsehoods and that they have been debunked many times are enough to demonstrate that he is not going through much effort to be accurate. Indeed his statements on radiocarbon and mammoths to be suggest outright lying. Not being honest in scientific matters is also something I take a very dim view of though not nearly as much as lying in court to try to avoid paying taxes.
And if he was not disgusting enough, Hovind is also an anti-semite. He is selling
Fourth Reich of the Rich and has endorsed
The Protocols of the Elders of Zion.
He is also a bit of a nut. He been claiming for at least several years that some people in Arkansas pay groceries by having their hands scanned. Currently, according to his own accounts, he has spent nearly $100,000 of the money that people have donated to him to avoid paying a $50 fine because he says the laws of the state of Florida (in particular the building code) does not apply to him. If I was a creationist who donated money, I would be dismayed by that kind of waste of money.
Kent Hovind is simply beyond any sort of defense. He is a man without any honesty or notion of civic responsiblity. He is a kook and a bigot who is duping the public with "facts" which simply not true.
How can anyone defend this man?
Well, here's some fodder for thought (from the Kent Hovind Lies page, sorry to spam but Ambrosia appears to be intent on not visiting):
