Bible study rules for public schools proposed

Feb 10, 2010 | Posted by: roboblogger | Full story: The Courier-Journal

FRANKFORT, Ky. - The state would create rules for teaching about the Bible in public high schools under a bill filed Monday by three Democratic senators.

Comments (Page 4,560)

Showing posts 91,181 - 91,200 of122,515
|
Go to last page| Jump to page:

“Speaker of Mountain Wisdom....”

Since: Jan 10

http://www.panoramio.com/user/

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#95356
Feb 22, 2013
 
Satanic Priest wrote:
<quoted text>Except mine, I worship the one true god.....oh flash back to my stupid youth
"Horsey Puckey Doo Doo" - Q
GPS

Ashland, KY

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#95357
Feb 22, 2013
 

Judged:

1

Their is a difference between teaching religion and teaching a religion. As such, concerned specifically mentioned a bible, to teach religion you wouldn't teach just a bible. The curriculum would need to convey the historical interaction and growth of religion from the earliest stories and their evolution into the different sects of the world. You would have a Western Torah/Bible/Koran based religion where the different players have been at each others throats for thousands of years. There would be a Eastern religions, with the philosophers.
You would have to study how western religions overwhelm and destroy pagan, native and aboriginal religions and society. There would be very little time for Jeasus Christ.

“Speaker of Mountain Wisdom....”

Since: Jan 10

http://www.panoramio.com/user/

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#95358
Feb 22, 2013
 

Judged:

1

Brian_G wrote:
<quoted text>I oppose wind and solar power in favor of fossil fuel power, wind and solar make too much pollution per Watt. Manufacture, installation, maintenance, repair, upgrade, replacement and disposal all create dangerous waste. Wind and solar are inefficient because they produce small amounts of electricity and production varies greatly over time. I need electricity when I turn a switch, not when the wind blows of sun is up. Wind power slaughters flying things and solar shades the flowers. I don't see the green, unless you mean government incentives.
Absolutely Correct... The only thing green about the green movement is the color of the money that flows like water from the poor to the rich as they jet to Cancun or Amsterdam or a dozen other meeting places where they sip fine wine and eat caviar while sharing a hot tub and lavish air conditioned suites.... While villages of people sit in mud huts wishing they had a single power line to light their world as they starve and die of thirst because they don't have power to pump water to drink and grow food.... While billions of poor people spend ever more of their money for power, cars, goods and services to pay for those green projects that make folks like Al Gore multimillionaires... The Green Movement is today a Religion.. with it's Priests, Clergy and Followers that Believe.. Good Gia Almighty... They Believe... As the Clergy in their fine robes and gold gilded mansions pass the plate the followers go forth and collect from the masses, by force if needed....
GWB

Rancho Cordova, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#95359
Feb 22, 2013
 

Judged:

3

2

2

what wrote:
<quoted text>
if u believe in tent revival miracles then u will believe in anything....lol
Like the GOP and Tea Party, good point.

“There is no god”

Since: Jul 12

War, WV

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#95360
Feb 22, 2013
 

Judged:

1

Quantummist wrote:
<quoted text>
"Horsey Puckey Doo Doo" - Q
Exactly. You got it right the first try.

“Speaker of Mountain Wisdom....”

Since: Jan 10

http://www.panoramio.com/user/

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#95361
Feb 22, 2013
 

Judged:

1

Satanic Priest wrote:
<quoted text>Exactly. You got it right the first try.
I have Discernment...... without the little voices in my head....

“The Fist of Goodness”

Since: May 11

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#95362
Feb 22, 2013
 

Judged:

1

Quantummist wrote:
<quoted text>
I have Discernment...... without the little voices in my head....
There you are, Discernment, excrement and are two different things!....You buffoon!!
Known Fact

Cocoa Beach, FL

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#95363
Feb 22, 2013
 

Judged:

2

1

1

Archangel Oger wrote:
<quoted text>
There you are, Discernment, excrement and are two different things!....You buffoon!!
The word arch means the very top. There is only one archangel named Michael he is the very top angel in heaven. HIS NAME IS NOT OGER!
Known Fact

Cocoa Beach, FL

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#95364
Feb 22, 2013
 

Judged:

2

1

1

Read Matthew 6:9,10 and find the solution to mankinds problems, GOD'S KINGDOM! When that prayer is answered then all of our problems will be solved.
Jeremiah 10:23 Man cannot direct his own steps...much less solve mankinds problems! Only God by means of his Kingdom can solve all of our problems!
Psalm 37:9-11, 29 Isaiah 9:6,7
blahblahblah

London, KY

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#95365
Feb 22, 2013
 
Yiago wrote:
<quoted text>
Yes, you are correct. We have 65 plants, according to Wiki. What I meant to suggest was that we need more. There is a public fear of these plants that curtails our desire to build them. Yet they are far more efficient and cost effective than traditional plants. If you think a nuclear plant has a high cost just compare it to a traditional plant cranking out the same energy. It is off the charts.
I don't understand the rest of your post. WTF are you talking about?
It's expensive
" Higher capital costs due to safety, emergency, containment, radioactive waste, and storage systems

Problem of long-term storage of radioactive waste

Heated waste water from nuclear plants harms aquatic life

Potential nuclear proliferation issue "...
----------

In March 2011, the approx. US $ cost to get 1 kg of uranium as UO2 reactor fuel (at current spot uranium price):
At 45,000 MWd/t burn-up this gives 360,000 kWh electrical per kg, hence fuel cost: 0.77 c/kWh.

"Most efficiency improvements have been priced at 1 to 3 per kilowatt-hour, while new nuclear energy is on track to cost 15 to 20 per kilowatt-hour. And no nuclear plant has ever been completed on budget."
Romm, J. The Staggering Cost of New Nuclear Power.Part One in a Series on a New Nuclear Cost Study.CfAP. Web. 2009

Hummmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm mmm...WTFrig didn't you comprehend?

“Question, Explore, Discover”

Since: Dec 11

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#95367
Feb 23, 2013
 

Judged:

1

blahblahblah wrote:
<quoted text>
It's expensive
" Higher capital costs due to safety, emergency, containment, radioactive waste, and storage systems
Problem of long-term storage of radioactive waste
Heated waste water from nuclear plants harms aquatic life
Potential nuclear proliferation issue "...
----------
In March 2011, the approx. US $ cost to get 1 kg of uranium as UO2 reactor fuel (at current spot uranium price):
At 45,000 MWd/t burn-up this gives 360,000 kWh electrical per kg, hence fuel cost: 0.77 c/kWh.
"Most efficiency improvements have been priced at 1 to 3 per kilowatt-hour, while new nuclear energy is on track to cost 15 to 20 per kilowatt-hour. And no nuclear plant has ever been completed on budget."
Romm, J. The Staggering Cost of New Nuclear Power.Part One in a Series on a New Nuclear Cost Study.CfAP. Web. 2009
Hummmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm mmm...WTFrig didn't you comprehend?
Your other post was fully of typos and oddly phrased sentences. Thank you for typing one that makes more sense.

Your source is most likely heavily biased. That dose not make it invalid, but it does put up a red flag.

I'm not an expert but I have looked into this a little bit over the years. My understanding is that nuclear power plants are far, far more efficient than traditional plants. There is the question of huge start up costs, but those costs would be diminished if we built more plants.

There is also the question of storing waste. I agree that is a major concern, but I do not think it is a show stopper. Nuclear plants generate less waste than traditional plants and are far easier on the environment. Also the energy saved in transporting fuel alone is pretty staggering.

There are numerous benefits to nuclear energy. And there are major obstacles as well. I personally think it is worth it, but I can understand peoples' concerns.

Like any controversial subject you need to read widely and listen to varying points of view in order to get a sense of where the truth probably lies. If you look at sources that are overtly anti-nuclear you are not going to get a clear picture. Look at the science, look at the history.

I'm on board with alternative energy sources, if they can promise more bang-for-buck. Nuclear has the biggest bang (pardon the pun). I think coal is simply not sustainable, and it is damaging to our environment to mine and use it. I'm not convinced that wind is worth the effort, but the jury is still out. Solar would be awesome, perhaps best, but the technology has to advance by orders of magnitude first. We need the friggin' lunar surface to be one giant solar panel.

“CAPS LOCK CAUSE CLIMATE CHANGE”

Since: Dec 08

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#95369
Feb 23, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Study the bible to learn wisdom and math texts to learn arithmetic.
DontCare

Frankfort, KY

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#95372
Feb 23, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

THE UNA FARTER wrote:
The fartman is all on board for nuclear power. Eat lots of beans and chimichanga's. This will produce less waste than fossil fuel. lol
Hello UNA, it's great to see you back posting.
blahblahblah

Somerset, KY

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#95373
Feb 23, 2013
 
Yiago wrote:
<quoted text>
Your other post was fully of typos and oddly phrased sentences. Thank you for typing one that makes more sense.
Your source is most likely heavily biased. That dose not make it invalid, but it does put up a red flag.
I'm not an expert but I have looked into this a little bit over the years. My understanding is that nuclear power plants are far, far more efficient than traditional plants. There is the question of huge start up costs, but those costs would be diminished if we built more plants.
There is also the question of storing waste. I agree that is a major concern, but I do not think it is a show stopper. Nuclear plants generate less waste than traditional plants and are far easier on the environment. Also the energy saved in transporting fuel alone is pretty staggering.
There are numerous benefits to nuclear energy. And there are major obstacles as well. I personally think it is worth it, but I can understand peoples' concerns.
Like any controversial subject you need to read widely and listen to varying points of view in order to get a sense of where the truth probably lies. If you look at sources that are overtly anti-nuclear you are not going to get a clear picture. Look at the science, look at the history.
I'm on board with alternative energy sources, if they can promise more bang-for-buck. Nuclear has the biggest bang (pardon the pun). I think coal is simply not sustainable, and it is damaging to our environment to mine and use it. I'm not convinced that wind is worth the effort, but the jury is still out. Solar would be awesome, perhaps best, but the technology has to advance by orders of magnitude first. We need the friggin' lunar surface to be one giant solar panel.
One of the biggest requirements, is adequate water supply.

Some states, just DO NOT offer that as far as natural resources go.

The lunar surface is NEVER going to be that, so get over it already...there's enough INEFFICIENCY draining the pockets of duh givverment already.

(hummmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm...damn big flies-wth is in their diets! And why is the sequesterd ground glowing with any eerie greenish hue, where once the grass grew green and lush, and the now murky water is unaccessable?)
religon suxs

Grayson, KY

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#95374
Feb 23, 2013
 
sodoms sux brown

Dayton, OH

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#95375
Feb 23, 2013
 

“Question, Explore, Discover”

Since: Dec 11

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#95376
Feb 23, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

blahblahblah wrote:
<quoted text>
One of the biggest requirements, is adequate water supply.
Some states, just DO NOT offer that as far as natural resources go.
The lunar surface is NEVER going to be that, so get over it already...there's enough INEFFICIENCY draining the pockets of duh givverment already.
(hummmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm...damn big flies-wth is in their diets! And why is the sequesterd ground glowing with any eerie greenish hue, where once the grass grew green and lush, and the now murky water is unaccessable?)
Again, you lost me. I can decipher the "givverment" phonetics but I have no idea what peyote you're using in the last bit.

“See how you are?”

Since: Jul 12

Earth

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#95377
Feb 23, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

2

Brian_G wrote:
Study the bible to learn wisdom and math texts to learn arithmetic.
Okay.
Pi = circumference/diameter = 3.14
1 Kings 7:23 circumference/diameter = 3
(The wisdom of God mathematics.)

Precipitation for 960 hours accumulated a minimum of 10,000 feet (plus 15 cubits)= over 10 feet per hour of rainfall.(the wisdom of God meteorology) No terrestrial features were impacted.(The wisdom of God geology.)

The flood occurred around 4,300 years ago. The oldest cities have been continuously inhabited since the beginning of the Chalcolithic period,(up to) roughly twice that long ago, and many, many sites predate the biblical record of the Garden of Eden.(The wisdom of God archaeology.) There is no human population bottleneck registered to 2300 BCE (the wisdom of God genetics) but if there were, in a couple generations there was a population surplus capable of building the Tower of Babel (the wisdom of God reproductive rates).

I can see how miraculous God "wisdom" is way more accurate than mundane arithmetic for Brain_D.

“Speaker of Mountain Wisdom....”

Since: Jan 10

http://www.panoramio.com/user/

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#95378
Feb 23, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

ChromiuMan wrote:
<quoted text>
Okay.
Pi = circumference/diameter = 3.14
1 Kings 7:23 circumference/diameter = 3
(The wisdom of God mathematics.)
Precipitation for 960 hours accumulated a minimum of 10,000 feet (plus 15 cubits)= over 10 feet per hour of rainfall.(the wisdom of God meteorology) No terrestrial features were impacted.(The wisdom of God geology.)
The flood occurred around 4,300 years ago. The oldest cities have been continuously inhabited since the beginning of the Chalcolithic period,(up to) roughly twice that long ago, and many, many sites predate the biblical record of the Garden of Eden.(The wisdom of God archaeology.) There is no human population bottleneck registered to 2300 BCE (the wisdom of God genetics) but if there were, in a couple generations there was a population surplus capable of building the Tower of Babel (the wisdom of God reproductive rates).
I can see how miraculous God "wisdom" is way more accurate than mundane arithmetic for Brain_D.
You left out that boat that had a finite external size yet a seemingly infinite inside size since it was big enough to hold a several square miles of bugs, mammals, birds, fish, reptiles and amphibians....(the wisdom of God's spacial constructs)

“See how you are?”

Since: Jul 12

Earth

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#95379
Feb 23, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

Quantummist wrote:
<quoted text>
You left out that boat that had a finite external size yet a seemingly infinite inside size since it was big enough to hold a several square miles of bugs, mammals, birds, fish, reptiles and amphibians....(the wisdom of God's spacial constructs)
I had accounted for that. Since the flood by necessity predated Pangaea, the Ark was in fact a TARDIS.(The wisdom of God's space time automotive engineering.)

Tell me when this thread is updated: (Registration is not required)

Add to my Tracker Send me an email

Showing posts 91,181 - 91,200 of122,515
|
Go to last page| Jump to page:
Type in your comments below
Name
(appears on your post)
Comments
Characters left: 4000
Type the numbers you see in the image on the right:

Please note by clicking on "Post Comment" you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

17 Users are viewing the Barbourville Forum right now

Search the Barbourville Forum:
Topic Updated Last By Comments
KY Can You Pass an 8th Grade Test from 1912? (Aug '13) 1 hr Boop 918
Who would make a great mayor? 1 hr WTF 74
can u apply for food stamps online 1 hr guss 28
KY Hundreds of birds die in western Ky. (Jan '11) 1 hr sPam 81,188
New Family Court Judge NEEDED!!! 1 hr WTF 38
Coming soon to America!!! SICK 1 hr guss 4
Preachers 1 hr guss 4
Eight arrested in Knox drug roundup... 7 hr your screwed 9
•••

Freeze Warning for Knox County was issued at April 16 at 3:24AM EDT

•••
•••
•••
Barbourville Dating

more search filters

less search filters

•••

Barbourville Jobs

•••
•••
•••

Barbourville People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

•••

Personal Finance

Mortgages [ See current mortgage rates ]
•••