Bible study rules for public schools ...

Bible study rules for public schools proposed

There are 148904 comments on the The Courier-Journal story from Feb 10, 2010, titled Bible study rules for public schools proposed. In it, The Courier-Journal reports that:

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.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at The Courier-Journal.

“Breaking the spell ”

Since: Dec 10

of the puppet master

#104009 May 18, 2013
pro·mote
[pruh-moht] Show IPA
verb (used with object), pro·mot·ed, pro·mot·ing.
1.
to help or encourage to exist or flourish; further: to promote world peace.
2.
to advance in rank, dignity, position, etc.( opposed to demote ).
3.
Education . to put ahead to the next higher stage or grade of a course or series of classes.
4.
to aid in organizing (business undertakings).
5.
to encourage the sales, acceptance, etc., of (a product), especially through advertising or other publicity.
do whut wrote:
<quoted text>
What would "promoting" mean to you?

“Breaking the spell ”

Since: Dec 10

of the puppet master

#104010 May 18, 2013
do whut wrote:
<quoted text>
What stats did I run from?
The one about how many pregnancies naturally abort. You bailed on why god allows this to happen. If god is nature, then is he not responsible for all these miscarriages?
Oh, I forgot, the ghost does not tell you anything you do not care about.

“Breaking the spell ”

Since: Dec 10

of the puppet master

#104011 May 18, 2013
do whut wrote:
<quoted text>
Again, what do you consider promoting?
Keep running, I will probably forget the question after a while.

“Breaking the spell ”

Since: Dec 10

of the puppet master

#104012 May 18, 2013
do whut wrote:
<quoted text>
I can't speak for everyone. I feel comfortable speaking for my church.
I have no political affiliation, not that it is relevant.
My church has said they do not oppose birth control and that the choice to use it or not is the choice of the couple. It is not a church's job to educate people on the forms of birth control. I'm not sure why you think it is. A church's main function is to bring people closer to God. Discussing birth control or overpopulation is not the responsibility of a church.
This is not just about overpopulation, it is about unwanted pregnancies and thus abortion. Contraception is a path to unwanted pregnancies.
If your church does not see it as their job to educate one how to reduce abortions, then you fail to show your church as being very pro active. Bitching about abortion is getting you nowhere if you sit on your hands to prevent it.

“Breaking the spell ”

Since: Dec 10

of the puppet master

#104013 May 18, 2013
do whut wrote:
<quoted text>
I can't speak for everyone. I feel comfortable speaking for my church.
I have no political affiliation, not that it is relevant.
My church has said they do not oppose birth control and that the choice to use it or not is the choice of the couple. It is not a church's job to educate people on the forms of birth control. I'm not sure why you think it is. A church's main function is to bring people closer to God. Discussing birth control or overpopulation is not the responsibility of a church.
Looking at the massive amount of dollars your church spent on prop 8, one would think their main purpose was to keep rights from those they have superstitious beliefs about.
We see your churches priorities and it proves to us that preventing abortion is not one of them.

“Breaking the spell ”

Since: Dec 10

of the puppet master

#104014 May 18, 2013
Speaking of prop 8, homosexual couples are great for adopting unwanted children.
Just another example of how religion fails to achieve the goals that are good for society.

“Breaking the spell ”

Since: Dec 10

of the puppet master

#104015 May 18, 2013
do whut wrote:
<quoted text>
I can't speak for everyone. I feel comfortable speaking for my church.
I have no political affiliation, not that it is relevant.
I just spelled out the relation. But as usual, you ignore all points we make with no logical reason offered as to why.
Your church is known to support republicans. I am sure most Mormons are republicans.
Ignore the realities and you ignore the solutions.

“I Am No One Else”

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

#104016 May 18, 2013
do whut wrote:
<quoted text>
No, it doesn't. Nor does what Hindu's believe have any affect on me. I do not subject myself to their direction.
Why not? They have just as much evidence you have and thus the same chance of being correct? Why are you taking your chances?

“Breaking the spell ”

Since: Dec 10

of the puppet master

#104017 May 18, 2013
do whut wrote:
<quoted text>
Why blame government officials for this? We can do things on our own to change this.
You just said it was not the job of the church to teach about contraception, so on this point, your post here fails miserably.
Churches have never adequately helped the poor. They might try, but never have succeeded as our government has.
As long as your churches priority is just getting new member to worship god, all other things are on the back burner.

“Breaking the spell ”

Since: Dec 10

of the puppet master

#104018 May 18, 2013
do whut wrote:
<quoted text>
Adoption should be made easier so she can get on with her life.
Some people realize at different points in their life that a child is preventing them from doing other things. Should it be acceptable for a career driven woman to decide that her 4 year old is keeping her from becoming a surgeon, so she will just end his/her life so she can go on with her own?
So what is your church doing to make adoption easier? Stigmatizing those who wish to have careers over being a parent?
Maybe just accept the fact some do not wish to be parents, then maybe you will see more bearing the child and putting up for adoption.
I know you wish for some Utopian world,but that is an impossibility.

Since: Aug 10

Location hidden

#104019 May 18, 2013
ChromiuMan wrote:
<quoted text>Sorry Bub, denial is not a defense. Nutball Muslim extremists have had a huge impact on you. PACs have an impact on you. You coexist on a planet with 7 billion other humans in a country that has over 300 million other humans. You are governed by a democratic republic. "Render unto Caesar...".
In that sense, yes I agree. But doctrinally no. Sorry, my confusion

Since: Aug 10

Location hidden

#104020 May 18, 2013
_Ummm_ wrote:
<quoted text>I already explained how that definition is fine in a literary sense. Rejecting it as applies to this discussion is not arrogance; it is a simple matter of it being insufficient and you apparently being too stupid to get that. You cannot define things using the same word. Period. And I'm not the one with the definition of "human" that would allow animals to meet it. That's you.

FYI, some monkeys are known to abort their fetuses when a more fitting mate shows up. Not that it matters to this discussion in any way. You arbitrary rule that I can't apply your poor definition of human to beings that may fit it (simply because they don't abort) is irrelevant. Give a better definition. And then explain what "living" is for that "human".
The definition is just fine, whether you choose to accept it or not. You choose to mince words to make it ok to abort, whatever, that's your choice to think that way, I happen to think you are wrong. And in matters of life and death, I choose life.

Here is an except from Webster on Life:
1 a : the quality that distinguishes a vital and functional being from a dead body b : a principle or force that is considered to underlie the distinctive quality of animate beings c : an organismic state characterized by capacity for metabolism, growth, reaction to stimuli, and reproduction 2 a : the sequence of physical and mental experiences that make up the existence of an individual b : one or more aspects of the process of living

1a would set a fetus apart because it is not dead. Dead means no chance of life.
C points out that a fetus certainly has capacity for growth and reaction to stimuli.

Obviously that if left alone, the purpose of a fetus is to develop into a child.

Since: Aug 10

Location hidden

#104021 May 18, 2013
Mike Duquette wrote:
<quoted text>Try looking up the word. If your church promoted birth control, you would have no problem answering this question.
Why is it a church's job to promote education of birth control? This is a parent's job, or perhaps a school system arguably. Church isn't for teaching how not to get pregnant. I can't figure out where your head is on this one. The LDS church has said what its stance is on it. What further would you expect?

Since: Aug 10

Location hidden

#104022 May 18, 2013
ChromiuMan wrote:
<quoted text>Oh? Did I say anything that would implicate conservatives of those actions and attitudes over other factions?
You said this:

"And yet it is the conservative front that resents spending money on education and benefits for children - even for food. Love the fetus, ignore the child?"

Did you mean something else?

Since: Aug 10

Location hidden

#104023 May 18, 2013
Mike Duquette wrote:
<quoted text>Of course the ghost is male, just as all the higher ups in Christianity and Mormonism are male. Typical chauvinist group.

You have avoided my questions so often and have been diverting so much, I forget which one we are talking about now.

But still would love to hear if your church is promoting contraceptives in any way, shape or form.
Do you not agree that promoting contraceptives is a good way to prevent unwanted pregnancies, thus abortions?
The actions He performs requires the priesthood. Males are given the opportunity to hold the priesthood because they need it. Women have been said not to need it. They have the potential to be more righteous by nature. You don't really care so I won't go any deeper.

I have avoided nothing. I have always answered every question, you just don't like the answer, you just like to pick me apart to make me appear stupid.

And if you mean by "promoting" that leaders have conversations about its appropriateness, yes they do. It is rarely a topic at the pulpit, but bishops have these conversations with youth and newly married couples quite regularly so they can plan their lives and become properly prepared to start a family. But if you are asking if we stand at the pulpit and talk about the importance of birth control. No, we choose to talk about the things that bring is closer to Christ.
Pitbullie

Versailles, KY

#104024 May 18, 2013
Actually, religion was the major factor in most of the killings you mention, and so very, very many more.
curious wrote:
<quoted text>
Seriously, dude, have you ever read the thing? Or studied any history?
Obviously you have not
Worst Atrocities of the 20-21st centuries
Mao Ze-Dong (China, 1958-61 and 1966-69, Tibet 1949-50) 49-78,000,000
Adolf Hitler (Germany, 1939-1945) 12,000,000 (concentration camps and civilians deliberately killed in WWII plus 3 million Russian POWs left to die)
Leopold II of Belgium (Congo, 1886-1908) 8,000,000
Jozef Stalin (USSR, 1932-39) 7,000,000 (the gulags plus the purges plus Ukraine's famine)
Hideki Tojo (Japan, 1941-44) 5,000,000 (civilians in WWII)
Ismail Enver (Ottoman Turkey, 1915-20) 1,200,000 Armenians (1915)+ 350,000 Greek Pontians and 480,000 Anatolian Greeks (1916-22)+ 500,000 Assyrians (1915-20)
Pol Pot (Cambodia, 1975-79) 1,700,000
Kim Il Sung (North Korea, 1948-94) 1.6 million (purges and concentration camps)
Menghistu (Ethiopia, 1975-78) 1,500,000
Yakubu Gowon (Biafra, 1967-1970) 1,000,000
Leonid Brezhnev (Afghanistan, 1979-1982) 900,000
Jean Kambanda (Rwanda, 1994) 800,000
Saddam Hussein (Iran 1980-1990 and Kurdistan 1987-88) 600,000
Tito (Yugoslavia, 1945-1987) 570,000
Suharto (Communists 1965-66) 500,000
Fumimaro Konoe (Japan, 1937-39) 500,000?(Chinese civilians)
Jonas Savimbi (Angola, 1975-2002) 400,000
Mullah Omar - Taliban (Afghanistan, 1986-2001) 400,000
Idi Amin (Uganda, 1969-1979) 300,000
Yahya Khan (Pakistan, 1970-71) 300,000 (Bangladesh)
Ante Pavelic (Croatia, 1941-45) 359,000 (30,000 Jews, 29,000 Gipsies, 300,000 Serbs)
Benito Mussolini (Ethiopia, 1936; Libya, 1934-45; Yugoslavia, WWII) 300,000
Mobutu Sese Seko (Zaire, 1965-97)?
Charles Taylor (Liberia, 1989-1996) 220,000
Foday Sankoh (Sierra Leone, 1991-2000) 200,000
Suharto (Aceh, East Timor, New Guinea, 1975-98) 200,000
Ho Chi Min (Vietnam, 1953-56) 200,000
Michel Micombero (Burundi, 1972) 150,000
Slobodan Milosevic (Yugoslavia, 1992-99) 100,000
Hassan Turabi (Sudan, 1989-1999) 100,000
curious

Winter Garden, FL

#104025 May 18, 2013
Yiago wrote:
<quoted text>
The foundation of science is observation, data collection, theory, criticism/review, and revision.
The foundation of science is NOT "not knowing".
And you should not assume "unexplainable circumstances". If it is natural, we can study it.
You need to look into theories of abiogenesis. Look at RNA world, for example. Look at thermal vents as a constant source of energy. MUCH work has been done in this field. Your characterization of this as being founded on "not knowing" is pure ignorance on your part. And laziness. Hell, ten minutes of honest research should *at least* make you acknowledge that this is a robust fiend of study.
Stop being a dumb Creationist kook and learn something. Your repeated logical fallacies are tiring.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abiogenesis
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/abioprob/
http://wiki.ironchariots.org/index.php...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RNA_world_hypoth...
http://exploringorigins.org/rnaworld.html
http://www.chem.duke.edu/~jds/cruise_chem/Exo...
The foundation of science is observation, data collection, theory, criticism/review, and revision.
Well,they've done all that and still do not have an answer.
I do not need to look any further. I and millions of others have found our answer.
Our answer is not based on studying old bones,rocks and theories based on events that supposedly took place billions of years ago,which no one witnessed,can not explain nor duplicate.
You are looking at that which is natural to explain that which is supernatural,which neither Science or unbelievers are able to understand..
But,keep looking,your search may lead you to conclude that you've been looking in the wrong places and hopefully the answer to that which you seek,will be provided.

Since: Aug 10

Location hidden

#104026 May 18, 2013
Mike Duquette wrote:
<quoted text>Many conservatives are to blame, just as many Christians are to blame.
Scared to blame anyone? If so, then you are not part of the solution, but part of the problem.
Blaming someone doesn't solve anything. It just categorizes people into stereotypes and raises resentment which puts a bigger wedges between people which rarely ever solves any problem, generally speaking.
curious

Winter Garden, FL

#104027 May 18, 2013
Mike Duquette wrote:
<quoted text>Frustrating, isn't it? Do unto others.....
I am not frustrated,I have found my answer.
I live very comfortably,confident in the fact that,MY GOD LIVES.
I do not hang my beliefs on studying old bones,rocks and theories of events that no one witnessed,no one can explain or duplicate,in the HOPE that someday this may all be explained...
That is blind faith....based on Science Fiction...
But,keep seeking,that which you seek,may come to you after all

“See how you are?”

Since: Jul 12

Earth

#104028 May 18, 2013
do whut wrote:
<quoted text>
In that sense, yes I agree. But doctrinally no. Sorry, my confusion
Confusion can be cleared, yet... YaA and curious remind me of a riddle:
Q. How many shrinks does it take to change a light bulb?
A. Just one, but the light bulb has to be willing to change.
Doctrinally you read the KJV, which was canonized by whom? Which came first - we've discussed the chicken or the egg, now do we review science or religion, ethics or morality, the preaching or the preacher, the magic or the magician, the con or the mark?

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form 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.

Barbourville Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Barbourville Venders Mall 15 min november 9
chinese restaurant RUDE 28 min scary 12
Anyone seen Kilgore fight ? 1 hr Very funny 10
Liquor License to locals only 1 hr governor 14
Places for rent.. 1 hr thanks 1
tara 2 hr kcb 8
Beating knox drug court drug tests ! 2 hr fyi 22
More from around the web

Personal Finance

Barbourville Mortgages