Bible study rules for public schools ...

Bible study rules for public schools proposed

There are 179985 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.

“See how you are?”

Since: Jul 12

Earth

#104029 May 18, 2013
do whut wrote:
<quoted text>
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?
So I did, at that. I'll have to pay more attention to what I post in which thread. Was I wrong?

“See how you are?”

Since: Jul 12

Earth

#104030 May 18, 2013
curious wrote:
<quoted text>
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
So "curious" does indicate strange instead of inquisitive. Who would have guessed?
By all means, replicate some biblical miracles - or else call them what they are, the earliest incarnations of science fiction.

Since: Aug 10

Location hidden

#104031 May 18, 2013
Mike Duquette wrote:
<quoted text>Please show a scripture that says you cannot ask a question for another?
I will find one if you tell me that you would believe anything beyond the shadow of a doubt that I told you the Holy Ghost told me.

Since: Aug 10

Location hidden

#104032 May 18, 2013
Mike Duquette wrote:
<quoted text>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.
Please refer to my previous post

Since: Aug 10

Location hidden

#104034 May 18, 2013
Mike Duquette wrote:
<quoted text>Keep running, I will probably forget the question after a while.
I answered

Since: Aug 10

Location hidden

#104035 May 18, 2013
Mike Duquette wrote:
<quoted text>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.
Contraception is a path to unwanted pregnancies? What?

Please show me again why it is a church's responsibility.
curious

Winter Garden, FL

#104036 May 18, 2013
ChromiuMan wrote:
<quoted text>
So "curious" does indicate strange instead of inquisitive. Who would have guessed?
By all means, replicate some biblical miracles - or else call them what they are, the earliest incarnations of science fiction.
God's miracles can only be duplicated by God.
That is why science will never be able to duplicate the miracle of life.
Their futile search has been unproductive,as you well know.
See articles posted below
Evolutionist Richard Lewontin in The New York Review, January, 1997, page 31:

We take the side of science in spite of the patent absurdity of some of its constructs, in spite of the failure to fulfill many of its extravagant promises of health and life, in spite of the tolerance of the scientific community for unsubstantiated just-so-stories, because we have a prior commitment, a commitment to materialism. It is not that the methods and institutions of science somehow compel us to accept a material explanation of the phenomenal world, but, on the contrary, that we are forced by our a priori adherence to material causes to create an apparatus of investigation and a set of concepts that produce material explanations, no matter how mystifying to the uninitiated. Moreover, that materialism is an absolute, for we cannot allow a Divine Foot in the door.

Recently a molecular biologist working on identifying genetic controls for diseases was interviewed by George Caylor of The Ledger, Lynchburg, Virginia. His article entitled, "The Biologist," appeared on February 17, 2000. I received permission to reproduce parts of the interview here, as a conversation between "G" (the interviewer) and "J" (the molecular biologist). It began by discussing the complexity of human code.

J: "I'm a bit like an editor, trying to find a spelling mistake inside a document larger than four complete sets of Encyclopedia Britanica."

G: "Do you believe that the information evolved?"

J: "George, nobody I know in my profession believes it evolved. It was engineered by 'genius beyond genius,' and such information could not have been written any other way. The paper and ink did not write the book! Knowing what we know, it is ridiculous to think otherwise."

G: "Have you ever stated that in a public lecture, or in any public writings?"

J: "No. I just say it evolved. To be a molecular biologist requires one to hold on to two insanities at all times. One, it would be insane to believe in evolution when you can see the truth for yourself. Two, it would be insane to say you don't believe in evolution. All government work, research grants, papers, big college lectureseverything would stop. I'd be out of a job, or relegated to the outer fringes where I couldn't earn a decent living."

G: "I hate to say it, but that sounds intellectually dishonest."

J: "The work I do in genetic research is honorable. We will find the cures to many of mankind's worst diseases. But in the meantime, we have to live with the 'elephant in the living room'."

G: "What elephant?"

J: "Creation design. It's like an elephant in the living room. It moves around, takes up an enormous amount of space, loudly trumpets, bumps into us, knocks things over, eats a ton of hay, and smells like an elephant. And yet we have to swear it isn't there
curious

Winter Garden, FL

#104037 May 18, 2013
ChromiuMan wrote:
<quoted text>
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?
The problem with Evolutionists is that the Rocks in their heads are telling them to look for answers from the rocks on the ground.

“Question, Explore, Discover”

Since: Dec 11

Location hidden

#104038 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 you think the 10 year old child should have had the baby? She went through a body-altering pregnancy that could have killed her. She had to have a c-section, otherwise she would have died in childbirth.

And you're ok with all of this? You don't think it would have been the moral choice to terminate the pregnancy?

You are so enamored with this idea of magical souls that you would put a child's life in jeopardy?

Regarding that last question you asked: of course not. Killing a child is murder. Having an abortion is a medical procedure.

That's why you make the decision early if it is on the table for you. We don't need religious men dictating that decision for women. It's their body, their choice.

And if you think kids having kids is OK you've got a serious brain problem, dude. Get off the Bible juice for a while. Join us here in reality. It's nice.

“Question, Explore, Discover”

Since: Dec 11

Location hidden

#104039 May 18, 2013
curious wrote:
<quoted text>
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.
Smug Creationist dodges never get old.

“See how you are?”

Since: Jul 12

Earth

#104040 May 18, 2013
curious wrote:
<quoted text>
God's miracles can only be duplicated by God.
That is why science will never be able to duplicate the miracle of life.
Their futile search has been unproductive,as you well know.
See articles posted below
Evolutionist Richard Lewontin in The New York Review, January, 1997, page 31:
We take the side of science in spite of the patent absurdity of some of its constructs, in spite of the failure to fulfill many of its extravagant promises of health and life, in spite of the tolerance of the scientific community for unsubstantiated just-so-stories, because we have a prior commitment, a commitment to materialism. It is not that the methods and institutions of science somehow compel us to accept a material explanation of the phenomenal world, but, on the contrary, that we are forced by our a priori adherence to material causes to create an apparatus of investigation and a set of concepts that produce material explanations, no matter how mystifying to the uninitiated. Moreover, that materialism is an absolute, for we cannot allow a Divine Foot in the door.
Recently a molecular biologist working on identifying genetic controls for diseases was interviewed by George Caylor of The Ledger, Lynchburg, Virginia. His article entitled, "The Biologist," appeared on February 17, 2000. I received permission to reproduce parts of the interview here, as a conversation between "G" (the interviewer) and "J" (the molecular biologist). It began by discussing the complexity of human code.
J: "I'm a bit like an editor, trying to find a spelling mistake inside a document larger than four complete sets of Encyclopedia Britanica."
G: "Do you believe that the information evolved?"
J: "George, nobody I know in my profession believes it evolved. It was engineered by 'genius beyond genius,' and such information could not have been written any other way. The paper and ink did not write the book! Knowing what we know, it is ridiculous to think otherwise."
G: "Have you ever stated that in a public lecture, or in any public writings?"
J: "No. I just say it evolved. To be a molecular biologist requires one to hold on to two insanities at all times. One, it would be insane to believe in evolution when you can see the truth for yourself. Two, it would be insane to say you don't believe in evolution. All government work, research grants, papers, big college lectureseverything would stop. I'd be out of a job, or relegated to the outer fringes where I couldn't earn a decent living."
G: "I hate to say it, but that sounds intellectually dishonest."
J: "The work I do in genetic research is honorable. We will find the cures to many of mankind's worst diseases. But in the meantime, we have to live with the 'elephant in the living room'."
G: "What elephant?"
J: "Creation design. It's like an elephant in the living room. It moves around, takes up an enormous amount of space, loudly trumpets, bumps into us, knocks things over, eats a ton of hay, and smells like an elephant. And yet we have to swear it isn't there
In other words, Godmagic has no more place in a laboratory than do faerie dust and unicorn tears. Big surprise.
A conservative christian interview with an anonymous biologist. How impressive.
endtimeNews

AOL

#104041 May 18, 2013
.

Final Prophecies & MIDEAST WAR Ready ---

http://youtu.be/tyLAVfcckcw


.

“See how you are?”

Since: Jul 12

Earth

#104042 May 18, 2013
curious wrote:
<quoted text>
The problem with Evolutionists is that the Rocks in their heads are telling them to look for answers from the rocks on the ground.
No, the problem evolutionists have is the same one most investigators of the natural world have had since the beginning of history... religious bigotry and organized superstition.

Since: Aug 10

Location hidden

#104043 May 18, 2013
Mike Duquette wrote:
<quoted text>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.
I was not the one that brought up church in conjunction with abortion, so I am positive that I didn't say my church was proactive in educating people about contraceptives. The purpose of a church is for people to gather to learn about the god they worship. I have never once went to church expecting to learn about condoms or diaphragms, etc. it is comical that you think that should be a topic in a church talk.
It's as strange as attending a hockey game and expecting to hear about antioxidants.

Since: Aug 10

Location hidden

#104044 May 18, 2013
Mike Duquette wrote:
<quoted text>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.
Our church believes in the sanctity of marriage between a man and a woman because we believe that is the way God intended it. So supporting traditional marriage should not come as a surprise. In my church, parents are expected to educate their children about the consequences of premarital sex, and extramarital relationships. There are lessons occasionally at church that supplement the teaching of the parents. But the underlying teaching of our church is to practice the law of chastity which is sexual relations only with a spouse. So there is no lesson such as: but if you are going to disobey God, use these.

Since: Aug 10

Location hidden

#104045 May 18, 2013
Mike Duquette wrote:
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.
Nice attempt at baiting me. But I happen to agree with you. If we stopped abortion and a gay couple was deemed appropriate to be able to provide for a child, I'm all for it.

Since: Aug 10

Location hidden

#104046 May 18, 2013
Mike Duquette wrote:
<quoted text>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.
There were tons of supporters of Ron Paul last election. And there are a ton of democrats. And there are millions of LDS members that live outside the US that couldn't care less about our political parties.
In not ignoring your points, I'm showing that they are incorrect.

Since: Aug 10

Location hidden

#104047 May 18, 2013
KittenKoder wrote:
<quoted text>Why not? They have just as much evidence you have and thus the same chance of being correct? Why are you taking your chances?
Because when I studied Hinduism, I did not feel any connection to any of their gods.

Since: Aug 10

Location hidden

#104048 May 18, 2013
Mike Duquette wrote:
<quoted text>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.
I said we can do this on our own. How did you turn this into a church thing again? I'm talking about all of society, regardless of religion, political preference, favorite ice cream, paper or plastic. I'm talking about humans (hopefully I don't have to define every common word I use) in our very own communities.
My point is that we can expect our government to fix all of our problems, especially local ones.

Since: Aug 10

Location hidden

#104049 May 18, 2013
Mike Duquette wrote:
<quoted text>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.
Please google the LDS adoption program. Please, I beg you. I want you to see it from the source. You won't have to take my word for it. Our church has the world's best adoption program. It has been commended as such several times. Same for the welfare system. It has been hailed as the example that governments should use around the world.

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
Word Association (Oct '08) 3 min Dudd 298
Word game (Dec '10) 6 min Dudd 288
{keep a word drop a word} (Oct '11) 9 min Dudd 4,410
~~Keep A Word~~Drop A Word Game. (Jun '10) 11 min Dudd 2,058
Shooting 32 min Quantummist 5
Does Any One Know Christina Sparks 50 min Add 7
Amanda couch 1 hr my opinion 2

Barbourville Jobs

Personal Finance

Barbourville Mortgages