Bible study rules for public schools proposed

Feb 10, 2010 Full story: The Courier-Journal 131,920

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.

Full Story
Yes and Amen

Winchester, KY

#104392 May 22, 2013
stuck in a lodi wrote:
<quoted text> I did not say it was 100% fool-proof. The majority of people who put the condom on in the correct manner do not experience "bursting or breakage". My point is; it's better than having no protection and risking such diseases.
For your second point, I said I encourage NO SEX UNTIL AFTER MARRIAGE, what part of that did you not understand? But I'm not going to pretend to be stupid in thinking that they will marry as a virgin! It is my responsibility as a parent to teach them SEX ED 101. for both genders!
AMEN!
Lust of anything is bad, sex, money, power!
It all withers, rusts, and blows away!
What we think important today is garbage tomorrow!

Since: Aug 10

Location hidden

#104393 May 22, 2013
ProvenScience wrote:
<quoted text>
Good, informative web site isn't it.
Yes, if you actually take the time to read it. Are you admitting that you were mistaken?

Since: Aug 10

Location hidden

#104394 May 22, 2013
ProvenScience wrote:
<quoted text>
...
If you cannot deal with actual FACTS, don't even bother to respond, because your ignorance will just be ignored.
I can't believe, after this little exercise with the Planned Parenthood website and your exposed glossing over (manipulation) of data, that you had the gall to say that. I think it's time for one of your little quiet, introspective periods that you claim to have from time to time.

“Breaking the spell ”

Since: Dec 10

of the puppet master

#104395 May 22, 2013
do whut wrote:
<quoted text>

To answer this last one: yes, I believe in the sanctity of marriage between a man and a woman, and I believe it is fine for a church to support this doctrine. Civil union is fine. Marriage indicates a connection with God.
So you wish to withhold marriage to homosexuals due to your superstition and yet cannot understand why we oppose your religion?
America is not a theocracy. We should not be making law due to your superstitions.
Would you not be just as upset as I if Muslims became a majority in America and they made superstitious laws (Sharia law)?
I am sure your church would love it if women could be kept from high ranking jobs also.
We get it, you and your church are bigots. And you wonder why so many look at your church as if it were a cult?
Show us your church is a leader in morality then we can talk about it following an actual god.
Withholding rights and privileges due to race, sex, or sexual persuasion is not moral. Your church has done all three and is still doing two of them.
You and your church learned nothing from its racism debacle.

Since: Aug 10

Location hidden

#104396 May 22, 2013
stuck in a lodi wrote:
Yes you did. and then you changed my original post to reflect your %'s , which was wrong! I still don't believe you understand that what you posted was wrong ,and/or misleading.
Exactly. It's hard to not get irritated by them (there are several in this forum who behave similarly to PS). I sometimes wonder how they act in real life and how frustrating it would be to work with or supervise them.

“Breaking the spell ”

Since: Dec 10

of the puppet master

#104397 May 22, 2013
do whut wrote:
<quoted text>
In case you haven't noticed, we don't disagree on contraceptives. We disagree on churches having the responsibility on teaching how to use contraceptives. I agree with Kitten, doctors are much better sources for this knowledge, I would have thought you would agree since you think churches teach fiction anyway.
I also didn't say the religious shouldn't teach youth about contraceptives. I said churches shouldn't. Parents most certainly should educate their children, religious or not.
No one thinks adoption is a sin. Pre-marital sex is a sin. Part of the repentance process is making amends for the sin. Adoption or raising the child are certainly great choices to repent of the sin.
I'm using my phone, so when you ask 5 or 6 questions at once, it is difficult for me to answer all of them. For that, I apologize. I don't avoid questions on purpose.
To answer this last one: yes, I believe in the sanctity of marriage between a man and a woman, and I believe it is fine for a church to support this doctrine. Civil union is fine. Marriage indicates a connection with God.
Churches are teaching fiction, and you are here defending that is all they teach. You oppose them teaching modern inventions that reduce abortions.

You cannot expect me to take you seriously when you complain about abortion so much then shirk the churches role in reducing abortions.

“Breaking the spell ”

Since: Dec 10

of the puppet master

#104398 May 22, 2013
do whut wrote:
<quoted text>
You missed it. They did use them. But they aren't 100% reliable so they still got pregnant.
And abstinence teaching does not stop kids from having sex. So neither approach is one hundred percent effective. This is why both need to be taught.
And I think if they do happen to get pregnant, abortion and adoption is an option.
ProvenScience

London, KY

#104399 May 22, 2013
stuck in a lodi wrote:
Yes you did. and then you changed my original post to reflect your %'s , which was wrong! I still don't believe you understand that what you posted was wrong ,and/or misleading.
The info YOU posted WAS misleading, just like I stated. the information I posted was from Planned Parenthood, not some made up bunch of bullchit opinion.
So now I WILL say-
Stop LYING and spreading FALSE propoganda!(which is NOT the same as resorting to a fifth grade level name calling MENTAL-ity.)

Need more FACTS to choke on?-

According to the World Health Organization...

Although Nonoxynol-9 has been shown to increase the risk of HIV infection when used frequently by women at high risk of infection, it remains a contraceptive option for women at low risk.

Nonoxynol-9 offers no protection against sexually transmitted infections such as gonorrhea or chlamydia.

There is no evidence that condoms lubricated with Nonoxynol-9 are any more effective in preventing pregnancy or infection than condoms lubricated with silicone, and such condoms should no longer be promoted. However, it is better to use an Nonoxynol-9 lubricated condom than no condom at all.

The Centers Of Disease Control (CDC) Report >
Letter on Nonoxynol-9 From the CDC >

Fact #1 - Nonoxyol-9 Does Not Kill HIV
For Years many have believed that Nonoxynol-9 Kills HIV. NOT TRUE. Here are some Articles Dispelling That Rumor..

[ The CDC Press Release ][ Non-9 DOESN'T Work ][ CDC Info On HIV and STD's ]

Fact # 2 - Nonoxynol-9 May Actually Increase Your Risk Of Acquiring HIV

There is evidence that supports an increase risk of HIV when using Nonoxynol-9 Spermicide. Non-9 is a powerful detergent. It is so strong that it can actually irritate the vaginal walls and rectal cavity causing a path for the virus to enter your system. Here is more information on this..

It appears that when used frequently in the vagina, contraceptive products containing Nonoxynol-9 can cause disruption of the vaginal epithelium (cell wall)- a condition that may increase a woman's risk of becoming infected with HIV. The impact of N-9 on the vaginal epithelial appears to be dose-related. Small infrequent doses of N-9 (once a day or less) appear to cause little or no disruption of the epithelium, whereas more frequent, larger doses consistently cause disruption.
(WHO/CONRAD Technical Consultation on Nonoxynol-9, June 2002)

( http://www.condomdepot.com/non9/ )

Fact # 3 - Nonoxynol-9 Does NOT Decrease Pregnancy Rates

According by a report from the World Health Organization (WHO). There is no proof that using non-9 will reduce your risk of becoming pregnant. Using a condom properly is over 98% effective.

“Breaking the spell ”

Since: Dec 10

of the puppet master

#104400 May 22, 2013
do whut wrote:
<quoted text>
Don't mix topics.
That's how God works is the best answer you are getting right now about the priesthood. Yes I could go much deeper into doctrine, but you have shown me you aren't ready to talk about it. I'm not going to give you more fuel to bash things that I hold sacred.
How an I mixing topics? Your churches stance on blacks holding the priesthood and women holding the priesthood is different how? Just how is this a separate topic?
So you are offended? Well you should be, it offends me how your church has bigoted policies. It is one large reason I left the Mormon church. Do you want other to leave your church for these reasons?
You refuse to think the church could be wrong on women and the priesthood, but you should take note, they were wrong on blacks and the priesthood for over a hundred years. So why do you have such absolute blind faith they could not be wrong now?

Now go and run from my points like you so often do.
ProvenScience

London, KY

#104401 May 22, 2013
stuck in a lodi wrote:
Your own website that you posted stated a 98% effective rating of condom use when used correctly and properly! now I must ask you, what part of that don't you understand?
1. That is NOT my website, it is the official website of Planned Parenthood.

2. YOU are remiss and guilty of FRAUD, for NOT posting ALL the FACTS as presented by that same website.
15-24 percent FAILURE rate, in NON perfect (REAL WORLD) situations.

NOT the BEST choice for females who TRULY wish to do the RIGHT thing.

3. Are you some sort of developMentally challenged person that cannot accept the FAULTs and Wrongs with in yourself? Sounds like it.
Seek help.

“Breaking the spell ”

Since: Dec 10

of the puppet master

#104402 May 22, 2013
do whut wrote:
<quoted text>
I'm not running from it. We aren't talking about that topic anymore. You seem to think gay marriage and contraceptives are the same topic.
Urging contraception is not relevant to church. The purpose of a church is to teach people about God and His gospel. Abstinence before marriage is God's law. This should be taught from the pulpit. It is the responsibility of the parents to educate their youth about other protection when they succumb to weakness.
And really? You are going to link obesity to churches? I'm sorry but this was the dumbest comment you have made to me. I hope it was just a childish jab and you weren't really serious.
The common link is, your church just sticks to teaching fiction and does not concern itself with actually teaching what helps people the most.
ProvenScience

London, KY

#104403 May 22, 2013
stuck in a lodi wrote:
anyway, here is one of those sites if you want to read it in it's entirety http://www.advocatesforyouth.org/publications...
Many of us prefer to only allow those with some actual SENSE, that know how to interact with DECENCY towards others, and have the credentials to work within edu envirnments, to teach our children.

Mostly because it keeps nutcases like yourself AWAY from being allowed to damage/corrupt or mislead young minds.

“Breaking the spell ”

Since: Dec 10

of the puppet master

#104404 May 22, 2013
do whut wrote:
<quoted text>
No, you are just wrong about the purpose of a church.
That's like making an argument that Piggly Wigglies should educate people on car maintenance. Without it, they won't be able to make it to their stores.
Piggly Wigglies do not claim to be getting messages from a god and do not claim to be promoting agendas to life. Your church does.
Talk about changing the subject.
ProvenScience

London, KY

#104405 May 22, 2013
Skeptical Spectacles wrote:
<quoted text>
Yes. If used correctly. That's true of any tool or device isn't it? If used incorrectly a chainsaw's effectiveness drops drastically.
<quoted text>
Again, not according to their numbers.~18% if not always used correctly. Which, now that I think about it, is still pretty effective (for something being used incorrectly).
<quoted text>
Better than 98%? Why don't you just admit that you're talking out of your ass?
Missed the given numbers for the piktures did ya?

Go back-look again-look for 15-24 percent (FAILURE rate)

And if I was talkn out muh butt-you wouldn't be typing about it! Maroon.

“Breaking the spell ”

Since: Dec 10

of the puppet master

#104406 May 22, 2013
do whut wrote:
<quoted text>
Your mistake in writing changed the entire meaning of your post.
One final time: sex education should not be taught in church. It should be taught in the home. I would say it should be taught in schools as well, but I've never seen it done well so I didn't see the benefit. If they modify the program, maybe that would be best. Maybe bring a doctor in to teach that day.
Yet you knew exactly what I meant.

Bring in a doctor? You ready for taxes to go up?
When did you ever see sex ed being taught? Or are you just parroting what your church told you?
Fact is, Christian churches often oppose sex ed in schools. Sounds like you are on the team of demeaning the program.
And if you church is in agreement with you, maybe they should bring in a doctor to teach the congregation?
ProvenScience

London, KY

#104407 May 22, 2013
Skeptical Spectacles wrote:
<quoted text>
Yes, if you actually take the time to read it. Are you admitting that you were mistaken?
Are you talking to yourself?

If you have a bowl of alphabet soup in front of you, and a bowl of chicken soup to the side of you, would you try and FRAUDUENTLY call the chicken soup, alphabet bet soup, just because it's soup?

(sniff sniff...ah smell FRAUD, FAKE and PAFONEY lol)
ProvenScience

London, KY

#104408 May 22, 2013
Skeptical Spectacles wrote:
<quoted text>
I can't believe, after this little exercise with the Planned Parenthood website and your exposed glossing over (manipulation) of data, that you had the gall to say that. I think it's time for one of your little quiet, introspective periods that you claim to have from time to time.
Can't admit it's NOT a "bahhhhhhhhhhhDUH" website huh?

Bless their LONGTIME helpful hearts, for those MATURE enough, who CHOOSE to walk the pathways of sense, sensibility, PERSONAL responsibility and PERSONAL accountability anyway.
ProvenScience

London, KY

#104409 May 22, 2013
Skeptical Spectacles wrote:
<quoted text>
Exactly. It's hard to not get irritated by them (there are several in this forum who behave similarly to PS). I sometimes wonder how they act in real life and how frustrating it would be to work with or supervise them.
Oh now THERE'S a LOAD-- of dung lol.

Since: Aug 10

Location hidden

#104410 May 22, 2013
ProvenScience wrote:
<quoted text>
Are you talking to yourself?
If you have a bowl of alphabet soup in front of you, and a bowl of chicken soup to the side of you, would you try and FRAUDUENTLY call the chicken soup, alphabet bet soup, just because it's soup?
(sniff sniff...ah smell FRAUD, FAKE and PAFONEY lol)
Go back and read the data again.

Data from the very website you provided:

Like all birth control methods, condoms are more effective when you use them correctly.
Each year, 2 out of 100 women whose partners use condoms will become pregnant if they always use condoms correctly.
Each year, 18 out of 100 women whose partners use condoms will become pregnant if they don't always use condoms correctly.

http://www.plannedparenthood.org/health-topic...

I have the facts on my side. You calling me names doesn't change that.

Since: Aug 10

Location hidden

#104411 May 22, 2013
ProvenScience wrote:
<quoted text>
Can't admit it's NOT a "bahhhhhhhhhhhDUH" website huh?
Bless their LONGTIME helpful hearts, for those MATURE enough, who CHOOSE to walk the pathways of sense, sensibility, PERSONAL responsibility and PERSONAL accountability anyway.
I really have no idea what you're saying here. I believe the info on the Planned Parenthood website is accurate. Condoms are ~98% effective if used correctly and ~82% effective even if used incorrectly. I've also shown (repeatedly) that you are misrepresenting the data from the website. By continuing your argument you are only showing that this wassn't an honest mistake, but instead an intentional lie.

Surely your god must be disappointed in you. Tsk tsk.

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
Bastards 6 min Dummies 1
Brett 1 hr Obvious 6
judy basinger (Jul '09) 1 hr Respect 17
dinky phipps 1 hr Yep 4
VCR tapes to DVD tapes 5 hr Jackie 1
who's the best lay from the creek 5 hr wondering 6
truck payments 5 hr hookah 17
Who is the best looking woman in knox co. (Feb '10) 14 hr Lisa 185
To the Garland family 14 hr jack 7
Barbourville Dating
Find my Match
More from around the web

Barbourville People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

Barbourville News, Events & Info

Click for news, events and info in Barbourville

Personal Finance

Mortgages [ See current mortgage rates ]

NFL Latest News

Updated 5:01 am PST

CBS Sports 5:01AM
Signs of Johnny Manziel's struggles evident in poor practice outings
NFL 6:52 AM
Tennessee Titans prepping for possible Jay Cutler deal
Bleacher Report 3:39 PM
Highlights, Recap for Chiefs vs. Steelers
Bleacher Report 4:04 PM
Highlights, Recap for Pats vs. Jets
Bleacher Report 7:36 PM
Bengals vs. Steelers Flexed to 'Sunday Night Football' in Week 17