Bible study rules for public schools ...

Bible study rules for public schools proposed

There are 161244 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.

Since: Aug 10

Location hidden

#104653 May 24, 2013
_Ummm_ wrote:
<quoted text>
Replace "how atheists feel" with "what scientists have determined based on evidence" and you've got a factual statement. You'll note the complete lack of the words "atheist" or "atheism" in the Wikipedia article you quoted, so you'd do well to not insert it for them (especially when it appears as though you'd use the label simply to discredit a well thought out and well supported hypothesis). I'm not saying that almost all atheists don't SHARE that opinion with scientists, because they do, but there is no reason to label something in that manner.
Also, I have not seen a response to my previous post. Did you miss it or did I?
<quoted text>
Yes, offensive hyperbole has never been used to restrict the rights of a group of people before. You're cutting a new path. Yawn.
<quoted text>
Yes. Science, the one thing that never comes to a conclusion without any evidence for it, will clearly point to the convoluted and self serving idea of "intelligent design" by some being that we have no evidence of, no method of interaction for, and no consistent concept of instead of a simple, proven theory that is entirely based in observed evidence and tested processes. Sounds legit.
Let me guess: you don't know any scientists, but you "know" that they're all conspiring to remove God from the world so that they can live like immoral Heathens, right?
Not trying to discredit, but I will certainly note the bias. Since it is pretty much how every atheist feels, it still seems appropriate.

I thought I answered everything. I'm getting asked a lot of things and trying to respond to all makes it look like I'm monopolizing the thread, which is not intentional. If I missed it, I'm sorry. I know I responded to one of yours today. Hopefully that was the one you are talking about.

“Breaking the spell ”

Since: Dec 10

of the puppet master

#104654 May 24, 2013
do whut wrote:
<quoted text>
I told you it was in D&C. Chapter 84 shoes the oath of the Priesthood. He speaks of how the Priesthood is passed from Father to son, and He tells us it was for the sons of Moses. Here is an excerpt:
For whoso is faithful unto the obtaining these two priesthoods of which I have spoken, and the magnifying their calling, are sanctified by the Spirit unto the renewing of their bodies.
They become the sons of Moses and of Aaron and the seed of Abraham, and the church and kingdom, and the elect of God.
You should read the whole chapter.
The origins of marriage predate recorded history, so my only source is the Bible. Other religions tell a similar story of the origin.
The only other speculation of origin is for a man to feel paternal rights to his own children and access to sexual relations with the same female. Usually they paid a bride price to her father for this. That doesn't sound much like marriage to me, but maybe it was for that type of society.
The bible also tells of payment to the father for his daughter. It is a tradition set in days when women were viewed as property. It was wrong then and it is wrong now.

I see you really could not find any absolute prohibition of women in the priesthood, but interpreted the old mentality of father son inheritance as some sort of reasoning for the discriminating behavior for your church.

Come to good moral ways then tell me how your church is better than others. As of now they are in the ways of old and bigotry.
defender

Chicago, IL

#104655 May 24, 2013
Skeptical Spectacles wrote:
<quoted text>Mmhmm. Everyone knows that Darwin was an agenda pushing lefty...

So, care to elaborate on the "science" that is pointing to ID?
Let's see... Cause and Effect, Entropy, Dependency, Irreducible Complexity, Endogenous Retrovirus study, DNA decay rate study and lack of intermediates in the fossil record... How's that?

Since: Aug 10

Location hidden

#104656 May 24, 2013
Mike Duquette wrote:
<quoted text>The bible also tells of payment to the father for his daughter. It is a tradition set in days when women were viewed as property. It was wrong then and it is wrong now.
I see you really could not find any absolute prohibition of women in the priesthood, but interpreted the old mentality of father son inheritance as some sort of reasoning for the discriminating behavior for your church.
Come to good moral ways then tell me how your church is better than others. As of now they are in the ways of old and bigotry.
Not just the father to son ordinance, but also the obvious parts where He says the sons of Moses, and sons of Abraham.

Do you not acknowledge the differences between men and women as a whole? Men are better at some things, and women are better at other things. This is by design. It isn't bigotry, just pay attention to the obvious differences that exist even today. We aren't talking about equal rights in the workforce or political world. We are talking about several different things that you are trying to lump into one.

If you want to talk about ancient times, there are several different cultures that used a bride payment type arrangement. In most cases, the batchelor was offering a price for his bride because he was taking a helper out of the father's house. One less had to help with all the manual chores that needed to be done for survival. So he paid in sheep or crops or whatever to compensate. In some cultures it was a social status thing. How many cows is my wife worth? etc. It wasn't necessarily that they were treated like property.
Is this the path you want to talk about now? Or today?

Today, in my church, callings hold no status. We've disagreed about this before. The calling of a prophet means his scope is bigger and he receives revelation for the whole church. The Bishop receives revelation for his local church members and how it should be run. It isn't a big deal though because tomorrow he could be called as the newsletter maker and someone else could be called as Bishop. No one would blink about this decision.
Women hold presidency callings within the church as well. Welfare commitees, Relief Society (largest women's society in the country), Young Women's program, Primary. The priesthood has a different purpose that has nothing to do with status in the church. Men and women are equally important in furthering the work of God and in the family. Poll female LDS members and the overwhelming majority will not feel inferior to men in the church. Of course there are outliers, but that is the case in almost every situation imaginable.

Why are you so intent on deeming me a bigot?
defender

Chicago, IL

#104657 May 24, 2013
Mike Duquette wrote:
<quoted text>The bible also tells of payment to the father for his daughter. It is a tradition set in days when women were viewed as property. It was wrong then and it is wrong now.

I see you really could not find any absolute prohibition of women in the priesthood, but interpreted the old mentality of father son inheritance as some sort of reasoning for the discriminating behavior for your church.

Come to good moral ways then tell me how your church is better than others. As of now they are in the ways of old and bigotry.
The bible also says that the would be husband must have a good home and means to take care of the daughter.. Funny how that's always left out... Woman was created to be mans helper and was indeed to answer to the man but also the man was to provide for and protect the woman and children... But I guess God should have checked with you first huh?
The simple fact is (like it or not) women cannot do the physical work men can..
ProvenScience

Somerset, KY

#104658 May 24, 2013
Skeptical Spectacles wrote:
<quoted text>
Mmhmm. Everyone knows that Darwin was an agenda pushing lefty...
So, care to elaborate on the "science" that is pointing to ID?
I'll pose a compass pointing answer.

Your "moral superiority" is NO better than myan.:-)

(Especially since YOU referenced Derwood, of the same apple tree plucker.)
ProvenScience

Somerset, KY

#104659 May 24, 2013
defender wrote:
<quoted text>
The bible also says that the would be husband must have a good home and means to take care of the daughter.. Funny how that's always left out... Woman was created to be mans helper and was indeed to answer to the man but also the man was to provide for and protect the woman and children... But I guess God should have checked with you first huh?
The simple fact is (like it or not) women cannot do the physical work men can..
Wow, you haven't met many independent, NON-lazy type women have you.

“pervinco per logica”

Since: Feb 12

Eradicate willful ignorance.

#104660 May 24, 2013
do whut wrote:
<quoted text>
Not trying to discredit, but I will certainly note the bias. Since it is pretty much how every atheist feels, it still seems appropriate.
That's not what "bias" means. Bias is synonymous with prejudice and irrationality, and most of the people you are addressing would find that highly insulting. Consensus would be more apt. But, for the sake of showing why it's not an appropriate way to label things:
Nazis used rockets. Rockets were developed using physics by german engineers. You DON'T call it "Nazi physics".
do whut wrote:
<quoted text>
I thought I answered everything. I'm getting asked a lot of things and trying to respond to all makes it look like I'm monopolizing the thread, which is not intentional. If I missed it, I'm sorry. I know I responded to one of yours today. Hopefully that was the one you are talking about.
I looked between now and my last post to make sure. No reply. Perhaps a mispost.
defender wrote:
<quoted text>
Let's see... Cause and Effect, Entropy, Dependency, Irreducible Complexity, Endogenous Retrovirus study, DNA decay rate study and lack of intermediates in the fossil record... How's that?
I don't know, Answers in Genesis, how is it?

Are you honestly so stupid that you think a single bit of that holds any weight or means anything? You may as well tell me there is no sun because such a thing as a shadow exists. And yes, I know you have no idea what I'm saying and probably think that I'm a sheep getting fooled by those evil liberal agenda pushing scientists. Clearly, since .023% of the scientific community agree with your view, I am wrong.
defender

Chicago, IL

#104661 May 24, 2013
_Ummm_ wrote:
That's not what "bias" means. Bias is synonymous with prejudice and irrationality, and most of the people you are addressing would find that highly insulting. Consensus would be more apt. But, for the sake of showing why it's not an appropriate way to label things:
Nazis used rockets. Rockets were developed using physics by german engineers. You DON'T call it "Nazi physics".
do whut wrote, "<quoted text>
I thought I answered everything. I'm getting asked a lot of things and trying to respond to all makes it look like I'm monopolizing the thread, which is not intentional. If I missed it, I'm sorry. I know I responded to one of yours today. Hopefully that was the one you are talking about."

I looked between now and my last post to make sure. No reply. Perhaps a mispost.
defender wrote, "<quoted text>
Let's see... Cause and Effect, Entropy, Dependency, Irreducible Complexity, Endogenous Retrovirus study, DNA decay rate study and lack of intermediates in the fossil record... How's that?"

I don't know, Answers in Genesis, how is it?

Are you honestly so stupid that you think a single bit of that holds any weight or means anything? You may as well tell me there is no sun because such a thing as a shadow exists. And yes, I know you have no idea what I'm saying and probably think that I'm a sheep getting fooled by those evil liberal agenda pushing scientists. Clearly, since .023% of the scientific community agree with your view, I am wrong.
Are you so stupid to believe in a big cosmic bang from nothing?
Complex living systems arising from chemical soup in an impossible environment ?... That takes some Harry Potter magic friend... With extra pixy dust!!
Perhaps just perhaps you are not as intelligent as you see yourself in the mirror... But hey it's a buyers market!!
stuck in a lodi

Elkhorn City, KY

#104662 May 24, 2013
We are officially in the "It's 5'oclock somewhere time in most U.S. Love these 3 day weekends!

“pervinco per logica”

Since: Feb 12

Eradicate willful ignorance.

#104663 May 24, 2013
defender wrote:
<quoted text>
Are you so stupid to believe in a big cosmic bang from nothing?
Complex living systems arising from chemical soup in an impossible environment ?... That takes some Harry Potter magic friend... With extra pixy dust!!
Perhaps just perhaps you are not as intelligent as you see yourself in the mirror... But hey it's a buyers market!!
What does that have to do with evolution, you redirecting nutjob? I'm not going to entertain your strawman bullsh!t, stick to the topic at hand.

Evolution is as much demonstrable fact as gravity. There is NO argument. Does that mean that we don't have observed gravitational anomalies that take further research to explain? No. Does that mean that we don't have small portions of evolution that are unknown to us and may take further research to explain? No.

Evolution is like a 5000 piece puzzle with 2-3 pieces missing. Intelligent design is like taking the same 5000 piece puzzle, tossing all of the pieces in the trash, and throwing the Bible down in their place while saying "Yep, solved that one!". You're throwing out everything that's been observed, tested, and makes sense while inserting something that is baseless, untestable, and unnecessary.

“Question, Explore, Discover”

Since: Dec 11

Location hidden

#104664 May 25, 2013
do whut wrote:
<quoted text>
All prophets are fallible. They are men. They make errors just like everyone else. They sin just like everyone else (though probably much less). This is what set Jesus apart. He never sinned, He wasn't fallible. This is why I'm not muslim.
He did describe what Jesus looked like. And God the Father as well.
Google is a click away. You should educate yourself on this religion before trying to tell a member of it what they believe.
Mormon leaders are famous for having long chats with God, Jesus, and Joseph Smith. It seems like it was an arms race to see which leader could claim the most authority. There was a split in the LDS over plural marriage back in the early 20th century and it split between the LDS and the Fundamentalists, right? The Fundie leader claimed to meet with Smith and Jesus, as was witnessed by a couple of high ranking members of that sect.

You guys see ghosts a lot. It miiiight be another reason Mormons have been viewed as a bit nutty. That and the underoos.

“Question, Explore, Discover”

Since: Dec 11

Location hidden

#104665 May 25, 2013
do whut wrote:
<quoted text>
One good example: Motherhood trumps anything man can do.
Right. Because the Abrahamic religions treat women like breeding mares. The men "hold the priesthood" in LDS. That means men have the keys to the magic kingdom. Women hold wombs, meaning they have the keys to future generations.

What that means in reality is that men run the show, women open their legs and shut their mouths.

That is how the LDS and virtually all these religious sects function. If I had a nickel for every time I've heard a *female* say to me that "The Bible says the man is the head of the household". It kinda makes me sick to think about the degree of brainwashing involved in that thought process. Men have more value inherently than females by virtue of the Bible, Koran, or BoM if you wanna include that one.

“Question, Explore, Discover”

Since: Dec 11

Location hidden

#104666 May 25, 2013
do whut wrote:
<quoted text>
I told you it was in D&C. Chapter 84 shoes the oath of the Priesthood. He speaks of how the Priesthood is passed from Father to son, and He tells us it was for the sons of Moses. Here is an excerpt:
For whoso is faithful unto the obtaining these two priesthoods of which I have spoken, and the magnifying their calling, are sanctified by the Spirit unto the renewing of their bodies.
They become the sons of Moses and of Aaron and the seed of Abraham, and the church and kingdom, and the elect of God.
You should read the whole chapter.
The origins of marriage predate recorded history, so my only source is the Bible. Other religions tell a similar story of the origin.
The only other speculation of origin is for a man to feel paternal rights to his own children and access to sexual relations with the same female. Usually they paid a bride price to her father for this. That doesn't sound much like marriage to me, but maybe it was for that type of society.
The Doctrines and Covenants are not part of the Bible. They were written in modern times. We know their history, who wrote them, and what has been said regarding them from then till now. If the Bible has some mystery as to the authorship of this or that book, the D and C is quite well documented.

I swear. If a charming enough LDS leader came along and claimed to have a conversation with Jesus and wrote the Book of Mormon Part II you guys would buy it hook, line, and sinker.

“Question, Explore, Discover”

Since: Dec 11

Location hidden

#104667 May 25, 2013
defender wrote:
<quoted text>
What does Gay marriage hurt? Why not group marriage? Or human-animal marriage?... Look most people today are afraid of saying what they really feel... Not me... I'm not saying everyone shouldn't have equal rights ... That's fine but that isn't what the homosexual movement wants anyway... How do I know that? Cause they already are getting what they want in every state... That battle is over... What they want is to cram their lifestyle down everyone's throat and bully people like you are this nice guy... Bottom line is it's disgusting... If you want to have sex with men then burn it up bro... You want to marry a man then great! Good for you... But don't look to darkin my door with your nasty ass lifestyle cause you just might get to meet the God you mock...
In the dictionary under "homophobe" you might find a snapshot of yourself.

What gays want is to be treated like anyone else. What you want is for them to sit down, shut up, and not be gay.

See the conflict?

I bet you even believe it is a choice, right? That gay men woke up one morning and said hmmmm....I think I'll go be gay today.

“Question, Explore, Discover”

Since: Dec 11

Location hidden

#104668 May 25, 2013
do whut wrote:
<quoted text>
No, I doubt their family would extend past the two of them since it is so hard to adopt if you aren't married. I'm really only talking about families with children here.
I'm against gay marriage, not gay civil unions. If a gay couple is able to provide physically, and emotionally for a child, I'm fine with gay adoption. The child may have a tough life explaining why they have 2 dads or 2 moms, but as our society gets more used to it, this will get easier too. Not sure about in school though. Kids are relentless sometimes with the way they pick on each other.
What I was saying earlier though, is if the statistics for monogamy with gays rings true in gay unions, there will be more children hurt by families split up than we have currently. It's already bad with straight couples that divorce, but bring in a population with a worse record, then it will make the total worse as well. The end result will be more kids with a jacked up home life.
Oh man.

Ok, the reason kids would give another kid hell over having two dads is because people like you give them the ammunition to do it. You fill their heads with spook stories and demean gays through your language and attitude. Of course they are going to give them hell. I used to make "faggot" jokes in school. Didn't have a clue it was a bad thing. If my parents and society had a healthy attitude and understanding of sexual orientation those jokes wouldn't be told. So don't pretend otherwise.

And let's not pretend marriage is in good shape. The divorce rate is through the roof without the aid of gay couples. Allowing for a potential increase in marriages of about 3-5 % is not going to tip the scale, my friend. That is a phenomenally bad argument.

"We want to protect our divorce rate" my ass. You want to protect your bigoted beliefs. You seem like a nice guy, why do you support this nonsense?

The other guys have asked you a zillion times to explain how gay marriage would hurt you. Best you can provide is this?

Game over. Gay marriage is going to be reality across the land. LDS might as well join 2013 since Jesus doesn't appear to be coming back any time soon.

“Question, Explore, Discover”

Since: Dec 11

Location hidden

#104669 May 25, 2013
_Ummm_ wrote:
<quoted text>
What does that have to do with evolution, you redirecting nutjob? I'm not going to entertain your strawman bullsh!t, stick to the topic at hand.
Evolution is as much demonstrable fact as gravity. There is NO argument. Does that mean that we don't have observed gravitational anomalies that take further research to explain? No. Does that mean that we don't have small portions of evolution that are unknown to us and may take further research to explain? No.
Evolution is like a 5000 piece puzzle with 2-3 pieces missing. Intelligent design is like taking the same 5000 piece puzzle, tossing all of the pieces in the trash, and throwing the Bible down in their place while saying "Yep, solved that one!". You're throwing out everything that's been observed, tested, and makes sense while inserting something that is baseless, untestable, and unnecessary.
Nice summary. I wish fundies could grasp logic enough to pinpoint their own logical fallacies. It seems that every time they go off on evolution they go straight to the creation of the universe, jumping disciplines and billions of years of time because they obviously do not know a damn thing about the topic.

Change in allele frequency this, atheist scum: stuff looks complicated to my brain so God did it! What, you can't prove me wrong? I win, sucker!

Or something like that.
How stupid can you be

Winchester, KY

#104670 May 25, 2013
KittenKoder wrote:
<quoted text>
this is correct, however, neither is killing a convicted murderer considered murder. Murder is taking life illegally. Abortion is not murder either.
Murder is laying in wait for "INNOCENT BLOOD"!
How much more innocent can a Baby be?
You're as ignorant as a person can be!
Buy a clue, cause you don't even have a shadow of one!
How stupid can you be

Winchester, KY

#104671 May 25, 2013
Quantummist wrote:
<quoted text>
Absolutely... As long as folks admit that Abortion is Homicide and those that Commit Homicide should be Judged as to the if it is Justified by the courts on an individual basis just as with Self Defense and killing of a convicted murderer.. We do not just allow the person that kills in self defense to walk away without question... The facts of the individual act are presented to the prosecutors office to determine if the claim of self defense is justified... If there is not evidence such a homicide was Not Justified the person claiming self defense faces prosecution...
I am opposed to the death penalty because of the possibility of one innocent person at some point is put to death...
But I have no problem with putting a bullet in the head of a person breaking into my house, or in defense of another human life..
It's a matter of Justification, and personal inconvenience or in the case of abortion doctors, Profit... Is to me Unjustified....
Great post!
Yes and Amen

Winchester, KY

#104672 May 25, 2013
Main way of Spreading Homosexuality...
Pervert the Children, and make them THINK it's
Natural, and Normal!

Kaitlyn Hunt, the 18-year-old Florida cheerleader facing felony charges for a sexual relationship she had with a younger girl, has refused to take a plea deal in the case, her lawyers said Friday.
Hunt now must go to court to face two charges of lewd and lascivious battery on a minor. If convicted, shefaces up to 15 years in prison and would haveto register as a sex offender.
Under the deal offered by a Florida state attorney, Hunt would have to submit to house arrest for two years. She also would be labeled as a convicted felon and be required to attend sex offender counseling.
"This is a situation of two teenagers who happen to be of the same sex involved in a relationship," according to a statement released by Hunt's attorneys, Julia Graves and Joseph Graves. "If this case involved a boy and girl, there would be no media attention to this case."
The statement went on to say that if Hunt's relationship had occurred "108 days earlier when she was 17, we wouldn’t even be here."
But the attorney representing the minor, who is now 15, said the case is strictly about the law.
"This is a violation of the law that's based upon an adult having sexual relations with a minor," Charles Sullivan told TODAY earlier this week. "Gender, sexual orientation of the parties has absolutely nothing to do with the prosecution."
WRONG IS WRONG!

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
I am the true Alpha Male. 7 min URomega 2
do gauges hurt 28 min NowUKnow 5
Sprinkles firing 30 teachers but keeps making j... 1 hr Place 16
Forcht bank closing?? 1 hr TOASTup 6
Kristian 2 hr coldhardtruth 2
Sheila 3 hr Ssi disability 3
Ray and brian 3 hr Good 3

Barbourville Jobs

More from around the web

Personal Finance

Barbourville Mortgages