Bible study rules for public schools ...

Bible study rules for public schools proposed

There are 160690 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

#104797 May 26, 2013
curious wrote:
<quoted text>
Woww,Thoughts like that one occur only during the times your brain is being taxed to the max...You musta been blow drying the hairs around your anal area when that one occured to ya...
Woww, indeed.
How nicely you word those pleasantries and sentiments on a Sunday morning. I'm sure you never fail to make your savior proud with your mindless apologist balderdash and foul interjections.
.

“pervinco per logica”

Since: Feb 12

Eradicate willful ignorance.

#104798 May 26, 2013
Quantummist wrote:
<quoted text>
If their Spouse is 16 and they are 19... Then they are a Pedophile ..Don't like it,,, don't care,,, If their spouse is 18 and they are 92 then they are not.... You can rationalize Child Rape all you wish to make yourself feel better for having a pedophile mindset all you wish but your neighbors should be aware of your proclivities for considering their children targets if they grow boobs at 12... You are here telling the world that as long as the child is developed to your lust level go for it... Facts are Facts... Sexual contact with a Child under 18 is Child Rape no matter how much you wish it wasn't...
No, you're wrong and an idiot. Unlike you, I don't try to portray the realities of a situation differently just because I don't like it. YOU don't know the definition of pedophelia, even though I provided you plenty of information to allow you to stop looking like a willfully ignorant hilljack.

The definition of "pedophelia" is the same whether you're in a third world cesspool that allows arranged marriages, legally, at 12 years old or a first world ultra-conservative craphole where idiots think that one day younger than 18 is rape if the other person is one day older. Legality does NOT change the definition. Nor do you. Your opinions concerning meanings well defined terms are utterly irrelevant and I honestly wish you could understand what a stupid child you're being on this topic. Not becoming of a person of your advanced age.

I expect old "wise" people to read and learn before spouting like a teapot about things they obviously don't understand. I also DON'T expect old "wise" people to create 10 different offensive strawmen in order to portray me as something I'm clearly not. So, I guess you're just old.

“Breaking the spell ”

Since: Dec 10

of the puppet master

#104799 May 26, 2013
defender wrote:
<quoted text>
No you asked me what others thought.. Stereotype much?
They say a snake won't bite a righteous man but it would eat my ass up... Lol..
You group all christians in the same box and clearly do not understand anything about ID
Creationist and intelligent design are not totally the same but once again all you see is us vs. them... Look deeper...
So you do believe in evolution? Do you have a problem with evolution being taught in schools?
defender

United States

#104800 May 26, 2013
Skeptical Spectacles wrote:
<quoted text>Ok, we'll start from the top. I didn't want you to worry about missing anything, so I saved my questions/requests from your initial response so we can go through them one at a time. See how helpful I am?

1: Explain what cause and effect you are referring to. Specifically the "scientific" evidence for cause and effect that points to ID and not Evolution.
Indeed sir... Since evolutionist cannot give an origin for their theory one can only assume that the beginning of ToE is the first reproduction of the simple cell... How does that violate Cause and Effect?
1) How did this simple cell reproduce?
It's already impossible that it's even here but now this SIMPLE cell somehow has genetic information to pass on... But it's not designed?... Then from where?... We have effect yet no cause...
2) Why did the first cell reproduce?... What's the point? Reproduction has no benefit for this simple cell... If anything this is against evolution as offspring would compete for food...
Any thoughts?

“Breaking the spell ”

Since: Dec 10

of the puppet master

#104801 May 26, 2013
Quantummist wrote:
<quoted text>
If their Spouse is 16 and they are 19... Then they are a Pedophile ..Don't like it,,, don't care,,, If their spouse is 18 and they are 92 then they are not.... You can rationalize Child Rape all you wish to make yourself feel better for having a pedophile mindset all you wish but your neighbors should be aware of your proclivities for considering their children targets if they grow boobs at 12... You are here telling the world that as long as the child is developed to your lust level go for it... Facts are Facts... Sexual contact with a Child under 18 is Child Rape no matter how much you wish it wasn't...
I hear the law is 16 for consent in many states. Likely Kentucky.
The age is a number picked by society. One could argue that a persons brain is not fully formed until age twenty. This is what the latest science says. So if we are going by brain maturity to make sex decisions, maybe the age of consent needs to be raised.

“Breaking the spell ”

Since: Dec 10

of the puppet master

#104802 May 26, 2013
Yiago wrote:
<quoted text>
Look up the word, Q.
It seems that you don't like having your intellect challenged.
Now, to the meat of what you posted here.
The 18 age limit is a necessary legal invention. We have to draw a line somewhere and 18 seems to be a good place to do it. At 18 people tend to be fully mature. I fully agree that this is a good age limit and it helps protect kids from predators.
But a 3-year gap between teens is not the stuff that sexual predation is made of. You are being pedantic. Do you honestly think that at age 19 I was some kind of sexual monster preying on kids?
Do you think the 18yo lesbian from the story I was responding to is a sexual predator because her girlfriend was not yet 18?
If so, can you be a bigger kook?
I hear some states have an age gap measure to the law.
This is a states rights issue and thus one would think Q. would not make such absolute claims of age as this is just absolutely false. Q is all about states rights, so it is quite amusing to me that he is contradicting his own ideology.
I hear some states will allow for 14 year old persons to have sex with adults if the parents consent.
I personally do not agree this is a good policy, but one would think Q of all persons would fight for the state to make that decision.

“Breaking the spell ”

Since: Dec 10

of the puppet master

#104803 May 26, 2013
defender wrote:
<quoted text>
Indeed sir... Since evolutionist cannot give an origin for their theory one can only assume that the beginning of ToE is the first reproduction of the simple cell... How does that violate Cause and Effect?
1) How did this simple cell reproduce?
It's already impossible that it's even here but now this SIMPLE cell somehow has genetic information to pass on... But it's not designed?... Then from where?... We have effect yet no cause...
2) Why did the first cell reproduce?... What's the point? Reproduction has no benefit for this simple cell... If anything this is against evolution as offspring would compete for food...
Any thoughts?
What was the cause and effect of this intelligent designer? Pixie dust?

“Breaking the spell ”

Since: Dec 10

of the puppet master

#104804 May 26, 2013
Yiago wrote:
Wow. I thought we were discussing the Bible, not my social life from 20+ years ago.
Hey maybe I'm like Joseph Smith. He married Fanny Alger when she was 16 and he was 28!
Nah. That really is kinda creepy, at least by 20th century standards.
Mormons have a long history that leads to modern days of this sort of standard.

“Breaking the spell ”

Since: Dec 10

of the puppet master

#104805 May 26, 2013
Ye of lil Understanding wrote:
<quoted text>Let them have ALL of that... except Custody rights!
If they are "Unrighteous" there should be NO Children exposed to that life... EVER!
Why stop at homosexuals then? I thought Christians believed all humans were not one hundred percent righteous?
Christianity targets homosexuals in an unequal manner.

“Breaking the spell ”

Since: Dec 10

of the puppet master

#104806 May 26, 2013
Ye of lil Understanding wrote:
<quoted text>Let them have ALL of that... except Custody rights!
If they are "Unrighteous" there should be NO Children exposed to that life... EVER!
Until the federal government recognizes gay marriage, they will not have all that.

Mike Duquette wrote:
<quoted text>Tax benefits, hospital visitation, insurance sharing, inheritance rights, custody rights.
ProvenScience

Somerset, KY

#104807 May 26, 2013
ChromiuMan wrote:
<quoted text>
Born to hump? You mean like "be fruitful and multiply," idjit?
The consensus in Frankfort (and many other state capitals) is that a 16 year old can marry with guardian permission, and back before the rise of Godless "libuhrulism" the consent laws were often set at far lower ages than they are now.
That was then, this is now.

The conSENSUS where I hailed from was until anyone was 18-BEWARE, one was treading in dangerous territory-bonehead.
And if we couldn't be good-then we were damn well expected to have enough SENSE (both male AND female) to be careful AND responsible for ourselves...'cause it were hard enough work for us just to keep up after ourselves on our own, let alone want to raise litters off of (UNHEARD of) givverment dollars of'a other peoples backs!!

Get the "differences" picture yet?
defender

United States

#104808 May 26, 2013
Mike Duquette wrote:
<quoted text>So you do believe in evolution? Do you have a problem with evolution being taught in schools?
I believe that evolution by design is possible... And that was hard to accept but one has to look with unbiased eyes... The only thing I wish to convey is evolution is no where near the fact that we are lead to believe... Anyone who takes a close unbiased look can clearly see this no matter what they believe...
Being taught in schools is one thing but being taught as absolute truth is wrong... There is a line between teaching a theory or just trying to destroy someone's faith...

“Breaking the spell ”

Since: Dec 10

of the puppet master

#104809 May 26, 2013
curious wrote:
<quoted text>
Science's attempts to describe the creation of the Universe,Earth and life as we know it as a natural event is malicious and ill conceived and I am not buying into that nonsense.
Something can not be created from nothing,that is not a natural event. Nonliving and nonintelligent matter
can not somehow transform itself into living intelligent matter.That is not a natural event.
Those events have never been witnessed nor have they been duplicated in lab studies.
Those theories are based on pure speculation on supposed events that no one can confirm took place at some point in time.
Any evidence that would support God as the creator,is arbitrarily dismissed...
What Science would have us believe is that an unintelligent universe created itself.
Mankind and the other species on the planet also created themselves,brought themselves into existence ,engineered the most sophisticated machine on earth ,all done without any prior knowledge or experience of what they were doing...This all occurred by accident..
Now,we have to try and figure out how it is that we created ourselves,because we do not know how we managed to accomplish that miraculous feat.
We also understand human nature's desire to not want to know God.
Science's nonfindings in no way diminish God's power or his existence.
Those of us who believe and trust in God,do so with good reason and ample proof...God and Christ have proved themselves to us.
Not because we are special or priviliged, but,because we diligently sought him..
Therefore,knowing that God is real,I have no need or use for absurd theories or opinions based on unprovable events as proposed by Science and Evolution.
How did your god get created?
The theory of evolution makes zero claims of how life came to be, so when you keep lumping evolution into this argument, it just makes you look like a hardheaded, ignorant person.
I say hardheaded because we have explained this to you many times over. So your ignorance has no justification. You clearly wish to remain ignorant of what evolution actually is or states in order to keep your superstitious faith.
Thus I will continue to show religion for the farce it is. You want a fight, you got it.

I am glad you stopped claiming you do not demean science. I guess you now realize all you do when science is mentioned, you demean it as you did here.
Religion is typically anti science. This is one major reason I protest religion. Not because of search for god.
And it is so contradictory that you state here people do not naturally look for god, as you ranted over and over that is what all of us are doing here. Make up your mind pal. Contradiction is a sure sign of being wrong.
ProvenScience

Somerset, KY

#104810 May 26, 2013
ChromiuMan wrote:
<quoted text>
Born to hump? You mean like "be fruitful and multiply," idjit?
The consensus in Frankfort (and many other state capitals) is that a 16 year old can marry with guardian permission, and back before the rise of Godless "libuhrulism" the consent laws were often set at far lower ages than they are now.
AND all those instilled expectations of ourselves(!), AND our faith in knowing we were walking RIGHT paths, worked out fairly well (given the any sane person realizes there's no such thing as "perfect", throwing in Murphys law and all that kind of thing into the equations of life per say too), for those of us who chose to LISTEN to the WISDOM holders we were taught by anyway.

“See how you are?”

Since: Jul 12

Earth

#104811 May 26, 2013
ProvenScience wrote:
<quoted text>
That was then, this is now.
The conSENSUS where I hailed from was until anyone was 18-BEWARE, one was treading in dangerous territory-bonehead.
And if we couldn't be good-then we were damn well expected to have enough SENSE (both male AND female) to be careful AND responsible for ourselves...'cause it were hard enough work for us just to keep up after ourselves on our own, let alone want to raise litters off of (UNHEARD of) givverment dollars of'a other peoples backs!!
Get the "differences" picture yet?
I know the differences. I was just reminding of the statutes that ARE on the books, not the absolute morals that have never existed inside of a church or out.
As far as your Malthusian Tea Party control freak attitude, yeah - already know about that, too.

“Breaking the spell ”

Since: Dec 10

of the puppet master

#104812 May 26, 2013
defender wrote:
<quoted text>
I believe that evolution by design is possible... And that was hard to accept but one has to look with unbiased eyes... The only thing I wish to convey is evolution is no where near the fact that we are lead to believe... Anyone who takes a close unbiased look can clearly see this no matter what they believe...
Being taught in schools is one thing but being taught as absolute truth is wrong... There is a line between teaching a theory or just trying to destroy someone's faith...
Still not sure where you stand as this statement looks to contradict.

The idea of ID has absolutely zero evidence.This is why the courts ruled it cannot be taught in schools as science. It is purely a superstitious belief.
Evolution has massive amounts of evidence. I am sure this massive amount of evidence will never be enough for you to believe it is true.

But one thing I wish to convey is, I as long as you and religion demean the science, I will demean your superstition.

“Breaking the spell ”

Since: Dec 10

of the puppet master

#104813 May 26, 2013
curious wrote:
<quoted text>
Science's attempts to describe the creation of the Universe,Earth and life as we know it as a natural event is malicious and ill conceived and I am not buying into that nonsense.
Science is the study of our natural world. Science is not trying to be malicious.
Maybe if your god had a shred of evidence, science would speak of this god.
What is malicious is claiming science is all wrong in order to protect your superstition.
defender

United States

#104814 May 26, 2013
Mike Duquette wrote:
<quoted text>What was the cause and effect of this intelligent designer? Pixie dust?
Great question!!! I don't know... But we are talking science so we know the complex working systems dependent on other systems to survive cannot simply arise by accident.... Chaos cannot create order...

“Breaking the spell ”

Since: Dec 10

of the puppet master

#104815 May 26, 2013
curious wrote:
<quoted text>

Something can not be created from nothing,that is not a natural event. Nonliving and nonintelligent matter
can not somehow transform itself into living intelligent matter.That is not a natural event.
Those events have never been witnessed nor have they been duplicated in lab studies.
Those theories are based on pure speculation on supposed events that no one can confirm took place at some point in time.
Science does not call this a "theory", it is called a hypothesis, as it makes no absolute claim of how life started.
Do you know the difference? If so, then quite misrepresenting the science and be truthful.

The idea of god is pure speculation, as zero evidence exists for a god.
You say "cannot" quite a bit, but of course you cannot show evidence that it could not happen. It is just your superstitious beliefs it did not happen.

“Breaking the spell ”

Since: Dec 10

of the puppet master

#104816 May 26, 2013
curious wrote:
<quoted text>

Any evidence that would support God as the creator,is arbitrarily dismissed...
Their is zero evidence. If you wish to produce the first evidence of god ever, please do so.

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
Foster children 15 min free ACH 8
What is Comp Care? 21 min know of him 6
Nobody could ever change my opinion on Relation... 1 hr The Specialist 3
Topix is a site that has Died. 1 hr The Specialist 12
Sonny hamblin 2 hr GotdaScoop 22
How can people even aford to be on Pills? 3 hr Bear 14
LBC club 3 hr Agentmethbuster 22

Barbourville Jobs

More from around the web

Personal Finance

Barbourville Mortgages