Bible study rules for public schools proposed

Feb 10, 2010 | Posted by: roboblogger | Full story: The Courier-Journal

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.

Comments (Page 5,003)

Showing posts 100,041 - 100,060 of127,803
|
Go to last page| Jump to page:

“There is no god.”

Since: Jan 12

USA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#104644
May 24, 2013
 
Skeptical Spectacles wrote:
<quoted text>
So, how does gay marriage weaken society? You still haven't explained how a gay couple getting married threatens another family's structure. Or am I missing something?
"Or am I missing something?"

Yes, "special understanding"(the religie or topix kind) you will have to become a religie to use it, good luck.
defender

Wessington Springs, SD

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#104645
May 24, 2013
 
Mike Duquette wrote:
<quoted text>again, do you deny the church complains about abortion?

Many complain civil unions do not get equal benefits. Why should they call it something other than marriage? It is a marriage by definition, so seems your complaint is pure superstition with zero reasons given.
Again I ask, in what way does gay marriage hurt you or your marriage?
Keep running from this question.
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...

“There is no god.”

Since: Jan 12

USA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#104646
May 24, 2013
 
Lmao, "bully people". Just like every religie on here has done with the "damnation" threat.

Since: Aug 10

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#104647
May 24, 2013
 

Judged:

1

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...
You know what they say about homophobes...
defender

Wessington Springs, SD

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#104648
May 24, 2013
 
curious wrote:
<quoted text>If my religious beliefs,meaning ,I believe in God and Jesus Christ as my saviour, demean science,I could care less.
Science is not my God and my Faith is not based on misguided Scientific theories and opinions..
If Atheists are offended by my beliefs,that is their problem.
If you ,are expecting an "I'm sorry you feel that way" or an apology,you will get neither.
I neither apologize nor am I sorry for my beliefs
I am honored that God has adopted me and that Christ is my saviour.
Don't let these bozos tell you the science is on their side... Not by a long shot!!! They can prove nothing.. In fact ToE (theory of evolution) has more holes than a block of Swiss cheese... It's the desperate hope of agenda pushing lefties... Science in fact points to an intelligent design... It's the 900 pound gorilla in the room that the evolutionist doesn't want to face....

Since: Aug 10

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#104649
May 24, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

do whut wrote:
<quoted text>
I didn't say a gay couple getting married threatens another family's structure. It threatens their family's structure.
Now I'm getting confused, are you suggesting that homosexual couples would have a more stable family structure if they didn't get married?
do whut wrote:
<quoted text>
I'm anxious to see more statistical data as time goes on, now that gays are allowed to marry in some states. For now, statistical data shows that gays prefer more variety in sexual partners and are less monogamous. So this would suggest that divorce rates would be higher, which certainly affects those with children. I truly hope that this won't be the case, because when children are involved, they suffer the most in divorces.
It smells like red herrings in here. Are you against gay marriage or gay adoption? Or both?

Since: Aug 10

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#104650
May 24, 2013
 
defender wrote:
<quoted text>
Don't let these bozos tell you the science is on their side... Not by a long shot!!! They can prove nothing.. In fact ToE (theory of evolution) has more holes than a block of Swiss cheese... It's the desperate hope of agenda pushing lefties... Science in fact points to an intelligent design... It's the 900 pound gorilla in the room that the evolutionist doesn't want to face....
Mmhmm. Everyone knows that Darwin was an agenda pushing lefty...

So, care to elaborate on the "science" that is pointing to ID?

“pervinco per logica”

Since: Feb 12

Eradicate willful ignorance.

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#104651
May 24, 2013
 
do whut wrote:
<quoted text>
This certainly describes how atheists feel about religion.
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?
defender wrote:
<quoted text>
What does Gay marriage hurt? Why not group marriage? Or human-animal marriage?
Yes, offensive hyperbole has never been used to restrict the rights of a group of people before. You're cutting a new path. Yawn.
defender wrote:
<quoted text>
Science in fact points to an intelligent design... It's the 900 pound gorilla in the room that the evolutionist doesn't want to face....
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?

Since: Aug 10

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#104652
May 24, 2013
 
Skeptical Spectacles wrote:
<quoted text>
Now I'm getting confused, are you suggesting that homosexual couples would have a more stable family structure if they didn't get married?
<quoted text>
It smells like red herrings in here. Are you against gay marriage or gay adoption? Or both?
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.

Since: Aug 10

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#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

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#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

Wessington Springs, SD

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#104655
May 24, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

1

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

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#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

Wessington Springs, SD

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#104657
May 24, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

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

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#104658
May 24, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

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

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#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.

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#104660
May 24, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

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

Wessington Springs, SD

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#104661
May 24, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

_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

Pikeville, KY

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#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.

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#104663
May 24, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

2

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.

Tell me when this thread is updated: (Registration is not required)

Add to my Tracker Send me an email

Showing posts 100,041 - 100,060 of127,803
|
Go to last page| Jump to page:
Type in your comments below
Name
(appears on your post)
Comments
Characters left: 4000
Type the numbers you see in the image on the right:

Please note by clicking on "Post Comment" 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.

81 Users are viewing the Barbourville Forum right now

Search the Barbourville Forum:
Topic Updated Last By Comments
KY 'Fox News Sunday' to Host Kentucky Senate Debate (Oct '10) 14 min GOTP 144,617
3 family yard sale 45 min yard sale 1
KY Hundreds of birds die in western Ky. (Jan '11) 1 hr gogetter 81,541
KY Paul vs Conway: The Nastiest Debate Of 2010 | T... (Oct '10) 1 hr gogetter 16,111
KC Basketball Coach 1 hr hmmm 48
Big chicken 1 hr Single 5
patrick baker arrested for donald mills murder 1 hr what 363
•••
•••
•••
•••

Barbourville Jobs

•••
Enter and win $5000
•••
•••

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 ]
•••