Bible study rules for public schools ...

Bible study rules for public schools proposed

There are 170509 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.

“Breaking the spell ”

Since: Dec 10

of the puppet master

#107951 Jul 4, 2013
curious wrote:
DOES ANYONE CARE TO EXPLAIN THE FOLLOWING
Biology texts illustrate amoebas evolving into intermediate organisms, which then give rise to amphibians, reptiles, mammals, and, eventually, humans. Yet, we never learn exactly when or how independent male and female sexes originated. Somewhere along this evolutionary path, both males and females were required in order to ensure the procreation that was necessary to further the existence of a particular species. But how do evolutionists explain this? When pressed to answer questions such as,“Where did males and females actually come from?,”“What is the evolutionary origin of sex?,” evolutionists become silent. How could nature ev
Silent? Not exactly, but that is likely what your religious propaganda is claiming we do.
My question is, if science does not yet know all the answers, must it mean god did it?
Males and females evolved as a slow differentiation of sexually reproducing species.
http://in.answers.yahoo.com/question/index...
To understand this, remember that sexual reproduction does not require separate sexes. There are many species of both plants and animals that reproduce sexually, but have no dedicated sexes. Either all individuals of the species have both male and female organs, or they will change from male to female at different times of their lives, or based on temperature during incubation, or a slightly different hormonal environment. So it is not difficult for individuals of some species to slowly get more and more differentiated.
So start with the development of sexual reproduction. This just means that gametes from one individual combine with the gametes of a second individual to form a new individual.
And second, none of these development had to be sudden. There did not have to be a sudden transition from asexual reproduction to one with sexual reproduction (as both can exist simultaneously in the same species); and there did not have to be a sudden transition from a species without sexual organs to one with (as sexual organs are just organs for better production, spreading, and fertilizing of gametes); and third, there did not have to be a sudden transition from a species without males and females to one where individuals only have one kind of sex organ or the other depending on genetics.
To give a single example that illustrates both of these points, look at the slime mold amoeba. It reproduces both asexually and sexually. Normally the amoebas just divide asexually ... so all the amoebas in a colony are clones of the same individual. But when resources get scarce, the amoebas congregate and produce a stalk with a fruiting body at the top filled with spores ... gametes (haploid versions of the amoeba cells). This bursts, releasing the spores (gametes) into the air, which encounter other spores (gametes) from other colonies, fertilize, and start a new colony.
The stalk and fruiting body can be considered the beginnings of a "sexual organ" ... it is a structure designed for the mass-production, and release of gametes.
But the main point is that this shows how there can be a slow transition from asexual reproduction to a *combination* of asexual and sexual reproduction, to a dedicated *sexually reproducing* species.
Second, once sexual reproduction is established, then the next step is the slow differentiation between "male" gametes (smaller, and better suited for mass-production and release), and "female" gametes (larger, and better suited for being fertilized and beginning the process of cell replication).
Third, once the gametes have differentiated, then organs will start specializing in the production of one or the other ... i.e. organs for making and releasing "male" gametes, and for making and protecting "female" gametes and making fertilization more successful.
F
.

“Breaking the spell ”

Since: Dec 10

of the puppet master

#107952 Jul 4, 2013
curious wrote:
<quoted text>

70 % of chidren raised by atheist parents will become religiously affiliated in their adult life...
http://www.patheos.com/blogs/f riendlyatheist/2012/07/14/why- arent-atheist-parents-raising- atheist-children/

“Breaking the spell ”

Since: Dec 10

of the puppet master

#107953 Jul 4, 2013
curious wrote:
<quoted text>

1)Although they claim not to believe in God,Atheists spend an inordinate part of their lifetims talking about God and seeking evidence for his existence.
Although Christians claim to believe in a god, they spend an inordinate part of their lifetime talking about atheism.

“Breaking the spell ”

Since: Dec 10

of the puppet master

#107954 Jul 4, 2013
curious wrote:
<quoted text>

Or,you should ask the 70% of children who were brainwashed by their parents into not believing in God and are now Believers.
Or,go to church and ask the attending Atheists and their children to explain their reasons for being there.
The same mental desire that keeps them always thinking about God is probably also responsible for their desire to attend church..
Ever wonder why so many believers become atheists?

You have no rational for cause and effect. Spouting a few stats does not prove your hypothesis, likely because the full stats show your hypothesis works against you.

“Breaking the spell ”

Since: Dec 10

of the puppet master

#107955 Jul 4, 2013
curious wrote:
<quoted text>

My opinion is that you should address your question to those Atheists,like yourself,who are unable to keep their mind from thinking about God.
.
I am unable to keep my mind from thinking about believers, not the god they imagine exists. I and others have explained this, and yet you cannot address this point.
Denial is how you keep faith.

“Breaking the spell ”

Since: Dec 10

of the puppet master

#107956 Jul 4, 2013
do whut wrote:
<quoted text>
I don't believe God can do anything, so that isn't "my side". What would you have me defend? Someone else's beliefs? You're the one that's wrong in this car in thinking every Christian fits your stereotype.
It is so sad you cannot understand my post.

I am glad to hear you do not believe a god could do anything, as it is a paradox of a claim. But some believer here made just that claim, so I posted a question to prove him wrong. Then you twisted everything into a pretzel to make some point that is irrelevant to the issue.

I have asked many questions here that you avoid like the plague, but love to whine on an on about something that is completely irrelevant to the issues we bring up.

“There is no god.”

Since: Jan 12

USA

#107957 Jul 4, 2013
Mike Duquette wrote:
I do not know if 70% is true or false but it points to atheists being very open minded and accepting of their childrens choices in life.

"In the long run, we shape our lives, and we shape ourselves. The process never ends until we die. And the choices we make are ultimately our responsibility." ER

“Breaking the spell ”

Since: Dec 10

of the puppet master

#107958 Jul 4, 2013
do whut wrote:
<quoted text>
And which ancestor is this that we split from?
All evidence points to some sort of ape. Precisely which one is yet to be determined, so god must have waved his magic wand and made us out of dirt.

“Breaking the spell ”

Since: Dec 10

of the puppet master

#107959 Jul 4, 2013
care8741 wrote:
<quoted text>
No, I'm not a poe... I am serious. And you are very right to be scared. Anyone who is traveling down a path like yours should be petrified... not for the path it's self, but for the judging God whom lies ahead...
It dosn't have to be this way, though! The Bible says that God loves this ol' world so much, that He sent His only Son, Jesus Christ, to be spat on, whipped, humiliated, layed on a board and nails pounded through His skin and flesh, and a spear thrust in His side. And for what? What crime did He do? Murderers and child molesters don't get treated as horrid! Jesus Christ was persicuted, tortured, and killed because He stood up for us. God didn't want us all to have to go to Hell, so He gave us a choice: Do as we wish, say He dosn't exist, pull your little scientific theory of evolution out of your hat(btw, Creationism has also been scientificly proved); or just believe. Believe in Father God, Jesus Christ, Holy Spirit. Believe that God sent His Son to save us from our sins. Read the Bible, believe it, do what it says. And pray:
Father God, Jesus Christ, Holy Spirit,
I am a sinner. I know Jesus came down to the world to save me from my sins. I accept the gift. Please, forgive me! I have done so much wrong in my life that it weighs me down. I want you to lead me. I want to be made new. Come in to my heart and I will do what you say. I Love you. I believe... now I believe.
In Jesus Christ's Name I pray... Amen
I am not scared of any god. Death scares me because I like life and do not want it to end. But I do not believe stories of an afterlife just because I wish for life to continue.

It is reasonable that Jesus was tortured due to his claims about god. You see, in a society that has specific beliefs of in a god, they do not take lightly someone coming along and changing the story. Evidently it is more heinous a crime than others.
Do you really expect ancient barbaric, superstitious people to act differently?

“Breaking the spell ”

Since: Dec 10

of the puppet master

#107960 Jul 4, 2013
LOL in a suit wrote:
<quoted text>
I do not know if 70% is true or false but it points to atheists being very open minded and accepting of their childrens choices in life.
"In the long run, we shape our lives, and we shape ourselves. The process never ends until we die. And the choices we make are ultimately our responsibility." ER
Studies show the claim Curious made was grossly wrong. No surprise here, but the actual stats do show parents who are atheist have a larger percentage of children trying out religion or simply claiming agnosticism over atheism than religiously raised children.
I posted a link earlier today that showed these stats from Pew.

“Breaking the spell ”

Since: Dec 10

of the puppet master

#107961 Jul 4, 2013
do whut wrote:
<quoted text>
Your response is irrelevant to mine, and doesn't make what I said any less true.
What I said was teach as fact, that which is fact, and teach as theory, that which is theory. How can anyone dispute that?
Who says they don't teach it as a theory? And you might wish to look up the word "fact" as you clearly do not really understand the definition. Also, look up the phrase "scientific theory" and the word "theory" to see the difference.
How many times this must be pointed out to you in order for you to learn is astounding.

“Breaking the spell ”

Since: Dec 10

of the puppet master

#107962 Jul 4, 2013
Quantummist wrote:
So someone wants polygamy. Does that mean it will happen? Someone might wish to marry a building, does that mean gay marriage will make that happen? Not anymore so than allowing interracial marriage. I have no doubt you were against that also as most tea party people are clearly racists as well as so homophobic that they wish to keep privileges from them.

Again, other than the religious question, you are a textbook republican.

“Breaking the spell ”

Since: Dec 10

of the puppet master

#107963 Jul 4, 2013
ProvenScience wrote:
Therefore, SOME of us will stand on our *original* appreciation that of the wisdom that can be found within the PERSONAL favorite quote of-
"Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind." - Albert Einstein
*NO additional quotes required* as MANY can READ, Speak and THINK as well, for THEMSELVES.
If we can think for ourselves, then posting a quote as if it is indisputable makes for a giant contradiction.

“Breaking the spell ”

Since: Dec 10

of the puppet master

#107964 Jul 4, 2013
do whut wrote:
<quoted text>
I'm ok with teaching that evolution occurs, while providing examples that have been proven. But apes to humans have not been proven yet, so it should be taught as a theory. Just as whether you are born gay or not has not been proven yet, it should be taught that it is a theory, and then present the evidence that leads some to believe it.
Look up the word "proven" dude. You sound so darned ignorant now it is driving me nuts.
You might think you know what these words mean, but it is clear you use them in a such sloppy manner to the point you sound uneducated.
Learn to use words properly so we can have an intellectual conversation. At this point I feel I am speaking to a child.

“Breaking the spell ”

Since: Dec 10

of the puppet master

#107965 Jul 4, 2013
ProvenScience wrote:
<quoted text>
Because it's a flawed and incomplete , and now rather antiquated theory ONLY as well.
With some of the most outdated, ignorant, elementary level "pictergraphs" to have ever been forced into textbooks anywhere.
Thank goodness, real Science that evolves as LOGIC presents reason and rational, and does NOT "stay" mired in dark age muddlesome muck.
Science evolves as evidence is produced.
Religion will be forever stuck in the "god did it" world.
Science is never complete and that is its greatest strength.
Religion claims absolute knowledge with zero evidence, and that is its greatest weakness.

“Breaking the spell ”

Since: Dec 10

of the puppet master

#107966 Jul 4, 2013
Known Fact wrote:
<quoted text>
Common sense is so rare these days it should be classified as a superpower!
The ideas that are common among lay persons are often so senseless that the phrase "common sense" is a senseless term to use.
It is common that most persons cannot understand this concept.
curious

Winter Garden, FL

#107967 Jul 4, 2013
Yiago wrote:
<quoted text>
Ah yes, another "You can't explain this, therefore God did it" post.
Here's a little insight about science: it is a work in progress. We don't have a magic book with all the answers. Actually, neither do you but you don't seem to understand that fact.
Here's some light reading on the subject of sexual evolution:
http://www.nature.com/scitable/topicpage/sexu...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolution_of_se...
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/01/...
You have been known to post a lot of gibberish and nonsense on Topix.
Neither you or any of the other misinformed and unqualified students of Evolution and Science are able to explain the questions that were posed.
The reason being that Evolution is a lie.
The creation of the universe and all there in was not caused by an accident.
Nothing can not create something out of nothing.
Someone of a superior intellect and power had to be there to create the events that led to the creation of the universe and life as we know it.
The foolish will say that it is impossible to believe that some unseen power created the universe."GOD"
But they will readily believe that it is entirely possible and logical that the universe and life as we know it was creared by accident,coincidence and chance.
I will file all that information in the circular file.
The 3 links you posted shed absolutely no light on the issues in question...
That was not surprising as you are the same one that claimed to have found evidence in the bible that pointed to Michael Jackson.
Your postings point to the fact that you are in dire need of a mental overhaul.
You can start that overhaul by joining the 25% of Atheists and their families that attend church on a regular basis.

“Breaking the spell ”

Since: Dec 10

of the puppet master

#107968 Jul 4, 2013
ProvenScience wrote:
<quoted text>
Who ever ruled out that the possible aforementioned vertebrae was not a sprinkle of proverbial salt dropped unto the Earth, from elsewhere..still YET, that of which remains unknown?
To rule such out-would sound about as ignorant and idioTic as an athiest speaking.
I like the part where the wicked witch melts away into the pile of hatred goo she represented.:-)
Salt? You mean like magic salt? I suppose one could remain in perpetual open ended lack of conclusions, or one could just assume that zero evidence has ever been produced of a magic salt giver thus be of the mind no magic salt be needed.
Funny how you point the finger at atheists yet believers are often of a firm mind a god must be needed, yet their is no evidence pointing to this conclusion.
You consistently have a double standard.

“Breaking the spell ”

Since: Dec 10

of the puppet master

#107969 Jul 4, 2013
curious wrote:
<quoted text>

The foolish will say that it is impossible to believe that some unseen power created the universe."GOD"
Just who made this claim?

First, it is clear billions believe a god created, so it is proven it is possible to believe this.

“Breaking the spell ”

Since: Dec 10

of the puppet master

#107970 Jul 4, 2013
curious wrote:
<quoted text>

Someone of a superior intellect and power had to be there to create the events that led to the creation of the universe and life as we know it.
If you have a single shred of evidence for this claim, you might sound like a reasonable person.

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
Tongues 21 min The Specialist 13
To my new Best Friend, Weird. 25 min The Specialist 5
Murder Fred Brown Arrested 37 min Brianna Logan the... 39
Darrel Blevins 51 min Friend 11
Peggy Jones Job Hunting 1 hr What 18
Warren to receive Knox schools JOB ! ! ! 1 hr go sprinkles 1
My Daughter is the Best Daughter in Barbourville 1 hr Shelia Jones 5

Barbourville Jobs

More from around the web

Personal Finance

Barbourville Mortgages