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
103,641 - 103,660 of 130,319 Comments Last updated 47 min ago
JustMeaness

London, KY

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#108409
Jul 18, 2013
 

Judged:

5

4

2

aWitchintheWoods wrote:
<quoted text>
***chuckles***
I read this a few days ago and thought of you and the other science-minded (is that a word?) folks on this forum. It is quite touching.
“Every atom in your body came from a star that exploded. And, the atoms in your left hand probably came from a different star than your right hand.
It really is the most poetic thing I know about physics: You are all stardust.
You couldn’t be here if stars hadn’t exploded, because the elements – the carbon, nitrogen, oxygen, iron, all the things that matter for evolution and for life – weren’t created at the beginning of time.
They were created in the nuclear furnaces of stars, and the only way for them to get into your body is if those stars were kind enough to explode.
So, forget Jesus. The stars died so that you could be here today."
-- Lawrence Maxwell Krass
Too bad ignorance and meaness isn't comprised of "star dust" though huh?
JustMeaness

London, KY

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#108410
Jul 18, 2013
 

Judged:

5

4

2

Quantummist wrote:
<quoted text>
Yes and we can tell how the types of stars each element was processed through before it became you... We know that at least one Quasar and One Super nova was required to make you you....
. A species that has been around for only a fraction of a tick of the cosmic clock.....
Kin yew splain to us how it izz dat all deez differnt containers of duh same elemental type of wallkin, tallkin mouf breaving type pixie DUHst ingwediants, can awrl be so'z differnt elsewise (yew know, outside of the realms of basic physic matter composition)

Do yewz have ter awlter yer doorways to fits yer them pompous blobs over OVER filled helium on yer shoulders through them?

OMG-just copy and paste post all the "SPECIES" in Periodic tables and point out the elements fo what's being discussed, in use...as shown for what it comprises--composition of the universe.

----------
Did you ever wonder what stars are made of? You might not be surprised to know that stars are made of the same stuff as the rest of the Universe: 73% hydrogen, 25% helium, and the last 2% is all the other elements. That’s it. Except for a few differences here and there, stars are made of pretty much the same stuff.

After the Big Bang, 13.7 billion years ago, the entire Universe was a hot dense sphere. The conditions inside this young Universe were so hot that it was equivalent to being inside the core of a star. In other words, the entire Universe was like a star. And for the brief time that the Universe was in this state, nuclear fusion reactions converted hydrogen into helium to the ratios we see today.

The Universe kept expanding and cooling down, and eventually the hydrogen and helium cooled down to the point that it could actually start collecting together with its mutual gravity. This is how the first stars were born. And just like the stars we have today, they were made up of roughly 73% hydrogen and 25% helium. These first stars were enormous and probably detonated as supernovae within a million years of forming. In their life, and in their death, these first stars created some of the heavier elements that we have here on Earth, like oxygen, carbon, gold and uranium.

Stars have been forming since the Universe began. In fact, astronomers calculate that 5 new stars form in the Milky Way every year. Some have more of the heavier elements left over from previous stars; these are metal-rich stars. Others have less of these elements; the metal-poor stars. But even so, the ratio of elements is still roughly the same. Our own Sun is an example of a metal rich star, with a higher than average amount of heavier elements inside it. And yet, the Sun’s ratios are very similar: 71% hydrogen, 27.1% helium, and then the rest as heavier elements, like oxygen, carbon, nitrogen, etc. Of course, the Sun has been converting hydrogen into helium in its core for 4.5 billion years.

Stars everywhere are made of the same stuff: 3/4 hydrogen and 1/4 helium. It’s the stuff left over from the formation of the Universe, and one of the most elegant pieces of evidence to help explain how we’re here today...

Frasier, C. "What are stars made of" Universetoday.com . 2/6/2009.

Footnote 1. Ahh 2009...back before the current admin had time to plunder, blunder, pillage and generally screw America over.)

Footnote 2. No "dying stars" requirement mentioned, for the formation of new ones to exist--just universal ELEMENTS already in existance.
Footnote 3. Yewr a maroon.
JustMeaness

London, KY

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#108411
Jul 18, 2013
 

Judged:

5

4

2

Annoyed wrote:
But alas, all we can do here is mingle and egg them on for fun
Maroons can fool some of the masses some of time, but not all of the masses all of the time.

Might want to tie a string onto Q and a couple of others toes, and twine them around some firmly rooted trees, so they don't float due to the abunDUNCE of hot air comprising the blob on they shoulders.
(and make sure there's no puddles of water around either, in case the other elements of BS compositional material is in float mode)
JustMeaness

London, KY

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#108412
Jul 18, 2013
 

Judged:

5

4

2

Carl Sagan wrote:
<quoted text>
If this message board promoted intelligent discussions and debates instead of a broken, anti-discussion 'judging' system - & didn't attract so many overweight, gossiping coal miners' wives, it could happen.
Hardly anyone on here can even tolerate someone with a different viewpoint than them.
Lets lessen the element of boron, it hard on the MOHs scale of rocks, that way we culd make sum better pliability in tolerance.

“See how you are?”

Since: Jul 12

Earth

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#108413
Jul 18, 2013
 
Brian_G wrote:
<quoted text>Tray shouldn't have bounced George's head off the street, what else can you expect? There were only two injuries on Tray, bruised knuckles and a bullet wound. Did you see the photos of George?
George started it and George ended it.

“I'll think about it.”

Since: Nov 07

central Florida

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#108415
Jul 18, 2013
 

Judged:

1

Quantummist wrote:
<quoted text>
Yes and we can tell how the types of stars each element was processed through before it became you... We know that at least one Quasar and One Super nova was required to make you you....
Evolution started the Instant Physical Matter was converted from the Unified Indefinable Energy Quantum at least 14 Billion years ago... Each subatomic particle that self assembled in the universe was a step in the Evolution of man and all life... How ever you define life... And that is a moving target... Today Life exists from 60 below zero to 400 degrees above, live lives in oxygen and it lives in pure methane.... Live exists at pressures that would cause your blood to boil at altitude and pressures that would crush you like a semi running over a grape... Life Thrives in toxic acid baths and the hearts of nuclear reactors... And that is but Life as We Know It... A species that has been around for only a fraction of a tick of the cosmic clock.....
I agree that most people's idea of "Life" is far, far too narrow.
They are saying "Life, you know, like us" when the variety of possibilities of living creatures is endless.
The more we think we know, the more there is to learn.

“I'll think about it.”

Since: Nov 07

central Florida

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#108416
Jul 18, 2013
 
Quantummist wrote:
<quoted text>
And interesting article Sorta on the subject...
http://news.yahoo.com/earths-gold-may-come-co...
Thanks. Interesting.
I have never been a big fan of gold but I can see where that would make it pretty special.

Since: Aug 10

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#108417
Jul 18, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

GWB wrote:
<quoted text>Do Mormons believe speaking on tongues "glossolalia" also? If not then why not?
Yes, but I have never seen it in the manner that is described in the New Testament. It is said to have happened in the Kirkland Temple in the early days of the church.

Since: Aug 10

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#108418
Jul 18, 2013
 

Judged:

4

3

2

Yiago wrote:
<quoted text>In a sense, if we're talking about supernatural beliefs, you are correct. It is no more crazy to believe that Smith was shown to an ancient document by a magical creature than it is to believe that a superpowerful being created the world in 6 days.

But if we juxtapose these beliefs against the actual evidence and a realistic worldview they do in fact pale by comparison.

I believe Smith was a fraud. My belief is far more plausible than your belief because it does not introduce magic. We know frauds exist, we do not know angels exist. And there is no such thing as Reformed Egyptian.
You also believe Jesus was a fraud, so your opinion is not important to me.
CivlLawsandEthic s

London, KY

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#108419
Jul 18, 2013
 

Judged:

5

4

3

ChromiuMan wrote:
<quoted text>
George started it and George ended it.
People have a right to protect themselves, their loved ones and everything else that goes along with that.

Was just talking with a friend who lives in Fla last night-her elderly female parent lives in a similar nieghborhood watch type community..and she and her friends are out "watching" peaceably, every night, armed with cell phones, to call the police (as Zimmerman did)at anytime, should suspect give reason to do so.

To think that those people, that LIVE in those communities, have any less right to be out walking (especially when compared to anyone who does NOT actually live in such) than anyone else-or any less right to protect themselves while doing such-is Insane...the insanity of the liberal toxicness of thieves, thugs and CONS who seem to think they have some sort entitleMENTALed (NON) right, to ANY one else's anything.

BOTH TM and GZ had civil "rights" to be out walking/driving that night.
Evidence shows, one chose to ABUSE that right, by ABUSING another human being, opting for initiating Violence, rather than abiding by civil law, and ignoring the right to have just kept walking.

SAD, but true...but not as patheTically disgusting as teenagers shooting a thirteen month old baby point blank in the face, to further their own self serving evil agendas of nothing but vile GREED.

Where's the "rioting and national media froth" for that type of EVILness and vileness, not only trying take the rights of OTHERS away, but vilely ruining the lives of TRULY innocent people.
DISGUSTING.

Baby shot dead in stroller; 2 Georgia teens charged with murder

http://www.cnn.com/2013/03/22/us/georgia-baby...

“See how you are?”

Since: Jul 12

Earth

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#108420
Jul 18, 2013
 
CivlLawsandEthics wrote:
<quoted text>
People have a right to protect themselves, their loved ones and everything else that goes along with that.
Was just talking with a friend who lives in Fla last night-her elderly female parent lives in a similar nieghborhood watch type community..and she and her friends are out "watching" peaceably, every night, armed with cell phones, to call the police (as Zimmerman did)at anytime, should suspect give reason to do so.
To think that those people, that LIVE in those communities, have any less right to be out walking (especially when compared to anyone who does NOT actually live in such) than anyone else-or any less right to protect themselves while doing such-is Insane...the insanity of the liberal toxicness of thieves, thugs and CONS who seem to think they have some sort entitleMENTALed (NON) right, to ANY one else's anything.
BOTH TM and GZ had civil "rights" to be out walking/driving that night.
Evidence shows, one chose to ABUSE that right, by ABUSING another human being, opting for initiating Violence, rather than abiding by civil law, and ignoring the right to have just kept walking.
SAD, but true...but not as patheTically disgusting as teenagers shooting a thirteen month old baby point blank in the face, to further their own self serving evil agendas of nothing but vile GREED.
Where's the "rioting and national media froth" for that type of EVILness and vileness, not only trying take the rights of OTHERS away, but vilely ruining the lives of TRULY innocent people.
DISGUSTING.
Baby shot dead in stroller; 2 Georgia teens charged with murder
http://www.cnn.com/2013/03/22/us/georgia-baby...
This case had nothing to do with random or wanton violence and your baby killing example is wholly immaterial.
It should have ended with Zimmerman calling the police, but instead HE escalated the situation - very likely because of the false bravado of being armed. Zimmerman is the one who chased Martin to within 70 yards of his door and Zimmerman was the one who initiated the confrontation.
I never claimed that he didn't have the right to defend his life, but there are many who believe that defending their THINGS gives them the personal liberty to inflict capital punishment. The essence of the "stand your ground" law is that even if you have an avenue of escape, you have the lawful right to cause grievous bodily injury and/or death if you feel your life is threatened. This being the case, did Martin not also have a lawful right to stand his ground?

“See how you are?”

Since: Jul 12

Earth

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#108421
Jul 18, 2013
 
aWitchintheWoods wrote:
<quoted text>
Thanks. Interesting.
I have never been a big fan of gold but I can see where that would make it pretty special.
http://www.miho.or.jp/english/member/shangril...
CivlLawandEthics

London, KY

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#108422
Jul 18, 2013
 

Judged:

5

4

3

ChromiuMan wrote:
<quoted text>
This case had nothing to do with random or wanton violence and your baby killing example is wholly immaterial.
It should have ended with Zimmerman calling the police, but instead HE escalated the situation - very likely because of the false bravado of being armed. Zimmerman is the one who chased Martin to within 70 yards of his door and Zimmerman was the one who initiated the confrontation.
I never claimed that he didn't have the right to defend his life, but there are many who believe that defending their THINGS gives them the personal liberty to inflict capital punishment. The essence of the "stand your ground" law is that even if you have an avenue of escape, you have the lawful right to cause grievous bodily injury and/or death if you feel your life is threatened. This being the case, did Martin not also have a lawful right to stand his ground?
Yeah, he had the right to head right back to the door where he was staying as a GUEST, rather than choosing the option of his spoken intent to "just bash on" a neighborhood watch person.

No common sense, already IN trouble (rather than IN school, IN is own neighborhood) returning to Guest lodging from purchasing purple drank ingrediants, met lacking in common sense too resident, out watching/looking for trouble.
CivlLawandEthics

London, KY

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#108423
Jul 18, 2013
 

Judged:

5

4

3

ChromiuMan wrote:
<quoted text>
This case had nothing to do with random or wanton violence and your baby killing example is wholly immaterial.
It should have ended with Zimmerman calling the police, but instead HE escalated the situation - very likely because of the false bravado of being armed. Zimmerman is the one who chased Martin to within 70 yards of his door and Zimmerman was the one who initiated the confrontation.
I never claimed that he didn't have the right to defend his life, but there are many who believe that defending their THINGS gives them the personal liberty to inflict capital punishment. The essence of the "stand your ground" law is that even if you have an avenue of escape, you have the lawful right to cause grievous bodily injury and/or death if you feel your life is threatened. This being the case, did Martin not also have a lawful right to stand his ground?
where's the outrage on the thirteen month old baby?

“See how you are?”

Since: Jul 12

Earth

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#108424
Jul 18, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

CivlLawandEthics wrote:
<quoted text>
where's the outrage on the thirteen month old baby?
CivlLawandEthics wrote:
<quoted text>
where's the outrage on the thirteen month old baby?
And you have all of the answers?
You ask for repugnance of a single case when the causes of society's ills are manifold.
Where is the impotent outrage at any of thousands of other senseless atrocities? Where is the outrage at the numbers of Americans serving time for possessing certain plant leaves? At parental dis-involvement with their children? At the lack of accountability and disconnect from the public good in government and business? At the smut, violence, disinformation and pablum that passes for news and/or entertainment? At the generations of millions who believe and choose to perpetuate that fairy tales are real? At the promotion of selfishness, narcissism and materialism as virtuous? Have you been to Sanford, Heathrow, Midway? I have.
The facts remain. Machismo and adrenalin made all of the decisions that night. GZ placed himself in harm's way playing wannabe cop and it could have as easily led to his own death. Would or should TM have then been acquitted for defending himself against a belligerent and armed man?

“I Luv Carbon Dioxide”

Since: Dec 08

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#108425
Jul 18, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

ChromiuMan wrote:
George started it and George ended it.
That's not what the evidence shows; George called the police, he was on the bottom, yelling for help. When T. bopped his head off the street, George shot.

“See how you are?”

Since: Jul 12

Earth

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#108426
Jul 18, 2013
 

Judged:

1

Brian_G wrote:
<quoted text>That's not what the evidence shows; George called the police, he was on the bottom, yelling for help. When T. bopped his head off the street, George shot.
The evidence shows that GZ spotted, profiled and chased TM, lost him, found him again and a confrontation ensued. We will never hear TM's side of the story. You can edit and confound the story any other way you want - and you usually do. That's why I loathe responding directly to your posts. Have a nice day.
curious

Ocoee, FL

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#108427
Jul 18, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

The tantalising proof that belief in God makes you happier and healthier
By Tom Knox
God has had a tough time over the past few years. On TV, in newspapers and on the internet, the debate as to whether faith has any relevance in a sceptical modern world has been as ubiquitous as it has been vigorous.
And it has been pretty clear which side is the most splenetic.
From Richard Dawkins’ powerful atheist polemics to Christopher Hitchens’ public derision of the Roman Catholic Tony Blair and Stephen Hawking’s proclamation that the universe ‘has no need for God’, it seems that unbelievers have had the dwindling faithful on the run.
Or have they?
Proof? Research has found that religious believers have a healthy and happier life, but what is the secret and how does religion work its magic?
As research for my latest novel, Bible Of The Dead, I have spent months investigating the science of faith versus atheism, and discovered startling and unexpected evidence. It might just change the way you think about the whole debate, as it has changed my view.
I am not a religious zealot. On the contrary, I was a teenage atheist. And although in adulthood I have had a vague and fuzzy feeling that ‘there must be something out there’, I was never a regular church-goer. But what I have discovered, on my voyage through the science of faith, has astonished me.
For a growing yet largely unnoticed body of scientific work, amassed over the past 30 years, shows religious belief is medically, socially and psychologically beneficial.
In 2006, the American Society of Hypertension established that church-goers have lower blood pressure than the non-faithful.
Likewise, in 2004, scholars at the University of California, Los Angeles, suggested that college students involved in religious activities are more likely to have better mental and emotional health than those who do not.
Meanwhile, in 2006, population researchers at the University of Texas discovered that the more often you go to church, the longer you live.
Attack: Christopher Hitchens made a public derision of Tony Blair's decision to becoming a Roman Catholic
As they put it:‘Religious attendance is associated with adult mortality in a graded fashion: there is a seven-year difference in life expectancy between those who never attend church and those who attend weekly.’
Exactly the same outcome was recently reported in the American Journal of Public Health, which studied nearly 2,000 older Californians for five years. Those who attended religious services were 36 per cent less likely to die during this half-decade than those who didn’t.
Even those who attended a place of worship irregularly — implying a less than ardent faith — did better than those who never attended.
curious

Ocoee, FL

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#108428
Jul 18, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Pretty impressive. But there’s more; so much more that it’s positively surreal.
In 1990,the American Journal of Psychiatry discovered believers with broken hips were less depressed, had shorter hospital stays and could even walk further when they were discharged compared to their similarly broken-hipped and hospitalised, but comparatively hThe tantalising proof that belief in God makes you happier and healthier
By Tom Knox
God has had a tough time over the past few years. On TV, in newspapers and on the internet, the debate as to whether faith has any relevance in a sceptical modern world has been as ubiquitous as it has been vigorous.
And it has been pretty clear which side is the most splenetic.
From Richard Dawkins’ powerful atheist polemics to Christopher Hitchens’ public derision of the Roman Catholic Tony Blair and Stephen Hawking’s proclamation that the universe ‘has no need for God’, it seems that unbelievers have had the dwindling faithful on the run.
Or have they?
Proof? Research has found that religious believers have a healthy and happier life, but what is the secret and how does religion work its magic?
As research for my latest novel, Bible Of The Dead, I have spent months investigating the science of faith versus atheism, and discovered startling and unexpected evidence. It might just change the way you think about the whole debate, as it has changed my view.
I am not a religious zealot. On the contrary, I was a teenage atheist. And although in adulthood I have had a vague and fuzzy feeling that ‘there must be something out there’, I was never a regular church-goer. But what I have discovered, on my voyage through the science of faith, has astonished me.
For a growing yet largely unnoticed body of scientific work, amassed over the past 30 years, shows religious belief is medically, socially and psychologically beneficial.
In 2006, the American Society of Hypertension established that church-goers have lower blood pressure than the non-faithful.
Likewise, in 2004, scholars at the University of California, Los Angeles, suggested that college students involved in religious activities are more likely to have better mental and emotional health than those who do not.
Meanwhile, in 2006, population researchers at the University of Texas discovered that the more often you go to church, the longer you live.
curious

Ocoee, FL

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#108429
Jul 18, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Christopher Hitchens made a public derision of Tony Blair's decision to becoming a Roman Catholic
As they put it:‘Religious attendance is associated with adult mortality in a graded fashion: there is a seven-year difference in life expectancy between those who never attend church and those who attend weekly.’
Exactly the same outcome was recently reported in the American Journal of Public Health, which studied nearly 2,000 older Californians for five years. Those who attended religious services were 36 per cent less likely to die during this half-decade than those who didn’t.
Even those who attended a place of worship irregularly — implying a less than ardent faith — did better than those who never attended.
eathen peers.
It’s not just hips. Scientists have revealed that believers recover from breast cancer quicker than non-believers; have better outcomes from coronary disease and rheumatoid arthritis; and are less likely to have children with meningitis.
Intriguing research in 2002 showed that believers have more success with IVF than non-believers.
A 1999 study found that going to a religious service or saying a few prayers actively strengthened your immune system.
These medical benefits accrue even if you adjust for the fact that believers are less likely to smoke, drink or take drugs.
And faith doesn’t just heal the body; it salves the mind, too. In 1998, the American Journal of Public Health found that depressed patients with a strong ‘intrinsic faith’(a deep personal belief, not just a social inclination to go to a place of worship) recovered 70 per cent faster than those who did not have strong faith.
Another study, in 2002, showed that prayer reduced ‘adverse outcomes in heart patients’.
But perhaps this is just an American thing? After all, those Bible-bashing Yanks are a bit credulous compared to us more sceptical Europeans, aren’t they?
Proclamation: Professor Stephen Hawking has said that the 'universe has no need for God'
Not so. In 2008, Professor Andrew Clark of the Paris School of Economics and Doctor Orsolya Lelkes of the European Centre for Social Welfare Policy and Research conducted a vast survey of Europeans. They found that religious believers, compared to non-believers, record less stress, are better able to cope with losing jobs and divorce, are less prone to suicide, report higher levels of self-esteem, enjoy greater ‘life purpose’ and report being more happy overall.
What is stunning about this research is that the team didn’t go looking for this effect — it came to them unexpectedly.‘We originally started the research to work out why some European countries had more generous unemployment benefits than others,’ says Professor Clark.
But as they went on, the pattern of beneficial faith presented itself.‘Our analysis suggested religious people suffered less psychological harm from unemployment than the non-religious. Believers had higher levels of life satisfaction.’

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

Add to my Tracker Send me an email

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.

Other Recent Barbourville Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
'Fox News Sunday' to Host Kentucky Senate Debate (Oct '10) 3 min Mr Pete Helmkamp 150,311
KY Paul vs Conway: The Nastiest Debate Of 2010 | T... (Oct '10) 2 hr hahahaha 16,128
compter parts 7 hr travis 1
laptops 7 hr travis 1
Charmaine 10 hr wow 4
Churches 10 hr Neighbor 6
Need Prayer 10 hr Neighbor 3

Search the Barbourville Forum:
•••
•••
•••

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 ]
•••