Bible study rules for public schools proposed

Feb 10, 2010 Full story: The Courier-Journal 131,904

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.

Full Story
Yes and Amen

Winchester, KY

#108752 Jul 24, 2013
Mike Duquette wrote:
<quoted text>You don't seem to realize who this rebuttal was about (yes and amen). YAA is the typical hater of atheists. He hates most science books and wants them out of schools. Now I see this as harmful. Maybe you do not, but that is your business.
You consistently see religion as harmless. Did you forget about 9/11 already?
We demonstrate on a daily basis our problems with religion yet your short term memory seems not to keep these grievances in mind.
It is not the belief we hate, we hate the negative actions of believers due to the beliefs.
Now can you comprehend this concept?
What a lying Dipstick you are!
IF... IF I hated you, I would not try talking to you!
Stop your lying, and open your eyes to the Light!
Yes and Amen

Winchester, KY

#108753 Jul 24, 2013
act your age wrote:
the entire nation is going the way of Detroit ,....
OK
keep backing obama and the democrats !
lets watch America fall !
it will be quite a show !
It's unstoppable!
Satan is grinding us to powder!
To God be the Glory of all who Repents, and is saved!
Yes and Amen

Winchester, KY

#108754 Jul 24, 2013
aWitchintheWoods wrote:
<quoted text>
At least I know how the differece between "whole" and "hole."
<quoted text>
Try not to appear any more foolish than you usually do.
I post only as aWitchintheWoods.
It bothers you to think there are so many educated, intelligent, well-spoken atheists. You would rather pretend we are all posting under multiple names. But you are wrong, as usual.
Anyone with half a brain would notice the distinct personalities represented.
"educated, intelligent, well-spoken"
Not always!
You can be "educated, intelligent, well-spoken", and STILL go to Hell!
Go figure!
Oh... Try not to make ANY spelling mistakes, as I may feel...
I will have to point them out to you!
Good day!

“See how you are?”

Since: Jul 12

Earth

#108755 Jul 24, 2013
do whut wrote:
<quoted text>
George Washington didn't write much of anything either, but we still have his words, and know what he stood for.
Now you're going all fundamental on us? Mind your 9th commandment.

http://memory.loc.gov/ammem/gwhtml/

http://gwpapers.virginia.edu/
curious

Ocoee, FL

#108756 Jul 24, 2013
Mike Duquette wrote:
<quoted text>Again you simply misstate the study you posted. The study was on the elderly on the brink of certain death and often in pain. The motives of suicide for these persons was actually somewhat noble as they cited the burden they felt they put upon their children supporting them financially to artificially extend their lives with modern medicine.
But you twist the actual study to include all atheists, young and old. This is just lying for the motive of demonizing atheism.
I brought this up to you when you first published the study and you ignored my response. You clearly ignore it to keep in denial and keep the faith.
Of course you do not realize the beliefs you have are considered detrimental by others. You sit in ignorant bliss as you discriminate upon homosexuals and constantly demean science. Ironically posting science studies to prove your own points astounds me..
Stop making up nonsense
Full article online: http://ajp.psychiatryonline.org/cgi/content/a...

ABSTRACT:

OBJECTIVE: Few studies have investigated the association between religion and suicide either in terms of Durkheim's social integration hypothesis or the hypothesis of the regulative benefits of religion. The relationship between religion and suicide attempts has received even less attention.
METHOD: Depressed inpatients (N=371) who reported belonging to one specific religion or described themselves as having no religious affiliation were compared in terms of their demographic and clinical characteristics.

RESULTS: Religiously unaffiliated subjects had significantly more lifetime suicide attempts and more first-degree relatives who committed suicide than subjects who endorsed a religious affiliation. Unaffiliated subjects were younger, less often married, less often had children, and had less contact with family members. Furthermore, subjects with no religious affiliation perceived fewer reasons for living, particularly fewer moral objections to suicide. In terms of clinical characteristics, religiously unaffiliated subjects had more lifetime impulsivity, aggression, and past substance use disorder. No differences in the level of subjective and objective depression, hopelessness, or stressful life events were found.

CONCLUSIONS: Religious affiliation is associated with less suicidal behavior in depressed inpatients. After other factors were controlled, it was found that greater moral objections to suicide and lower aggression level in religiously affiliated subjects may function as protective factors against suicide attempts. Further study about the influence of religious affiliation on aggressive behavior and how moral objections can reduce the probability of acting on suicidal thoughts may offer new therapeutic strategies in suicide prevention.

Pitzer College sociologist Phil Zuckerman compiled country-by-country survey, polling and census numbers relating to atheism, agnosticism, disbelief in God and people who state they are non-religious or have no religious preference. These data were published in the chapter titled "Atheism: Contemporary Rates and Patterns" in The Cambridge Companion to Atheism, ed. by Michael Martin, Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, UK (2005). In examining various indicators of societal health, Zuckerman concludes about suicide:
Concerning suicide rates, this is the one indicator of societal health in which religious nations fare much better than secular nations. According to the 2003 World Health Organization's report on international male suicides rates (which compared 100 countries), of the top ten nations with the highest male suicide rates, all but one (Sri Lanka) are strongly irreligious nations with high levels of atheism. It is interesting to note, however, that of the top remaining nine nations leading the world in male suicide rates, all are former Soviet/Communist nations, such as Belarus, Ukraine

Since: Aug 10

Location hidden

#108758 Jul 24, 2013
Mike Duquette wrote:
<quoted text>All laws are of man made traditions. Just look at the difference between the old and New Testament. The old traditions/laws needed an update and Jesus was that avenue to the changes.
Now is time for more updates. And I do not mean Joe Smith has the correct path to new traditions or laws. If he did, your church would never have made such massive mistakes as discriminating like it has done and is still doing.
Our traditions are moving past the era of Smiths days ( 1840). Our laws have moved along. Now catch up or be left behind.
I am speaking as a religious person so I can't agree. I believe some of their laws were from God.
Jesus fulfilled the Mosaic law and brought to them the higher law. He also corrected their laws that had crept overtime into something the law was not meant to be.
Like don't work on the Sabbath. Man had turned this into a more strict law than necessary. The law restricted normal work, but not the work of The Lord. He showed them it was ok to heal on the Sabbath.

I will obey the laws of this country because I love my country and wish to remain a citizen. But I will also abide by God's laws and will not abandon them regardless of what you say I should do. If God chooses to change a law that He has commanded us to follow, and communicates this to me directly or through His prophet, I will obey after receiving my own witness from the Holy Ghost that it is indeed from God.

I couldn't care less if you leave me behind as I do not wish to travel the same path as you are taking on several topics. Feel free to leave me behind and call me weird for choosing such (thus fulfilling scripture).

Since: Aug 10

Location hidden

#108759 Jul 24, 2013
Yiago wrote:
<quoted text>"Victim in Waiting"...that would be a great band name.

And you live in a strange world if you think someone is going to rape my cat and you are somehow going to skin your smoke wagon, do a double flip over the "bad guys", and save the day. That's called Hollywood.

I used to live in a rough part of a city. Had several friends and loved ones that were mugged. I was also attacked. None of us needed a gun and I'm thankful none of us had guns or the situations would have been worse.
Wow, I would rather have a gun and ensure this monster would not continue to gather victims.

Since: Aug 10

Location hidden

#108760 Jul 24, 2013
Mike Duquette wrote:
<quoted text>Would a book about George Bush written by Karl Rove show George as a liar or a fraud? No, and I certainly would not expect the bible to tell the truth about Jesus. The bible is a propaganda book on Jesus, not an unbiased historical document.

Jesus was taught by John the Baptist. It is reasonable to assume John lead Jesus to believe he was special, so when John got his head chopped off, Jesus took the leadership role in the void.

Read the story of David Koresh and you will find the same thing happened. It is pretty textbook stuff.

If you showed a bit of critical thinking and skepticism of the bible, I might think you were not one hundred percent brainwashed, but you show absolutely zero ability to doubt the bible could have any flaws.
Where do you find any record that says John taught Jesus anything?

Since: Aug 10

Location hidden

#108761 Jul 24, 2013
Mike Duquette wrote:
<quoted text>I also respect those peoples right to believe as they wish. But respecting freedom of religion is far different than respecting what one believes.
Elaboration was not needed by you if you could only write what you mean instead of writing what you do not actually mean. All you needed to write was, you respect the right of different beliefs. Now is that to long of a sentence to write, or are you just that careless in words?

The ten commandments show no respect for the right to believe as one wishes. So do you differ from god on morality? I certainly do, and this is one large reason I think this god must be a myth. This god does not ask, he demands, and commands, with zero respect for a freedom of choice.

I am glad you do not demand like your unreasonable god. But having a double standard for a god just shows the glaring contradictions of logic.This is why I continue to conclude you are in denial to keep the faith.

I respect your right to believe, but I do not respect the actions of Christians due to their beliefs all to often.
I don't write on here to please you. I'll write how I wish to write. If you care enough to want to know more, feel free to ask. I don't get much free time to doodle on here so I keep things concise most if the time.

I can learn about someone's beliefs and see why they believe as they do most of the time. So I can respect most others' beliefs. I said what I meant to say.

And no, I don't demand that anyone believe as I do. That's not my choice. It is theirs. It is my duty to educate others on my beliefs if they wish to hear them. Then it is their choice what to do with that information.
They have the choice to believe and act as they wish. Does that mean I think they are following the right path? No.

I am fine with God demanding His believers to act a certain way and do certain things. Since they believe He created them, it isn't unreasonable for them to think He has certain expectations of them.

Since: Aug 10

Location hidden

#108762 Jul 24, 2013
LOL in a suit wrote:
<quoted text>Free on hulu. A christian dies and an atheist keeps his bible. Waste of time, christian propaganda, no historical value. It does have a moment that "curious" would like. The atheist "makes a comment" about the christians religion. The christian says, for one with no faith you ask a lot of questions about religion.

Atheists ask questions.
So god exists.
Actually I was referring to the part where Mormons on both sides of the war meet.

Since: Aug 10

Location hidden

#108763 Jul 24, 2013
Yiago wrote:
<quoted text>I'm sorry those tragedies happened to you. I fully realize these things do happen every day.

But I'm not paralyzed with fear as a result and I don't feel so insecure I have to carry a lethal weapon to buy milk.

I'm sorry you do. And, as I told the other poster, I have no interest or intention of attacking your right to do so. Just keep your pop guns away from my kids and we'll have no quarrel.
You trivialize the trip to the store to buy milk, but do you realize that these life or death situations do not likely only happen on the day you go somewhere different that doesn't have a good reputation? These things can happen at any time and at almost any place. Seriously, who leaves the house thinking today is the day I'm going to get mugged so I'll carry my defense weapon today?
So I can't really blame people that choose to be cautious and carry a weapon that could save their lives so long as they do so legally.

Since: Aug 10

Location hidden

#108764 Jul 24, 2013
ChromiuMan wrote:
<quoted text>Now you're going all fundamental on us? Mind your 9th commandment.

http://memory.loc.gov/ammem/gwhtml/

http://gwpapers.virginia.edu/
No, you just missed the point completely.
It does not matter to me that Jesus Himself did not write a book that we have today. I believe the scriptures are true, though not inerrant. I believe in prophets and apostles that are appointed by God to communicate His messages to us. I believe in the Holy Ghost and have learned to identify His guidance.

You struggle to believe Jesus even existed, so when I say "Jesus said", you automatically place doubt in the remainder of the sentence. I do not think this way because I have received an undeniable personal witness that Jesus not only existed, but is the most important figure in all of human history, as well as human future.
curious

Ocoee, FL

#108765 Jul 24, 2013
Yiago wrote:
<quoted text>

do whut wrote:
<quoted text>
The entire Bible, both Old and New Testaments speak of Jesus being the Son of God.
You are totally unprepared to have this discussion. Please go read Mark again and tell me there are no mentions of Him claiming to be the Son of God or fantastic miracles.
Then I can indeed call you a liar.

Yiagio says

You are the second person who chose not to read the words "correct me if I'm wrong". So you dismiss my entire point? I was trying to be fair to your boy, Jesus. I was trying to give you some middle ground between liar and nutcase.
The Hebrew Bible never mentions Jesus Christ. Not one time. Ever. Not. Once.
You should go and read it sometime. It's dreadful.
Mark has no real miracles in it, right? Jesus didn't rise from the dead in Mark. Mark was written earliest. Each subsequent gospel adds more elaboration and miracles. By the time you get to John it's a friggin' circus.
That's precisely how legends grow. Do you not find that slightly suspicious? Why doesn't the Bible come right out of the gate from page one with "Jesus, the son of god, who walked on water and rose from the dead, is your lord and savior"?
YIAGIO, the foundation for your argument is based on 3 FALSE STATEMENTS.
you claimed that THE GOSPEL OF Mark made no reference to JESUS being the son of GOD...
You were wrong
YOU CLAIM Mark made no reference to miracles or the resurrection
YOU ARE WRONG.
So,from that false foundation,your innane rantings lead you to conclude that the history of Jesus is a legend.
Your false statements failed to provide the evidence required to corroborate your inane rantings.

“I'll think about it.”

Since: Nov 07

central Florida

#108767 Jul 24, 2013
do whut wrote:
<quoted text>
I believe the scriptures are true, though not inerrant.
Do you really not see something wrong with this statement?

True = Consistent with fact or reality; not false or erroneous.
Inerrent = Incapable of erring; infallible. Containing no errors.

So, you are saying that you believe scriptures are true...but they aren't.
You are some kind of weird.
country

Campbellsville, KY

#108768 Jul 24, 2013
Religion and politics never-ending arguments

“Question, Explore, Discover”

Since: Dec 11

Location hidden

#108769 Jul 25, 2013
do whut wrote:
<quoted text>
Just because they don't name Him as Jesus doesn't mean they didn't foretell exactly what He would do and go through. He fulfilled the prophesies from the OT. Please try to prove me wrong. I invite the attempt.
Yes I am correcting you, because you are wrong. I'm not doing so to be malicious, just setting the record straight.
Back to Mark, you don't even have to read far to see Jesus calm a storm with a wave of His hand. Is this not a miracle to you?
To address Mark first, yes I am wrong. My comments about Mark were made with question marks or uncertainty because it had been a while since I read it. The main point I wanted to make was that the gospels seem to ratchet up the level of magic as you go along, regarding the divine nature of Jesus. Plus there's just a ton of interesting textual criticism of the synoptic gospels regarding the fact that they do not agree with each other on key points (particularly related to the events after the crucifixion).

There are LOTS of reasons to be skeptical of the Bible's claims. One of them is why on earth no documents outside the Bible mention all these crazy magic spells being cast left and right by this hippie? And the Romans, who according to Christians were extremely put out by Jesus, don't bother to mention him in their records.

Now, about the Hebrew Bible,*you* are quite wrong. And the onus is not on me, but on you. If you claim that the OT predicts Jesus you're going to have to supply a ton of evidence. First of all, predicting the future is not possible so you have to present some pretty god-damned compelling evidence. Second, the book never mentions Jesus. And yes, we're going to need a name. Earlier in this thread I showed how you could predict Michael Jackson from the Bible. It is not hard to predict Jesus.

You can get almost anything you want out of thousands of verses written in archaic languages. If you give me "And lo shall there be a lamb to the slaughter" it will still not prove your assertion. You see what you want to see, I see what the evidence shows me.

“Question, Explore, Discover”

Since: Dec 11

Location hidden

#108770 Jul 25, 2013
BigWorldSmallmindeness wrote:
<quoted text>
Some would like to escalate being some what self defensively prepared, as being some sort of "criminal element act" as well, believe it or not.
Of course, they've probably never had to walk the walk of having to do so, just to survive.
Yeah, its your right to protect yourself. No doubt. But I would argue that using a gun to do it is not a good idea because bullets tend to kill people. You can't come back from killing a person or getting killed.

You can come back from pepper spray or tazing.

“Question, Explore, Discover”

Since: Dec 11

Location hidden

#108771 Jul 25, 2013
Quantummist wrote:
<quoted text>
Until the day comes when your kids are on a milk carton and your just another helpless victim crying on Nancy Grace ....
Alrighty then. I'll keep that in mind, Magnum PI.

“Question, Explore, Discover”

Since: Dec 11

Location hidden

#108772 Jul 25, 2013
curious wrote:
<quoted text>
YIAGIO, the foundation for your argument is based on 3 FALSE STATEMENTS.
you claimed that THE GOSPEL OF Mark made no reference to JESUS being the son of GOD...
You were wrong
YOU CLAIM Mark made no reference to miracles or the resurrection
YOU ARE WRONG.
So,from that false foundation,your innane rantings lead you to conclude that the history of Jesus is a legend.
Your false statements failed to provide the evidence required to corroborate your inane rantings.
Yes, I was wrong about Mark. It does contain miracles and Jesus is said to have risen near the end. I was remembering it wrong.

But no, that is not why I dismiss Jesus as a divine figure. There are lots of other reasons such as the fact that divine figures don't exist.

“Question, Explore, Discover”

Since: Dec 11

Location hidden

#108773 Jul 25, 2013
treebeard wrote:
<quoted text>
Thanks, man. I just got a little confused on your stance is all (not too hard for me sometimes). It seems we view it similarly. I am a woman (not that it matters), small, and I keep a gun in the glovebox, and I will carry it with me when I'm hiking and such. Mostly, I just have a huge fear of very bad people, I'm not afraid to admit it. Politically, I feel things should be stricter on gun possession. But regardless how you got it (registered or illegal), I think once a person owns a gun, they must then take on the responsibility of that weapon. I own several, and I understand well that if one were to ever take another's life, then that's on me. But I don't feel every gun owner sees it this way, and those are the people who should NOT have a gun. Just my quick (and terribly rough, ill-prepared) thoughts on the matter :)
Yeah, that's the thing. I'm kinda harsh on people who pack guns around. My dad used to carry a little .22 in his pocket all the time. Always bugged me.

My beef is with these Tea Party types who just love to tote weapons everywhere and make claims that it reduces crime. But it doesn't reduce crime. And there are plenty of examples of people being shot accidentally, especially kids. So I am dubious of anyone who claims that carrying a gun or keeping lots of guns makes things safer.

But I do understand why some people keep a gun, as you point out. I've had loved ones attacked and I'm sure if they had a gun in their hands they might have felt a bit safer. Maybe. Then again, what if that gun is taken away by an attacker?

In most cases a mugger isn't going to check to see if you have a gun before mugging you. They are just going for the opportunity to snatch a purse or a wallet. I was attacked by two guys who were just after whatever money I was carrying. They didn't get it, and I got away from them. But some of my friends were punched or kicked and their wallets stolen.

I can't imagine the fallout if they had been packing a gun. You can't take back a bullet.

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
German shepard 1 hr doggy 2
Porsche mills 1 hr sad days 25
barbourville affordabe funeral home (Oct '08) 2 hr someone who knows 109
jeff vaughn not dories jeff violas jeff is a rat 3 hr Junes son Jeff Va... 4
How many kindergarten teachers at Lay? 6 hr question 11
terry smith from the creek 8 hr wondering 4
Brett 9 hr sorry 2
To the Garland family 10 hr Friend 5
what happen on the creek ambulances an law is u... 23 hr Get a life 8
Barbourville Dating
Find my Match
More from around the web

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 ]

NFL Latest News

Updated 2:09 pm PST

Yahoo! Sports 2:09PM
RT Eric Winston quickly settling in with Bengals
NBC Sports 3:14 PM
Losers of 13 of 14, Titans set for top draft pick - NBC Sports
Bleacher Report 4:00 AM
Broncos vs. Bengals: TV Info, Spread, Injury Updates, Game Time and More
Bleacher Report 9:00 AM
Start 'Em, Sit 'Em Week 16: Debating Difficult Fantasy Football Lineup Decisions
NBC Sports11:17 AM
Peyton Manning officially questionable for Monday night