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
103,921 - 103,940 of 130,415 Comments Last updated 6 hrs ago

Since: Aug 10

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#108727
Jul 23, 2013
 
Quantummist wrote:
<quoted text>
Gravity is an Effect... the set point of the speed of light is an effect.... All Caused by the Quanta of Energy physical matter was converted out of at the Big bang... I call it the Quantum State, Einstein called it Space/Time and Maxwell called it the Ether.... It acts as an Inverse Tensor between all real physical particles with inertial mass no matter the separation distance... All Particles are directly connected from the farthermost particles to those within a single group of em producing particles such as a helium atom.
You as a Being made of Matter cannot ever directly observe the Quantum State, Space/Time, Ether because you are inside it, a direct part of it connected by it to each and every particle in the Universe you attempt to observe causing you and all observers to have an Intrinsic Bias... We can Measure, Model, observe the Effects of the Quantum State on Matter but can Never model the Quantum State absent Matter as all mathematical models Only deal with Matter with Inertial Mass in motion relative to other Matter with Inertial Mass in motion.... When we attempt to model it all out math falls to Infinity, paradox... Both of which I contend do not exist within the universe....
Interesting. I'm not sure I follow it because it sounds like quantum entanglement or non-locality to me (I don't understand the distinction between those either). But, interesting.
ProvenScience

London, KY

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#108728
Jul 23, 2013
 

Judged:

3

3

2

Mike Duquette wrote:
<quoted text>So out of that whole list, you could only find one thing to comment on? You commented on something that really does not address the question or point.
You made an earlier comment on atheists hating on believers, but you have yet to comment on how believers hate upon others.
Now keep in that denial cave.
ChromiuMan wrote:
<quoted text>
But why do the majority of believer posters hate on others >SO MUCH<? They don't just hate on atheists, they hate on Catholics,'evolutionists', Democrats, astrophysics, agnostics,- on things like the Higgs boson, and wikipedia. They even hate on honesty and compassion. Is that rational, sane, logical or thinking?
I answered ALL the questions, I just elaborated on one of them.
Was the four word answer too simple?

“Tend to Offend”

Since: Jul 13

SHADY ACRES

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#108729
Jul 23, 2013
 

Judged:

1

simply pull off the strip..and stick anywhere!

Got tough bathroom stains? KABOOM cuts through all kind's of mildew and grime.

And i lost 40 pounds on Neutralism system........ and we now have the Queen talking about the future of the new Baby.

-do you have the royal baby fever?
SistaNoneyabiz

London, KY

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#108730
Jul 23, 2013
 

Judged:

6

5

3

Mike Duquette wrote:
<quoted text>So because you feel you follow most rules, this is some sort of excuse to not follow the one in question?
Just admit you are wrong like an honorable human would do and stop demonizing the accuser for deflection.
I do not think you are an evil person just because you cannot follow this one rule of society. But the accusation was never meant to accuse you of an evil. I am simply pointing out how your behavior makes it hard for us to follow a line of the argument. This is why the rule is what it is.
Good, because this is just aNother duhm top-icks thread, irrelevent to anything except for it's pathetic existence on the gutter dump end of the internets sewage system. Not much right about any of it actually, so that isn't really any sort of realistic accusation there either, unless you're a blinkered type of bloke....mired in ignorance of a viewing the world as a simplisTIC one of mere black/white, right/left, stop/go...you know, clueless as to the REST of the realms of reality.

So, keeping it simple for the simple minded then--How about trying to figure out what the newest member of the Church of England's name will be?!

(Something that is actually refreshing to hear of!)

Guiness? Try not to throw your elbow out raising the cheers!
SistaNoneyabiz

London, KY

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#108731
Jul 23, 2013
 

Judged:

6

4

2

Mike Duquette wrote:
<quoted text>Are you agreeing with me? I have no idea what your riddles mean and I really do not care to try and figure it out.
Your mind if far different than mine, so your analogies do not seem to fit in my opinion.
Mike Duquette wrote:
<quoted text>You mean differing religions are only natural? I agree. It is as if no real god is actually a part of any of this.
"Yup".
(doesn't get much simpler than that huh?)

Since: Feb 12

Roseville, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#108732
Jul 23, 2013
 

Judged:

1

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.
Full Metal Jacket, Platoon and Battlestar Glactica are some of my favorites. All that cussing, killing,drinking and fornication with the locals. It's the politicians fault for sending us, we are forgiven.
ProvenScience

London, KY

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#108733
Jul 23, 2013
 

Judged:

5

4

2

Mike Duquette wrote:
<quoted text>So is pushing for an agenda of less science books in the science classroom harmless in your opinion? I do not see it as harmless.
Now are you going to address this point or are you going to keep diverting to only addressing the extremes? The extremes I pointed out were only given to show definitively how religion can lead to bad.
Umm otay ...this is one of those see the twisted distortion for duhmmies practice paragraphs right?

Just leave the Science books alone--there's NOT enough of them!!
ProvenScience

London, KY

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#108734
Jul 23, 2013
 

Judged:

5

4

2

Mike Duquette wrote:
<quoted text>Evidently provenscience thinks harm can only mean murder.
He shows consistent double standards as shown here by condemning atheists for debating believers but refuses to address how the believers debate atheists.
Double standards are evidence of the denial needed to keep some faith.
Now you've crossed the line and confused yourself.

Keep it simple, you think ad speak for YOURSELF and I can and will do the same.

Just because some atheists are haters, doesn't mean all of them are, and just because some believers debate atheists doesn't mean all believers believe in it.
And just because something might seem a double standard to You personally, does not mean it is to others, and actually I would think that anyone else's faith would have nothing to do with your, or my (for that matter) perspective of standards, or double standards, at all.

Unless...are you some sort of roboTic pwetend-to-be-a-clone, or something freaky like that?

(pshew...ewe...)
ProvenScience

London, KY

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#108735
Jul 23, 2013
 

Judged:

5

4

2

Quantummist wrote:
And just for the heck of it...
A Moment of Zen...
http://static.panoramio.com/photos/original/9...
aka : enough time to fix a cup of coffee...and tend to some work.

lol

“I'll think about it.”

Since: Nov 07

central Florida

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#108736
Jul 23, 2013
 

Judged:

5

4

3

SistaNoneyabiz wrote:
<quoted text>
Good, because this is just aNother duhm top-icks thread, irrelevent to anything except for it's pathetic existence on the gutter dump end of the internets sewage system. Not much right about any of it actually, so that isn't really any sort of realistic accusation there either, unless you're a blinkered type of bloke....mired in ignorance of a viewing the world as a simplisTIC one of mere black/white, right/left, stop/go...you know, clueless as to the REST of the realms of reality.
So, keeping it simple for the simple minded then--How about trying to figure out what the newest member of the Church of England's name will be?!
(Something that is actually refreshing to hear of!)
Guiness? Try not to throw your elbow out raising the cheers!
Since "this is just aNother duhm top-icks thread," why are you and your oh-so-superior intellect here all the time?

You do nothing but insult pretty much everyone.
You fail miserably at being clever and witty.

I'm guessing you don't have the social skills for friends in real life either.

(Don't bother to respond. I will simply consider myself already insulted on your behalf.)

“Question, Explore, Discover”

Since: Dec 11

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#108737
Jul 23, 2013
 

Judged:

1

treebeard wrote:
<quoted text>
You may have answered this in the past (pardon me, I'm half asleep), but I would like to know your stance a little further, if you would indulge me. You seem to feel people shouldn't pack guns. Do you think the same thing about a woman? Do you feel sprays, stuns, and whistles are sufficient for a female, or do you feel a female should be trained to defend herself (and often her children as well) empty handed?
Sure, I can share my opinion on this.

First of all I'm not opposed to anyone's right to bear arms. I enjoy shooting rifles and things like that myself, though I haven't really done it in years. But I don't think the average citizen should have the right to own very powerful weapons such as machine guns and the like. I'm not interested in debating that matter either, it is way down my list of debate topics.

I don't even overtly oppose Conceal and Carry laws or Open Carry or any of that junk. I think it's dumb, and I think less of people who do it (being honest here). But I don't necessarily use my votes to take it away from them. I don't really care.

But I am bugged by people who make arguments in support of carrying a gun around in public. I think their arguments tend to be based on wild speculation about how they would act in a situation with a criminal. Sure, sometimes a person legally carrying a gun can seem to avert a possible crime. But it seems rare to me. And it seems far more likely that if you were jumped by a mugger, for example, you would not have the time or presence of mind to get out your gun and do anything with it.

And honestly I think shooting someone is a bad idea. I don't have any sympathy for muggers or anything but in the dozen or so cases I know of personally any injuries sustained were extremely minor and in most cases the attacker got nothing. Adding a gun to the mix would only have made these situations worse.

Regarding women, I think both women and men should be prepared to defend themselves to the best of their ability at all times. Sure, no problem. Mace and pepper spray is savage stuff but it wears off. You can pull that trigger and nobody dies.

Pull the trigger on a gun and there's no going back.

“Question, Explore, Discover”

Since: Dec 11

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#108738
Jul 23, 2013
 
Quantummist wrote:
<quoted text>
I have had 3 friends murdered and 2 that used their side arms to prevent anyone from being murdered, or mugged... And you are correct as long as you get mugged and walked away I guess life is all butterflys and roses in your world... But now in your delightful world outside the rough part of town when the next mugging happens to you, your friend's and family I hope you do again walk away delighted in your survival skills.... But when you find yourself in the presence of a mugger that decides you, your family members or friends look like folks he would love to bludgeon to death call 911 and wait....
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.

Since: Aug 10

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#108739
Jul 23, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Yiago wrote:
<quoted text>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"?
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?

Since: Aug 10

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#108740
Jul 23, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

ChromiuMan wrote:
<quoted text>Jesus didn't write a single word of the New Testament.
George Washington didn't write much of anything either, but we still have his words, and know what he stood for.

Since: Aug 10

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#108741
Jul 23, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Spaceship earth wrote:
<quoted text>I found a link about the question I ask you that shows the LDS places the blame the killing of LDS on other LDS on the president of that country and you are not held blameless. The writer of the article sees things differently than the LDS leadership.

Religious ones seem to worship a God of war, I do see similarities between pagan worship and war also. Those who go into combat will walk with the devil.

That said, I agree with defending out country also. No I have not seen "Saints and Soldiers" and would like to watch it sometime.

----------
Should A Mormon Join The Military?
An Insidious Doctrine

Ask most latter-day saints about reconciling war with the commandment “Thou shalt not kill”, and you’ll nearly always hear that war is an exception to that rule. They'll tell you that God doesn’t hold the soldier accountable for any killing done in battle. When a Mormon kills during wartime it doesn’t count against him. He gets a pass. Responsibility for any killing transfers to the politicians who sent him into war.

The problem with this widely held “doctrine” is that it’s a false one. It is not supported anywhere in the scriptures. In fact, the reverse holds true.

As legions of those returning soldiers unable to live with themselves will tell you, God will hold you personally accountable for every last person you killed regardless of whether or not you were wearing a government issued uniform at the time.

http://puremormonism.blogspot.com/2009/11/sho...
I can see this writer's point.

I'll read more later when I have time
SistaNoneyouBiz

London, KY

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#108742
Jul 23, 2013
 

Judged:

7

4

3

aWitchintheWoods wrote:
<quoted text>
Since "this is just aNother duhm top-icks thread," why are you and your oh-so-superior intellect here all the time?
You do nothing but insult pretty much everyone.
You fail miserably at being clever and witty.
I'm guessing you don't have the social skills for friends in real life either.
(Don't bother to respond. I will simply consider myself already insulted on your behalf.)
Reality-it's topicks, NOT a Britannica consortum.

Guess all you'd like, sorry to have to call you out as Wrong (although that does seem to be some sort of ulitimate goal for many, although not all, thank Goodness).

Please do feel free to assume your own insults, of your own self, on your own behalf, because that level of nastiness is not at all appealing to me.

Cheers!
BigWorldSmallmin deness

London, KY

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#108743
Jul 23, 2013
 

Judged:

7

4

3

Yiago wrote:
<quoted text>
n and men should be prepared to defend themselves to the best of their ability at all times. Sure, no problem. Mace and pepper spray is savage stuff but it wears off. You can pull that trigger and nobody dies.
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.

“I was born a poor, black child”

Since: Jan 07

that weren't no easy thing

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#108744
Jul 23, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

Yiago wrote:
<quoted text>
Sure, I can share my opinion on this.
First of all I'm not opposed to anyone's right to bear arms. I enjoy shooting rifles and things like that myself, though I haven't really done it in years. But I don't think the average citizen should have the right to own very powerful weapons such as machine guns and the like. I'm not interested in debating that matter either, it is way down my list of debate topics.
I don't even overtly oppose Conceal and Carry laws or Open Carry or any of that junk. I think it's dumb, and I think less of people who do it (being honest here). But I don't necessarily use my votes to take it away from them. I don't really care.
But I am bugged by people who make arguments in support of carrying a gun around in public. I think their arguments tend to be based on wild speculation about how they would act in a situation with a criminal. Sure, sometimes a person legally carrying a gun can seem to avert a possible crime. But it seems rare to me. And it seems far more likely that if you were jumped by a mugger, for example, you would not have the time or presence of mind to get out your gun and do anything with it.
And honestly I think shooting someone is a bad idea. I don't have any sympathy for muggers or anything but in the dozen or so cases I know of personally any injuries sustained were extremely minor and in most cases the attacker got nothing. Adding a gun to the mix would only have made these situations worse.
Regarding women, I think both women and men should be prepared to defend themselves to the best of their ability at all times. Sure, no problem. Mace and pepper spray is savage stuff but it wears off. You can pull that trigger and nobody dies.
Pull the trigger on a gun and there's no going back.
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 :)

“Speaker of Mountain Wisdom....”

Since: Jan 10

http://www.panoramio.com/user/

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#108745
Jul 23, 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.
Until the day comes when your kids are on a milk carton and your just another helpless victim crying on Nancy Grace ....
Yes and Amen

Winchester, KY

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#108746
Jul 24, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

aWitchintheWoods wrote:
<quoted text>
You ARE a cartoon.
No surprise coming from you!

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.

•••
•••
Barbourville Dating

more search filters

less search filters

•••

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 ]
•••