Bible study rules for public schools proposed

There are 20 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.

Since: Aug 10

Location hidden

#111794 Aug 27, 2013
stuck in a lodi wrote:
27 girls in the USA from the year 2009 back to 1908 that were under 12 and of those many were raped. Never said it never happens, by some of that data, one girl began her cycle at 12 months. Which is rare to say the least. I want Joe Dirt to show me his stats that prove KY ranks #1 in pre teen pregnancy. For the record.. none of the 27 girls listed were from KY, which is not an up to date record.
Really. I moved in to my house. Got a newspaper because the last home owner subscribed, read it, and told my wife, and then threw it away while saying wow!

That was the extent of my research on this.

Since: Aug 10

Location hidden

#111795 Aug 27, 2013
Yiago wrote:
<quoted text>When it comes to money the LDS would sell the bones of Joey Smith. You know the main reason the LDS stopped encouraging polygamy? The Federal government threatened to take their money. Actually, they did take a lot of it. Not that I agree that was right or necessary but that seems to be the straw that broke the camel's back. Revelation be damned.
Please support your claim

Since: Aug 10

Location hidden

#111796 Aug 27, 2013
ChromiuMan wrote:
<quoted text>examples of a stopped clock being right twice a day:
"No no." (spelling error there - should read "No know.")
and:
"The New Testament is the story..."
Do you have a point? If so, I missed it other than to weakly insult.
stuck in a lodi

Pikeville, KY

#111797 Aug 27, 2013
Well that's just great JOe...you "black eye" our lil state by saying our pre teen girls are doing more than pretending to play house, then say, well I don't have that paper anymore. How am I to defend our lil angels now? I'm gonna hafta make a trip to the Library and research their newspaper archives. Demmitt
stuck in a lodi

Pikeville, KY

#111798 Aug 27, 2013
I do agree , it is a problem in every state, I guess I'm just wishful thinking that KY isn't highest in pre teen or teen.

“Breaking the spell ”

Since: Dec 10

of the puppet master

#111799 Aug 27, 2013
do whut wrote:
<quoted text>
If we were protected from every bad thing that could ever happen, what would we be like? I would think we would take everything good for granted and just expect it all the time. I think you have to know the bad to appreciate the good.
I think the analogy works very well. I think it closely parallels.
So Yiago's brother had to die young in order to appreciate any good in the world?
Sorry but your excuses are barbaric.
By your reasoning, no one will appreciate anything in that Utopian heaven.

Since: Aug 10

Location hidden

#111800 Aug 27, 2013
Yiago wrote:
<quoted text>Bingo. I totally agree. When I say god dammit I am IN NO WAY referring to any deity at all. It is merely an expression of emotion in the moment, or it is an emphasis on just how obscene or terrible something is (god damned child rapist), or I'm just ribbing someone (;-)).

Words and phrases of that nature have a long history in our society. Their power comes from their scandalous nature. Even today when certain words can be heard on prime time TV it is still not acceptable to go around uttering them all the time. They still have power. I suspect they always will.
This is rationalization.
With this mentality is along the lines of the different meanings of the words I hate you.

Think about the difference between you saying to your child with a sober tone "I hate you", and a teenage girl in her best valley girl voice "you have pink nail polish too? I hate you" giggle giggle.
stuck in a lodi

Pikeville, KY

#111801 Aug 27, 2013
do whut wrote:
<quoted text>
Please support your claim
Back The Fac UP Joe.... That statement coming from YOU???

Now that's damn hilarious!!!

“See how you are?”

Since: Jul 12

Earth

#111802 Aug 27, 2013
do whut wrote:
<quoted text>
Do you have a point? If so, I missed it other than to weakly insult.
All reliable evidence points toward religious texts as being complete fabrications and what you "know" is wistful delusion. If you find that insulting, think of how your neurons feel about being forced to fire in such perturbed and cockamamie directions. Did you need me to be more or less concise on that in future posts?
stuck in a lodi

Pikeville, KY

#111803 Aug 27, 2013
do whut wrote:
<quoted text>
Really. I moved in to my house. Got a newspaper because the last home owner subscribed, read it, and told my wife, and then threw it away while saying wow!
That was the extent of my research on this.
Well I could say that I read somewhere that the society of LDS men experience erectile disfunction more that other men of different faith.
stuck in a lodi

Pikeville, KY

#111804 Aug 27, 2013
Mike Duquette wrote:
<quoted text>And this is a great example of what you "think" you "know". All evidence shows you were not shot in the head TWICE and yet you insist you know otherwise.
Your stories are textbook delusions and false perceptions. We should send you down to the universities for live examples of how the mind can play tricks upon a person.
Next you will be telling is a god spoke to you.
He's already said that ... Remember, He said god told him Obama was the Anti-Christ.

“Breaking the spell ”

Since: Dec 10

of the puppet master

#111805 Aug 27, 2013
Yes and Amen wrote:
<quoted text>Oh no...
My kids usually LEARN by the second time, thus...
I don't have to call them anything!
You on the other hand...
I think you are obtuse on purpose!
Having your background in several religions,
Knowing that many people knows that there is a creator, and
your denial of such, and equating Christians with Muslims...
Tard is about the only word I can use!
Many people "believe" in this supposed creator, just as many people once believed in Zeus, but clearly the majority did not make it true then, so why would it now?
Muslims believe in a creator on an equal manner as Christians.
You are simply calling someone a tard because they do not agree with you. It has nothing to do with learning.

Since: Aug 10

Location hidden

#111806 Aug 27, 2013
Mike Duquette wrote:
<quoted text>That is a great question, I only wish it had an easy answer, but I will try.
The outsiders test is something that must be taken with every religious belief you have. With every religious philosophy you follow. And certainly with every idea that has no physical evidence.
There are several ways to take the test. One is to imagine yourself as a believer of an opposing religion, or opposing philosophical view. In other words, be critical to your own views. Scrutinize them with the same standards you use to oppose other beliefs.

This is why I oppose any "faith". The faith itself seems to be something that demands a person forgo doubting. If you forgo ability to doubt in an absolute manner, their is no way to critically scrutinize your own beliefs.

This is why I like science. Science embraces and demands constant scrutiny of all claims. It is a never ending process that never rests upon it laurels. Seems to me religion does nothing but rest upon its laurels.

I have specifically pointed out many instances where you refused to take the outsiders test. So the examples should have been noted there, but I will give an example now.
I could ask how you refuse to believe Mohammed was a prophet, for example. Do you use the same standards to scrutinize Mohammed and the claims of the Koran as you do the bible and Jesus?
Keep in mind, if you change the standards, you are throwing a giant monkey wrench in the thought experiment.
This is why I keep honing in on the double standards of the bible.

Feel free to ask for elaborations if I have been unclear.

Keep in mind, the outsiders test takes practice. It takes deep thought sometimes. The deeper the thought the more complete the experiment. The test is never really complete, if you follow the rules of science.

I find posting on topix helps me take my own outsiders test. And believe it or not, I do find I am wrong about some things and I change my views accordingly.
I backed away from almost everything I believed at one time and investigated tons of different religions as open minded as I knew how. I sought truth for years. I'm not opposed to challenging my own beliefs and have done so several times. And I don't always find every answer that I seek. Of course my current religion has origins that are newer than most so it is easy to find concerns. Some have quick answers, some have unsettling answers, and some have no straightforward answer. But faith is not science. I don't expect there to be a test with data filled conclusions for everything. The Holy Ghost does exist and one of His main purposes is to bring us peace when we need it. Another purpose is to confirm God's gospel truths. Once I decided to study the doctrine of the LDS church, I did not find what I expected to find. Having my mind made up that it was a cult, I had no intentions of this investigation taking long at all. Instead I found answers that made sense that filled in the gaps that I thought existed in the Biblical interpretations of other denominations. I found that the Spirit was strong when I pressed to learn more. To make a long story short, I still did not want to join the church because of what I had always heard, and because my family thoroughly disapproved.
I do feel like I took what you call an outsiders test. Including researching Islam. So I answer based on what I have learned and experienced. I am firm in my faith, as you should expect by now, so maybe my answers appear that I am closed off to other suggestions. But that is not the case. So though I can't always answer everything that challenges my religion, or sometimes things look bad in the church's history, that doesn't change that the doctrine I believe in has proven itself much closer to what I think God intended, than anything else I have studied.

Since: Aug 10

Location hidden

#111807 Aug 27, 2013
Mike Duquette wrote:
<quoted text>Yes, and I can agree the GD word serves no purpose here that is useful in the debate, and thus is pointless to be added. Many of the insulting things you have claimed of me are different though. They are not pointless words. They are really just opposing views. Opposing views often seem harsh. I at least attempt to make a effort to make a point with all my words. Many times I delete the last sentence of a post. If I proofread the post, I find that last sentence gets a bit unnecessary and often is overboard offensive.
I often do not proofread my posts, so I am not claiming some of my sentences are not unnecessarily offensive.
I am sure we could all use some more control and practice deleting the last sentence that is over the top.

Feel free at anytime to question the point of making an offensive statement.
I'm pretty good at picking out insults from a point. Maybe you can elaborate on a point you made that I considered offensive

Since: Aug 10

Location hidden

#111808 Aug 27, 2013
Mike Duquette wrote:
<quoted text>On the subject of respect, yes it should not be excluded here, but as I pointed out earlier, the nature of debate can get offensive. I see a difference in someone getting offended and respect. Some people get to easily offended. Even if I am trying to respectfully disagree, some people are going to be offended. So in a forum debate such as this, if they cannot handle disagreement, they need not be here or just learn to deal with being offended.

My philosophy in life sees no reality of a person living in an "offense free zone". I feel some people need to be offended. I think some offenses can be productive. An "offense free zone" can be to conducive for brainwashing.

I am sure when I state that your god is a murderer, it is offensive. But I feel it is productive for you to understand what the claims of your god in the bible are, is just cold blooded murder. It is offensive for me to hear of people worshiping such a murderer.

Take the outsiders test and check your god for morals.
Questioning scripture and doctrine seem normal to me if not necessary. Taking it to labels I think becomes personal and is meant for either shock value, or to kindle emotions.

I have attempted to put this example in a different perspective for you, but either you don't understand my answer, or just don't think it is sufficient.

Since: Aug 10

Location hidden

#111809 Aug 27, 2013
Mike Duquette wrote:
<quoted text>What I do not do is kill my child with the idea his life is eternal. That would be immoral for any being to do, period.

I guess we just have different standards of morality. I think murder is bad, and you see it as good in this case.
Is this act an eye for an eye, or turning the other cheek? The standards seem to come in three's here. As in the case of the flood, the babies were murdering no one. I suppose that old god had not yet realized he should ease up and just go by the eye for an eye rule. Oh well, he is only human. Live and learn.
Fully agree, because you aren't God and should not determine if a person should die or not. Now if you decided to build billions of little robots and had them become self-aware and a couple hundred of them liked the idea of the terminator movies and decided to arm themselves and wipe you out, or destroy all your plans for them, I would understand you pulling their power source.

Again, the OT laws were instituted after the people became so wicked that they could not live the higher laws so the lesser, more carnal laws were given, and punishments instituted. God also decided to let them have kings and judges because they could not live the higher laws. He had Moses allow divorce as well because they couldn't live marriage properly.

The NT brought back the higher laws and Jesus taught us to leave the judging of sin to God. So that's why we no longer practice eye for an eye.

Since: Aug 10

Location hidden

#111810 Aug 27, 2013
Mike Duquette wrote:
<quoted text>Using the reasoning of an eternal scale, any murder can be justified. Just as in the case with 9/11.
I certainly see your point, but in the case of the flood, God made the judgment. In 9/11, Bin Laden judged.

A friend of mine made a point to me one time that made me think. Since we believe that Jesus is the Jehovah of the OT, he said that he could see how Jesus matured from the OT to the NT. He was a jealous God in the OT, and forgiving in the NT. He has a point too.

Since: Aug 10

Location hidden

#111811 Aug 27, 2013
Mike Duquette wrote:
<quoted text>Demanding worship is far different that hoping for respect.
If you kill everyone on the planet, I have zero respect for you. I will condemn you.
If I believe the god of the bible is real, then I would really think he murdered many millions of innocent persons in the flood.
I do not see creating a human as a rational for destroying, torturing, or killing said human.
Sounds like an arrogant parent that tells his child, "I brought you into the world, I can take you out". We put people who act out this in prison for being immoral and a danger to a peaceful society.

A good teacher uses the example of him, or herself to convey the message. The flood story teaches one to murder.

I am glad you do not believe I am condemned for the simple act of disbelief. I really think the bible differs from your opinion as do most Christians.

I am really sad you think murdering millions of innocent children was moral.
I never said it was moral, I said I can understand God's anger.

And I can kinda picture the Far Side comic I saw one time when you say you condemn Him.
It was a picture of God in front of a control panel with a screen that showed a guy walking under a piano being lifted. His finger was about to push a big butting that said "Smite".
I kinda picture Him having to take 10 breaths when some one says what you did. Then going: No, I'm calm. I'm not going to do it.
Haha

“Question, Explore, Discover”

Since: Dec 11

Location hidden

#111812 Aug 27, 2013
do whut wrote:
<quoted text>
If we were protected from every bad thing that could ever happen, what would we be like? I would think we would take everything good for granted and just expect it all the time. I think you have to know the bad to appreciate the good.
I think the analogy works very well. I think it closely parallels.
Depends on your definition of god. Christianity defines god as being perfect. There's a lot of logical contradictions in a perfect god that creates imperfect beings, allows them to suffer, and hides his grace behind a veil of mystery. It makes no sense.

And appealing to that "mystery" as if we can't comprehend it is just a way of justifying ANYTHING you want to say about god. It is an evasion of logic. Yet even the most hardcore Christian Fundamentalist still must acknowledge that logic dominates any debate or else you aren't having a debate.

God cannot break the rules of logic, no matter how "perfect".

Anyway, my point is why create flawed creatures that suffer and then sit back out of reach, out of sight, and watch? If that is god, then god is a real bastard isn't he?

Even if you take faith as the answer. Most people do not have faith in your god. Your god is very, very specific. It is a Mormon god. I would argue that is it not the same god worshiped by Baptists or Catholics at all since your theology diverges so radically from the norm.

Yet if you follow your own logic the Mormon god is the real one. And everyone else is mislead.

But on what grounds can you possibly base that assumption except on pure, unrefined, blind faith?

“Question, Explore, Discover”

Since: Dec 11

Location hidden

#111813 Aug 27, 2013
SistaNoneYaBiz wrote:
<quoted text>
And this is how much huMAN kind has advanced (or rather NOT) sometimes.
Lets comapre and contrast your phrase(s) of-
Hell, it is not even fair to criticize Bible authors for being ignorant. They couldn't help it. They were working with the best they had. And they produced an epic set of stories, sometimes dreadful to read and sometimes quite lovely. When understood in context, that is.
And let the SAME thing be said, even though worded somewhat differently, by a Sistuh-and we might have a bunch saying --oh hell no, oh no, that's just utter hubris.
YUP...which proves every time, how even derwood fell short, flawed and merely human, of having "all the answers".
You may be a very nice person and very sincere. But I don't understand half of what you post.

Who is "derwood"?

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
ljs 39 min danny 4
Check drawers 56 min cofused 19
Silverscreen Tanning - Ringworm 1 hr source unknown 23
Yard sell signs 2 hr Fed up with morons 1
~~Keep A Word~~Drop A Word Game. (Jun '10) 2 hr Doug77 663
Where's Arthur Vaughn? 4 hr Casey 3
Anybody know David Allen smith? (Jul '13) 5 hr concerned 21
state police 16 hr Dear Knox 10
More from around the web

Barbourville People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

Personal Finance

Mortgages [ See current mortgage rates ]