Bible study rules for public schools ...

Bible study rules for public schools proposed

There are 148345 comments on the The Courier-Journal story from Feb 10, 2010, titled Bible study rules for public schools proposed. In it, The Courier-Journal reports that:

FRANKFORT, Ky. - The state would create rules for teaching about the Bible in public high schools under a bill filed Monday by three Democratic senators.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at The Courier-Journal.

“Breaking the spell ”

Since: Dec 10

of the puppet master

#128772 Apr 20, 2014
curious wrote:
<quoted text>
Permit me to correct your atrocious error , Tis not, Everyone in the world agrees that the Hebrews wrote those texts.
It is everybody in your world , the world of Topix, where a couple of 2 or 3 atheists ,masquerade as many, agrees that the Hebrews wrote those texts.
And you are partially right,the Hebrews wrote those texts,as inspired by God
You must be a twitter Fan , because indubidably , you are a twit
YIkessssssssssssssssssssssssss ssssssssssssssssssssssssssssss ssss
Nothing about his statement can you show is incorrect. Adding something to the statement does not make the statement false.
Not everyone believes it was inspired by a god, so adding that is simply your opinion. You have zero actual evidence to back up the claim.
So calling him names just makes you look like you have no argument, and is getting a bit out of control.

“Breaking the spell ”

Since: Dec 10

of the puppet master

#128773 Apr 20, 2014
SevenTee wrote:
<quoted text>
The Jewish people are still intact to this day in the same land (Israel), more proof for you
Proof of what? It is evidence all the claims were not fabricated from whole cloth. It proves not a single supernatural claim. It does not even prove how the land was conquered. All evidence of history and archeology shows it was not invaded in mass at one point in time as the bible claims. That is evidence the bible lies about history.

We are aware you do not question the claims of the bible, as if the men who wrote it could not lie. Well that just tells me how gullible you are. It does not help you sell your story to someone who does not blindly accept it.

“Breaking the spell ”

Since: Dec 10

of the puppet master

#128774 Apr 20, 2014
curious wrote:
<quoted text>
It certainly appears that when their misdeeds are brought to the Light, they head for the darkness , searching for excuses
Is that what you call it when a person does not blindly accept an event being of the supernatural? Or what you call it when someone does not accept god had a moral reason for killing someone who worshipped a golden calf? I call it being skeptical. Looking for real answers is not what I consider being in the dark.
curious

Winter Garden, FL

#128775 Apr 20, 2014
Yiago wrote:
<quoted text>
You have a serious problem answering my question. It is probably because you are a decent human being and you know it is NEVER ok to stone men to death. Yet the god of your Bible said it was ok to do so.
So, why would god give a green light to stoning? Well, stoning was an ancient method for executing people. The Bible is full of ancient stories written by ancient people. So stoning fits the character of the ancient world. And the act of homosexual intercourse is a very ancient social taboo. We have a natural "ick" reaction to it that often plays out negatively in cultures, if not violently. It makes sense that ancient peoples may have imposed death sentences on homosexuals.
I don't blame ancient people for having less sophisticated moral ideas. Racism, in-group superiority, the superiority of men over women...these were cultural ideas deeply rooted in ancient peoples. We have progressed away from those ideas. We have a far more sophisticated view of morality.
We know it is never ok to stone people.
But you are stuck with a god that said it was ok. And now you are squirming because you MUST accept that it was ok, per your lord, to stone men to death. Your way of wiggling out of it is the New Testament, which does not call for stoning men to death for being gay (though guys like Paul were clearly still of the homophobic camp all the way).
Here's what I really want to know. Do you think it is now NOT ok to stone men to death for being gay? If so, is this because god told you so or is it because you know, as a rational human being, it is never ok to stone people to death?
Simple question. Did god tell you not to stone people or did your own moral sense point you in that direction?
I don't have a problem answering a question that asked based on it's proper perspective, which neither you or pre K will do.
You state " Why would God give the green light to stoning? then you proceed to give YOUR reasons as to why He did so . I don't want to hear your reasons, I want to hear the reasons God gave. That is the crux of the matter. I do not care to answer your question based on your unbelieving rationale Try as you might , I am not falling for that trap.
God gave specific reasons as to why those instructions were to be obeyed and there were definite objectives to be attained if the rules were obeyed and cosequences if they were disobeyed.
When you frame your question based on God's instructions and what God's objectives were, then I will be able to justify my position, based on all the facts presented.
If you are unwilling to do that, in order to gain an unfair advantage by not accurately listing the reasons and objectives involved, then stop wasting your time and mine.

And you keep rewording the question, again leaving out the very pertinent information that you do not want to address, in an attempt to trap me. Ain't gonna work.
Base your questions on what is contained in the Bible,not your personal agenda

“Breaking the spell ”

Since: Dec 10

of the puppet master

#128776 Apr 20, 2014
The_Box wrote:
<quoted text>
Why would he do that? My son has a good system of ethics and will not help someone else cheat. It would also be really obvious if he was doing double homework for a year or suddenly needed a ride to an SAT testing center for an exam that I didn't sign him up for.
<quoted text>
It wouldn't be on his record, because he wouldn't do it.
The way I see it, Libertarian is part of the cheating that he claims is so bad. He failed to even try to inform anyone that he was bullied into cheating. Yet he seems so sure it would have lead to no help. Well it is typical of theists to just accept an idea than to test it.

“Breaking the spell ”

Since: Dec 10

of the puppet master

#128777 Apr 20, 2014
The_Box wrote:
<quoted text>
There is only one odd element of your story.
<quoted text>
...why would your ad not fit the description of your dog? That doesn't make any sense.
If someone posted an ad for a lost chihuahua, and my neighbor recently found a labrador, I wouldn't answer that ad. Do you think God told this woman "Hey Lady, that lost chihuahua ad isn't really about a chihuahua. It's about the labrador your neighbor has. Call!"
If I was convinced a miracle had truly happened, that add would be framed and on my wall. Yet I am sure the miracle add cannot be reproduced. The evidence of miracles seem to miraculously disappear.
I am really curious as to what the add says, and what the dog actually looked like.
I am curious about how many times Curious prayed, but he keeps dodging that question. Is this go round he finally admits to at least praying sometime before the call. This was always left out of his previous testimonies. Just so you know, I repeatedly asked how many times, he never answered.

The only really odd part of the story is, he prayed multiple times to a god he did not believe existed.
I wonder if he prayed to multiple gods to better the odds?
curious

Winter Garden, FL

#128778 Apr 20, 2014
Mike Duquette wrote:
<quoted text>I simply see you do not question what may seem unusual.
Not that it has anything to do with proving my statement as incorrect. In fact you just proved it correct. You showed evidence was shown, thus faith is not needed. This contradicts what so many Christians keep insisting....that faith is needed and no evidence should be expected.
You claim to pray to gods you do not believe exist? Did you just coincidently pray to a certain god? I think it was more likely it was the god you were indoctrinated to believe in. It makes no sense you would pray multiple times to a god you do not believe is real. So I question your story.
And seeing as how you prayed more than once about your dog, it is less of a coincidence you got a call during one of those prayers.
So your add was so poorly written, the woman doubted it was the correct add for the dog? Well it seems it did spark something in her brain, but as normal, most humans do not realize what makes a person think what. So her laypersons testimony of what she was thinking or not does not hold much weight. Evidently you feel it is very important.
I really do not see a whole lot of coincidences here. And when you are questioned on them, you typically run and whine, instead of trying to show you are logically correct. So it leads me to conclude you just wish it to be a godly miracle instead of questioning with scrutiny.
But thanks for showing the contradiction of faith.
Well, you are entirely welcome..........For demonstrating once again your inability
to grasp the true meaning of faith.
I would also take this opportunity to congratulate Known fact ,I believe he is the one who accurately described you as a failed mormon/catholic Atheist...Very astute observation on his part.
Your response, based on your ability to spread misinformation,is laughable and you are a pitiful sight in attempting to provide what you know to be inaccurate information.
I have never claimed that I had prayed more than once for my dog.
That is one of your intentional lies in order to defend your baseless faith.
In conclusion, A faith that can only be defended by lies does not deserve to be catergorized as afaith....It falls under the con job catergory

“Breaking the spell ”

Since: Dec 10

of the puppet master

#128779 Apr 20, 2014
Libertarian wrote:
<quoted text>
You know, back when I was 18 years old I actually believed in the system just like you do. Experience taught me better. Everything that you have suggested we do is exactly what we did do. Except for one thing: My father demanded a public acknowledgement that it had happened.
As to showing how the libertarian free market system will prevent this sort of thing from happening, I don't see any need to.
If an institution is corrupt enough to warrant destruction, as public education certainly is, there is no need to worry about what will take its place. Whatever arises can be no worse, and there is a possibility that it will be better. If nothing arises to take its place, then the institution is not needed and can be done without.
Sorry, but I do not accept that philosophical outlook at all. Capitalism has corruption. Do you suggest we destroy that institution?
Corruption is impossible to destroy. It is like attempting to destroy the drug world. You can do things to slow it, but some will always exist.

I am so glad you refuse to attempt to show your idealism as possibly being better. You have no evidence in history to even use for a positive example.
And of course capitalism is already full of corruption, so you cannot use that as an example. Yet you obviously have an extreme double standard on capitalism.

You see, double standards show the problem in philosophies.

“Breaking the spell ”

Since: Dec 10

of the puppet master

#128780 Apr 20, 2014
SevenTee wrote:
<quoted text>
They prefer the darkness along with the snakes, rodents and vermin
I probably should be happy when you guys say stuff like this, as it is great for pushing people away from religion.
Most people I speak to about religion that are less active in it cite these sort of reasons.
Keep up the good work.

“Breaking the spell ”

Since: Dec 10

of the puppet master

#128781 Apr 20, 2014
Libertarian wrote:
<quoted text>
It is apparent you did not grow up in the rural South.
Football is the be all and end all of the school system in most counties.
Board of Education? What a joke. The dumbass football player was the nephew of a Board member!
Before the expansion of the social system of public education, being so rural was almost an automatic assurance of being illiterate.
History shows your system does not work, and it was thrown out for something that has proven to work better. Of course it is not perfect, but Utopia cannot exist. Evidently no one sent you that memo.

“Breaking the spell ”

Since: Dec 10

of the puppet master

#128782 Apr 20, 2014
The_Box wrote:
<quoted text>
Uh, since when?
Geldoff was shown as an example of an atheist who had done some good. As his donating efforts have been very productive.
The bible claims us non believes can do no good.
Evidently 70 thinks that means he must be worshipped and looked at as if he can do no wrong.
Of course this makes no sense.

SevenTee wrote:

Geldof is a major league POS worshiped by the atheists.

“Breaking the spell ”

Since: Dec 10

of the puppet master

#128783 Apr 20, 2014
curious wrote:
<quoted text>
Well, you are entirely welcome..........For demonstrating once again your inability
to grasp the true meaning of faith.
I would also take this opportunity to congratulate Known fact ,I believe he is the one who accurately described you as a failed mormon/catholic Atheist...Very astute observation on his part.
Your response, based on your ability to spread misinformation,is laughable and you are a pitiful sight in attempting to provide what you know to be inaccurate information.
I have never claimed that I had prayed more than once for my dog.
That is one of your intentional lies in order to defend your baseless faith.
In conclusion, A faith that can only be defended by lies does not deserve to be catergorized as afaith....It falls under the con job catergory
Why would you say the prayer was answered "within a day" of praying, instead of simply repeating it happened as you prayed? It implies you prayed more than once. You have yet to state if you did or not, but calling me a liar does imply you prayed only once. Maybe if you tried to answer my repeated questions, you would be understood more clearly.
You have failed to show what I do not understand about faith. Care to tell us? Maybe you just write as poorly as your lost dog ads?
You keep claiming I am wrong, but cannot articulate just how I am wrong.
Repeating your silly story sure is no explanation.
Maybe I do not understand faith, and you sure cannot explain it. All I keep hearing is your claims of evidence. I am waiting for the faith part.

Since: Apr 08

Cambridge, UK

#128784 Apr 20, 2014
curious wrote:
<quoted text>
We certainly don't mind that YOU don't take part in celebrating our Saviour having risen from the dead.
However , we do welcome the presence of the 20% of atheists who attend church on a weekly basis.
I'm back now

I just went out to the shops.

The garden centre was closed because it's Easter Sunday but the DIY shop was open.

Weird, I'd have thought Jesus would prefer plants being sold rather than hammer and nails.

“Breaking the spell ”

Since: Dec 10

of the puppet master

#128785 Apr 20, 2014
curious wrote:
<quoted text>
I don't have a problem answering a question that asked based on it's proper perspective, which neither you or pre K will do.
You state " Why would God give the green light to stoning? then you proceed to give YOUR reasons as to why He did so . I don't want to hear your reasons, I want to hear the reasons God gave. That is the crux of the matter. I do not care to answer your question based on your unbelieving rationale Try as you might , I am not falling for that trap.
God gave specific reasons as to why those instructions were to be obeyed and there were definite objectives to be attained if the rules were obeyed and cosequences if they were disobeyed.
When you frame your question based on God's instructions and what God's objectives were, then I will be able to justify my position, based on all the facts presented.
If you are unwilling to do that, in order to gain an unfair advantage by not accurately listing the reasons and objectives involved, then stop wasting your time and mine.
And you keep rewording the question, again leaving out the very pertinent information that you do not want to address, in an attempt to trap me. Ain't gonna work.
Base your questions on what is contained in the Bible,not your personal agenda
All you need to do is simply tell us his reasoning to have someone stoned for incest. As of yet, you keep dodging that simple question I have repeatedly asked.

Since: Apr 08

Cambridge, UK

#128786 Apr 20, 2014
curious wrote:
God gave specific reasons as to why those instructions were to be obeyed and there were definite objectives to be attained if the rules were obeyed and cosequences if they were disobeyed.
Just like Hitler giving specific reasons for exterminating the Jews.

You look at a situation and can't see it for what it is.

Tell me what instructions were disobeyed that your god had to kill 70,000 people when David carried out a census.

“Breaking the spell ”

Since: Dec 10

of the puppet master

#128787 Apr 20, 2014
curious wrote:
<quoted text>
The one " odd element" as you call it,is not something that I have a definite answer for.
However ,keep in mind that ladyX ,according to her, had a brief look at my dog,and more than a week had passed since she saw him. According to her recollection,the dog I described did not fit the description of the dog that had been found.
My dog was mostly black and some tan on his legs and underside and had a white spot on his chest. Depending on the position of the dog when you looked at him, you would not see the white spot on his chest or the tan color on his underside or legs..
The fact remains that,for whatever reason, she did not believe the dog in question fit the description of the dog in the add I placed in the paper
I have no other explanation..........Other than what she told me
So again you fail to show what the ad says.
The fact you did not even question her testimony is evidence you believe with no skepticism. You see, I would have asked what was so wrong with my ad?
This is what separates the faithful with the non faithful. The faithful do not question.
How can you expect to learn the possible real reasons for her testimony if you did not press her on any of it? There could have been a simple logical reason you were called, but you failed to investigate. The scientific minded person investigates. The gullible blindly accept miracles as the answer.

“Breaking the spell ”

Since: Dec 10

of the puppet master

#128788 Apr 20, 2014
curious wrote:
<quoted text>
The one " odd element" as you call it,is not something that I have a definite answer for.
However ,keep in mind that ladyX ,according to her, had a brief look at my dog,and more than a week had passed since she saw him. According to her recollection,the dog I described did not fit the description of the dog that had been found.
My dog was mostly black and some tan on his legs and underside and had a white spot on his chest. Depending on the position of the dog when you looked at him, you would not see the white spot on his chest or the tan color on his underside or legs..
The fact remains that,for whatever reason, she did not believe the dog in question fit the description of the dog in the add I placed in the paper
I have no other explanation..........Other than what she told me
Perhaps she realized that after a week, she was not sure, thus she picked what seemed to be the closest one. But unless we see the other ads, your miracle has no evidence. It would have been so simple to save the paper to prove a miracle had in fact occurred, yet this never seems to happen.
No evidence for a god exists. The faithful must blindly believe the testimony of others without question or skepticism.

“Breaking the spell ”

Since: Dec 10

of the puppet master

#128789 Apr 20, 2014
Khatru wrote:
<quoted text>
Just like Hitler giving specific reasons for exterminating the Jews.
You look at a situation and can't see it for what it is.
Tell me what instructions were disobeyed that your god had to kill 70,000 people when David carried out a census.
Well Hitler actually did give reasons. And now those reasons can be examined for the flaws they have. God gave no reasons. The faithful blindly believe god just knows more than they.
God says it is bad, they accept it is bad, no questions asked.
The similarity of god followers who killed the Jews and the Jews who killed the other god followers is, they both just accepted what their leader demanded without question. Both were under pressure of fear of the leader punishing them for not carrying out the death sentences.
curious

Winter Garden, FL

#128791 Apr 20, 2014
Yiago wrote:
<quoted text>
You keep getting this stuff wrong. Myself and others have tried to help clear it up but it doesn't seem to stick.
There are probably evolutionary reasons that humans react negatively to the things you listed. Our innate reaction against these things seems to be founded primarily in their negative relationship to reproduction.
As ancient people you would expect such things to be met with harsh disapproval.
But these ideas are not part of some kind of package of sin, as you would think. They are unrelated to each other and each carries a different set of potential problems - real or imagined.
Bestiality is just wrong simply because animals cannot consent. I disagree with Singer on this as do most people, including atheists. My reply to you was based on the fact that you DO NOT understand Singer's position. I don't like it when people misrepresent an argument and then attack the misrepresentation. It's called a strawman fallacy and you are the king of it. Learn the real argument then address it with intellectual honesty.
And since we can all agree that having sex with animals is both wrong and disgusting perhaps we can move past that one.
Incest presents real problems for reproduction because it is a bad idea to mix gene pools. But it isn't at all clear that sexual relationships between relatives WITHOUT the possibility of reproduction are wrong. I think it is a topic worthy of deep discussion. I would not promote such relationships because they do carry the possibility of devastating psychological harm and being attracted to a relative is NOT a sexual orientation.
Homosexuality has no place on your list, frankly. There is simply no reason to oppose it. People are often gay. So what? It's a natural tendency among all mammals to have gay relations.
Who's being harmed by that? And if you pull out some instance of some psychopath giving people STDs I'll assume you truly are an idiot who cannot fathom rational thinking. There are plenty of psycho priests and preachers we could mention but that doesn't make Christians bad people, does it?
There you go again with your nonsensical explanations. Yourself and others have done nothing but muddy up the waters. Your excuse that
"There are probably evolutionary reasons that humans react negatively to the things you listed. Our innate reaction against these things seems to be founded primarily in their negative relationship to reproduction.
probablies and it seems appear to be an excuse in order to justify your beliefs
"But it isn't at all clear that sexual relationships between relatives WITHOUT the possibility of reproduction are wrong."
Then,you go on to list the reasons why you would not promote such.
It is for those and other reasons that the topic is not worthy of discussion,It carries some horrific consequences and can not be justified.
You are a bundle of contradictions and it seems that though you claim these behaviours to be wrong, you are attempting to find a way to justify them.
You say that homosexuality harms no one" Who's being harmed by that?" Then you want to disregard the harm that AIDS has caused within the homosexual community, you want to disregard the harm done to young men by homosexual priests , you want to disregard the goals of NAMBLA, which is to decriminalize sex between men and young boys
The list goes on.
I find your beliefs and morals to be disgusting and most assuredly we will never ,ever agree

“Breaking the spell ”

Since: Dec 10

of the puppet master

#128792 Apr 20, 2014
curious wrote:
<quoted text>
First of all , why donjt you let Yiago respond , instead of you behaving like a good errand boy and acting in his behalf.
Secondly , your attempts to deviate from the subject at hand are a failure.
Fact is that , you dare not provide the reasons and the objectives given by the Jews as instructed by God, where God condems such behaviour as Homosexuality , incest , beastiality and sex outside of marriage , among others as being sinful ,which defiles the individual and the land....
Well , those types of behaviours, which we know how decadent they are and the damage they cause, are the self same that the atheists I have been quoting condone.
YOU are a prime example of the mental anguish atheists inflict on themselves.
On the one hand you condem the actions of homosexual priests and on the other, you totally condone the homosexual lifestyle. That type of logic has to be wreaking havoc with your mind.
Some of you claim to be opposed to incest,,,those who do so,are agreeing with Him they don't believe in. Some of you who claim to be opposed to beastiality are in agreement with Him you don't believe in.....And the list goes on...
Incest ,homosexuality sex at any age without restraints,among others are cancers that destroy the moral fabric of any society.
Those who condone that type of behaviour are just as guilty as those who practice such.
But, you dare not address those issues, instead ,you will deviate with one of your farcical excuses.
You have more than abundantly proved your mental incompetence, the fruits of your unbelief.....
Your nonsense , gibberish and immoral logic only accomplishes strengthening my faith and most assuredly , you will not drag me back into the gutter, been there ,God got me out and I ain't going back in..........
So,when you have time, go aroud searching for a homosexual priest who has abused some male report him to the proper authorities and when he is charged, you can fill in as a character witness and defend his lifestyle,in your own imitable way.
You can inform the authorities that you are no longer an atheist or a secular humanist you are now a freethinker.All within one week.....Mentally discombobulated does not do justice to your fragile state of mind.
You must be going through a hormone induced evolutionary process heretofore unknown.
Who knows ,by next week you may have evolved into a dufus, a yam fam and a mamaluke
Aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaah , the fruits of atheism, total dysfunction of a traumatized mind..........
Generally claiming it is bad for the land or society does nothing to explain why. Evidently you do not know what the reasoning is expected of laws.
An expected reason would be more specific. Maybe like saying it scars the mind. But your bible does not do this, it just claims it is bad, and you blindly accept it. Showing a rule is actually good does help. The bible does not do this, it just demands you do it, and you better not question the rule.
Well Jesus evidently questioned the rules, and the blind followers killed him for questioning.
Now you blindly accept the rules have changed, yet have no real reasoning other than god has a new plan. Not that it explains why the new rules are better or worse. In fact you strangely feel both rules were great. Sorry, but you can't have it both ways. It is the contradiction that shows you just accept without question.
]
BTW, homosexuality is no more dangerous than heterosexuality. Maybe if your bigoted self allow them to marry, you would see a fair play result of such claims.
The very act of keeping them in unequal playing fields skews the test.

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
Elijaha messer and cliftina Brock 20 min Lmao 4
Cute guy that works at advance 41 min HeyJude 5
missing person kenneth allen saunders (kenny) (Nov '15) 1 hr concerned citizen 28
Bonita Williams and Darren west to destroy city... 1 hr numb nuts 4
What's for rent 2 hr Looking to rent 1
~~Keep A Word~~Drop A Word Game. (Jun '10) 4 hr Princess Hey 1,397
{keep a word drop a word} (Oct '11) 4 hr Princess Hey 3,843
Diagnostic Review 7 hr Enlightened 9
More from around the web

Personal Finance

Barbourville Mortgages