Bible study rules for public schools ...

Bible study rules for public schools proposed

There are 143121 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: Dec 11

Location hidden

#133728 Jul 9, 2014
do whut wrote:
<quoted text>
Here is a decent article:
This article is horrendous. It reads like something a high school freshman wrote.
do whut wrote:
Marriage has been universally acknowledged throughout history as a legal contract between a man and a woman in which there is emotional and sexual fidelity, along with childrearing.
False. Historically, marriage has often been polygamous, with men having multiple wives who represent pieces of property. Mistresses and other lovers have also been acceptable in many societies.
do whut wrote:
So, when marriage is redefined, the society is dramatically affected.
False. Marriage was redefined for many states 50 years ago when interracial marriage bans were discarded. Was society dramatically affected? No. Marriage was redefined 10 years ago in Massachusetts to allow gay couples. Was society dramatically affected? No.
do whut wrote:
Legalizing gay marriage means changing the laws of the land. The ramifications are vast, and we are seeing the effects of homosexual legal "rights" affecting housing, education, the work place, medicine, the armed forces, adoption, religion, etc.
These changes are not related to gay marriage. They are anti-discrimination laws.
do whut wrote:
Here is a list of ways in which gay marriage can bring harm.
It can bring huge financial and emotional stress.
Homosexuals can sue people who are exercising their religious beliefs. For example, a heterosexual married couple with children who do not want to rent a room in their own family household to homosexuals could be sued for discrimination based on "sexual orientation." This can incur significant financial and emotional stress upon the family--not to mention the "prior restraint" effect of the fear of being sued which results in a family not renting out a room.
Again, this relates to anti-discrimination laws, not gay marriage.

Furthermore, it can be applied to ANY anti-discrimination laws.

"African Americans can sue people who are exercising their religious beliefs. For example, a heterosexual married couple with children who do not want to rent a room in their own family household to African Americans could be sued for discrimination based on 'race'."

Since: Apr 08

Nottingham, UK

#133730 Jul 9, 2014
do whut wrote:
Marriage has been universally acknowledged throughout history as a legal contract between a man and a woman


False. What about the legally married gay couples in Canada, Spain, Portugal, Argentina, Denmark, Sweden, Norway, Iceland, Belgium, Netherlands, and South Africa.

Notwithstanding Mormon polygamy, what about the many countries where polygamy is still practiced?

What's more, look back at your history and you'll see that gay marriages existed in ancient China as well as in the classical world.
do whut wrote:
Since marriage is also a moral issue, redefining marriage is redefining morals. Furthermore, marriage is an extremely wide-spread practice within any society and has many legal and moral issues attached to it. So, when marriage is redefined, the society is dramatically affected.
Marriage is a commitment made born out of love and trust. It wasn't that long ago when Christians considered marriage outside of their race to be and what's more, marrying children was also considered to be perfectly acceptable in the Christian world.
do whut wrote:
Legalizing gay marriage means changing the laws of the land. The ramifications are vast, and we are seeing the effects of homosexual legal "rights" affecting housing, education, the work place, medicine, the armed forces, adoption, religion, etc. Are all the changes good? That is hotly debated. But we have to ask, is it morally right to force all of society to adopt the morals of a minority?
No one is forcing anyone's morals on anyone. It's more a case of bigots wanting to deny gay people equal rights with heterosexual people. The same sort of bigotry we say when blacks were treated less favourably than white people.
do whut wrote:
It can bring huge financial and emotional stress.
Only to those who are bigoted enough to get all worked up over it.
do whut wrote:
Homosexuals can sue people who are exercising their religious beliefs. For example, a heterosexual married couple with children who do not want to rent a room in their own family household to homosexuals could be sued for discrimination based on "sexual orientation." This can incur significant financial and emotional stress upon the family--not to mention the "prior restraint" effect of the fear of being sued which results in a family not renting out a room.
In a secular society, no one's religious beliefs gets to trump people's civil rights.

“See how you are?”

Since: Jul 12

Earth

#133731 Jul 9, 2014
Khatru wrote:
<quoted text>
No doubt, when he makes these posts, curious is experiencing the "peace that surpasseth all understanding".
Edit: "pees that surpassseth all underwear."
wwwcurious

Ocoee, FL

#133732 Jul 9, 2014
Yiago wrote:
<quoted text>
Wow. What Creationist website did this nonsense come from?
This is NOT how evolution works and it is almost certainly NOT how life first started. This story reflects a profound (and sad) misunderstanding of science. Or it reflects an overt attempt at deception and confusion, two things the Fundamentalists are good at.
Here's a key to the fundamental flaw (someone else may have already pointed it out):
Nature is not trying to build you or me or anything else. At each instant in nature it is what it is. It is not working toward anything in particular. So when you state that you place all the elements of a wrist watch into a barrel you have already made the mistake of assuming something specific is trying to be produced.
Life just tries to survive. It uses what it has. The fundamental processes involved in this are probably key to how it started in the first place. I don't know.
But here's the thing. When we say we don't know exactly how life started that doesn't mean you get to stuff a god into the knowledge gap. That's just sloppy and irresponsible thinking.
What you posted does nothing to clear up the problem that atheists and evolutionists face

"In other words, instead of an Intelligent Mind creating our human minds, atheists join evolutionists in their unshakeable belief that nature spontaneously generated all living things from mindless nothingness (this is called "Chemical Evolution").

Yet, although the simplest being we know of represents complexity beyond what our own minds can remotely fathom—they insist that even the most complex being we know about "occurred by chance.""
wwwcurious

Ocoee, FL

#133733 Jul 9, 2014
Information
Another important component of life is information. The common factor in all living organisms is the information contained in their cells. Where and how did all this coded information arise? Proteins are amazingly versatile and carry out many biochemical functions, but they are incapable of assembling themselves without the assistance of DNA. The function of DNA is to store information and pass it on (transcribe) to RNA, while the function of RNA is to read, decode, and use the information received from DNA to make proteins. Each of the thousands of genes on a DNA molecule contains instructions necessary to make a specific protein that, in turn, is needed for a specific biological function.
Any hypothesis or model meant to explain how all life evolved from lifeless chemicals into a complex cell consisting of vast amounts of information also has to explain the source of information and how this information was encoded into the genome. All evolutionary explanations are unable to answer this question. Dr. Werner Gitt, former physics professor and director of information processing at the Institute of Physics and Technology in Braunschweig, Germany, and Dr. Lee Spetner both agree that information cannot arise by naturalistic processes:
There is no known law of nature, no known process and no known sequence of events which can cause information to originate by itself in matter.15
Not even one mutation has been observed that adds a little information to the genome. This surely shows that there are not the millions upon millions of potential mutations the theory [evolution] demands.16
The DNA code within all plant and animal cells is vastly more compact than any computer chip ever made. DNA is so compact that a one-squareinch chip of DNA could encode the information in over seven billion Bibles. Since the density and complexity of the genetic code is millions of times greater than man’s present technology, we can conclude that the originator of the information must be supremely intelligent.
Two biologists have noted:
DNA is an information code.... The overwhelming conclusion is that information does not and cannot arise spontaneously by mechanistic processes. Intelligence is a necessity in the origin of any informational code, including the genetic code, no matter how much time is given.17
God, in His Word, tells us that His creation is a witness to himself and that we do not have an excuse for not believing (Romans 1:19–20). The fact that the information encoded in DNA ultimately needs to have come from an infinite source of information testifies to a Creator. And as we saw above, the only known way to link together left-handed amino acids is through purposeful design.
Since no human was present to assemble the first living cell, it is further testimony to an all-wise Creator God.
wwwcurious

Ocoee, FL

#133734 Jul 9, 2014
Given Enough Time ...
Nobel prize-winning scientist George Wald once wrote:
However improbable we regard this event [evolution], or any of the steps it involves, given enough time, it will almost certainly happen at least once.... Time is the hero of the plot.... Given so much time, the impossible becomes possible, the possible becomes probable, the probable becomes virtually certain. One only has to wait; time itself performs miracles.18
In the case of protein formation, the statement “given enough time” is not valid. When we look at the mathematical probabilities of even a small protein (100 amino acids) assembling by random chance, it is beyond anything that has ever been observed.
What is the probability of ever getting one small protein of 100 left-handed amino acids?(An average protein has at least 300 amino acids in it—all left-handed.) To assemble just 100 left-handed amino acids (far shorter than the average protein) would be the same probability as getting 100 heads in a row when flipping a coin. In order to get 100 heads in a row, we would have to flip a coin 1030 times (this is 10 x 10, 30 times). This is such an astounding improbability that there would not be enough time in the whole history of the universe (even according to evolutionary time frames) for this to happen.
The ability of complex structures to form by naturalistic processes is essential for the evolution model to work. However, the complexity of life appears to preclude this from happening. According to the laws of probability, if the chance of an event occurring is smaller than 1 in 10-50, then the event will never occur (this is equal to 1 divided by 1050and is a very small number).19
What have scientists calculated the probability to be of an average-size protein occurring naturally? Walter Bradley, PhD, materials science, and Charles Thaxton, PhD, chemistry,5 calculated that the probability of amino acids forming into a protein is:
4.9 x 10-191
This is well beyond the laws of probability (1x10-50), and a protein is not even close to becoming a complete living cell. Sir Fred Hoyle, PhD, astronomy, and Chandra Wickramasinghe, professor of applied math and astronomy, calculated that the probability of getting a cell by naturalistic processes is:
1 x 10-40,000
No matter how large the environment one considers, life cannot have had a random beginning.... There are about two thousand enzymes, and the chance of obtaining them all in a random trial is only one part in (1020)2000 = 1040,000, an outrageously small probability that could not be faced even if the whole universe consisted of organic soup.20

Since: Feb 14

Location hidden

#133735 Jul 9, 2014
Yiago wrote:
<quoted text>
Throw me a bone. What trees are you talking about? Give me a link so we can talk apples to apples.
Here's the thing to remember about science: it is transparent. If someone makes a claim that can be shown to be false you can bet money on the fact that it will be shown to be false. Scientists make their name on discovery and debunking of discovery. Conspiracies, while they do happen, are generally short lived. Take the classic Piltdown Man hoax for example. How was that hoax discovered? Science. Someone took the time to examine the bones more closely.
The forest of petrified trees are easy to google. I figgered if your Interest had been there, you'd done checked.
dude, there is NO WAY them trees stood upright like that for millions of years while that happened.
Wood rots and In a relative amount of time will topple over.
I live here In the mountains and see it regularly and it's not In millions of years.
I don't care what science says..
There is only one way them trees could have had that sediment built up around them W/OUT toppling over, and I don't care how science explains it to fit what they think..
I need not say it, cause you already know..
They have found whales bones In deserts, marine life on tops of mountains, not on just some mountains, but globally with consistent pattern..
They say it's earths plates colliding and pushing up the mountains, YEAH RIGHT!
Archaeological scientist were the ones that found piltdown man and tried that dumb shyt!

Since: Apr 08

Nottingham, UK

#133736 Jul 9, 2014
wwwcurious wrote:
Information
Another important component of life is information. The common factor in all living organisms is the information contained in their cells. Where and how did all this coded information arise? Proteins are amazingly versatile and carry out many biochemical functions, but they are incapable of assembling themselves without the assistance of DNA. The function of DNA is to store information and pass it on (transcribe) to RNA, while the function of RNA is to read, decode, and use the information received from DNA to make proteins. Each of the thousands of genes on a DNA molecule contains instructions necessary to make a specific protein that, in turn, is needed for a specific biological function.
Any hypothesis or model meant to explain how all life evolved from lifeless chemicals into a complex cell consisting of vast amounts of information also has to explain the source of information and how this information was encoded into the genome. All evolutionary explanations are unable to answer this question. Dr. Werner Gitt, former physics professor and director of information processing at the Institute of Physics and Technology in Braunschweig, Germany, and Dr. Lee Spetner both agree that information cannot arise by naturalistic processes:
There is no known law of nature, no known process and no known sequence of events which can cause information to originate by itself in matter.15
Not even one mutation has been observed that adds a little information to the genome. This surely shows that there are not the millions upon millions of potential mutations the theory [evolution] demands.16
The DNA code within all plant and animal cells is vastly more compact than any computer chip ever made. DNA is so compact that a one-squareinch chip of DNA could encode the information in over seven billion Bibles. Since the density and complexity of the genetic code is millions of times greater than man’s present technology, we can conclude that the originator of the information must be supremely intelligent.
Two biologists have noted:
DNA is an information code.... The overwhelming conclusion is that information does not and cannot arise spontaneously by mechanistic processes. Intelligence is a necessity in the origin of any informational code, including the genetic code, no matter how much time is given.17
God, in His Word, tells us that His creation is a witness to himself and that we do not have an excuse for not believing (Romans 1:19–20). The fact that the information encoded in DNA ultimately needs to have come from an infinite source of information testifies to a Creator. And as we saw above, the only known way to link together left-handed amino acids is through purposeful design.
Since no human was present to assemble the first living cell, it is further testimony to an all-wise Creator God.
God of the gaps

Since: Apr 08

Nottingham, UK

#133737 Jul 9, 2014
wwwcurious wrote:
Given Enough Time ...
Nobel prize-winning scientist George Wald once wrote:
However improbable we regard this event [evolution], or any of the steps it involves, given enough time, it will almost certainly happen at least once.... Time is the hero of the plot.... Given so much time, the impossible becomes possible, the possible becomes probable, the probable becomes virtually certain. One only has to wait; time itself performs miracles.18
In the case of protein formation, the statement “given enough time” is not valid. When we look at the mathematical probabilities of even a small protein (100 amino acids) assembling by random chance, it is beyond anything that has ever been observed.
What is the probability of ever getting one small protein of 100 left-handed amino acids?(An average protein has at least 300 amino acids in it—all left-handed.) To assemble just 100 left-handed amino acids (far shorter than the average protein) would be the same probability as getting 100 heads in a row when flipping a coin. In order to get 100 heads in a row, we would have to flip a coin 1030 times (this is 10 x 10, 30 times). This is such an astounding improbability that there would not be enough time in the whole history of the universe (even according to evolutionary time frames) for this to happen.
The ability of complex structures to form by naturalistic processes is essential for the evolution model to work. However, the complexity of life appears to preclude this from happening. According to the laws of probability, if the chance of an event occurring is smaller than 1 in 10-50, then the event will never occur (this is equal to 1 divided by 1050and is a very small number).19
What have scientists calculated the probability to be of an average-size protein occurring naturally? Walter Bradley, PhD, materials science, and Charles Thaxton, PhD, chemistry,5 calculated that the probability of amino acids forming into a protein is:
4.9 x 10-191
This is well beyond the laws of probability (1x10-50), and a protein is not even close to becoming a complete living cell. Sir Fred Hoyle, PhD, astronomy, and Chandra Wickramasinghe, professor of applied math and astronomy, calculated that the probability of getting a cell by naturalistic processes is:
1 x 10-40,000
No matter how large the environment one considers, life cannot have had a random beginning.... There are about two thousand enzymes, and the chance of obtaining them all in a random trial is only one part in (1020)2000 = 1040,000, an outrageously small probability that could not be faced even if the whole universe consisted of organic soup.20
God of the gaps

Since: Dec 11

Location hidden

#133738 Jul 9, 2014
wwwcurious wrote:
Not even one mutation has been observed that adds a little information to the genome.
Curious, why do you continually post articles written by liars? This is so obviously false that it's laughable anyone would believe it.

“See how you are?”

Since: Jul 12

Earth

#133739 Jul 9, 2014
pusherman_ wrote:
<quoted text> The forest of petrified trees are easy to google. I figgered if your Interest had been there, you'd done checked.
dude, there is NO WAY them trees stood upright like that for millions of years while that happened.
Wood rots and In a relative amount of time will topple over.
I live here In the mountains and see it regularly and it's not In millions of years.
I don't care what science says..
There is only one way them trees could have had that sediment built up around them W/OUT toppling over, and I don't care how science explains it to fit what they think..
I need not say it, cause you already know..
They have found whales bones In deserts, marine life on tops of mountains, not on just some mountains, but globally with consistent pattern..
They say it's earths plates colliding and pushing up the mountains, YEAH RIGHT!
Archaeological scientist were the ones that found piltdown man and tried that dumb shyt!
Again, the only relevant statement in your post is "I don't care what science says." Your opinion is duly noted.

http://webecoist.momtastic.com/2010/09/14/har...

“See how you are?”

Since: Jul 12

Earth

#133740 Jul 9, 2014
The_Box wrote:
<quoted text>
Curious, why do you continually post articles written by liars? This is so obviously false that it's laughable anyone would believe it.
One point after another of curious' articles have been addressed and unveiled for the misinformation they are. Curious seems to think that cutting and pasting the same crap over and over means it or his interpretation will become retroactively true. <shrug> I see little point in posting and reposting rebuttals he'll only ignore today or forget tomorrow - especially when if he deigns to reply, the meat of his rebuttals is nothing but toxic vitriol and more desperate Lies for Jesus.
SNYB

Somerset, KY

#133742 Jul 9, 2014
ChromiuMan wrote:
<quoted text>
Again, the only relevant statement in your post is "I don't care what science says." Your opinion is duly noted.
http://webecoist.momtastic.com/2010/09/14/har...
Ooops...there that word again... on a totally different web even...and again...and ooooh what's this ..this weather...they call rain? How do anyone make mud?

O_o
SNYB

Somerset, KY

#133743 Jul 9, 2014
...why... that "F'"(lood) word's mentioned so much...even with Duquettes and Chrumolios counting pegs combined... they would need more ape digits to count 'em all!!!!
wwwcurious

Ocoee, FL

#133744 Jul 9, 2014
Khatru wrote:
<quoted text>
God of the gaps
Despite their vehement denials to the contrary,atheists are strong believers in Magic and Miracles.
They claim that the Universe , life,intelligence and consciousness needs no creator as the believe there is no God.
They believe that a miraculous and magical event took plave , whereby Nothing created something from Nothing. They also believe that Nothing provided the information contained in DNA....
Lo and behold, and then they wonder whu they are called fools when their beliefs are illogical and insane....
However, they will claim that they are not fools, lunatics or illogical.. They willdefend their outrageous beliefs by claiming that they don't know the answer to these questions.
If not God, then tell me who or how?
Can Nothing be the responsible agent for creation?
That is the huge albatross that your faith has superglued to your necks and your faith can not defend....You are left with illconceived excuses,illogical reasoning and believing in that which you claim not to believe,,,Magic and Miracles....
Again,I ask, if not God, then whom or how?
Your faith has failed you and abandoned you, hung you out to dry, denying you of the ability to give a plausible explanation for your beliefs.....

That goes for you , Box, Duket , Chromolio, Q,YIAGO, Witchetty etal.
Unfortunately, I had to include Q...I like the old curmudgeon...
However, his responses are far from persuasive...
wwwcurious

Ocoee, FL

#133745 Jul 9, 2014
The_Box wrote:
<quoted text>
Curious, why do you continually post articles written by liars? This is so obviously false that it's laughable anyone would believe it.
The only article written by atheists that I have posted is the one written by Staks Rosch
" Atheism has a suicide problem" and that was far from being alie.
Obviously,when an article is posted that you can not refute, you resort to the last refuge of a scoundrel , unable to refute,you deceitfully label it alie....
Such is the MO afforded you by your atheist faith.. abandoned and hung out to dry
atheist motto
Nothing created something from nothing. This nothing also brought the universe into existence and provided all the information contained in DNA....Making life possible.
The lifeless created life, the unconscious created consciousness and the unintelligent created intelligence... This is a MIRACLE of MAGICAL proportions.....So said Houdini
and the atheist faithful

“See how you are?”

Since: Jul 12

Earth

#133746 Jul 9, 2014
SNYB wrote:
<quoted text>
Ooops...there that word again... on a totally different web even...and again...and ooooh what's this ..this weather...they call rain? How do anyone make mud?
O_o
Leave it to Sista to read "that word" in a post that has nothing to do with "that word."

Since: Dec 11

Location hidden

#133747 Jul 9, 2014
wwwcurious wrote:
Obviously,when an article is posted that you can not refute, you resort to the last refuge of a scoundrel , unable to refute,you deceitfully label it alie....
It is a lie. And one that is trivially easy to see for anyone with even a basic understanding of what is being talked about, which you clearly lack.

Imagine a gene pool with 2 alleles for a certain train:
ABCDD and ABCDE

A mutation occurs and results in an allele ABCDF. Now the gene pool has ABCDD, ABCDE, and ABCDF. There has been an increase in information.

Curious, why do you even post about these topics when you're completely ignorant of them? Doesn't it tell you something that you can't actually generate a post of your own content and are forced to copy and paste Creationist lies?
SNYB

Somerset, KY

#133748 Jul 9, 2014
ChromiuMan wrote:
<quoted text>
Leave it to Sista to read "that word" in a post that has nothing to do with "that word."
Good job Mr. Predictable!

(floods...what flooding....it awrl a bush's a fault!)
wwwcurious

Ocoee, FL

#133749 Jul 9, 2014
ChromiuMan wrote:
<quoted text>
You typed AA org, not atheist org.
Do you think your habitual defamation. libel and name calling somehow promote your "cause?"
Hey , pumpkin head, Read the lawsuit filed by AA org attempting to keep the Cross, a historical artifact, out of the 9/11 museum...filed by AA org. American atheists org.
AA has more sense than AA org. so do not compare them. AA is not foolish enough to file such
a foolish and absurd suit as they are not afflicted by dyspepsia , anxiety,depression,mental anguish and headaches at the sight of the Cross . Seems to me that those who belong to AA are turning to the Cross and Christ to heal them of their maladies,whereas the atheists claim that the Cross is the reason for their afflictions
Forget the pumpkin head remark, I still likee ya and your 3 eyed alligator pet.
Tell him Jim said hello..........

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
The Oven Mitt 30 min Go guys 68
Is judge ex Jm hall going to prison ? 31 min chris229 18
Joe Ore arrested again 4 hr curious 2
Qualfications of a Pastor? 5 hr MisFit Kid 8
laptops 4 sale 6 hr ttwarewolf 12
kink 8 hr rufus 10
looking for something too rent.... 8 hr remt 2
Shooting at Walmart??? 9 hr MisFit Kid 52
More from around the web

Personal Finance

Barbourville Mortgages