Bible study rules for public schools proposed

There are 137787 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

#101872 Apr 30, 2013
do whut wrote:
<quoted text>
Sure there is documentation from their tests. Why wouldn't there be?
Well lets see it? The world is waiting for the first documented miracle. What are you waiting for?

Since: Aug 10

Location hidden

#101873 Apr 30, 2013
Mike Duquette wrote:
<quoted text>Fact is, many of other denominations or even other religions believe they get answers and yet they are not the same answers you get.
Now if god does not follow rules of logic, then why should I follow him? If he wishes for a logical man to believe in him, then he should act logically or else actually present himself.
Do you have a mustard seed of faith in Mohammed? How about a mustard seed of faith in Zeus?
I thing God does follow logic, but not our version of it. Your comment represents a lack of humility in that there could be a creator, one greater than you, and that is the equivalent of pride in this situation.

And no I have no faith in Zeus, and after studying Islam, I have no faith in their beliefs.
EveintheGardenof

Hazard, KY

#101874 Apr 30, 2013
Snakes are out sun worshipping! Step carefully!

“Breaking the spell ”

Since: Dec 10

of the puppet master

#101875 Apr 30, 2013
do whut wrote:
<quoted text>

I didn't suggest that man and monkey had sex. I know that was the common thought in the 90's, but I didn't say it. Funny how that was your first defensive response though. What I had heard last was that they determined that people that were capturing these primates were injured and the disease passed that way. Either way, that is man's fault. And as far as I know, the disease didn't hurt the primates, they were more of a carrier.
Everyone suffers from disease. The rain falls on the just and unjust. And I don't have a clue why some are helped and others aren't. That's up to God. The important thing to me is that He has helped upon request and I have experienced that first hand.
I suggested it because that is the stereotypical claim of the religious. So far you are spot on with the typical claims of the religious and you mentioned monkeys. So I am actually shocked you know the old claim is known to be false. But am still confused why you blame man just because man was somehow involved. The way you speak of blame here is as if he deserves to suffer.

So you have no clue about why god helps some and not others? Then why do you not ask your holy ghost to clear up the confusion. In fact, why do you not ask him to clear up all my questions?

BTW, you are still contradicting your claim that god does not intervene.
Contradiction is a sure sign you are wrong about something.
EveintheGardenof

Hazard, KY

#101876 Apr 30, 2013
do whut wrote:
<quoted text>
I thing God does follow logic, but not our version of it. Your comment represents a lack of humility in that there could be a creator, one greater than you, and that is the equivalent of pride in this situation.
And no I have no faith in Zeus, and after studying Islam, I have no faith in their beliefs.
Signs showing it's not looking like too great a spring over in the mid-east lands.

“Breaking the spell ”

Since: Dec 10

of the puppet master

#101877 Apr 30, 2013
do whut wrote:
<quoted text>

And no, I don't see that marriage helps keep anyone monogamous, regardless of sexual preference. I think it is a flawed argument that if gays are allowed to marry, then STDs will decrease. I have not seen that it has helped heteros stay monogamous in the least. If they are going to cheat, they do it. If you are suggesting that fear of divorce and having to split 1/2 of their belongings will help them remain monogamous, then it isn't about love or rights to marry at all. In that case, what good is marriage? It would be better to not marry at all. That goes for straights and gays.
So you really do not see marriage as a path to monogamy?
Of course I realize all married people are not monogamous, but I am not talking about all, I am talking about a path that leads to better.
The act of marriage is often very public, and this alone puts the couple in the spotlight to at least try to remain monogamous.
Most any sex expert would tell you that marriage does help people be more monogamous. So I am not sure where you are getting this perception, but I am starting to understand why you have some unusual perceptions.

Marriage can be good for many reasons, so your list really does not seem to be relevant. BTW, I said nothing of divorce, so I am not sure what your point is here.

“Breaking the spell ”

Since: Dec 10

of the puppet master

#101878 Apr 30, 2013
do whut wrote:
<quoted text>
Do you know the history of Utah?
There wasn't a soul living in that area but Ute Indians. I can't speak for Washington, but for Utah, It would not be the same without Brigham taking tens of thousands of Mormons there.
I am sure white men would have gotten their sooner or latter. And when I say "White men" Brigham made sure to make it all white men.

“Breaking the spell ”

Since: Dec 10

of the puppet master

#101879 Apr 30, 2013
do whut wrote:
<quoted text>
I thing God does follow logic, but not our version of it. Your comment represents a lack of humility in that there could be a creator, one greater than you, and that is the equivalent of pride in this situation.
And no I have no faith in Zeus, and after studying Islam, I have no faith in their beliefs.
So you failed to use the logic of Islam? It is not your logic, so you surely passed it over by testing it with human logic.
And yes, I am using sarcasm to show your logic of god having different logic is illogical.

Did I say their could not be a god? No, so why do you assume that is what I think? Show me evidence of a creator god first, then judge to see if I am just hubris.

I tried to use the example of Zeus to your questions to me, but for some reason you see no connection.

BTW, I think their are lots of things and people that are greater than myself. So tell me again just what I said that leads you to conclude pride is a problem with me?

Since: Aug 10

Location hidden

#101880 Apr 30, 2013
curious wrote:
<quoted text>
Let me explain,for the last time,how illogical your explanation is.
Maybe you will finally understand.
If,I had come to you,with the problems I've had to faceand asked you what I should do,here is what you would have suggested,based on your analysis
I should be patient,have faith and wait for the possibility,that, perhaps,at some point in time,by chance or coincidence some event will take place,that may resolve my problem.
WTF? How did you get that from what I said? When did anyone on here suggest that you should have done nothing?
curious wrote:
<quoted text>
Let us remember that placing your faith in the hope ,that by chance,some event may happen,is called ,being superstitious.
Again...WTF? In what universe is that a definition for superstitious? Believing that there are supernatural causes for events is being superstitious. Although you did at least use the word "faith" in your definition, so I'll give you partial credit for that.
curious wrote:
<quoted text>
Let us also remember the huge difference between may happen and WILL happen.
Your solution is definitely not very reassuring and that all I have to do is hope.Nothing else is required on my part.
I'm running out of WTFs. Again, how the heck did you get that from what I said? Action is required on your part. Thought is required on your part.

Prayer is the same as doing nothing, and you have not provided evidence otherwise.
curious wrote:
<quoted text>
So,instead I turn to Scriptures and ....etc etc
So, once again you avoid the question(s) put to you. Instead, you deflect and attempt to distract. As I suspected you would.

I agree with ChromiuMan, I'm not here to "shake anyone's faith" either. To be honest, I don't care what you believe. I don't know you and for all intents and purposes, what you believe affects me nil.
I just have a problem with people like you who make ludicrous claims in an attempt to influence others.
You are a charlatan. And a lousy one to boot.

Since: Aug 10

Location hidden

#101881 Apr 30, 2013
Mike Duquette wrote:
<quoted text>It is extremely unlikely it happened at all. This is why we expect evidence of the claim. The more unlikely the event, the less likely one would believe it with no evidence.
I was first hand witness to the second one. What other evidence do you require?

Since: Aug 10

Location hidden

#101882 Apr 30, 2013
Mike Duquette wrote:
<quoted text>Well that does not answer any of my questions. Did you have a point with this statement? I do not see it having a single thing to do with what I was talking about.
You said what you thought caused all the different religions with similarities. So I said what I think caused it.
How did you not follow that??

Maybe we have too many conversations going on with each other. Lets simplify to one ping ping type exchange with one question at a time.

Since: Aug 10

Location hidden

#101883 Apr 30, 2013
Mike Duquette wrote:
<quoted text>Some evidence instead of just claims with zero evidence would be a nice start.
I would love for some logic to accompany the story.
I'm not showing you doctor's statements from this. I will not reveal my mother n law's identity. Sorry
Where is this lacking logic?
EveIntheGardenof

Hazard, KY

#101884 Apr 30, 2013
Mike Duquette wrote:
<quoted text>I am sure white men would have gotten their sooner or latter. And when I say "White men" Brigham made sure to make it all white men.
Possibly one of the earliest documentations of 18th century religious rebellion combined with early American political agenda...hehe :-).

Brigham Young, ca. 1850
Brigham Young

Brigham Young later in life

Brigham Young was born June 1, 1801 in Whittingham, Vermont. He was the ninth of eleven children, growing up in an unsettled frontier environment characterized by frequent family moves to various communities throughout upstate New York. Despite the influences of a strict, moralistic family and being exposed to the religious fervor that characterized the "burned-over-district " of upstate New York, he was slow to associate with a particular religious denomination until he formally joined the Methodist Church in 1824. His formal education was minimal and he was apprenticed to be a carpenter, painter, and glazier-trades which he used to support himself. In 1824 he met and married his first wife, Miriam Works, by whom he had two daughters.

By 1830 he was living in Mendon, New York where he first came in contact with the teachings of the newly-formed Mormon Church. However, he did not submit to baptism until 14 April 1832 and only then when other members of his immediate family joined. He found Mormonism appealing in its emphasis on Christian primitivism, its millennialistic orientation, authoritarianism, certain Puritan-like beliefs, and the fact that it offered him an avenue to achieve status and recognition through its lay priesthood.
EveIntheGardenof

Hazard, KY

#101885 Apr 30, 2013
do whut wrote:
<quoted text>
I was first hand witness to the second one. What other evidence do you require?
No offense meant :-).

Since: Aug 10

Location hidden

#101886 Apr 30, 2013
Mike Duquette wrote:
<quoted text>Of course you are, this is why you use terms for what you believe that do not sound like you believe crazy stuff as much. This makes us think it no less crazy though. But I understand it helps you justify believing in magic.
If you just think I'm crazy, then maybe we should end this exchange?

Since: Aug 10

Location hidden

#101887 Apr 30, 2013
Mike Duquette wrote:
<quoted text>Was it worth alienating us no racists to believe in your religion? Seems to me if it actually turned a single person away from a "true" church, god would never have allowed Brigham to put into policy racist ideas as he did.

Now obviously it turned many a black persons away, but surely it turned many other people away also, due to them using logic to determine truth instead of magical ghosts.
Do you even know what 1850 was like in America?
EveIntheGardenof

Hazard, KY

#101888 Apr 30, 2013
do whut wrote:
<quoted text>
I was first hand witness to the second one. What other evidence do you require?
Because no matter how some might wish to stick a stereotypical label of "racism" on the HISTORY of...there were undoubtedly, MANY other factors of those mid 1800 years in US History-like trans Missouri migration.

http://etc.usf.edu/maps/pages/3300/3328/3328....

Since: Aug 10

Location hidden

#101889 Apr 30, 2013
Mike Duquette wrote:
<quoted text>Sorry, but I really did not understand anything about this statement. You abstain from marriage? Are you writing faster than you are thinking or am I missing something? Really, this makes no sense.
You are saying that allowing marriage for gays will help them become more monogamous. I am pointing out that this is NOT the case for heterosexuals.
Today we see more people abstaining from marriage, waiting way longer to get married, having children out of wedlock, and the highest divorce rates ever.
I point this out to ask you if you really think the trend will be any different with gays?
curious

Ocoee, FL

#101890 Apr 30, 2013
Skeptical Spectacles wrote:
<quoted text>
WTF? How did you get that from what I said? When did anyone on here suggest that you should have done nothing?
<quoted text>
Again...WTF? In what universe is that a definition for superstitious? Believing that there are supernatural causes for events is being superstitious. Although you did at least use the word "faith" in your definition, so I'll give you partial credit for that.
<quoted text>
I'm running out of WTFs. Again, how the heck did you get that from what I said? Action is required on your part. Thought is required on your part.
Prayer is the same as doing nothing, and you have not provided evidence otherwise.
<quoted text>
So, once again you avoid the question(s) put to you. Instead, you deflect and attempt to distract. As I suspected you would.
I agree with ChromiuMan, I'm not here to "shake anyone's faith" either. To be honest, I don't care what you believe. I don't know you and for all intents and purposes, what you believe affects me nil.
I just have a problem with people like you who make ludicrous claims in an attempt to influence others.
You are a charlatan. And a lousy one to boot.
Spektakals,I want to thank you
If,a Christian would have said that about me,I would have been offended.

The fact it came from an Atheist makes me feel good.

Something you are not able to understand at this time.
StarttheStove

Hazard, KY

#101891 Apr 30, 2013
do whut wrote:
<quoted text>
Do you even know what 1850 was like in America?
Cow pattie? lol.

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.

Keavy Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
is the law about drop outs going back if under ... 51 min pokey 6
fake christians 2 hr Rebecca 24
add a word--drop a word (Apr '10) 4 hr Brainsneeze 1,023
Aluminum pop cans? How much is it worth? (Jan '13) 6 hr sam 25
obama was behind benghazi 7 hr JRH 10
Anywhere to meet single ladies 9 hr Yeti 14
Election Who do you support for U.S. House in Kentucky (... (Oct '10) May 21 cowboy 712
More from around the web

Keavy People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

Personal Finance

Mortgages [ See current mortgage rates ]