Truemors
is reporting from
Member
NP Rank:
NP Rank:
Catholic bishops sell pornography and creationism in Kentucky
Share:
by JerryM | August 23, 2012 at 08:03 pm
176 views | 2 Recommendations | 5 comments
Did you know the Catholic church in Germany owns a publishing company, Weltbild that sells online, pornographic magazines? Also, it owns a Munich based publishing company, Droemer Knaur, that also sells online pornographic magazines. I don't believe material made for and by adults for other adults should be banned, but the Catholic church in the past and now, has favored bans not just of images but books, such as Tropic of Cancer.
That Catholic leadership in Germany have ignored concerns for years by Catholics on the selling of this material by one of their companies is not that surprising, considering their ignoring child molestation by their priests and how the average Catholic has no more say in their church, than do I.
Closer to home, in Kentucky, the Kentucy Republican party, no shock, is opposed to the teaching of evolution. Because, as they point out, it's just a theory. But in science, a theory is a model that describes observations and data. The ability of me to post this column online, is because of the scientific theories of relativity, quantum mechanics, electro-magnetic theory, among others. Not guesses. That a vaccine for polio stops people from getting polio, is based on the theory of evolution. Not a guess, as is how theory is commonly defined in laymen's terms.
So, Republican legislators in Kentucky are thinking that the ACT test that students in take to get into college, be changed to strike out the national standards of knowledge of evolution. Since it is a just a theory, of course. They have a point. In the bible, Pi, the circumference of a circle divided by its' diameter is defined as 3 instead of approximately 3.14. The math section of the ACT should reflect that and just define Pi as a solid 3, as the bible commands it.
Advertisement
What is NowPublic?
NowPublic lets people work together to cover news events around the world.
Crowd Power
Related Stories
Recommendations (2)
Anonymous users (2)
Most RecentMost Recommended Comments (5)
- Sign In or Join to post comments
Devalued (not verified)at 23:55 on August 23rd, 2012
But according to you pornography is good. And if pornography is good then what can be wrong with creationism? Or is your porno world just for God hater's? Think of creationism as just one more type of porn. Let it be taught in the schools alongside the classes that encourage young boys to explore homosexuality. After all, God made homosexuals homosexual, no?
at 05:28 on August 24th, 2012
Pornography is fine but according to the Catholic church it is awful. It is hypocrisy on their part that I am pointing out, especially in their support for censorship. Second, creationism is just wrong. It is not scientific, it is unsupported and is just a religious belief. By the way, you simpleton, I don't hate a god I don't believe in. I know this might be hard for such an "intellect" like yourself to understand, but people who don't believe in a god can't logically hate a god. Yes, I know it is a deep thought and you have trouble grasping this "complex" idea when you have trouble counting to six on your hands.
Gays exist, creationism only exists as a concept because it is not true. The world isn't 6000 years old. I never read so many illogical statements and awful thinking as in the short paragraph you posted. It is like you tried to do a satire of a really stupid person, how bad was your post.
- Sign In or Join to post comments
Devalued (not verified)at 06:37 on August 24th, 2012
I'm smart enough to know that idiots like you who hold pornography up as a social good will equivocate to justify the Gay, Lesbian, and Straight Education Network (GLSEN) efforts to normalize homosexuality in public classrooms. Kindergarten students are now being taught about “human differences” while activists establish youth homosexuality clubs on campuses so that kids can be “initiated” into alternative lifestyles.
The theory of evolution offers nothing tangible to further education anymore than the creation theory detracts from further education. The whole anti-creation game is a petty, simple-minded, pout-fest by the God-hater's to belittle, vilify and exclude the religious majority.
According to intellectual hypocrites like yourself we can't have the creationist theory of the religious majority taught along side the theory of evolution but, you porno's can champion babies in kindergarten being exposed to the sexual appetites of a very tiny social/sexual minority. Don't talk to me about illogical statements retard, until you know the definition of illogical and acknowledge the complete lack of moral and ethical exigencies of your systemic hatred.
- Sign In or Join to post comments
"thirty-aught-six" (not verified)at 15:06 on August 24th, 2012
@Devalued
You have to excuse JerryM. He can only cut and paste mish-mash from his God-hating Christian hating Conservative hating Republican hating overlord Austin Cline. He happily reprints every bit of trash that conforms to and confirms his narrow and bigoted world view. I had a great morning laugh reading JerryM's latest diatribe against the religious. So prideful in his ignorance, exclaiming to the world that the Bible "commands" that Pi =3.
Newsflash JerryM. The Bible does not make any determination about the value of Pi. What the Bible describes is the building of a ceremonial vessel for the Temple of Solomon using cubits.
"And he [Hiram] made a molten sea, ten cubits from the one rim to the other it was round all about, and...a line of thirty cubits did compass it round about....And it was an hand breadth thick...." — First Kings, chapter 7, verses 23 and 26
Ignorant dolts like JerryM don't have any understanding of Pi, let alone the breadth of a cubit from one man to another. Had Hiram's forearm been just a smidgen longer he would have nailed PI not even knowing the existence of Pi as a mathematical constant.
So let's school JerryM. The earliest written approximations of π are found in Egypt and Babylon, both within 1 percent of the true value. In Babylon, a clay tablet dated 1900–1600 BC has a geometrical statement that, by implication, treats π as 25/8 = 3.1250. In Egypt, the Rhind Papyrus, dated around 1650 BC, but copied from a document dated to 1850 BC has a formula for the area of a circle that treats π as (16/9)2 ≈ 3.1605. In India around 600 BC, the Shulba Sutras (Sanskrit texts that are rich in mathematical contents) treat π as (9785/5568)2 ≈ 3.088. In 150 BC, or perhaps earlier, Indian sources treat π as ≈ 3.1622.
The first recorded algorithm for rigorously calculating the value of π was a geometrical approach using polygons, devised around 250 BC by the Greek mathematician Archimedes. This polygonal algorithm dominated for over 1,000 years, and as a result π is sometimes referred to as "Archimedes' constant". Archimedes computed upper and lower bounds of π by drawing regular polygons inside and outside a circle, and calculating the perimeters of the outer and inner polygons. By using the equivalent of 96-sided polygons, he proved that 223/71 < π < 22/7, that is 3.1408
[Archimedes proved that Pi was 3.1408] Ooopsy! More approximately Pi =3.14159. Looks like Archimedes science really phuched up and misled humanity for over 1,000 years. I guess we can expect JerryM to have a fresh article tomorrow dis'ing Archimedes for being such a total douche and making us believe the lie for more than a thousand years.
- Sign In or Join to post comments
Devalued (not verified)at 16:52 on August 24th, 2012
I wouldn't be the least surprised to hear that Jerry believes Pi comes with ice cream. Thanks for your post.
What the religious hater's espouse is a attack on humanity who will not deny part of their living experience. In effect the hater's argue, "Religion is activity in this part of the brain; science is activity in that part of brain; beliefs that stimulate this part of the brain are invalid; beliefs that stimulate that part of the brain are valid." It's bullshit.
The hater's use Darwinism in an attempt to invalidate creationism. There's about 300 different interpretations of natural selection and maybe about as many interpretations of creationism. It's a gross misrepresentation by either side of the debate to pit the most liberal interpretation against the most narrowly construed. It's like saying who has the 'real' raisin cookie by counting up the raisins in the individual cookies, and then declaring that the one with the most raisins is the one true raisin cookie. That all other raisin cookies are just cookies that may contain raisins but are not necessarily raisin cookies. It's stupid, narrow-minded bigotry is all it is.
It's not any kind of intellectual understanding, rather fixated dogmatist straining at the end of their leash demanding that it is they who hold the theoretical knowledge of all that lies beyond current human understanding. If you have a problem with religion that is you arguing with your own brain and whatever images you don't want to like. Normal people, the least observant, aren't in any struggle with religion. That war of ideas is between the two extremes of the deniers and the evangelist. They're small minorities pushed out to the edges of civil discourse by the majority.
The irony in all this is that Darwin himself never claimed that his theory was the one and singular way. He went to his deathbed protesting that he'd been misinterpreted: there was no reason, he said, to assume that natural selection was the only imaginable mechanism of evolution. If that was good enough for Darwin, it's good enough for me. Unlike the hater's I have no problem holding to and accepting a plurality of ideas on similar subject matter. I like to think that theistic evolution is a happy median. I'm not religious but, no one has ever proven there is no God. And those who might want to, aren't worth listening to.