Go to THE PROPHET
- Add a comment
- Go to MY SON (KOOKA) - THE DESTROYER OF WORLDS
homegirl
When I have ever said people should not be allowed to teach their children as they desire? I may not agree with what you plan to teach them, but since I believe in freedom and such and I also do not wish to have anyone trying to tell me what to teach my children, I would ever push any idea of telling a parent they can not teach their children. I may tell you I feel what you are teaching them is wrong and will cause problem and so on, btu I would never try to stop you from having the right to raise your children. Just because I do not agree with your views of raising children and have already seen the problems caused by what you believe children should and should not be taught, does not mean I am going to tell you you can not teach them as you see fit. They are your children and you get to screw them up some on your own.
posted by
kooka_lives
on September 1, 2005 at 6:32 AM
| link to this | reply
actually, homegirl
I think he, like me, wants people to seek, learn and then pass on valid ideas and not invalid.
posted by
Xeno-x
on September 1, 2005 at 6:22 AM
| link to this | reply
homegirl
where do you get that?
posted by
Xeno-x
on August 31, 2005 at 1:47 PM
| link to this | reply
SEEMS HE LEARNED YOUR VIEWS
just like he doesn't want us teaching our kids our views.?
posted by
homegirl
on August 31, 2005 at 10:44 AM
| link to this | reply
I'm glad I read this. Now I want to immediately read Kooka's posts...
posted by
Renigade
on February 3, 2005 at 6:13 PM
| link to this | reply
Testing
As my father said a few times testing one, two, three. God himself test humans! Can we pass the tests? I believe God created us all. And God created everything in us that we ourselves need on earth to survive. Soul, Body, Mind, and Spirit. We all have that part of God that we need. We just have to allow God to direct us and mature us. Not everyone will have the same job. But for sure God will make us what God wants us to be.
Please visit my blog writings and give me your comments! Thank You
posted by
Experience
on January 31, 2005 at 9:50 AM
| link to this | reply
Thanks for a thoughtful post
posted by
jollyjeff
on January 27, 2005 at 2:34 PM
| link to this | reply
Golly,
thanks for the primer 101 on fact vs opinion. So glad someone's willing to help me with my definitions and vocabulary.
posted by
JanesOpinion
on January 27, 2005 at 9:05 AM
| link to this | reply
janes
Facts are not a matter of faith. I just ask you to prove things which can be proven. I ask you you to show me my conclusion, which I have provided proof of and you claim are wrong, to be wrong.
I have never asked for proof of something which is purly faith. I have deabted such and given the facts which back up my ideas and listened to the proof that backs up other's idea, but when it was all about faith I have never said I have 100% proof of anything.
I think this concept has gone over your head. Facts can be proven and I have done that many, many times. Beliefs and opinion can not and so I never ask for proof of such things. If something is a fact then one can not claim the opposite as being an opinion. I really do not understnad why this is such ahard concept for you. You are still very much lost as to what is fact and what is opinion and belief.
Fact- Homosexuality has no ture connection at all to pedophiles
Opinion- Homosexuality is not a lifestyle I agree with
The first can and has been proven. The second is my personal feelings. Do you see the difference?
Please find for me where I have asked you to prove God. I have not mentioned the idea of proof of God for sometime. I did it sevreal times in the past as part of a debate with a Chrsitian willing to debate the issue and not become an ass about it, or to make a point about how one can not really prove an issue of faith.
And by the way, there was no civil tone at all in your first comment about me. Right off the back you do eveyrthing you can to discredit me and question my integrity.
posted by
kooka_lives
on January 26, 2005 at 7:25 PM
| link to this | reply
Mr. Painter,
so much for explaining the whole semantics issue. It seems to have gone right over Kooka's head. And so much for my civil tone used in my first comment. It certainly wasn't returned by him. Again, for the record, I'm not into "proving" matters of faith, because I would be the first to admit that you cannot PROVE the existence of God. Sure, I believe God is, but I cannot prove that to him without a shadow of a doubt.
Drop all the "prove" related words you use, Kooka, and I'd be a happier woman.
posted by
JanesOpinion
on January 26, 2005 at 7:02 PM
| link to this | reply
Kooka a Destroyer?
His views are different than mine (and many others') but I have never known him to be anything less than proffessional. He always gives thought provoking insights to his point of view; and although I have seen several people lambast him and try to goad him into a battle, I don't see him reciprocate. 
No, the problem people have with him is that he is steadfast in his beliefs; and provides logic to back up his arguements. I think maybe that is what bothers some people! 
posted by
David1Spirit
on January 26, 2005 at 4:30 PM
| link to this | reply
Janes
Every single time I have ever claimed to have proven something wrong I have proven it wrong. I have yet to make that claim without providing proof. And proof that I am wrong in those situation has yet to ever be provided by anyone. If you really wish to prove that I am wrong, then provide as much proof of what you claim as I provide of what I claim.
Out side of your Christian's articles, which very clearly over look many, many major points (Which I tried to explain to you and show you the facts of), you have not provided anything else to show their obviously predetermined views to be correct. I read those article and I saw that hatred those writer had for homosexuals. They did nothing but paint a very clear picture that homosexual were evil and would be the downfall of our society if allowed to have rights. The same thing was said by a large portion of Christians when blacks wished to have equal rights you know. If you wish to prove your point find unbiased articles that say the same thing. Your problem with this alone show that you do not wish to go beyond what the Christian community tells you to believe. I do not agree with the homosexual lifestyle and admit it, but I am not going to paint them as something they are not. You can say you do not agree with it and that the Bible says it is wrong and such (That I don't debate because that is the level of opinion and beliefs), but once you start to spread what is very clearly misinformation about them then you have crossed a line. Also their were no experiments in any of the articles you linked to. It was looking as statistics and not taking into account that pedophiles really can not be considered true homosexuals because they do not have any sexual attraction to other adult males. They were lumping all men who molested boys as being gay just because it was male on male and not looking at if those adult men had relationships with other adult men. I really have no clue how one would do an experiment to determine if a true homosexual was a child molester. If you do your research you will find that there is no true link between the two things.
I am still waiting for you to point out where else I have not proven my point when I have made the claim to proving it. If the homosexual debate is all you have, then you have proven yourself wrong in your accusations of me.
You don't make generalizations? Funny because I know for a fact you make nothing but generalizations about atheists. I read that post of yours on it and comment about the insulting generalization you made which fit with no atheist I know and sounded more like Christian propaganda than anything else.
You said "The only thing the atheist religion has to offer is a self-righteous focus on elevating the individual as his own god; and the assumption that all religions are quackery or a crutch upon which weak people lean because they aren’t strong enough in themselves."
That is 100% generalizing.
Please point out my generalizations if I do it so much.
posted by
kooka_lives
on January 26, 2005 at 4:25 PM
| link to this | reply
Old Man
That person was straight out lying. I had caught that blogger in several lies in fact. I had proven them to be lies. Basically that blogger just hated getting caught and so tried to discredit me instead of admitting to lying.
I think the main issue is that I am honest and tot eh point. I do not let people get away with not telling it how it is. If they try to make a claim that I know to be wrong I prove them wrong and make it clear that they are wrong. People hate this. They try to claim things to be 'opinion' when that can not be true since it has been proven to be wrong. Opinion should not be proven one way or the other, so if an opinion can be proven wrong then it can no longer be an opinion, but someone holding on to a lie.
I do not try to prove beliefs wrong in general. I do state my opinion of them and how I see things, but at those time I try to make it very clear that such is opinion. Some time I just talk about possibilities and someone finds offensive with that. Part of it comes from a need by some to see anything that might question their beliefs as being offensive. They are much more comfortable not thinking about any of it.
And I agree with you about how many Christians having already decided that their conclusion as correct are not willing to give the steps leading to those conclusions. I have very often been told by Christians here that I am just wrong and when I ask for proof they say they do not need to give any until I prove things otherwise. I go and prove things to be otherwise and they still claim they do not need to provide proof of their conclusion. I can only assume at that point I have proven my conclusion to be the correct one until proof is given that goes against my proof.
I am heat?
Blogit is a kitchen?
Okay...
posted by
kooka_lives
on January 26, 2005 at 4:01 PM
| link to this | reply
Mr. Painter,
You make some very valid points. My biggest "beef" with your son is that he loves to state, and has stated over and over "I've proven this" or that against Christianity -- when in fact he has proven very little. He has stated several times words to the effect "I've proven the Christians wrong about homosexuality . . . there's nothing wrong with that lifestyle." When I've argued with him on this, and provided a slew of research contradicting his notions, he completely disregarded that research because he said they were conducted by Christians. Well, the fact is that if it's a well conducted scientific study, there will be validity in the results -- even if the results are not to his liking and conducted by scientists who don't share his belief system.
He has also "proven" many other things wrong about Christianity or Christians that, in many ways cannot be proven since it's a system of belief and less of a science. So in some ways, you could say that my argument with him, if anything, is more about semantics. I had a graduate professor once tell me "never use the word 'prove' until you have shown you can back up your theories with research that can be replicated and can demonstrate the same results. Then you have proof." So in my book, Kooka has numerous theories and beliefs, but no proof, and should not be passing along his views as such.
I'm glad you have such loyalty to your son, Mr. Painter. I would be disappointed if you did not. And contrary to what you and your son may think, I do strongly support the notion that one should put one's beliefs to the test, not to mention Scriptures. I do not support the notion of blind faith. Kooka tends to make many generalizations, and I know he's accused Christians of supposedly blindly believing what they're told. I for one don't do that, and I know many, many Christians who question what they hear -- so that's another irksome semantic that I find annoying (i.e. his generalizations).
So have a discussion with him about semantics, will ya? And give him my regards. 
posted by
JanesOpinion
on January 26, 2005 at 11:49 AM
| link to this | reply