“仁愛兒童之家” 的創辦人李國華先生，深覺神帶領他到雲南省，探訪 那裡住在福利院和山區的孤兒和貧困學生，他感受到孤兒和貧困學生的需要，更確定神是要他用愛心和行動去關懷雲南的孤兒和貧困學生。 因此來函請求“輝煌基金會”能撥款支持。 “輝煌基金會”主席禢慶華先生與太太禢羅淑儔女士曾到昆明實地考察，也看到這需要與異象，基金會通過資助其每年經費的50%共3年。 並命名為 “輝煌仁愛兒童之家” 願神祝福這事工，讓更多人因此蒙福!

現職柴 灣社署的 社工李國華 ， 五年來 一 直 在 香 港 籌 款 ， 到 雲 南 山 區 辦孤兒院 。 詎 料 造 福 窮鄉的孤兒院 ， 上 週 卻 被 揭 發 原 來 一 直 是 性奴集中營 。

記者 上 週 到 雲 南 ， 發 現 至 少 四 名 女 童 受 李 國 華 侵 犯 ， 最小的 只 有 十二歲 ； 她 們 供 述 ，這位村民眼中的好心「 香港乾爹爹 」 ， 三年來怎樣逼她們陪 睡 、 共浴 。

「 乾 爹 （ 院 童 都 這 樣 叫 李 國 華 ） 坐 在 床 上 ， 沒 有 說 話 ， 突然推倒 我 落 床 ， 用身子 壓下 我 ， 脫 下 我 的 褲 子 ， 我有大 叫不 好 不 好 ； 同 學 剛 回 來 ， 拍 門 叫 乾 爹 開 門 ， 我 大 叫『 救 我 』 ， 但 掙 扎 不 了 … … 給 乾爹搞了。」 阿 雲（ 假 名 ）憶 述 十 二 歲 時 第 一 次 被 李國 華 強 暴 。

○ 六 年 某 天 放 學 後 ， 阿雲說李帶她 和 另 一院童到 車 站旁 的賓館 ， 李 另 一 院 童 出 外 買 東 西 ， 趁機 在 房 內 強 姦 阿 雲 。 「 之 後 我 打 電 話 給 媽 媽 ， 不 想 住 孤 兒院 ； 但 媽 媽 沒 理 ， 堅 持 叫 我 住 。 」 阿 雲 說 ， 她 不 知 怎 樣 告 訴 母 親 她 被 人 強 暴 的事 ，她 明 白 父 親 仍 坐 牢 ， 母 親 靠 採 茶的微薄 生計不能供她讀書 ， 孤 獨 無 助 的 小 雲 只 能 啞忍 。 之 後 兩 年 ， 她 便 成 為 李 的 性 奴 。

COMMENT:

又一基督教醜聞, 每當有人同我講 他是基督徒 我就很驚惶地回應本人冇乜錢.

此文章非本人作品, 不清楚內容是否真實, 但李國華確是基督徒及被告強姦女童.

一個咁既教會, 就算派埋錢俾我, 我都唔入.

文章搞自:
http://www2.uwants.com/viewthread.php?tid=7012651

Others:
http://hkg.westkit.net/?p=v&id=2145872&page=3

http://news.sina.com.hk/cgi-bin/nw/show.cgi/2/1/1/1432361/1.html

台灣的同志大遊行人數屢創新高，2008年參與人數已突破1萬8千人，主辦單位「台灣同志遊行聯盟」表示，台灣同志遊行規模為亞洲第一，也被視為兩岸三地同志人權運動的指標。2009年有大約2萬名來自國內外的同志和支持者上街。

台灣基督長老教會、靈糧堂、台北市聯禱會等主要教會，昨則宣布今發起「上帝的愛超越同志愛」遊行。活動總召集人、台灣基督長老教會牧師陳福住表示，我們不贊 同這個遊行愈辦愈大。同性愛混亂了性別，導致價值錯亂，希望上帝降恩給陷在錯誤的同性戀者，讓他們得著生命的更新。「遊行完後，我們很願意跟同志團體對 話。」

又, 中文大學崇基學院神學院學生會日前發表聲明，指摘五旬節聖潔會香港總監督伍山河上月在神學日講道的言論，帶歧視女性的成分，包括指昔日教會的女傳道「肥肥矮矮腳粗粗、唔靚嘅」等。學生會成員昨日表示，伍山河前日再次出席神學院活動時已就言論道歉。[2]

又, 基督教學校往往只聘請基督教的人,歧視有不同信仰及無神論者,是以經濟壟斷為手段(因為名校是世襲制,而名校所以成為名校,又是殖民地的基督教主子遺下來 的),壓迫無神論者。經濟不景時,往往突然多了不少基督徒,你猜多少是因為信仰,有多少是因為飯碗?如果基督教是有公義心的話,為什麼在宗教科以外都一律 任用基督徒,令有同樣教學能力的教師失業,更有甚者,是用人唯親,貪污腐敗呢?基督教學校中,有沒有公義的存在呢? [3]

基督徒只佔人口不到十分一,但立法會中佔超過一半,另外,民建聯和基督教恩福堂過從甚密,更有基督教網民指出,恩福堂穌牧師為梁美芬曲線站台, 假言論自由之名,以宗教干預政治。因為香港沒有相關法例,因此基督教教會可明目張膽,以宗教干預政治,達到把自己的道德議題轉化成政治議題,成了社會的特 權階級,一方面可以選委會選特首,一方面則在教堂/學校動員群衆,向世俗社會的公民價值進攻 [3]

台灣同志遊行聯盟總召楚楚表示，基督教團體以「愛」之名，行「歧視」之實，令人覺得非常諷刺。他們不會去插花遊行。[1]

台灣大學社會工作學系暨研究所助理教授王雲東認為，多元的社會中，不同的團體有不同的信仰和價值觀，對存有某種程度不同差異的團體，應以包容和尊重的立場出發，才能避免激化衝突。[1]

________________________________________________________________________

[1] 2009年10月24日 蘋果日報 http://tw.nextmedia.com/applenews/article/art_id/32040221/IssueID/20091024; 2009年12月6日(明報專訊】http://hk.news.yahoo.com/article/091205/4/fi6a.html

[3] http://bbs.comefromchina.com/forum183/thread726336.html

Teenage birth rates are higher in states with greater levels of religious belief, possibly due to strong disapproval of contraception, a study suggests. [1]

In the study, researchers compared U.S. CDC data on teen birth rates with data from the Pew Forum's U.S. Religious Landscapes Survey. A state's level of religious belief was determined by averaging the percentage of respondents who agreed with the eight most conservative opinions in the survey, such as "Scripture should be taken literally, word for word." [1]

Mississippi topped the list for conservative religious beliefs and teen birth rates. More abortions among teens in less religious states. But even after accounting for the abortions, the study team still found a state's level of religiosity could predict their teen birth rate. [3]

Most of those "religious" states are also so-called red states. Generalizations are always dangerous, but lack of education, low or no income, and increased religiosity tend to intertwine and build on each other. One other, possibly more interesting development released in this  new study is that the children of teen mothers are more likely to have mental health issues. [2]

The relationship could be also due to the fact that communities with such religious beliefs (a literal interpretation of the Bible, for instance) may frown upon contraception, researchers say. If that same culture isn't successfully discouraging teen sex, the pregnancy and birth rates rise. Earlier marriage among religious individuals could also partly explain the finding. [3]

Reference[1] Teen Birth Rates Higher in States Where Religion Is Widespread U.S. News Sept. 16 2009[2] Too Much Religion Leads to High Teen Pregnancy Rates Bonnie Erbe, Thomas Jefferson Street blogU.S. News September 18, 2009[3] Link may be due to communities frowning on contraception, researchers say MSNBC.COM Sept . 16, 2009

Scientists at the Relativistic Heavy Ion Collider (RHIC) report the first hints of profound symmetry transformations in the hot soup of quarks, antiquarks, and gluons produced in RHIC’s most energetic collisions. Somehow, the“bubbles” formed within this hot soup may internally disobey the so-called “mirror symmetry” that normally characterizes the interactions of quarks and gluons.

RHIC’s collisions of heavy nuclei at nearly light speed are designed to re-create, on a tiny scale, the conditions of the early universe. RHIC may have a unique opportunity to test in the laboratory some crucial features of symmetry-altering bubbles speculated to have played important roles in the evolution of the infant universe.

Early data from RHIC’s STAR detector hint at a violation in what is known as mirror symmetry, or parity. This rule of symmetry suggests that events should occur in exactly the same way whether seen directly or in a mirror, with no directional dependence. But STAR has observed an asymmetric charge separation in particles emerging from all but the most head-on collisions at RHIC: The observations suggest that positively charged quarks may prefer to emerge parallel to the magnetic field in a given collision event, while negatively charged quarks prefer to emerge in the opposite direction. Because this preference would appear reversed if the situation were reflected through a mirror, it appears to violate mirror symmetry.

INFORMATION EXTRACTION FROM:

http://www.newsweek.com//frameset.aspx/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.bnl.gov%2Fbnlweb%2Fpubaf%2Fpr%2FPR_display.asp%3FprID%3D1073

Under a high magnification of 13671x, this scanning electron micrograph (SEM) depicted a single Gram-negative Escherichia coli bacterium of the strain O157:H7.

The organism can be found on a small number of cattle farms and can live in the intestines of healthy cattle. Meat can become contaminated during slaughter, and organisms can be thoroughly mixed into beef when it is ground. Bacteria present on the cow's udders or on equipment may get into raw milk.

Eating meat, especially ground beef, that has not been cooked sufficiently to kill E. coli O157:H7 can cause infection. Contaminated meat looks and smells normal. Although the number of organisms required to cause disease is not known, it is suspected to be very small.

Bacteria in diarrheal stools of infected persons can be passed from one person to another if hygiene or handwashing habits are inadequate. This is particularly likely among toddlers who are not toilet trained. Family members and playmates of these children are at high risk of becoming infected.

Content Credit CDC/ National Escherichia, Shigella, Vibrio Reference Unit at CDC Photo Credit Janice Carr CDC

在去年農曆新年期間, 某宗教的信徒.
在揮春上, 放上外教信仰, 廣泛流傳,
神棍又公開地推擴宣傳迷信
令農曆新年大為失色

煩請神棍們....
在農曆新年期間停止公開歪曲中華史實, 文化和信仰

更請某宗教信徒們...
在農曆新年期間停止公開汚染中華史實, 文化和信仰

多謝合作!

[This is a discussion between two people on an article]

Religion and other forms of magical thinking continue to thrive — despite the lack of evidence and advance of science — because people are naturally biased to accept a role for the irrational, said Bruce Hood, Professor of Experimental Psychology at the University of Bristol.[2]

This evolved credulity suggests that it would be impossible to root out belief in ideas such as creationism and paranormal phenomena, even though they have been countered by evidence and are held as a matter of faith alone.[2]

It [2] doesn't serve as evidence or proof of any kind.  It's just a huge coloring-in of what people think fits if they want to hold fast to naturalism being fake.  It also makes a few appeals to the authority without telling why he his supposed conclusions or supposed evidence are so authoritative.  It's really a pathetic display of pomp over theists and mystics, disguised as scientific news.

Creation is just a hypothesis; nobody can prove it or demonstrate that creation didn't happen. Evolution is a process; it happens daily and it has been happening for a long period of time. If creation is real, the stories in bible are real, then, the ancient living things should be identical to the modern living organisms. Of course, there are much more evidence to support evolution.

Evolution is not an evidence to support "god doesn't exist". It can be an machinery for the creator to create the world. Again, it is just a hypothesis. That is why I am an agnostics.

I won't debate creation and evolution, as they are two different things - one is a hypothesis while the other one is a process.

Well if that is all that Evolution is, then you would be right.  Then again, we could really go bare-bones, saying that evolution is just another word for progress or for any change over time.

I was referring to the Evolution that Darwin made popular.  Creationists have a term, baramin, which is also said "created kind".  "A species is a man-made term used in the modern classification system. And frankly, the word species is difficult to define, whether one is a creationist or not!"  Also, as baraminology is being refined, a "Baramin is commonly believed to be at the level of family and possibly order for some plants/animals (according to the common classification scheme of kingdom, phylum, class, order, family, genus, species). On rare occasions a kind may be equivalent to the genus or species levels."  One baramin does not give birth to another kind, no matter how subtly it is part of the other kind.

It's not the case that (Biblically) Literal Creationism demands that animals be exactly the same as their ancestors of 4004 B.C.  As someone who accepts that the Global Flood really happened, i believe in a more active evolution of animals than a Darwin-like Evolutionist does.  2348 B.C. (or was it 2347, oops) is last minute for Darwin-like Evolution.  But, no morphological advancement would make a new baramin (a.k.a. created kind), neither has such been observed.

You are right: "Evolution is not an evidence to support "god doesn't exist"."Even if you stated, "Evolution does not force the idea that god doesn't exist."  Besides that D.Evolution is not evidence, you would still be right.  But, for your soul's sake, theism and even monotheism are not enough.  E.g. James 2:19 in the Bible, "You believe that there is one God. You do well. Even the demons believe—and tremble!"  Bible-ism is better than monotheism.  E.g. Jesus said in Mark 8:38 and similarly in Luke 9:26, "For whoever is ashamed of Me and My words in this adulterous and sinful
generation, of him the Son of Man also will be ashamed when He comes in the glory of His Father with the holy angels."  All i'm really trying to say in this paragraph is that monotheism is just a starting point in accepting the truthfulness of the Bible, and thus Darwin-like Evolution is anti-Bible and not anti-universe-creator if you stick to a modern, generic One that used or allowed Darwinism.

There are many evidence for evolution; evolution talks about the process of the change of the organisms but not how the life begins. There is no conflict between creation and evolution. Let's get back to the "time frame of evolution". According to bible, world was created only a few thousand years ago! I won't expect much difference between today organisms and those existed a few thousand years ago. But we know that there were living things long before "those few days" that Bible God created the world.

Again, there is no evidence for "no creator" and there is also no evidence for "the existence of creator". Intelligent design as well as atheism are absolutely fine to me, and I am an agnostic.

One more thing -- Bible God is not necessary The Creator.
Here are some key hypotheses:

1. There is a Creator.
2. Creator created the world.
3. Bible God exists.
4. Bible God is the creator.
5. Bible God is love.
6. Global flood existed. Bible God almost erased all the living things on earth just simply because a few people worshiped other gods.

Look, hypothesis 5 contradicts hypothesis 6. Besides, Bible's description about nature is quite different from what we have observed. In addition, there are also lots of questions in Bible. For example, right before Jesus died, Jesus said something like ... "God, why did you give me up?" This really indicated Jesus was not closely related to God. Besides, Jesus never said, he was the God. And, I don't find anything about trinity in the bible. Please, don't take it wrong. I am not saying there is no Creator, no God. I just don't know. On the other hand, there are too many issues and hypotheses related to Bible/Creation, and that is why I am an agnostic.

[We can't really debate a topic based on personal feelings or opinion, simply because there is no conclusion. ]

Extracted from:

http://scibean.xanga.com/720044118/why-are-creationists-always-the-winners/?page=1&jump=1508337291#1508337291

In the year of 2008, 76% of American are Christian. [1]

The researchers did note that those who went to religious services, prayed, meditated, or were highly spiritual were more likely to be obese, and less likely to smoke. The obesity finding was not surprising, given that congregations and families often "fellowship" over meals. Given that many religions discourage smoking tobacco, the smoking finding was not difficult to explain.

Koenig also noted that half of the people studied were either African American or Hispanic, groups that, on average, have poorer access to health care than whites and Asian Americans.African Americans, on average, are also some of the most religious people in the world.

Ivan Oransky Being religious may not make you healthier after all Reuters Mon Feb 8, 5:16 pm ET
http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20100208/lf_nm_life/us_religion_health

[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_the_United_States