Dad Confronts Abortion Protesters At Clinic

[Jon]

I know where we came from, we were all created by G0d, and one day, at the end of our lives we will return back to him. Now whether or not we stayed true or turned away depends where we will spend our eternity. You really must stop being so judgemental, only G0d can point the finger. If he willed it, you or I could die in the next second. Also, jackass, you just asked
"Anyway, Jon, what do you say to the Muslim? The Orthodox Jew? The Hindu? Are they wrong, and you are right? Is their g0d false, and yours real?

All of humanity could convert to Islam tomorrow. Would that mean you are wrong, Jon?

Would that make Allah real? And your g0d is false?"

I answered "There are as many paths to G0d as there are religions."
This just goes to show how tempramental you are yet again towards me and Shade because oh no! We think differently than you!

[Archael]

I know where we came from, we were all created by G0d, and one day, at the end of our lives we will return back to him.

And how do you know this?

You read it somewhere? Somebody told you? It says it in some holy book?

That's really honest, Jon. Way to be honest with yourself.

Thinking you have the answers to life itself is arrogant, ignorant, and delusional, Jon.

[Shade]

Anyway, Jon, what do you say to the Muslim? The Orthodox Jew? The Hindu? Are they wrong, and you are right? Is their g0d false, and yours real?

All of humanity could convert to Islam tomorrow. Would that mean you are wrong, Jon?

Would that make Allah real? And your g0d is false?

You asked it you got it.
No. For exalty the same reason as you told me.
You see it works both ways

Unlike you seem to think that we don't ADMIT too that our religion/god may not be true, since there isn't proof of were we came from, but we believe that we were made by god(s). You don't. And this point forward I don't give a jack shit, since this is leading nowhere(anymore).

[Archael]

You asked it you got it.
No. For exalty the same reason as you told me.
You see it works both ways

What? I think you screwed up your quotes there Shade.

My answer to my own Allah question is No - because if every human starts believing in ONE g0d, that doesn't mean that g0d is real.

Inversely, if we find evidence that Zeus exists, then I will start believing in Zeus, and I will be able to prove it, by showing you that evidence. Then my belief in Zeus will be grounded in EVIDENCE. Unlike your current beliefs in whatever g0d it is you picked, which you hold WITHOUT any evidence, that is why you can't prove anything.

Evidence proves things are real. Belief does not. Your parents teaching you that Velius is real isn't evidence or proof of his existence. But actually having Velius in front of you, ripping your arm out, is evidence. It's evidence you can use to prove to other people that he's real.

[Wiz]

Here Jon, these are the type of people who annoy me, Arch, Phil, etc... (YT Channel)

spoiler: shockofgod:vr3ljm6q

http://www.youtube.com/user/shockofgod?blend=1&ob=4

People that impose their ideologies and shun others because they (others) respectfully disagree with them are the people that need to stop talking.

It's really hard to do that though cuz it is YT (Free Speech) where users can just ban people in the blink of a second (disable making video responses, making comments of vids and channel).

That SOB YT'er who subscribed to me (for $$) and Arch's previous religion threads and personal experiences at my private school (to name a few) are what "converted" me to atheism. Those things I listed and research have common sense employed into them once you look into detail on the subject. It's really not that hard to see his stance on the matter if you research long and hard for a few weeks on the internet about religion/atheism like I did.

Like Arch Said, the "conversion" (shouldn't even be called that) to atheism doesn't happen overnight or in the span of a day. Just sit back for a sec Jon and take a few weeks to get affiliated with the world of science and what it truly holds in meaning.

[Shade]

You asked it you got it.
No. For exalty the same reason as you told me.
You see it works both ways , if you were wondering.

[Archael]

Only true answer is no, since St. Ajora still may not be real at all.
I agreed you at something lawl, btw Jon got tempbanned for thanking St. Ajora for Zodiacs job, instead of thanking him

[Kill_Bones]

No! How dare you! Christianity is crap! Athiesm all the way!!!!!!! Christianity is horrible! Bad! Wrong! Now I want to kill a puppy just for you guys mentioning Christianity! Die!

Aren't MadLibs fun? This is a redo of Jon's post in Homeopathy thread.

[Shade]

I didn't understand your post... your posts are hard to read  

I can unterstand like every thing that you guys say 100%

Btw it doesn't help you guys unterstand my writing that it comes from spriting forum were they really did not give about writing format(mostly meaning things like the, a, an are usually missing).

[Archael]

This discussion was really going dandy until Jon said he knows where everything started.

I seriously don't know how to respond to somebody who thinks they know things like that for a fact.

It makes sense now, why he's not open to questioning his beliefs. He isn't open to changing his mind because he thinks he KNOWS the answers to life and death.

[Kill_Bones]

Lol The History of This Thread: A month ago Arch posts the topic. We all agree that "The Bitches must DIE". I make a comment about alot of people here being atheist. GS shows up and we have an engaging debate on religion. Jon shows up aND MaGICXAL SKAI WISSARD WILLE SMAIGHT YOO!!!

[Shade]

This discussion was really going dandy until Jon said he knows where everything started.

I seriously don't know how to respond to somebody who thinks they know things like that for a fact.

It makes sense now, why he's not open to questioning his beliefs. He isn't open to changing his mind because he thinks he KNOWS the answers to life and death, that has to be comforting. Delusional, but comforting.

I agreed I liked this talk we had.
Also he is Tempbanned until Till November 19 7:00PM GMT-5:00.
4 fucking days. Damm

[philsov]

@Lourdes healing river:

http://www.skepdic.com/lourdes.html

Obvious site bias and some of the base links now being 404's aside, and assuming the stats to be true... I'm really not impressed.  

Over the past 150 years, some 200 million people have made the pilgrimage.* For those who care, that's a success rate of .0000335% or 1 out of every 3 million. Furthermore, since 1947 anyone claiming a miraculous cure has to go before a medical board. "From 1947 to 1990, only 1,000 cures were claimed and only 56 were recognized in that time, averaging 1.3 cures a year, against 57 a year before 1914."* Since 1978, there have been only four recognized cures.

In fact, I've been to Lourdes myself.  The mineral water tastes like ass and I still have dandruff.  

@Miracles themselves:

They're called supernatural for that very reason.  And for all we really know they are signs from a creator.  However, as knowledge technology advances and we are experiencing less and less miracles.  If the only deity to worship is a mere God of Gaps, then its not worth of veneration.  My personal favorite miracles are the ones that occur to the various saints.  Saint Denis, for example, after being decapitated, picked up his own head, walked for six miles, and preached a sermon along the entire distance.  That is a badass.  Assuming it to be true, then I have no explanation.  Everything we know of the human body suggests that without lungs a head cannot speak and without a head a body cannot function.  But.

But, for the sake of argument, let us assume it to be true -- that all the miracles as documented in the bible, upon the saints of the roman catholic church, and various less recorded and more word of mouth miracles to be thusly in the true definition of the word.  So what?  Do these miracles give weight to the accuracy and validity of the Bible?  Are these miracles proof of an omnipotent, omniscient, and good deity?  Are these miracles proof that the supernatural being that is manifesting itself the exact same as the supernatural being as spoken of in the holy literature?  Does this awesome deity have a discernable will?    Proof for a supernatural being and proof of a supernatural being with an array of qualities we attribute to it are completely separate ideas.  Anyone making this leap is not thinking in the process of facts and evidence to conclusion, but rather conclusion first and then finding facts to support it.  

In fact, here's the thought process for a random miracle to be evidence of the Judeo-Christian god.  I know I'm repeating myself, but here's the argument:

- Something supernatural occurs like self-resurrection, leviation, walking/talking without a head or lungs, etc
- Therefore, something supernatural exists
- Because something supernatural exists, it must be all powerful, all knowing, and benevolent with a discernible will.  

That is as logicially sound as:

- I see something black, with wings, flying, a beak, some feather, laying eggs, warm blooded, with a spine, etcetccetc
- Therefore, birds exist
- Because this bird exists, it must like long flies along the beach, camping out along that swanky lookout cliff, and has an affinity for playing the harp

It makes no sense whatsoever.  Miracles give just as much credence to Odin/Zeus/whatever the hell naturalish deities Druids like(d) as they do the Judeo Christian Deity.  But certainly the Judeo Christian one exists while the others do not, correct?

Edit:  and now you went and got banned.  Sigh.

[Wiz]

@ Phil: You're like the "G" version of TAA but also funny.

I like that .

I hereby dub you "The Scientist".

Gonna go shove food into my face now XD

Toodles.

[Shade]

@Lourdes healing river:

http://www.skepdic.com/lourdes.html

Obvious site bias and some of the base links now being 404's aside, and assuming the stats to be true... I'm really not impressed.  

Over the past 150 years, some 200 million people have made the pilgrimage.* For those who care, that's a success rate of .0000335% or 1 out of every 3 million. Furthermore, since 1947 anyone claiming a miraculous cure has to go before a medical board. "From 1947 to 1990, only 1,000 cures were claimed and only 56 were recognized in that time, averaging 1.3 cures a year, against 57 a year before 1914."* Since 1978, there have been only four recognized cures.

In fact, I've been to Lourdes myself.  The mineral water tastes like ass and I still have dandruff.  

@Miracles themselves:

They're called supernatural for that very reason.  And for all we really know they are signs from a creator.  However, as knowledge technology advances and we are experiencing less and less miracles.  If the only deity to worship is a mere St. Ajora of Gaps, then its not worth of veneration.  My personal favorite miracles are the ones that occur to the various saints.  Saint Denis, for example, after being decapitated, picked up his own head, walked for six miles, and preached a sermon along the entire distance.  That is a badass.  Assuming it to be true, then I have no explanation.  Everything we know of the human body suggests that without lungs a head cannot speak and without a head a body cannot function.  But.

But, for the sake of argument, let us assume it to be true -- that all the miracles as documented in the bible, upon the saints of the roman catholic church, and various less recorded and more word of mouth miracles to be thusly in the true definition of the word.  So what?  Do these miracles give weight to the accuracy and validity of the Bible?  Are these miracles proof of an omnipotent, omniscient, and good deity?  Are these miracles proof that the supernatural being that is manifesting itself the exact same as the supernatural being as spoken of in the holy literature?  Does this awesome deity have a discernable will?    Proof for a supernatural being and proof of a supernatural being with an array of qualities we attribute to it are completely separate ideas.  Anyone making this leap is not thinking in the process of facts and evidence to conclusion, but rather conclusion first and then finding facts to support it.  

In fact, here's the thought process for a random miracle to be evidence of the Judeo-Christian St. Ajora.  I know I'm repeating myself, but here's the argument:

- Something supernatural occurs like self-resurrection, leviation, walking/talking without a head or lungs, etc
- Therefore, something supernatural exists
- Because something supernatural exists, it must be all powerful, all knowing, and benevolent with a discernible will.  

That is as logicially sound as:

- I see something black, with wings, flying, a beak, some feather, laying eggs, warm blooded, with a spine, etcetccetc
- Therefore, birds exist
- Because this bird exists, it must like long flies along the beach, camping out along that swanky lookout cliff, and has an affinity for playing the harp

It makes no sense whatsoever.  Miracles give just as much credence to Odin/Zeus/whatever the hell naturalish deities Druids like(d) as they do the Judeo Christian Deity.  But certainly the Judeo Christian one exists while the others do not, correct?

Edit:  and now you went and got banned.  Sigh.

LOL that's funny, this was meant for Jon I see.

I agree, miracles don't still prove gods existence, they may prove that's some suprenatural, but what it cause exalty would still be unknown.

[Jaakl]

I guess that this is an epistemologic discussion. Taking Popper philosophy, if god exists it would be a falsifiable reality. It can be put to a test and if in reality the theory works, then is real. Do tou see it? No is not there, the theory is not falsifiable, because the christianism and any other religion or dogmatic ideology tries to transform the reality to adapt it to the theory. In Popper words the theory has to adapt itself to the reality ando you have to put it to the falsification test if you want to turn it into a science.

Therefore, theology is just a way of science that studies the theos of the people. In many ways is just an expression of the collective thought. And for some people, religion is a moral and emotional support.

Unfortunately, religious people are often blinded by the religion itself, is just too sad.

This discussion has to be turned into a legal discussion about abortion, not a pro religion or pro atheism one. Is on the constitutional side and jurisdictional one that we have to see the abortion. Has the people the right to and the freedom to abort? has the woman the right to choose about his body?

the answer is yes. They have the right to choose. I came from a country where all the abortion forms are proibihited, is just a situation that is pretty harmful for the people of my country, illegal abortion is a real problem.

I guess we could talk about it in the other side of the discussion

[Odal]

Unfortunately, religious people are often blinded by the religion itself, is just too sad.

Scientific people are also often blinded by science itself.  The Green movement is a good contemporary example of this imo.  But it's amazing how self-righteous people can be even when they side with science, when most of these people have never tested any of the science they're fed.

[Archael]

Science changes based on what evidence proves is real. If tomorrow evidence surfaced that there's aliens out there, science will accept it. If tomorrow evidence surfaces which proves that Odin made us all, science will accept it.

I just can't understand how you can be blinded that way. It is a simple approach to accepting things as evidence allows. and rejecting them in the same way

Unless you're simply not doing things scientifically and not going by evidence, that is. In which case, yes, I'm sure there's people who have started to believe in scientific principles without evidence behind them.

But don't try to insinuate that science works on faith like religion does.

[Jaakl]

Anyway, the science works as the human works. Putting a name to the things that we can feel. Is just that. In Nietzsche words, they are metaphores.

And of course god doesn't exist either, is just a emotional support as I said before. But science things are just a convention about the things that we can feel or we can see.

The paradigma an change anytime and we need to have an open mind for the changes of the knowledgment.

Dogmas are useless.

[Wiz]

Wow, The Young Turks videos are being posted here? Oy, I may have to stop visiting here lol. TYT are just a group of confused, emotional, and extreme leftists.

TYT's more to the left politically than right I agree with that, but they're not extremists. They've attacked Senator Chris Dodd of Connecticut, a Democrat who's the Chairman of the Banking Committee here in the USA for bailing out and deregulating the Big Banks on Wall Street (Bank of America, Goldman Sachs, Chase) who stole OUR (the taxpayers) dollars by fucking around with toxic assets in which they created by handing out loans to people with bad credit scores.

Advocating the choice to having an abortion is conservative, not liberal. Liberals are the people in the streets who probably want to outlaw the act of abortion. They're the ones who say "We know what's right for everyone, so let's make it law..."

As for your stance on Abortion, I agree on, but your take on the guy's actions in the video and your defs of liberal and conservative are flipped-flopped on their rear ends.

Generally Speaking

Conservative = Someone who's prone to stick to roots of ideology or sentiment or decision for interpretation.
Liberal = Someone who's open to another person's ideology or sentiment or decision for interpretation.

Everyone who's in favor of abortion is open-minded (Liberal) to someone's decision on the matter (Pro-Choice), not closed-minded (Pro-Life) because for the most part the bible said so (Conservative). The argument about whether the fetus is considered a human that has rights is debatable, but that's not what I'll be addressing.

I have never understood the idea of "I don't like what they're doing, so let me go do the same thing to prove them wrong." And that's exactly what this guy did. He didn't like them protesting, so he objected to it. Really? You're going to get mad that someone is hurting your feelings, so you're going to go out of your way to hurt theirs? Hmm, way to take the moral high ground, buddy!  Dirt slinging

The protesters that the guy and his wife had to face made their trip a living shit and you can't defend that they were there to make those "could've-been-parents" feel bad; They weren't at the clinic to spouse their take on the matter at all.

The fact that there was a good chance the baby was going to die according to that video and the analysis of the clip suggests that you didn't even watch it all the way. And yeah, the guy was completely justified in what he was doing and completely civil when calling them out for what they did. Dude was agitated by those people and challenged their actions. Wouldn't you?

And "Dirt Slinging"... really?

"Baby-Killers... you will burn in hell!". The two ladies were completely fine with saying trash like this, BUT NO.... possible father confronts them on public property on messages like that and they threaten to call the police for harassment.

^ Double Standard at it's best.