archaeologist #fundie

archaeologist #fundie phpbb88.com

one of the things that makes the atheist argument against faith healing moot is their support for abortion. when a christian does faith healing the athiest is up in arms raising holy hell ready to prosecute the believer and send them to prison in case the child dies BUT when it comes to abortion, very few, if any, athiest rallies against the death of the unborn, do not advocate prosecuting the mother or doctors involved, do not seek imprisonment for those involved in the procedure and so on.

their hypocrisy ruins their opposition to faith healing as they are only against the death of a child if the action is not done their way and approved by them. such people need to remove themselves from any discussion on faith healing for they cannot be honest nor impartial,let alone truthful.

60 comments

old comment by Sisyphus

Actually, and I think I can safely say I speak for many atheists when I say this, we get pissed off when people try faith healing on their kids for several reasons.

1) If the illness/injury can be easily and effectively treated by modern medicine then faith healing is murder. Not only murder, but cold blooded, torturous murder. Do you have any idea how long it takes a diabetic to go into DKA and die from it? It can take weeks.

2) If the illness/injury can NOT be easily and effectively treated by modern medicine then faith healing is torture. What kind of cold hearted monster would allow their child to die screaming in agony when a simple shot of medicine could make him/her comfortable?

3) A zygote, embryo or even a fetus is not the same as a fully developed, sentient child.

4) Faith healing has been shown time and time again NOT TO WORK!

old comment by Swede

If a Christian does faith healing on an adult, I couldn't care less. Adults have the right to do stupid things. If someone (Christian, Muslim, pagan or atheist) stops a child from getting proper medical attention, then it's child-abuse and the child ought to get his/her own legal guardian.

The Bible doesn't care about children younger than 40 days. Which is because so many children died shortly after birth at the time it was written. No point in getting attached to the child before you knew it would probably survive. A 9 week old embryo has about 25 percent chance of getting to birth. It has no brain, no nervous system, it's not sentient and can't feel pain. It's less aware than a tape-worm. Do you worry about tape-worms?

A post-birth child has a brain, a nervous system, is sentient and aware, can feel pain.

Where do you stand on war and the death penalty? Are you as adamantly against killing there too?

old comment by Fundies Make Me Sick

"when it comes to abortion, very few, if any, athiest rallies against the death of the unborn, do not advocate prosecuting the mother or doctors involved, do not seek imprisonment for those involved in the procedure and so on."

Maybe that's because abortion is LEGAL, you moronic fuckstick.

Atheists attack faith healing because it relies on the supernatural. Atheists (generally) don't believe in the supernatural and therefore believe that faith healing isn't real. So if someone dies because a pastor/parent/friend/whoever decides to pray over them (or have someone else do it) when they're sick instead of doing the sensible thing and taking them to the hospital (and this has happened in case you don't know), then not only atheists, but any compassionate human being, has every right to attack the so called faith healer.

"...such people need to remove themselves from any discussion on faith healing for they cannot be honest nor impartial,let alone truthful."

You need to remove yourself from any discussion that requires logic and knowledge of the real world because you have neither. Please don't reproduce.

old comment by Anon-e-moose

"one of the things that makes the atheist argument against faith healing moot is their support for abortion."

image

"when a christian does faith healing the athiest is up in arms raising holy hell"

If anything, said 'Christian faith healers' should be up in arms raising holy hell about how James Randi & his JREF aren't processing their claims - specifically the careful, stringent & peer-reviewd scientific tests - conducted upon said 'gifted' people, so they can claim Randi's $1 million prize. Indeed, banging the doors of the JREF off their hinges in their impatience to have their 'gifts' recognised by the scientific establishment, tested, replicated & duplicated by non-Christians for the betterment of humanity as a whole.

Yet, the JREF hasn't so much as been approached by any famous Christian 'faith healer' to date. Not a one.

Their hypocrisy ruins their opposition to the scientific investigation of healing as they are against the annihilation of their 'faith', if the investigation is not done their way and approved by them. Such people need to remove themselves from any logical discussion on faith healing, for they cannot be honest, let alone 'truthful', to the JREF. Because they'd be exposed as the fakes, frauds & charlatans they really are.

Ergo, 'faith healing' - like homeopathy (yes, John. A Davidson, I'm looking at you) - is nothing more than complete bollocks that has no right to exist. And indeed, as they have no justifiable basis in scientific fact, the practice(s) of such should be legislated out of existence. QED.

Here endeth the lesson.

old comment by TheJebusFire

At the age of five, Nancy Brewster of El Paso, Texas, developed lumps on her neck and threw up repeatedly. She was too sick to go to school after first grade. A Christian Science practitioner prayed for Nancy. She urged the girl and her mother to deny the symptoms of the illness as an illusion. Nancy was constantly told that she was God’s perfect child and nothing could be wrong with her.

Nancy was made to exercise in 100 degreeplus heat and forced to eat even though she was vomiting. Both her mother and the practitioner believed that Nancy was just being stubborn. Her mother sometimes even beat Nancy and blamed her for not getting healed. Nancy got no pain relief, even an aspirin. She was not held or comforted because that would be giving reality to the disease.

Nancy died September 29, 1963, at age 7. Her death certificate lists “probable malignant lymphoma” as the cause.

More:
http://www.childrenshealthcare.org/

Children who die of failed faith healings usually die horrible painful deaths. Most abortions are done before the fetus can feel pain.

old comment by

@ #1258580 Brendan Rizzo

They really are that genuinely deluded. It's the same sort of lie that propagated cures like 'vegetable tonics' earlier in the last century (Chiefly alcohol with carrot water in minute quantities; The 'cure' was that it got you drunk enough to no longer care). If it worked, you would think that sooner or later, a reputable university would start re-tooling their medical doctoral courses away from multi-million dollar training programs into faith healer training of some sort.

The evidence against it far outweighs any anecdotal claims that it actually does anything more than serve as a placebo. It has never been properly validated, the results are not replicated outside of vague claims, and there's literally a one million dollar prize just waiting, for anyone to come along and claim it by demonstrating that this actually works.

old comment by Anon

>>Brendan Rizzo

You know what I don't understand? ... where the hell do these guys get their so-called "success stories" from? Are they just knowingly lying? Even I, as cynical as I am, having trouble believing that EVERY single person who has claimed an exorcism or faith healing is lying on purpose. Are they just that deluded or something? <<

Some are plants and willful deception, but others are coincidences that people chose to interpret in favor of their beliefs (confirmation bias), stories that have been repeated and distorted so many times that any semblance of the original events has been lost, or cases where the patient's quality-of-life could be significantly improved by their state of mind. The last is the placebo effect, which disappears in a double-blind setting and can never extend to things like acute infections, bones that need resetting, and amputations.

So says Wikipedia.

archaeologist #fundie phpbb88.com

60 comments

Confused?