The English baby that the British health plan want to kill should tell everyone a lot

Fixation? How about I just happened to see your blank statement that "late term abortions of viable fetuses are illegal in the U.S." and I called you on it? Apparently you do not care what you say so long as it advances your side's agenda.

https://www.liveaction.org/news/the...ecting-the-preborn-from-abortion-at-any-time/

 

Why did no one outside of Fatima notice the sun changing? I knew you were going to bring up bullshit like Fatima and call it "empirical evidence". Apparently you don't know what empirical evidence is.

Who was the master watchmaker who wired our eyes upside down? Who designed the appendix, an organ which serves no modern purpose except to kill us? Which intelligent designer gave us wisdom teeth, which show every indication of being leftovers from a pervious period of evolution?

 

Please stop attempting to exploit this tragic case to promote your fanatical agenda.

 

You know you are really annoying me with your garbage accusations.

I am not talking about "This Case" and never was. I am talking about your inane bogus statement that late term abortions are illegal in the USA. So please stop being an a$$ about it.

 

why do you find it necessary to lie, in order to try and make an argument?

 

So in other words, you have no empirical evidence.

 

Please address the topic. If you need to familiarize yourself with restrictions on abortion in the US, you should do so.

 

Apparently, when the truth doesn't serve, some resort to hysterical fallacies.

 

Oh, but they did. From 25 miles away. But you will never accept the testimony of an eye witness if it does not align with your wants.
Testimonies found on pages 61 and 62 of this web site.
http://crc-internet.org/our-doctrin...th-fatima/10-the-dance-of-the-sun-october-13/

Then your next follow up, I already know, will be: Why did they only see the sun freak out in Portugal, why not in other nations around the globe? And the answer it simple: Because God can do as He pleases. He created the cosmos and laws of science, He is not subject to them.

No, you are just a man in denial, that’s all. Empirical evidence, also known as sensory experience, is the knowledge received by means of the senses, particularly by observation and experimentation.

Empirical Evidence: On July 13, 1917 three Portuguese shepherd children claim the Virgin Mary is talking to them. They claim she told them to tell the crowd present that on October 13 she will perform a sign so that all present will see it and know that it is from heaven and her words are from God. Are you with me so far? Or do you deny that even took place? Because that prediction was so well known by the whole countryside and beyond that… Empirical Evidence >> …in August these three children were kidnapped under the orders of the mayor of Ourem and kept imprisoned for 2 days. They were separately interrogated and threatened with death if they did not recant their stories or their claims. None of them did. The rioting of townspeople forced the authority to release them. Do you deny this because you do not want to believe it happened? Sorry, friend, that is empirical evidence which suggests this whole Fatima saga has a real impact behind it for the nation of Portugal.

Empirical Evidence: The day of October 13, 1917 was extremely rainy around Fatima and beyond. Anywhere from 40,000 to 90,000 people trudged on foot through the rain and mud to be at the site where the children predicted a great miracle would occur on that very day. According to thousands of eye witnesses captured by journalists and on film the sun “danced.” It could be seen by the naked eye without harm. It turned over on itself and spinning shot off multi colored rays that covered the entire landscape. After about 12 minutes of this it turned blood red and charged the earth. Then it receded and all of the soaked ground and clothes of the people were bone dry. Atheists journalists and agnostic scientists present testified to these facts as well. These are all facts. This is empirical evidence which you say does not exist.

You want more empirical evidence? I will give you observable facts and scientific experimentations on the Shroud of Turin. Then you impress me how you can tell those scientists they do not know what they are talking about.

Your questions are so sad. A real act of desperation, imo. Not unlike, no matter how many miraculous healings have occurred where the doctors are totally lost for explanations, you or they come back with “yeah so, how come God cannot heal an amputee?” Are you following? You are in denial of amazing evidence so you demand more and more. So here above you decide “well if there really is a God he sure screwed up designing the human body.” Oh, get serious. Here you believe and accept a brain could (over time) assemble itself from a lump of coal without any cogent thought or will and nary a mistake (like Dawkins claims) and that is easier to swallow? There is your definition of insanity.

 

Is there nothing you people will not play politics with?

This has nothing to do with a British health plan, it has everything to do with a terribly ill child that the doctors in Great Ormond Street Hospital (one of the best hospitals in the world) have decided is beyond medical help. An american doctor thinks he may be able to help and has been given access to the child.

Prof Michio Hirano was studying the scan and other medical records before deciding whether he felt the boy could benefit from treatment for the rare mitochondrial DNA depletion syndrome.

He spent about four and a half hours inside the hospital on Monday.

The hospital said there was an honorary contract in place, meaning that for the duration of the visit Dr Hirano had the same rights as one of the hospital's own clinicians.

He was also given full access to Charlie's medical records, and hospital and clinical facilities, including diagnostic images.

Dr Hirano was also given an opportunity to examine Charlie, according to the hospital.

Meetings between the American neurosurgeon and other medical experts are due to continue on Tuesday.

Doctors from GOSH will meet with Prof Hirano to discuss the boy’s plight. The hospital believes Charlie has suffered irreversible brain damage and that life support should be switched off allowing him to "die with dignity".

Charlie’s parents Chris Gard and Connie Yates say he should be given a chance of treatment. A source close to the parents said: “They remain optimistic after the scan.”


An EEG brain scan was conducted on Sunday, the first since March. Prof Hirano has said that the scan in March did not evidence of irreversible brain damage.

The latest scan will be key to deciding Charlie’s fate. A High Court judge has already decided Charlie the ventilator keeping him alive be removed but could change his mind.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/07/17/charlie-gards-parents-optimistic-new-brain-scan/

This decision will be taken by a judge acting on the best medical advice from both sides of the Atlantic, I cannot think of another way this decision could be made, the parents are not qualified to decide what is best and are clearly distraught. The doctors were in agreement until the US doctor offered his help, now they are discussing the case.

Some things are above politics and this is one of them.

 

So you want to use Fatima as empirical evidence, but when someone points out no one else outside of general area noticed any change to the sun, your response is "well god can do anything"?

You don't see how those positions are directly contradictory?

There's plenty of examples of mass religious hysteria among Muslims, Pagan, Hindus, etc. Are you going to accept those accounts as proof their gods exist? Or do they get rejected as part of special pleading argument that only evidence you support in favor of Christianity counts?

The Shroud of Turin is not proof god exists.

Now that you bring it up, why doesn't god ever cure amputees? Why does God only seem to heal people in cases where the body has the capacity to heal itself?

Can you name a single Scientists who believes brains were formed from lumps of coal?

 

What is wrong with you?

 

But they are, in defiance of the parents' wishes. In the US, doctors don't make these decisions, family members do. But the British health care system is run by the government, so their doctors get to make the decision even when it violates the parents' (and I presume even the patient's) wishes. Someone mentioned the Terri Schiavo case. The only reason there was a dispute there was the parents wanted to keep Terri Schiavo alive and her husband wanted her dead. He could have gotten a divorce and been free of her, but it was her money keeping her alive, and he wanted that money, so he sued to kill her, and won. (One of the guardians ad litem in the case came to the same conclusion. From Wikipedia: "Pearse found that there was no possibility of improvement but that Michael Schiavo's decisions might have been influenced by the potential to inherit what remained of Terri Schiavo's estate as long as he remained married to her. Due to a lack of a living will and questions regarding Michael's credibility, Pearse recommended denying his petition to remove her feeding tube.") Personally, I am of the opinion that providing food and water are not medical treatments and so cannot be discontinued by the relatives. Starving and/or dehydrating someone to death is cruel and inhumane. Turning off a heart or lung pump and letting someone die of natural causes is not.

 

And your opinion means diddly squat unless you have been in the situation of looking after helpless cases

We often do not feed end of life patients in palliative care because the body itself closes down and they just do not feel the need to eat and drink. I am not a Pal care nurse but I know many who are and they often speak of the heartbreak of having to tell relatives that they not only should not force food and drink on a loved one at end of life but that they are doing more harm as that loved one will choke and become MORE uncomfortable.

Euthanasia actually means "gentle death" and unless you have seen a lot of death then you do not understand how death can be inevitable

 

I'm not sure what you're going on about. Secularists believe brains were formed from 'primordial ooze'.

 

No matter the healthcare system there will always be negatives to point out.

 

If you do not like the decision of a British Doctor you are perfectly free to seek a private doctor, for you or your child. The government would not stop anyone doing so. So whether you are NHS or Private has no bearing on your rights. We do not allow parents to chose to harm their children, that is a difference in law, nothing to do with private v public healthcare.

 

M. Sanger never liked abortion, she felt a fetus should be carried to term. If the mother didn't want the child, it could be adopted out. She was interested in providing birth control information - mostly on spacing children out so that mothers & families could be safer. She provided services to whoever asked, & in the time & place she was working, it was mostly working-class mothers in working-class neighborhoods (tenements, more or less) that she was mostly working with. Sanger figured that women with financial means could take care of their own families & pregnancies with little need of help from her or Planned Parenthood.

 

Again there is no government monopoly, if the government denies coverage then go to the private doctor, just as in the US. There is a huge private medical service in the UK, I have used it myself for acupuncture and a chiropractor. Indeed most NHS doctors are in private practice as well.

 

Can you link to a single scientific paper that says that?

 

No. You are not reading very well. A number of eye witnesses several miles away are in that link I provided. Your only rebuttal would be they are all liars or fake people. (but of course). I said just because the sun’s defiance of cosmic laws was not witnessed in Spain, France or any other part of the world does not deny what was witnessed in Portugal. I said God is the creator of the universe and is not subject to it, it is subject to God who can suspend any laws He gave rise to.

Again, are you the least bit interested in the truth or just building up a case based on diversions and implausible suggestion? First, you need to acknowledge a major difference between mass hysteria vs. mass hallucination. The vast, vast majority of the 70,000 present claimed to have seen the sun in miraculous activity and fashion. That has nothing to do with mass hysteria, but some skeptics claim it was mass hallucination. Really? Like 70,000 all hallucinated the very same images? One expert said that possibility is more miraculous than the miracle itself. Plus to those who say many historical examples of mass hallucination, there are science and medical sources that claim there is no clear evidence of that ever occurring on record.

Not if you live your whole life compartmentalizing information and showing no ability to make logical connections. You all truly tire me out. All of these miracles approved by the Vatican and so many others all point to Jesus Christ, NONE OTHER. If you still cannot assent to the obvious message that is truly a shame. http://www.nationalreview.com/article/434153/shroud-turin-jesus-christ-blood-relic-sudarium-oviedo

Here we go again. I already addressed your desperation. No matter what miracle God provides, you demand another one and if that does not materialize you use that to remain a skeptic.

Well, actually, there is well-documented historical event of a Catholic man having his amputated leg restored, but that is hardly the larger point.
https://churchpop.com/2016/01/12/god-cured-amputee-the-astonishing-miracle-of-calanda/

If you did your own investigation you would find 67 cases at Lourdes, France that were reviewed by a completely independent panel of medical experts and deemed healings of incurable medical conditions. Not the Church, an independent board of doctors always available for these types of submissions from Lourdes. But you so easily dismiss those medical experts don’t you? Why? Because you want to.

The classic “dodge,” so often used by “evolution without God” believers. Ok, it wasn’t a lump of coal, I used it to illustrate the obvious point. That being, if you trace all life back to its origins, including humans, what are our most primitive forms we evolved from? --- from something like DNA molecultes and amino acids or protein cells? Yes or no? And they allegedly ultimately became microorganisms and then what?... water bugs, slugs, clams, I don’t know? But from that we get mammals,etc. Yes or no? So next time be brave and answer the obvious question directly without only pointing out it wasn’t a lump of coal and then running scared.

 

You can either use Goddidit magic, or you can use science. If you are going to try and argue for scientific empirical evidence, then you can't say "well the fact that no one outside of the area noticed because God can violate the laws of physics at will". It's one or the other.

None of the Vatican's miracles are independently verifiable or repeatable by science, and that isn't even addressing the fact that they are a biased source.

It doesn't bother you at all that your supposedly all powerful god has never once healed a person except in a case where the body has the theoretical ability to heal itself?

Don't you find it curious that this supposed healed amputee occurred in an era before cameras or even objective reporting and that the only sources that "confirmed" it were theists?

So you admit you deliberately lied about evolution?

 

I find you to be invincibly ignorant or willfully defiant NO MATTER WHAT EVIDENCE IS GIVEN.

I will search for another soul willing to consider the evidence. I wish you well.

 

Yeah, how ridiculous to expect the same level of evidence that a scientist would to confirm a hypothesis.

 

Caring and knowledgable folks are attempting to decide whether the experimental treatment being considered would merely prolong suffering.

It's a valid concern, and fanatics with an agenda contribute nothing to such a problematic, tragic case by exploiting it.