Christians attempt to silence non-religious messages at Christmas

[Patriot2009]

No dodge here - I just recognize faulty logic when I see it. I'd like to see you provide evidence that the prayer caused the alleged cancer to disappear (without resorting to the post hoc fallacy).

My logic isn’t faulty because it isn’t a resort to Post Hoc Ergo Propter Hoc, or as you described it, the post hoc fallacy. The post hoc fallacy, which states, "Since that event followed this one, that event must have been caused by this one.", would require that there be other plausible explanations for my wife’s healing. In other words, it’s a cousin of the false dichotomy we’ve already discussed.

You can claim that it’s a post hoc fallacy. But, without presenting any other plausible explanation, your words are rendered to nothing more than hot air. Your problem is that the notion that 4 scientific tests, each confirming the findings of those before, were all flawed or incorrect is so far beyond the realm of likelihood that it simply isn’t plausible. Instead, its incredible.

And, the alternative, that the later tests showing that she is cancer free were wrong would present you with a greater problem yet. She took the test every month for 6 months, with every result showing no cancer, along with a negative MRI!

So, I invite you to show us something else.

BTW, thanks for providing me this wonderful opportunity to present my testimony for everyone who is reading this who aren't infected with your brand of cynicism...

Spontaneous regression is documented. And if I'm not mistaken, it occurs at about the same rate among populations regardless of religious belief.

Spontaneous regression? Not in the case of Pancreatic Cancer.

Pancreatic Cancer is a particularly nasty disease for which, according to the American Cancer Society, in all stages of pancreatic cancer combined, the one-year relative survival rate is 20%, and the five-year rate is 4%. And those numbers are for patients who undergo aggressive treatment including a combination of chemotherapy and resection, which means the partial or complete removal of an organ or other bodily structure. The problem is that the pancreas is essential in the digestion of food.

 

[Patriot2009]

No dodge here - I just recognize faulty logic when I see it. I'd like to see you provide evidence that the prayer caused the alleged cancer to disappear (without resorting to the post hoc fallacy).

My logic isn’t faulty because it isn’t a resort to Post Hoc Ergo Propter Hoc, or as you described it, the post hoc fallacy. The post hoc fallacy, which states, "Since that event followed this one, that event must have been caused by this one.", would require that there be other plausible explanations for my wife’s healing. In other words, it’s a cousin of the false dichotomy we’ve already discussed.

You can claim that it’s a post hoc fallacy. But, without presenting any other plausible explanation, your words are rendered to nothing more than hot air. Your problem is that the notion that 4 scientific tests, each confirming the findings of those before, were all flawed or incorrect is so far beyond the realm of likelihood that it simply isn’t plausible. Instead, its incredible.

And, the alternative, that the later tests showing that she is cancer free were wrong would present you with a greater problem yet. She took the test every month for 6 months, with every result showing no cancer, along with a negative MRI!

So, I invite you to show us something else.

BTW, thanks for providing me this wonderful opportunity to present my testimony for everyone who is reading this who aren't infected with your brand of cynicism...

You can't actually link the prayer with the alleged disappearance of the cancer. All you can do is say "There is no other explanation so it must be the prayer"

And, you can’t suggest a reasonable alternative any more than the doctors have been able to. So there ya go…

I repeat my invitation to do so.

 

[YWN666]

My logic isn’t faulty because it isn’t a resort to Post Hoc Ergo Propter Hoc, or as you described it, the post hoc fallacy. The post hoc fallacy, which states, "Since that event followed this one, that event must have been caused by this one.", would require that there be other plausible explanations for my wife’s healing. In other words, it’s a cousin of the false dichotomy we’ve already discussed.

You can claim that it’s a post hoc fallacy. But, without presenting any other plausible explanation, your words are rendered to nothing more than hot air. Your problem is that the notion that 4 scientific tests, each confirming the findings of those before, were all flawed or incorrect is so far beyond the realm of likelihood that it simply isn’t plausible. Instead, its incredible.

And, the alternative, that the later tests showing that she is cancer free were wrong would present you with a greater problem yet. She took the test every month for 6 months, with every result showing no cancer, along with a negative MRI!

So, I invite you to show us something else.

BTW, thanks for providing me this wonderful opportunity to present my testimony for everyone who is reading this who aren't infected with your brand of cynicism...

You can't actually link the prayer with the alleged disappearance of the cancer. All you can do is say "There is no other explanation so it must be the prayer"

And, you can’t suggest a reasonable alternative any more than the doctors have been able to. So there ya go…

I repeat my invitation to do so.

My absence of an explanation does not mean the default explanation is prayer. You have to prove it and you cannot.

How did the doctors explain it in their records? I have doubts that they listed the explanation as prayer LOL
If it makes you feel better to believe prayer was the explanation, so be it but you can't claim it to be fact unless you can prove it.

 

[Againsheila]

You can't actually link the prayer with the alleged disappearance of the cancer. All you can do is say "There is no other explanation so it must be the prayer"

And, you can’t suggest a reasonable alternative any more than the doctors have been able to. So there ya go…

I repeat my invitation to do so.

My absence of an explanation does not mean the default explanation is prayer. You have to prove it and you cannot.

How did the doctors explain it in their records? I have doubts that they listed the explanation as prayer LOL
If it makes you feel better to believe prayer was the explanation, so be it but you can't claim it to be fact unless you can prove it.

Some people just don't understand faith, and never will.

 

[Patriot2009]

You can't actually link the prayer with the alleged disappearance of the cancer. All you can do is say "There is no other explanation so it must be the prayer"

And, you can’t suggest a reasonable alternative any more than the doctors have been able to. So there ya go…

I repeat my invitation to do so.

My absence of an explanation does not mean the default explanation is prayer. You have to prove it and you cannot.

How did the doctors explain it in their records? I have doubts that they listed the explanation as prayer LOL
If it makes you feel better to believe prayer was the explanation, so be it but you can't claim it to be fact unless you can prove it.

Actually, I don’t have to prove a thing, especially if it is just to satisfy your demands.

You claim that my testimony is representative of a post hoc argument. That being the case, all you need do is present another reasonable explanation and you prove your point.

The fact that you haven't is all we, me and the rest of folks reading this discussion, need to know.

BTW, it's interesting that you are now describing my explanation as the "default" explanation. Thus far, it's been the ONLY explanation presented.

Where's yours?

And, the doctors haven't tried to explain it in my wife's records. All that they say is that she is now cancer free according to the same tests they used to diagnose her cancer to start with. Noteworthy here is the fact that when we expressed our belief to her oncologist, he didn't try to dispute it.

 

[AllieBaba]

You can't actually link the prayer with the alleged disappearance of the cancer. All you can do is say "There is no other explanation so it must be the prayer"

And, you can’t suggest a reasonable alternative any more than the doctors have been able to. So there ya go…

I repeat my invitation to do so.

My absence of an explanation does not mean the default explanation is prayer. You have to prove it and you cannot.

How did the doctors explain it in their records? I have doubts that they listed the explanation as prayer LOL
If it makes you feel better to believe prayer was the explanation, so be it but you can't claim it to be fact unless you can prove it.

However, there are very few doctors who will not admit that they have witnessed miracles they cannot explain medically.

 

[YWN666]

And, you can’t suggest a reasonable alternative any more than the doctors have been able to. So there ya go…

I repeat my invitation to do so.

My absence of an explanation does not mean the default explanation is prayer. You have to prove it and you cannot.

How did the doctors explain it in their records? I have doubts that they listed the explanation as prayer LOL
If it makes you feel better to believe prayer was the explanation, so be it but you can't claim it to be fact unless you can prove it.

Some people just don't understand faith, and never will.

Oh, please..... Disagreement does not mean misunderstanding.

 

[YWN666]

And, you can’t suggest a reasonable alternative any more than the doctors have been able to. So there ya go…

I repeat my invitation to do so.

My absence of an explanation does not mean the default explanation is prayer. You have to prove it and you cannot.

How did the doctors explain it in their records? I have doubts that they listed the explanation as prayer LOL
If it makes you feel better to believe prayer was the explanation, so be it but you can't claim it to be fact unless you can prove it.

Actually, I don’t have to prove a thing, especially if it is just to satisfy your demands.

You claim that my testimony is representative of a post hoc argument. That being the case, all you need do is present another reasonable explanation and you prove your point.

The fact that you haven't is all we, me and the rest of folks reading this discussion, need to know.

BTW, it's interesting that you are now describing my explanation as the "default" explanation. Thus far, it's been the ONLY explanation presented.

It is certainly not a reasonable explanation and just because it was the only one offered, that doesn't mean it has to be the explanation. If I claim that the cancer disappeared because the Flying Spaghetti Monster willed it away, would that explanation carry equal weight? In this case, yes, it would. Both have ZERO credibility.

Where's yours?

And, the doctors haven't tried to explain it in my wife's records. All that they say is that she is now cancer free according to the same tests they used to diagnose her cancer to start with. Noteworthy here is the fact that when we expressed our belief to her oncologist, he didn't try to dispute it.

It would not serve any useful purpose for a doctor to dispute what you BELIEVE, even if he thought it was a load of mindless bunk. You choose the easy way out and attribute everything you can't explain to your god with NO proof whatsoever. Just think of all of the things that were once unexplainable and attributed to the supernatural that we now know the scientific answers to.

 

[YWN666]

And, you can’t suggest a reasonable alternative any more than the doctors have been able to. So there ya go…

I repeat my invitation to do so.

My absence of an explanation does not mean the default explanation is prayer. You have to prove it and you cannot.

How did the doctors explain it in their records? I have doubts that they listed the explanation as prayer LOL
If it makes you feel better to believe prayer was the explanation, so be it but you can't claim it to be fact unless you can prove it.

However, there are very few doctors who will not admit that they have witnessed miracles they cannot explain medically.

Maybe you want to read your comment again and modify it? Those double negatives are killers

 

[WhiteLion]

And those are the ONLY 2 options? That's called a false dichotomy.

OhhhHooo big words to confuse, debunk and otherwise thwarp their faith, ITS NOT A FALSE DICHOTOMY, its a dichotomy alright, but nevertheless not false, now it could be false in your eyes YWN666. Dichotomy is nothing more than a direct split, disection or partition, but to label the dichotomy false is a personal vendetta, no what scares the hell out of you is that dichotomy alone could mean an absolute dicision for GOD?
Cancer couldve beeen cured by karocine or cured by faith but wait... it couldve been cured by both??? theres ya 3rd option, so your false dichotomy theory has no bases here.

KNOW GOD! KNOW ACCOUNTIBILITY! NO GOD! NO ACCOUNTIBILITY!

Although I disagree with the position regarding Divine Healing being taken by YWN666, he is quite correct that Againsheila’s conclusion about what “cured” the man she described was presented as a false dichotomy. Look it up.

A false dichotomy , also known as an either or argument, a false dilemma or a straw man argument, presents an argument in terms of only two choices as the solution when there are more than the two in fact.

I don’t believe that Againsheila meant to make the argument in those terms deliberately. But, then again, maybe she did…

lol i gave you websters defintion of dichotomy without the falsehood aspect, then showed the possibility of a 3rd option that would cancel out dicotomy as being a preceived false dichotomy. reread it, it will dawn on you...

KNOW GOD! KNOW ACCOUNTIBILITY! NO GOD! NO ACCOUNTIBILITY!

 

[N4mddissent]

My logic isn’t faulty because it isn’t a resort to Post Hoc Ergo Propter Hoc, or as you described it, the post hoc fallacy. The post hoc fallacy, which states, "Since that event followed this one, that event must have been caused by this one.", would require that there be other plausible explanations for my wife’s healing. In other words, it’s a cousin of the false dichotomy we’ve already discussed.

You can claim that it’s a post hoc fallacy. But, without presenting any other plausible explanation, your words are rendered to nothing more than hot air. Your problem is that the notion that 4 scientific tests, each confirming the findings of those before, were all flawed or incorrect is so far beyond the realm of likelihood that it simply isn’t plausible. Instead, its incredible.

And, the alternative, that the later tests showing that she is cancer free were wrong would present you with a greater problem yet. She took the test every month for 6 months, with every result showing no cancer, along with a negative MRI!

So, I invite you to show us something else.

BTW, thanks for providing me this wonderful opportunity to present my testimony for everyone who is reading this who aren't infected with your brand of cynicism...

Spontaneous regression is documented. And if I'm not mistaken, it occurs at about the same rate among populations regardless of religious belief.

Spontaneous regression? Not in the case of Pancreatic Cancer.

Pancreatic Cancer is a particularly nasty disease for which, according to the American Cancer Society, in all stages of pancreatic cancer combined, the one-year relative survival rate is 20%, and the five-year rate is 4%. And those numbers are for patients who undergo aggressive treatment including a combination of chemotherapy and resection, which means the partial or complete removal of an organ or other bodily structure. The problem is that the pancreas is essential in the digestion of food.

After doing a little research, you are right that pancreatic cancer is particularly nasty. But I also came across this interesting fact. Autoimmune pancreatitis is not a well known disease. It symptoms are wide ranging and result in frequent misdiagnosis of pancreatic cancer. One study looked at 15 patients with AIP and found that 8 of them (more than 50%) were diagnosed with cancer (6 with pancreatic cancer, 2 with bile duct cancer). In light of this, I think we have to consider the possibility of misdiagnosis as well. In which case, the idea of spontaneous cancer remission is no longer even applicable.

 

[WhiteLion]

My absence of an explanation does not mean the default explanation is prayer. You have to prove it and you cannot.

How did the doctors explain it in their records? I have doubts that they listed the explanation as prayer LOL
If it makes you feel better to believe prayer was the explanation, so be it but you can't claim it to be fact unless you can prove it.

Actually, I don’t have to prove a thing, especially if it is just to satisfy your demands.

You claim that my testimony is representative of a post hoc argument. That being the case, all you need do is present another reasonable explanation and you prove your point.

The fact that you haven't is all we, me and the rest of folks reading this discussion, need to know.

BTW, it's interesting that you are now describing my explanation as the "default" explanation. Thus far, it's been the ONLY explanation presented.

It is certainly not a reasonable explanation and just because it was the only one offered, that doesn't mean it has to be the explanation. If I claim that the cancer disappeared because the Flying Spaghetti Monster willed it away, would that explanation carry equal weight? In this case, yes, it would. Both have ZERO credibility.

Where's yours?

And, the doctors haven't tried to explain it in my wife's records. All that they say is that she is now cancer free according to the same tests they used to diagnose her cancer to start with. Noteworthy here is the fact that when we expressed our belief to her oncologist, he didn't try to dispute it.

It would not serve any useful purpose for a doctor to dispute what you BELIEVE, even if he thought it was a load of mindless bunk. You choose the easy way out and attribute everything you can't explain to your god with NO proof whatsoever. Just think of all of the things that were once unexplainable and attributed to the supernatural that we now know the scientific answers to.

Its pretty much useless/baseless to show the err of your ways, evidently youve rationalized yourself right out of what you believed long ago. I could do same as you, if i think therefore i am?, am i really? So with this said, just because people drink milk, hunt rats (and some do 3rd world countries), have hair on their bodies and long long fingernails, doesnt necessarally prove that their cats or in the Felidae family? However if we rationalize it long enough we could conjure up a family resemblence or even a possible linage, see how ludicrous this sounds? See there's a fine line betwix science and religion, you have bad science as well as bad religion.

Example take the boy that went off to college, now this boy was raised in a Christian family enviroment, he spent several years studing hard to earn his degree. One day the boy returned home from college and his dad ask him to help out in the family watermellon patch which his dad toiled hard to make ends meet. The boy was grumbling and complaining about having to turn all those watermellons over to keep them from rotting on the underside. The boy thinking he knew it all and had been taught in college that GOD was nothing more than a mystical figuare, says dad? if GOD's so smart why didnt he just put these watermellons up in this oak tree so we wouldnt have to toil over turning them?, about that time a fairly large acorn popped him in the head and the boy screeched and his dad laughed and said, son ant you glad that wasnt a watermellon?? So see even if we do see through a glass darkly GOD has already done it for us.

Or take for example the theory of Co- Existance, that says basically, if we all decended from or the common ancestry of apes? why are the apes and primate family still here today?? Wouldnt Humans be the end result and not co-exist(apes wouldnt be here today).. Co-Existance makes human ape decendancy a paradox hands down oh and branching just dont cut it either lol same end result. Common Ape Ancestry? thats simular to the cat scenario i mentioned earlier?

Or take for example the Woodpecker oh yes GOD designed all things very masterfully and purposely. Out of thousands of bird species the family, Picidae, Phylum: Chordata or Woodpecker is the only bird with built in shock absorbers between his skull and his beak like a elastic cartilage that absorbs hours and hours of banging on trees, now remember no other bird can do this NONE! Another feature of the Woodpecker that no other bird has, is that his long tongue is wrapped around his brain and uncoils to reach in the deep holes hes been boreing all day long and recieve the bugs that are eating the tree that supplies us with the useful oxygen we as humans cannot live without. Last but not least the Woodpeckers feet and legs are design like no other to stand flat footed on the vertical surface of a tree or telephone pole infinitely. Folks this didnt happen by sheer accident, for this to happen by chance or accident would take a number example 100 with trillion zeros behind it in other words theres no chance that the Woodpecker came in to existance by accident or chance GODs not a gambler...

Or stack Noahs ark against the RMS Titanic, Christians built the ARK, secular humanist built the Titanic, and had the nerve to challenge GOD to sink it, what a bunch of fools. That thing went straight to the bottom of the ocean without passing go or collecting 200 dollars SAD. What do you think's happening to the USA now, we, including me, thwarped GOD out of society for the last 60-70 years, oh this thing just didnt happen over night and just like the Titanic we goin down and it ant gonna stop until we learn what serving the True and Living GOD means.

I could go on and on but my time is limited here, i reiterate there's a fine line between science and religion and like brothers some are good and some are bad. Dont knock it just because you never understood it, or others that may beleive in GOD and have a opinion different than yours. Prayers like the wind blowing, you cant see the wind, but you can feel it, evidence? watch the treetops rock to and fro when it blows GODs moving lol...

KNOW GOD! KNOW ACCOUNTIBILITY! NO GOD! NO ACCOUNTIBILITY!

 

[YWN666]

Its pretty much useless/baseless to show the err of your ways, evidently youve rationalized yourself right out of what you believed long ago. I could do same as you, if i think therefore i am?, am i really? So with this said, just because people drink milk, hunt rats (and some do 3rd world countries), have hair on their bodies and long long fingernails, doesnt necessarally prove that their cats or in the Felidae family? However if we rationalize it long enough we could conjure up a family resemblence or even a possible linage, see how ludicrous this sounds? See there's a fine line betwix science and religion, you have bad science as well as bad religion.

Example take the boy that went off to college, now this boy was raised in a Christian family enviroment, he spent several years studing hard to earn his degree. One day the boy returned home from college and his dad ask him to help out in the family watermellon patch which his dad toiled hard to make ends meet. The boy was grumbling and complaining about having to turn all those watermellons over to keep them from rotting on the underside. The boy thinking he knew it all and had been taught in college that GOD was nothing more than a mystical figuare, says dad? if GOD's so smart why didnt he just put these watermellons up in this oak tree so we wouldnt have to toil over turning them?, about that time a fairly large acorn popped him in the head and the boy screeched and his dad laughed and said, son ant you glad that wasnt a watermellon?? So see even if we do see through a glass darkly GOD has already done it for us.

Wow, it took you 6 paragraps to avoid the issue. The watermelon story is cute but that and the rest of your nonsense demonstrates your fundamental misunderstanding of science and your extreme gullibility. Your "why are there still apes?" question confirms it. Maybe your feeblemindedness is the very reason you're a religious nutjob in the first place.

What you're doing is attributing things you don't understand to a god but if you want that to be accepted as truth, you have to PROVE it. You assume that your explanation is the truth because it was the only explanation offered. That is not how science works.

 

[YWN666]

My logic isn’t faulty because it isn’t a resort to Post Hoc Ergo Propter Hoc, or as you described it, the post hoc fallacy. The post hoc fallacy, which states, "Since that event followed this one, that event must have been caused by this one.", would require that there be other plausible explanations for my wife’s healing. In other words, it’s a cousin of the false dichotomy we’ve already discussed.

You can claim that it’s a post hoc fallacy. But, without presenting any other plausible explanation, your words are rendered to nothing more than hot air. Your problem is that the notion that 4 scientific tests, each confirming the findings of those before, were all flawed or incorrect is so far beyond the realm of likelihood that it simply isn’t plausible. Instead, its incredible.

And, the alternative, that the later tests showing that she is cancer free were wrong would present you with a greater problem yet. She took the test every month for 6 months, with every result showing no cancer, along with a negative MRI!

So, I invite you to show us something else.

BTW, thanks for providing me this wonderful opportunity to present my testimony for everyone who is reading this who aren't infected with your brand of cynicism...

You can't actually link the prayer with the alleged disappearance of the cancer. All you can do is say "There is no other explanation so it must be the prayer"

And, you can’t suggest a reasonable alternative any more than the doctors have been able to. So there ya go…

I repeat my invitation to do so.

I don't have to. You're the one making the positive assertion so the burden is on you to prove it. Get going, bub. We're waiting.

 

[WhiteLion]

Its pretty much useless/baseless to show the err of your ways, evidently youve rationalized yourself right out of what you believed long ago. I could do same as you, if i think therefore i am?, am i really? So with this said, just because people drink milk, hunt rats (and some do 3rd world countries), have hair on their bodies and long long fingernails, doesnt necessarally prove that their cats or in the Felidae family? However if we rationalize it long enough we could conjure up a family resemblence or even a possible linage, see how ludicrous this sounds? See there's a fine line betwix science and religion, you have bad science as well as bad religion.

Example take the boy that went off to college, now this boy was raised in a Christian family enviroment, he spent several years studing hard to earn his degree. One day the boy returned home from college and his dad ask him to help out in the family watermellon patch which his dad toiled hard to make ends meet. The boy was grumbling and complaining about having to turn all those watermellons over to keep them from rotting on the underside. The boy thinking he knew it all and had been taught in college that GOD was nothing more than a mystical figuare, says dad? if GOD's so smart why didnt he just put these watermellons up in this oak tree so we wouldnt have to toil over turning them?, about that time a fairly large acorn popped him in the head and the boy screeched and his dad laughed and said, son ant you glad that wasnt a watermellon?? So see even if we do see through a glass darkly GOD has already done it for us.

Wow, it took you 6 paragraps to avoid the issue. The watermelon story is cute but that and the rest of your nonsense demonstrates your fundamental misunderstanding of science and your extreme gullibility. Your "why are there still apes?" question confirms it. Maybe your feeblemindedness is the very reason you're a religious nutjob in the first place.

What you're doing is attributing things you don't understand to a god but if you want that to be accepted as truth, you have to PROVE it. You assume that your explanation is the truth because it was the only explanation offered. That is not how science works.

The proof was laid before you even in the woodpecker you're still without understanding, and further more i wasnt trying to prove to YOU anything, i was simply offering others here a dicotomy? to your anti-christian humanism, as i'd mentioned earlier, you rationalized away what little faith you had long ago, if any... Understanding??I understand quite clearly what GODs WORD has to say about it all, however, in the same self respect i didnt expect you to understand any of this. Others here have the right to faith healing and voicing their opinions forthright. When folk like yourself dont know how to read between the lines, you call others you dont agree with, fundamentalist or some foul mouthed insult???. Also please tone down those little boarderline jestures of charactor assasinations your casting at people of faith you dont agree with...quote=YWN666( Maybe your feeblemindedness is the very reason you're a religious nutjob in the first place.)comments, keep it to yourself please, that was pretty hateful... You had to insult me personally huh??

THe only other explanation there is for anything this day and age is FAITH in GOD, in the coming days we the people gonna need all we can get........

KNOW GOD! KNOW ACCOUNTIBILITY! NO GOD! NO ACCOUNTIBILITY!

 

[rcajun90]

They never found out who stole the sign? Wouldn't there be finger prints on it? Could have been some teenagers, fanatical Christians or the very people that put up the sign. I'm a Catholic and I love Christmas (Yes I know it is not the actual day of the birth of my lord). I'm also an American and I realize that under our countries laws everyone has a right to free speech. If homosexual Black Panther Nazi's want to put up a sign that is fine. I don't agree with them but it is America. It seems the Freedom From Religion group is playing the victim. If I put up an Obama sucks sign in an all black neighborhood should I be surprised if it disappeared?

 

[WhiteLion]

They never found out who stole the sign? Wouldn't there be finger prints on it? Could have been some teenagers, fanatical Christians or the very people that put up the sign. I'm a Catholic and I love Christmas (Yes I know it is not the actual day of the birth of my lord). I'm also an American and I realize that under our countries laws everyone has a right to free speech. If homosexual Black Panther Nazi's want to put up a sign that is fine. I don't agree with them but it is America. It seems the Freedom From Religion group is playing the victim. If I put up an Obama sucks sign in an all black neighborhood should I be surprised if it disappeared?

 

[N4mddissent]

They never found out who stole the sign? Wouldn't there be finger prints on it? Could have been some teenagers, fanatical Christians or the very people that put up the sign. I'm a Catholic and I love Christmas (Yes I know it is not the actual day of the birth of my lord). I'm also an American and I realize that under our countries laws everyone has a right to free speech. If homosexual Black Panther Nazi's want to put up a sign that is fine. I don't agree with them but it is America. It seems the Freedom From Religion group is playing the victim. If I put up an Obama sucks sign in an all black neighborhood should I be surprised if it disappeared?

I think the point was that this is America and the people who stole the sign obviously thought that FFR should not have the right to free speech since they stole the sign. And I think your all-black neighborhood sign analogy is not accurate. If I put up a pro-Obama sign in a white neighborhood should I be surprised if it disappeared? If one group wants to put up a sign on public property representing one belief, then they should not get so bent out of shape (some going so far as exhibiting criminal behavior) when another group wants to do the same. And some people will say that it is the FFR people who are trying to oppress or silence the christians in this example. Makes no sense.

 

[Patriot2009]

They never found out who stole the sign? Wouldn't there be finger prints on it? Could have been some teenagers, fanatical Christians or the very people that put up the sign. I'm a Catholic and I love Christmas (Yes I know it is not the actual day of the birth of my lord). I'm also an American and I realize that under our countries laws everyone has a right to free speech. If homosexual Black Panther Nazi's want to put up a sign that is fine. I don't agree with them but it is America. It seems the Freedom From Religion group is playing the victim. If I put up an Obama sucks sign in an all black neighborhood should I be surprised if it disappeared?

I think the point was that this is America and the people who stole the sign obviously thought that FFR should not have the right to free speech since they stole the sign. And I think your all-black neighborhood sign analogy is not accurate. If I put up a pro-Obama sign in a white neighborhood should I be surprised if it disappeared? If one group wants to put up a sign on public property representing one belief, then they should not get so bent out of shape (some going so far as exhibiting criminal behavior) when another group wants to do the same. And some people will say that it is the FFR people who are trying to oppress or silence the christians in this example. Makes no sense.

You and others here are apparently operating under the mistaken notion that freedom of speech translates directly to “freedom to post signs on public property”. As I pointed out earlier here, there is no such “freedom” and the Supreme Court has so ruled.

If the atheists, or the KKK, or the Nazis or any other extremist organization wants to post signs they can put them up in their yards, rent space on the sides of buildings, take out newspaper ads or any other number of ways to publicize their positions, they are quite free to do so. That is what freedom of speech is all about. However, their desire to put signs on public property is not protected by the Constitution. It’s as simple as that.

 

[Patriot2009]

Spontaneous regression is documented. And if I'm not mistaken, it occurs at about the same rate among populations regardless of religious belief.

Spontaneous regression? Not in the case of Pancreatic Cancer.

Pancreatic Cancer is a particularly nasty disease for which, according to the American Cancer Society, in all stages of pancreatic cancer combined, the one-year relative survival rate is 20%, and the five-year rate is 4%. And those numbers are for patients who undergo aggressive treatment including a combination of chemotherapy and resection, which means the partial or complete removal of an organ or other bodily structure. The problem is that the pancreas is essential in the digestion of food.

After doing a little research, you are right that pancreatic cancer is particularly nasty. But I also came across this interesting fact. Autoimmune pancreatitis is not a well known disease. It symptoms are wide ranging and result in frequent misdiagnosis of pancreatic cancer. One study looked at 15 patients with AIP and found that 8 of them (more than 50%) were diagnosed with cancer (6 with pancreatic cancer, 2 with bile duct cancer). In light of this, I think we have to consider the possibility of misdiagnosis as well. In which case, the idea of spontaneous cancer remission is no longer even applicable.

You might have had a valid point, except that the symptoms of AIP weren't present in my wife's case and the treatment for AIP would be the use of corticosteroids, which were never employed in my wife’s case.

Moreover, AIP is a form of chronic pancreatitis, which would mean that she would still be exhibiting the symptoms if she hadn’t been treated with corticosteroids.