Do You Agree?

[Sheldon]

I'm not sure where you got that from, but I suggest you put it in the category it belongs - fake news.

LINK "On Sunday, a Texas House committee released the most exhaustive account yet of the shooter, his planning, his attack and the fumbling response he provoked.

The 77-page report, provides a damning portrayal of...police response that disregarded its own active shooter training.

In total, 376 law enforcement officers — a force larger than the garrison that defended the Alamo — descended upon the school in a chaotic, uncoordinated scene that lasted for more than an hour. The group was devoid of clear leadership, basic communications and sufficient urgency to take down the gunman, the report says."

There are multiple sources confirming this now.

HERE is another one "UVALDE, Texas — Nearly 400 law enforcement officials rushed to mass shooting that left 21 people dead at a Uvalde elementary school but "systemic failures" created a chaotic scene that lasted more than an hour before the gunman was finally confronted and killed, according to a report from investigators released Sunday."

Trying to deny this fact as "fake news" is absurd bias.

 

[Sheldon]

I would want the police to be safe. After all, they are human too, with families. Some have small children. Why would I be selfish, and think only of me, and what belongs to me?

Probably because it is their job to put themselves in harms way, in order to protect others, especially unarmed children. You're simply wrong here, but then that was clear some time ago.

 

[Sheldon]

What if the murderer had shot everyone in the room, and then blew his brains out, would I be crying, saying... "Oh. The police should have?" Or would I be complaining about guns? Like most people do, I might find something else to complain about, and blame.

That's a false dichotomy, we can blame the gunman, but also blame the police for their culpability here, as their incompetence contributed to the tragedy. The problem is you're not thinking rationally, and only care about defending the police, laudable but entirely misplaced here, as they are clearly culpable for massive errors of judgment. The police ignore their own active shooter training.

 

[Sheldon]

ok back to abortion for a minute. So are you saying it's ok to kill a fetus after taken out by choice of a mother's womb while it's still alive?

I'm saying that late term abortions are extremely rare and usually out of medical necessity. The vast majority of terminations involve a blastocyst, and sometimes a developing foetus that would not survive without the mothers body. So implying abortions involve killing infants is extremely disingenuous.

 

[Bird123]

have a nice day. I usually don't deal with soothsayers that have all the answers or think they know...bye for now. Maybe later...

I am not a soothsayer. I do say what actually exists. I have been on my journey to Discovery for many years. I can see no end to what can be Discovered. As a Hungry Student, I walk forward.

I make no demands on anyone. I simply place Real Truth in the world. What others choose to do with Real Truth is entirely up to them. I merely point.

Unconditional!! Your choices or actions will never bother me in the least. In fact, we are all supposed to make our own choices. Choices show God and the world what we know and what we need to learn. Choices are too important to allow others to make them for us.

That's what I see. It's very clear!!

 

[YoursTrue]

I'm saying that late term abortions are extremely rare and usually out of medical necessity. The vast majority of terminations involve a blastocyst, and sometimes a developing foetus that would not survive without the mothers body. So implying abortions involve killing infants is extremely disingenuous.

So abortions don't involve the willful taking of life? Perhaps I'm not understanding you. Do or do not you consider abortion to entail the willful taking of life. What you decide based on your ideas does not have to be my way of looking at it, right? If you decide the willful removal of a living fetus is the ok thing to do, I won't stand and stop you. The choice is yours. But then my choice insofar for myself doesn't have to be the same as your choice, does it?

 

[Bird123]

There is no objective evidence this world or anything else was "created".

I can see you have no clue. Widen your view and thinking. It stares us all in the face. God is hiding nothing. On the other hand, High Intelligence created us and this universe. One must Stretch in the attempt to keep up.

Those who seek must be open to all possibilities not just the ones that one wants to be true. Real Truth will not always be an agreeable thing.

That's what I see. It's very clear!!

 

[Bird123]

Which deity is this?

You have heard of the ten commandments?

That's what I see, it's very clear...

The Real God has made no commandments. There is no need. On the other hand, mankind values the petty thing of attempting to control others. Look to mankind for the source of your commandments.

That's what I see. It's very clear!!

 

[Sheldon]

Sheldon said: ↑
I'm saying that late term abortions are extremely rare and usually out of medical necessity. The vast majority of terminations involve a blastocyst, and sometimes a developing foetus that would not survive without the mothers body. So implying abortions involve killing infants is extremely disingenuous.

So abortions don't involve the willful taking of life? Perhaps I'm not understanding you.

Well re-read my post quoted verbatim above, and see if you see anything that remotely implies I made any such claim.

Do or do not you consider abortion to entail the willful taking of life.

It involves a decision to terminate a pregnancy, the zygote blastocyst, or developing foetus will not survive this.

What you decide based on your ideas does not have to be my way of looking at it, right?

Well it's not my decision, as it's not my body. How anyone feels about this is of course up to them, as long as they don't insist women should feel as they do, or lose the right to bodily autonomy.

If you decide the willful removal of a living fetus is the ok thing to do, I won't stand and stop you.

Again I am not making this decision, and again I haven't asked anyone to do anything, that is precisely what I am against, taking away other people's right to bodily autonomy.

The choice is yours.

Nope, I am a man, so I have no choice here, a woman has a choice, and that is the only moral position, as to take away bodily autonomy is to enslave people.

But then my choice insofar for myself doesn't have to be the same as your choice, does it?

I have never told anyone what choice they can make regarding their own body, quite the opposite.

 

[Sheldon]

Sheldon said: ↑
There is no objective evidence this world or anything else was "created".

I can see you have no clue.

Yes it is quite common for theists to attack the poster, rather than address what is actually said, but the statement is factually correct. There is no objective evidence this world or anything else was "created".

Widen your view and thinking. It stares us all in the face. God is hiding nothing. On the other hand, High Intelligence created us and this universe. One must Stretch in the attempt to keep up.

Those are just unevidenced platitudes.

Those who seek must be open to all possibilities not just the ones that one wants to be true.

When someone demonstrates some objective evidence that a deity is possible then I will give it due consideration. Simply asserting that it is possible is no different to any other unevidenced claim.

Real Truth will not always be an agreeable thing.

I'm guessing you don't see the irony in that statement at all, since you are the one making a claim you very heavily biased in favour of. I have no stake either way, and am not treating god claims any differently than I treat all other claims.

That's what I see. It's very clear!!

Things usually are very clear, to people who are closed minded in favour of one view, they would never ever abandon. There is no belief I would not discard if the objective evidence demands it.

 

[Sheldon]

Sheldon said: ↑
Which deity is this?

The Real God has made no commandments.

Which deity is this? What objective evidence can you demonstrate that it exists?

 

[YoursTrue]

Well re-read my post quoted verbatim above, and see if you see anything that remotely implies I made any such claim.



It involves a decision to terminate a pregnancy, the zygote blastocyst, or developing foetus will not survive this.



Well it's not my decision, as it's not my body. How anyone feels about this is of course up to them, as long as they don't insist women should feel as they do, or lose the right to bodily autonomy.



Again I am not making this decision, and again I haven't asked anyone to do anything, that is precisely what I am against, taking away other people's right to bodily autonomy.



Nope, I am a man, so I have no choice here, a woman has a choice, and that is the only moral position, as to take away bodily autonomy is to enslave people.



I have never told anyone what choice they can make regarding their own body, quite the opposite.

Interesting that the person who impregnated the woman bears little to no responsibility in the decision to have the fetus killed.

 

[YoursTrue]

Well re-read my post quoted verbatim above, and see if you see anything that remotely implies I made any such claim.



It involves a decision to terminate a pregnancy, the zygote blastocyst, or developing foetus will not survive this.

Again, let me try to understand this. To terminate a pregnancy does not, in your opinion, terminate a life?

 

[Bird123]

Yes it is quite common for theists to attack the poster, rather than address what is actually said, but the statement is factually correct. There is no objective evidence this world or anything else was "created".



Those are just unevidenced platitudes.



When someone demonstrates some objective evidence that a deity is possible then I will give it due consideration. Simply asserting that it is possible is no different to any other unevidenced claim.



I'm guessing you don't see the irony in that statement at all, since you are the one making a claim you very heavily biased in favour of. I have no stake either way, and am not treating god claims any differently than I treat all other claims.



Things usually are very clear, to people who are closed minded in favour of one view, they would never ever abandon. There is no belief I would not discard if the objective evidence demands it.

At the beginning of a journey to Discovery, one must be open to all possibilities. At the beginning of my journey I was open to the possibility that God did not exist. As I put the pieces together, the view changes with each Discovery. A direction is formed which either leads to results or one finds oneself in left field wondering where the wrong turn was. Still, correction is made and a new direction is formed to Discover more.

The only mistake one can make is not to be open and expecting the knowledge to come to one on it's own. Discovery does take work. It is not served up as beliefs as religion does.

I can point the way and give you all the answers but until you Live the Lessons, you will rely on your belief that God could not possibly exist. See? You are depending on Beliefs just as theist.

How about this: Everything created has Purpose. Things that form randomly have no purpose. As you look at this universe, world, and people can't you see any purpose at all? Further, where is all the randomly formed stuff without purpose floating around for one to see?

I see well ordered, purposeful things everywhere. You want God not to exist so badly that you ignore those things staring you in the face.

I have found no religion that understands God at all. Why must you constantly base your idea of God on what you know is wrong? I say get out there, as I have, and Discover who God really is for yourself. In time, you will Discover reality is so much better than all those beliefs you are hanging onto for dear life.

The best part of God is that ,just like all the physics, everything about God does add up perfectly.

An Action of God: Knowledge and Wisdom are not given. They are acquired on the struggles to acquire them. It's all one's free will. What is it that you really seek? It has always been within your reach. It all waits to be Discovered. Why do you sit on your hands?

So now you see an action of God. Why does God take this action? Discovering the answers will lead you to Discovering God.

That is what I see. It's very clear!!

 

[Bird123]

Which deity is this? What objective evidence can you demonstrate that it exists?

It's about what actually is. God nor any of us have or need names. We are all who we are. Names are created by mankind so language can have a frame of reference. As a Spiritual being, names and language serve no purpose.

Your objective evidence awaits your Discovery. It awaits your journey. It has never ever been about Beliefs or convincing you to Believe. I have pointed you in the direction by which you can Discover it all for yourself. The question remains: Do you seek? Do you really want to Know??? Maybe there is something else you are after.

That's what I see. It's very clear!!

 

[nPeace]

Again, let me try to understand this. To terminate a pregnancy does not, in your opinion, terminate a life?

To them, it's just a clump of meaningless cells that can be discarded anytime.

I wonder though, why none of them would want the doctor to take that "meaningless" mass and extract the cells that will form the skin tissue, the ears, nose, or penis, and use them for something meaningful.

Agenesis
In medicine, agenesis refers to the failure of an organ to develop during embryonic growth and development due to the absence of primordial tissue. Many forms of agenesis are referred to by individual names, depending on the organ affected:

What are anotia and microtia?
Anotia and microtia are birth defects of a baby’s ear. Anotia happens when the external ear (the part of the ear that can be seen) is missing completely. Microtia happens when the external ear is small and not formed properly.

Agenesis - Wikipedia
Agenesis - Wikipedia

Absence of the penis, known as aphallia, is a very rare congenital anomaly. It is believed to be a result of either the absence of the genital tubercle or its failure to fully develop and is associated with the level of hormones and chromosomal rearrangements. The failure of the genital tubercle influences the development of the penis and partly depends upon testosterone secreted by Leydig cells of the testis.

A man born without a penis just got a new 'bionic' one that will let him have sex for the first time ever

A clump or mass of meaningless cells, uh.
Makes you wonder why people believe evolution by natural selection makes any sense.
Why operate on people, to make them "normal"... Aren't they normal, according to the natural processes... regardless of what's missing? Why not let natural selection take its course?

 

[nPeace]

How about this: Everything created has Purpose. Things that form randomly have no purpose. As you look at this universe, world, and people can't you see any purpose at all? Further, where is all the randomly formed stuff without purpose floating around for one to see?

I see well ordered, purposeful things everywhere. You want God not to exist so badly that you ignore those things staring you in the face.

 

[Sheldon]

Interesting that the person who impregnated the woman bears little to no responsibility in the decision to have the fetus killed.

Is it? Why?

 

[Sheldon]

Again, let me try to understand this. To terminate a pregnancy does not, in your opinion, terminate a life?

Define "life" in this context. Are you claiming an insentient clump of cells is alive in the same sense that a woman whose body it is a part of is alive?

 

[Sheldon]

The only mistake one can make is not to be open and expecting the knowledge

What knowledge is this, you keep claiming to have it, but failing to present any of it?

I can point the way and give you all the answers

Yet you can't objectively evidence them.

until you Live the Lessons, you will rely on your belief that God could not possibly exist. See?

nope, that's not my beliefs, see?

You are depending on Beliefs just as theist.

Except I require sufficient objective evidence to support them before I accept that are true, and I will discard them the minute sufficient objective evidence .

Everything created has Purpose.

There is still no objective evidence anything was created.

Things that form randomly have no purpose.

What things, and what objective evidence can you demonstrate to support this claim?

You want God not to exist so badly

I no more want any deity not to exist, than I want Hercules or mermaids or unicorns not to exist. Something either exists or it does not, you're claiming a deity does, so present what objective evidence you claim to have. As so far all you have presented is unevidenced subjective claims, that's what I see, as it really is pretty clear.

Why must you constantly base your idea of God on what you know is wrong?

I am an atheist, so this claim is as bizarre as it is false.

You don't seem to have addressed the factually correct statement, that there is no objective evidence that this world or anything else was "created".