I meant something about Hitler and the Jews.

 

when I was a fundie minister I was anti-choice of course. Then after years of moving away from that I became pro-choice, mainly because there are too many fucking people in the world and we are destroying all our natural resources. 

 

There is a billboard not too far from my house that reads 

 

  I did some poking around before but I don't believe its premise.   I am not unsympathetic in regards to killing something living and how difficult it would be for someone to make that decision, but I really hate how Christians have made it their cause. I firmly believe there is no biblical support for it. Abortions have been around a long time. There is Egyptian record of abortion dated  1550 BC. China, Greece, Rome have documents regarding it even procedures. All this before Christ and Paul. And yet those guys don't even write one word about it. Paul worries about hair length (1 Corinthians 11).   

2 Samuel 12:13-14 - God the abortion doctor.

 

How many pregnant women were involved in his genocides?

  

Noah's flood - Genesis 6:6-7

  

Sodom and Gomorrah - Genesis 19:24-25

  

Ordering the Jews to kill every man, woman and child

    

Joshua 6:20-21; Joshua 8:25; 1 Samuel 15:2-3; etc, etc.

 

 

Then he (Jesus) will burn in hell nearly everyone including children, save a remnant. This god is blood thirsty.   

 

So are these Christians more "moral" than their god?    

I guess Christians love it because it generates so much emotion and now Ray Comfort will (ab)use it to pull people in as if this god has been on the right side all along.

bullshit, bullshit, bullshit

       

 

Except of course if she decides to abort it, taxpayers should pay for it. If she decides to deliver it and raise it, taxpayers should pay for it too.

I should just write checks to the government for women's choices, but it's no of business what they do with it. Abort 12 babies or deliver 12, it's none of my fucking business except to pay for it all.

 

 

Excellent points ex-minister.  I find it difficult to believe that an idiot like Ray Comfort could change someone from being pro-choice to anti-abortion in 44 seconds or 95 seconds, like the videos were "claiming". I would not be a bit surprised if that wasn't paid people, helping to pull off his propaganda stunts.

 I don't think you and CJ get at all where I'm coming from. I want legal abortion, in fact I want mandatory birth control.
 The problem of have is the total hypocrisy of the leftist and feminists, with their hands off my womb libertarian mentality. But then when it comes to either paying for the abortion or paying for the baby, they're all of a sudden socialists that want the government to interfere in people's lives to take money from one person to pay for the choices of another. "Hands off my womb!" How about hands off my paycheck, as well?  Most abortions are because the woman can't afford the baby, so she usually can't afford insurance. I'm for the government paying for abortions as long as it's part of a social contract and not a free benefit provided for nothing. The government doesn't go after men that don't take care of their offspring and force them to pay or have a vasectomy. They go after the easiest target.  

 

 

 Bullshit. Half the adult population pays no taxes, and you know it's highly skewed. A lot of people that have children expect others to pay for their burden. If we really had this "shared burden" idealized society, we wouldn't have taxes because everyone could pay for the services they use for their family. Taxes are just plain armed robbery they opposite of a shared burden society. A lot of men that are programmed to be such wienies when it comes to standing up to this leftist feminist hypocrisy. We're supposed to give women their precious reproductive freedom and respect their individual choices. But then when it comes time to pay for the baby or the abortion, then we're all on big caring family that 'shares the burden' unless of course they or the guy that knocked them up can't pay. It's like BP leaving a big oil spill and then expecting everyone else to pay for the mess they leave. But we have to respect their right to drill however, wherever whenever they want. The hypocrisy of this just reeks.   

 

Why would it be "impossible to set up or maintain"? Commercial companies have no problem charging for the services they provide, why not the government? The current system is unsustainable as we can see by our debt. The current system is designed for welfare queens and welfare kings in corporate board rooms.

The concept of taxation is highly irrational. It is designed to make the rich and powerful more so without any contribution to the economy. It keeps the poor in a permanent state of poverty with just enough benefits to keep them alive and voting for the people that give them welfare benefits to live on the edge of survival. It punishes work and innovation.

Every service and benefit a person receives can be pay as you go. If there are indigent people, put them into a job training programs paid for by people that receive benefits such as land/water usage and mining/drilling rights. And there must be mandatory birth control to keep population pressures from causing poverty.

 

Goodie, another topic about abortion!

 

 

 

I agree. I go a step further though and say welfare drags people down as a whole. People who are raised by parents on welfare learn that welfare is a good wonderful thing some people are entitled to and work is .. I dunno who work is for anymore, people with that misguided ..sense of pride? 

Yes! Get the rich people off welfare and get them to work! Then the poor people who are working and still need the help will have it.

 I'm sure I could easily make money ripping people off and paying no taxes. I guess I want to sleep well at night.

Aren't you also grateful to have food and clothes on your back. So why don't, we make these paid for by taxes as well? If you really want to have good police and paved roads in the future, taxation makes no sense to pay for it. As time goes on more people can't or won't pay because they don't have to. So the question is why can't all services be pay as you go? No taxes, just user fees?

 

Probably nothing. Hoping for a world without taxation is like hoping for a world without religion. Most people just shake their heads at all the misery in the world and refuse to see how it is caused by so much irrational behavior. We're all just sheep.

A good start could be only supporting politicians that will start to reform the insane tax code.

 

Non sequitur.

The fact that women are 'more' equal, is a different topic. If you want to debate that, start a new thread.

 

I think you're misinformed, if you think a company like BP can just set up and drill wherever they want without anyone's permission.
 

Saying it does not make it so.
 

You have a funny way of connecting the dots. How is there 'no contribution to the economy' if the money is spent on goods and services? Are they burning taxation dollars?
 

How do you think infrastructure gets built?
The US used to be in the Top 10 in infrastructure in the world, not too long ago. I think it's barely in the Top 30, currently.
 
Do you think that has anything to do with that dumb Bible thumping 'Gawd Fearun' Christian redneck G.W. Bush starting a decade old bombing/rebuilding spree in the Middle East?
America's a 'Christian Nation Y'all' after all.
Sounds like an internal problem to me.
He's a born and bred 'Mericun who worships the baby Jesus, and will 'spend' America into a hole to go after 'Eeeevil Doers', just like the good book says.
That's what America wanted; a President like that.
And that's what they got.
The majority of Americans proved not once, but twice, how stupid they are by voting that clown into office.
 
It's official. It's an internal problem. America has got it's head up it's own ass.
 
 
 
 

No is right.

Source:  http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=5564

 

"Hugh d’Andrade and Bob Wing's 2002 Map 1 entitled "U.S. Military Troops and Bases around the World, The Cost of 'Permanent War'", confirms the presence of US military personnel in 156 countries. 

The US Military has bases in 63 countries. Brand new military bases have been built since September 11, 2001 in seven countries. 

In total, there are 255,065 US military personnel deployed Worldwide.

These facilities include a total of 845,441 different buildings and equipments. The underlying land surface is of the order of 30 million acres. According to Gelman, who examined 2005 official Pentagon data, the US is thought to own a total of 737 bases in foreign lands. Adding to the bases inside U.S. territory, the total land area occupied by US military bases domestically within the US and internationally is of the order of 2,202,735 hectares, which makes the Pentagon one of the largest landowners worldwide (Gelman, J., 2007)."

Spend more and more on fighting the world, and lower taxes, and borrow money to fund it all. Fucking brilliant...

 

 

Gotcha. Makes sense. I do that kind of thing a lot, too. Sometimes too much, but that's another topic.

There's plenty to debate, if you're comparing the cost 'burden' of society paying for an abortion, vs what the cost 'burden' is for an unwanted child brought up in less than ideal conditions.

Pay a little now vs pay a lot more later...
 

 

Strawman. That's not my position.

Don't overstate what I said.

I never made any statement to the contrary, so I have no idea why this is in response to what you quoted.

That's like arguing that 'guns' kill people.
 

The gas tax (in theory) is scaled to be linear with road deterioration. That is a sound strategy.

I'm not even convinced that the gas tax covers the maintenance of roads, nevermind your claim that it's being diverted for other uses.

What about Cheney and Halliburton, and the Bush family and Dresser which merged with Halliburton and got multi million dollar contracts from the Department of Homeland Security?

Do you blame 'taxation' for that spending?

 

Let's talk about ROI.

What about the government paying $14.00 for a stamped washer that goes on a nut and bolt on a military tank. I ain't making that up (but I'm too lazy to search for a source), I saw an investigation done on 60 minutes or CNN.

What's the ROI on that?

Is 'taxation' the reason why a washer is valued at $14.00?

Can you estimate what the US space race to the moon has cost since it's inception?

WTF is the ROI on that?

How the fuck did the race up to the moon and the knowledge of what moon dust is made up before the Russians 'benefit' the average American?

Pride??

I bet a lot of Americans would have argued that it was worth the price just for the 'pride' of beating the Russians in the race to the moon.

Kennedy was certainly for it.

 

WTF are churches providing 'services', collecting income from patrons, and not paying taxes?

 

 

EXC, the problem is that taxation, while you may not like it, is necessary for any society larger than a township to function properly.  Taxes are what build roads, educate people, ensure infrastructure and also protect us in times of danger, IE fires, emergencies, etc. Taxation works under the principal that insuriance companies are supposed to, the idea that in essence everyone pays in a bit here and there so that if there is an emergency we have the resources at our disposal to deal with it. Taxes are part of the social contract. You've benefited from public funding and taxation all your life, roads, schools, police, fire departments, food and drug regulation, etc. Not to mention the fact that frankly corporations do need regulation, they exist only to produce profit, not to promote the public good. This means that we need to make sure that they don't pollute and poison groundwater or release chemicals that cause problems for residents of an area as well as making sure that their products are safe to use.

Part of the problem too is that you seem to believe that anyone on relief is just going to stop working. During an economic recession people are being fired who may have been hard workers and skilled, but the company either decided to cut the budgets or that the stock price needed to be a bit higher, so out you go. Relief means that people aren't starving to death and that parents can feed their children while they look for work. I could also point out that a society should be compassionate to their least fortunate but I imagine you'd argue that we should just let those that can't find a job in a bad economy starve?

Also, more government spending doesn't mean more debt. During the depression Roosevelt spent heavily setting up massive public works projects to employ people and give them hope as well as producing things that could be useful or just be nice to look at (planting trees and the like.) As well as funding the arts to provide people with something to help them pull themselves from a grinding hopelessness. Even if it wasn't perfect it was a damn sight better than nothing at all and it provided people with work experience as well as producing things like the hoover damn which helped bring electricity to many homes in the US.

Let me ask you a different question, do you understand that governments can't save money? IE they can't bank it, so what they get they have to use, either returning it in tax cuts or spending it to build up infrastructure and expand programs. I would also ask how you would suggest that governments 'earn' money. Do they have to put out petitions for every individual tax increase? If so most people would reject them because all they understand is 'taxes bad!' and thus necessary funding is lost. But then I imagine your greatest goal is looking out for number one, right?

I think you misunderstand my position.

Not everyone drives a car or flies on planes. So we have user fees such as gas tax, airport security fee etc... The government mandates you carry auto-insurance, but they can leave the insurance to private companies that are regulated. There is no reason with modern technology the same principles can't be applied to fire, police and every other service no provided by our now bankrupt governments. The only government employees need only be a small percentage of managers and business regulators, that can be fired when they screw up. Only a nation of slaves requires politicians to be our leaders.

If companies are in a business such as chemicals, why should I pay taxes to regulate their business? There should be user fees on such businesses to cover their costs. Fire protection should be paid for by the people that need it the most, not out of a general fund manipulated by politics.

Taxes today are means of wealth transfer. Do you find the concept of user fees and insurance mandates irrational or is letting politicians play games with other people's money(that they didn't earn) a better way to go?

 

But all you do is delay the the starvation with welfare. You raise taxes and debt to pay for welfare, you're just kicking the can down the road. The basic problem is too many people chasing after too few jobs and too few resources. All welfare can do is delay the day of reckoning or the Malthusian catastrophe.

The concept of aid to the poor can only be net beneficial to society if there is also mandatory family planning, mandatory education and work in areas the economy needs.

I don't have a big problem with what Roosevelt did. The problem today is the welfare systems works where if you have more babies you get more money. You can study whatever you want in college while we have massive labor shortages in areas like health care for the elderly. The current system is insane.

Government is the sovereign authority over a portion of land. So they should charge people a user fee for the right to use the land. This would force conservation of natural resources. With services like fire and police, do what we do with auto insurance, mandate everyone that everyone buy a minimal coverage based on one's potential risk of needing these services. Move toward privatizing these services. Also fees for things like patents, copyrights, bank regulation, etc... Why do you find income tax rational?

I don't see why a government can't 'earn' it's money just like every business. By getting paid when it provides a service or grants a license, not when it puts a gun to your head like an armed robber.

Who doesn't look out for number one? Aren't all the government unions that have bankrupted us just looking out for themselves? So how could any corporation be any worse? At least you can fire them if they rip you off, instead with these unions, we're on the hook to pay our their generous pensions for the rest of our lives.

 

I wish I could have commented on Ray's newest cinematic abomination earlier, but better late then never.

I am going to avoid talking about the pros and cons of abortion and strictly stick to fact-checking Ray's BS movie.

Shortly after Ray made this movie, I made a response article on RationalWiki, which I invite everyone to read,

http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/180_%28movie%29

 

(Please feel free to read and comment on it. If you can think of anything to improve it, please share).

It cracked me up when Ray called himself a Jew.

In the article, I first wanted to explain why Ray's history was not only poor but also completely dishonest. I volunteered at the Museum of Tolerance for nearly 7 months and led people in tours, educating the public what actually happened, and I could easily spot when Ray got his facts wrong about Hitler and the Nazis. Ray tries to give the impression that Hitler was not a Christian and all Nazis are anti-christian, which is totally bogus.

 

Eventually, addressing abortion would be inevitable, but I wanted to remain as neutral as possible. So, I just checked to see if Ray's arguments had any consistency or logic in it... and surprise, surprise it did not. For instance, Ray says "why punish the child for the crimes of the father" and all I had to do was point out that is exactly what God does: he punishes us for the crimes of Adam and God killed a child for the crimes of David (and god is supposed to be righteous and perfect).

It appears the Bible did not agree one bit with Ray's arguments, which is probably why Ray did not ring up the Bible at any time while he was interviewing these people (who could have been prompted).

I pointed out every fallacy I could, which was mainly appeal to emotion.

I was actually surprise that Ray did not mention Darwin or evolution in the movie, but after some digging I knew it was too good to be true. Ray claimed in a "180 Course Book" that Hitler used Darwin's theory to justify his views, so I had to include it in the article for the unfortunate people who bought and read Ray's pile of garbage.

 

So anyway, I welcome all feedback on this article as well as any improvement. If you like it, spread it around. The places I think I do need help with is Ray's 180 Course guide. I found the first 18 pages online, but these are only the questions. If anyone could find the "Answer Key" to this booklet, that would deal a big blow in Ray's face.

                       Hitler and the nazi's and several other bastards have use something called Social Darwinisim; which in brief means servivl of the richest or servival of the most effective bully. Darwin would be appalled to have his name used for such idiotcy. Comfort is just one more idiot who wouldn't know Darwin if it hit him in the face. Worse yet Comfort doesn't want to know.

 

Ray is poisoning people's brains with this crap. First off Hitler was a politician, not a scientist. NO western scientist or western atheist would ever value the pseudo science Hitler concocted.

Funny though, some people at the top of our wealth chain do have the "sink or swim" attitude. They are just as clueless that while getting resources is part of evolution, so is the importance of the stability of the ecosystem, and so is cooperation.

Evolution can work through force or cooperation and the kind side of humanity prefers cooperation. The dark side of evolution is that people can get to the point of selfishness and live in a bubble at the cost of others.

That is why to avoid fascism of any kind, religion, political party, or class, our system must protect diversity and foster more economic stability.

Ray really needs to be put to task by the skeptic community in mass. He is dumbing down society and poisoning peoples minds.