What is Digg?191 Comments
- OBKenobi, on 10/12/2007, -4/+81Eventually, science will be able to provide you with a new hand. We are getting close to that point now.
- yoshitx, on 10/12/2007, -4/+69I lost my hand in a metal stamping machine.
When I asked a faith healer for a miracle, new hand, he just looks at me like Im stupid. - Nameless1, on 10/12/2007, -6/+55This is not faith, this is abuse of faith. The evangelist "healers" abuse our faith in order line their own pockets with money.
- kaijunexus, on 10/12/2007, -13/+60Oh geez, here we go again .... god proving his existence in 3 ... 2 ... 1 ...
hmmm .... i said "1", god .... - Steamy, on 10/12/2007, -1/+47I wish I knew if sockpuppets is being ironic or stupid.
- Iffrat, on 10/12/2007, -4/+39i think they should be sued for making tv suck on Sundays .. but thats just the way i feel
- nonchai, on 10/12/2007, -3/+33Its so puzzling why faith healers like Benny Hinn seem to spend so much time using gods infinite powers to heal such relatively trivial problems as back pain and other conditions that exhibit pain symptoms. Its well known how mind games and the placebo effect can cause pain to temporsrily go away,
If god is so powerful how come he never heals amputees ?. Time to sue Benny Hinn, Rheinhardt Bonkke and all the other "snake oil" evangelical fundamentalist so called faith healers that in reality want the gullible to put their faith in THEM and their archaic fundamentalist NONSENSE.
These filthy rich travelling false hope salesmen make me puke.
- spudnic, on 10/12/2007, -4/+32Or because blind faith is dangerous, and I mean literally. this story is evidence of that.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -1/+27He's making a point. He didn't really lose his hand. http://www.whydoesgodhateamputees.com/ Well I mean he might have lost his hand...
- 60days, on 10/12/2007, -2/+27Phrenology was always a pseudo-science, which yes, is another area full of retards.
- mbabauer, on 10/12/2007, -7/+32@gstlouis
Miracles? Like what, a ham sandwich that looks like the virgin Mary? Or a window that looks like Christ being crusified? Perhaps the only miracle here is the fact that people haven't seen passed the ***** earlier. There are plenty of religions out there, who's to say yours is the right one? Or who's to say any are right.
I have a very hard time believing that we are only moral because we have to impress some omnipotent being sitting somewhere watching us all, or that said being would give two iotas about us, our sickness, etc, etc. I hope that we are moral because its in out nature...that its a conscious choice, not some pre-determined track.
To that end, the only thing that will save this country is not more religion, its less. Bible-toting zealots sometimes forget this country was founded on freedom of religion. This freedom also includes my freedom to not have any. And before you start throwing up things like "In God We Trust", know that there were plenty of people involved in the shaping of this countries early doctrine that did not believe in your god, and some who believed in none. - meshgiath, on 10/12/2007, -10/+32The "Jesus is magic" people need to die off and leave the world in common-sensical peace.
- cakestick, on 10/12/2007, -5/+26ATTAAAAACK!
- laseractive, on 10/12/2007, -7/+27I don't know which is more disturbing in this story, the guy making money by lying about healing people or the guy that believed it. I guess you get desperate though when you are dying. Sad story all the way around. Can't see this case making it though. How do you put faith on trial?
- P5ycHo, on 10/12/2007, -7/+27What's your point?
Are you realizing that religion IS dangerous and you predict people coming to digg and start saying "Told ya so"? - Jaybob, on 10/12/2007, -2/+19Phrenology is not a science. It's practitioners are merely faith healers trying to use the perception of a "science" to convince people. The only thing phrenology has proven is that the human head has bumps. And I could have told you that with out claims that they do anything other than protect your brain.
- devilfunk, on 10/12/2007, -4/+17Darwin wins!
- tont0r, on 10/12/2007, -2/+14"drmangrum
People still prey in hospital you dumbass.
You would prey to god yourself if you had cancer."
They 'prey'?? what sick cannibal hospital are you going to? - cybersnafu, on 10/12/2007, -1/+12We have angered the paper mache gods! RUN FOR THE HILLS!
- polyGone, on 10/12/2007, -5/+15Christianity gives christianity a bad name.
- pcgeek101, on 10/12/2007, -8/+18@Nameless1: Thank you for pointing that out. It's too bad that people like this give Christianity a bad name. It's also too bad that everyone can't see past that.
- abcdefghij, on 10/12/2007, -4/+14oh my science!
you, timechild, must lead us in a battle against the United Atheist Alliance! - j10s, on 10/12/2007, -5/+15Wow this sounds Chiropractic.
- thunderer, on 10/12/2007, -6/+16I feel quite the opposite. Being preached to about the sins of homosexuality by a guy in a dress is funnier than Comedy Central.
- brenthals, on 10/12/2007, -0/+10Darlene Bishop is Co-Pastor of Solid Rock Church in Monroe Ohio. This is a link to that gawdy church.
http://www.solidrockchurch.org/images/king_fount.jpg - pbaehr, on 10/12/2007, -2/+12@obrysii:
Well, isn't it wonderful that we can realize that we've made a mistake in science, correct it, and move on? Science is constantly changing as we learn new things. If we had considered Newton to be infallible and refused to change his theories when Einstein stepped up to the stage you'd have a point. - xbasilx, on 10/12/2007, -3/+13Idiots such as this televangelist should be also facing criminal charges, not merely a civil lawsuit
- sockpuppets, on 10/12/2007, -28/+38You're asking faith healers for miracles? It sounds like you are stupid, no offense.
- rationalist, on 10/12/2007, -5/+14"Most religions from what I have seen have tried to build a better person and a better community."
Empirically, religions don't seem to be doing a very good job.
Perhaps it's time to give reason a chance. - drmangrum, on 10/12/2007, -2/+11I always loved when that phrase was kicked out by someone. They, of course, would get angry when I would say "If I helped myself, how did God help me?"
- Veritate, on 10/12/2007, -3/+12@obrysii,
No, modern science is not infallible, which is why it changes. In case you hadn't noticed, phrenology has been dead for a long time. The reason? It did make assertions which could be proven false. And, they were.
It's legitimate to discuss what may become pseudo-science, and I'd go for other topics with questionable evidence. String theory, perhaps.
Religion, however, has none of the virtues of being even a pseudo-science. Religions are based on bald assertion. As such, it's not even worthy of investigation. - jacobmiller, on 10/12/2007, -2/+11Why is this not faith? Is faith not the process of believing in miracles without having any rational basis for doing so?
- roc4u, on 10/12/2007, -2/+10@ gstlouis
Of course, they were faithful like they've been told to be, and now they are beginning to open their eyes to the possibility that it's all been a lie.
Also, if it turned out the other way, then proven for a fact that a person can cure cancer, trust me scientists and athiest alike would be crowning this person Sir Awesome alongside the Christians and Muslims.
Sceptics aren't devoid of the want for amazing things to happen, they just demand that they are proven to work, because the history of man is littered with snake oil salesman and liars. - webmonk, on 10/12/2007, -0/+8@obrysii: Plus, he gave you the cancer you needed the strength to try and overcome in the first place.
- drmangrum, on 10/12/2007, -3/+10I'm confused. You believe in faith healing, but you caution to get to a hospital if your sick. Thats like being on the titanic, screaming that everything is fine, but putting on a life vest anyway. Either you have faith or you don't.
- mb96net, on 10/12/2007, -3/+10"if I am realizing anything, it's that an exponentially increasing number of people are becoming atheists simply because it's more socially acceptable. Weaklings."
Are you so blind... to quote the bible "you see the pebble in your brother's eye, but cannot see the log in your own". Exactly the opposite is true, people that are NOT atheists (in North America it's Christians) are those that believe what they believe because it is socially acceptable. If you were born and raised on an island with no exposure to religion, do you honestly believe you would be a Christian? No, it's only because your parents (and your community) raised you to be Christian, that you are. Atheists are the people that take a step back and say "hey maybe the rest of society is wrong, maybe religion isn't true, let's examine it and find out". Christians say "no, no, it's got to be true because most people I know think it's true".
Who is the weakling? Atheists only make up 3% of North Americans (as of a poll I read on-line a few months ago, I'll look for link and post). How is challenging the view of the majority considered being WEAK? It's the definition of courage! It is much more difficult to stand up to a friend than an enemy.
Weakling... - MysticSavage, on 10/12/2007, -6/+13Here's the thing...God helps those who help themselves. And by help themselves, I mean SEE A ***** DOCTOR!!!
- drmangrum, on 10/12/2007, -3/+10I would? I'm atheist. If i had cancer, i would HOPE that it would go into remission. I would HOPE it would operable. I would HOPE I would live through it. I wouldn't pray.
Funny how when the christians get offended, they are the first to cast stones. Hypocrite. - rationalist, on 10/12/2007, -3/+10Same anecdotes are told about faith healers and laying on of hands. Anecdotes are not evidence of effectiveness; at best, they are evidence of an unreliable and erratic placebo effect, or the occasional, incidental and fleeting effect of tissue massage during "manipulation". Repeated double-blind clinical trials around the world have demonstrated no difference between those treated by "real" chiropractors and those treated by untrained actors pretending to treat subjects while performing random "manipulations".
This is not true of all "alternative" medicine; some trials, for example, have shown statistically significant differences between actual acupuncture treatment and mock applications - but only for a limited scope of short-term pain relief; this indicates that some actual, physical mechanism is at work, and merits further study.
All medical treatments which claim to have measurable physiological effects should be evaluated based on empirical evidence, not wishful thinking.
Chiropractic is complete hucksterism, practiced by frauds, based on falsified evidence and its claimed effects violate basic understanding of human physiology and medicine. Its claims have been debunked, its effectiveness disproven. Sadly, it doesn't matter how much you want to believe it cured you - though I don't doubt your pain lessened under the placebo effect; intensity of belief plays no role in making something real. - Onwlyix, on 10/12/2007, -2/+8Interesting, but I hate stories with only 5 sentences. I'd like to know more, please.
- mike_douglas, on 10/12/2007, -1/+7"If he hadn't died, this whole wrongful death trial would be silly now, wouldn't it?"
Did you, by any chance, attend Liberty University? - drmangrum, on 10/12/2007, -1/+7In a civil case, you can sue for ANYTHING. Which is why our courts are so hopelessly clogged with BS. It's all in how you make your case.
- polyGone, on 10/12/2007, -2/+8Being atheist isn't the socially cool thing to do. That is what religion is. Every time I tell someone I am an atheist, they all look around at their peers to check and see if they all 'still believe in god'. Then, there only argument is that they all believe. None of them have read the bible or can even give me the basic principles of their religion. It was after reading the bible I became and atheist.
If intelligence, questioning, and adaptation is weak, then I guess I am 'weak'.
***** caveman.... - mbabauer, on 10/12/2007, -0/+6@exsst
You assume he/she believes in God, or at least the God all Christians believe in. My wife was raised buddhist, and although she would probably pray, it would not be to *your* God. Its ignorance that people of faith can't grasp the idea that someone may not share their thoughts and beliefs, or that we should. If you sleep well at night because your believe in Christianity (there is a difference between believing in God and Christianity, as there are many "Gods"), then thats awesome for you. But, don't make me believe in it or expect I should just because you do. - derekschaefer, on 10/12/2007, -1/+7Feel sorry for the guy.. but the preacher's own FAMILY is suing her? She must be demented or have lost a grip on reality. No matter what you believe in, God or no not, words cannot heal chronic ailments : Anyways, ridiculous and sad story.
- tont0r, on 10/12/2007, -4/+10@pcgeek101
thats human nature to only look at the bad. or maybe an American thing, i dont know. But when bad things happen, it puts a black eye on people. When good things happen, nothing really happens.
Better put by Futurama, 'When you do something right, people wont be sure you have done anything at all' - rationalist, on 10/12/2007, -2/+7obrysil, thank you for making my points for me. You seem to think you were refuting me, while making exactly the point I was making - religion doesn't seem, on balance, to do a great job making people better, despite thousands of years, tremendous resources and a near-monopoly on the means of communication for much of recorded history; therefore, considering its demonstrated costs to society, perhaps it is immoral to promote it. Religion being adherence to a codifed set of beliefs and rituals that are supposedly inerrant and the product of received divine reason, it is inherently vulnerable to abuse; it discourages free inquiry and encourages unquestioned obedience to authority; it claims immunity from the basic tools of critical thinking that form the basis of all human progress and indeed modern human civilization itself; and, because it inherently divides the world into believers and nonbelievers, into possessers of truth and deniers of truth, religion is an inherently destructive social force.
There is little evidence to suggest that people become better with religion; on the contrary, comparative studies of both individuals and nations demonstrate quite conclusively a direct correlation between tendency toward criminality, immorality, and a depressed quality of life, by all reasonable measures, on the one hand, and religiosity, on the other. In short, the more devout an individual, the more likely they are to end up in prison, divorced, abusing child or spouse, prejudiced, etc., vs a rationalist; and the more devout a nation, in a comparison of all free nations, the more depressed quality of life measures are for that society as compared to its more secular peers.
Empirically, as well as anecdotally, therefore, whatever incidental and occasional merits inure to the faithful cannot be demonstrated as originating from faith - one might just as well have done good things as an atheist, or bad things as a believer; while significant costs to society, contributory factors to social instability, and hampers to human progress are manifest in religion.
It seems evident that pursuing a rational, secular life based on critical thinking and self-determination is the more sensible and even more moral path. - Veritate, on 10/12/2007, -2/+7"One must suffer to know the sweetness of the reward. Like denying yourself dessert until after you've eaten the spinach."
So, if someone dies early Christians are sorrowful because they didn't suffer enough. Hmm, seems to clash with those who die early due to cancer, doesn't it? Surely a 20-year old with cancer is doing their fair share of suffering, and shouldn't be denied entrance to the afterlife? Or you mean that because they haven't suffered enough, they won't appreciate not having cancer (you know, after they die -- dying does cure cancer, right? It's not part of your religion that your diseases follow you into the afterlife?). - 60days, on 10/12/2007, -3/+8Phrenology never passed the required level of proof for the scientific method (which should have been obvious considering the kind of ill-defined subjective qualities assigned to each area - e.g. 'Veneration'/'Ideality') and the reliance on tenuous correllation instead of any testable causal relationship. It may well have been believed by some people, even some scientists, but science makes no claim over the contents of peoples minds, only the process of exploring reality, which has certainly proven effective (take a moment to consider the mechanics of the device you are using right now). I'm not saying conclusions reached via current scientific knowledge can't be wrong (it regularly is on the cutting-edge) but its ability to acknowledge that and correct our knowledge is what makes it effective.
PS - I was suprised by your comment saying atheists can rarely logically explain their beliefs, since you are on Digg, where it happens pretty much hourly in the comments and articles. This suggests to me my arguments aren't going to be taken on board. - chiklit, on 10/12/2007, -1/+6They should just charge god with negligent homicide.
-
Show 51 - 100 of 189 discussions
The Digg Toolbar for Firefox lets you Digg, submit content, and keep track of Digg even when you're not on the Digg site. Download the official 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is 