Here we expose the religions of the world for the frauds they really are.
Preying on the gullible and lost, giving them all the answers they want to hear,
and in turn leading them into a world of ignorance and disinformation; religion has got to go.
CHICAGO, Illinois (AP) — When it comes to saving lives, God trumps doctors for many Americans.
An eye-opening survey reveals widespread belief that divine intervention can revive dying patients. And, researchers said, doctors “need to be prepared to deal with families who are waiting for a miracle.”
More than half of randomly surveyed adults — 57 percent — said God’s intervention could save a family member even if physicians declared treatment would be futile. And nearly three-quarters said patients have a right to demand that treatment continue.
When asked to imagine their own relatives being gravely ill or injured, nearly 20 percent of doctors and other medical workers said God could reverse a hopeless outcome.
“Sensitivity to this belief will promote development of a trusting relationship” with patients and their families, according to researchers. That trust, they said, is needed to help doctors explain objective, overwhelming scientific evidence showing that continued treatment would be worthless.
Pat Loder, a Milford, Michigan, woman whose two young children were killed in a 1991 car crash, said she clung to a belief that God would intervene when things looked hopeless.
“When you’re a parent and you’re standing over the body of your child who you think is dying … you have to have that” belief, Loder said.
While doctors should be prepared to deal with those beliefs, they also shouldn’t “sugarcoat” the truth about a patient’s condition, Loder said.
Being honest in a sensitive way helps family members make excruciating decisions about whether to let dying patients linger, or allow doctors to turn off life-prolonging equipment so that organs can be donated, Loder said.
Loder was driving when a speeding motorcycle slammed into the family’s car. Both children were rushed unconscious to hospitals, and Loder says she believes doctors did everything they could. They were not able to revive her 5-year-old son; soon after her 8-year-old daughter was declared brain dead.
She said her beliefs about divine intervention have changed.
“I have become more of a realist,” she said. “I know that none of us are immune from anything.”
Loder was not involved in the survey, which appears in Monday’s Archives of Surgery.
SAN FRANCISCO — – Doctors may not discriminate against gays and lesbians in medical treatment, even if the procedures being sought conflict with physicians’ religious beliefs, the California Supreme Court decided today.
In the second, major gay-rights victory this year, the state high court said religious physicians must obey a state law that bars businesses from discriminating on the basis of sexual orientation.
“The 1st Amendment’s right to the free exercise of religion does not exempt defendant physicians here from conforming their conduct to the . . . antidiscrimination requirements,” Justice Joyce L. Kennard wrote for the court.
The decision stemmed from a lawsuit filed by Guadalupe T. Benitez, an Oceanside lesbian who lives with her partner and wanted to become pregnant with donated sperm.
Benitez contended that Dr. Christine Brody, an obstetrician and gynecologist at the North Coast Women’s Care Medical Group in Vista, told her that her religious views prevented her from performing an intrauterine insemination on a lesbian.
Another physician at the clinic, Dr. Douglas Fenton, later told Benitez that the staff was uncomfortable helping her conceive a child and advised her to find another doctor outside the medical group, Benitez said.
The doctors denied the allegations. Brody said she would not perform the procedure on any unmarried woman, heterosexual or homosexual.
Justice Marvin Baxter, in a separate concurring opinion, said doctors can avoid liability by referring patients who want procedures that conflict with their religion to other physicians in the practice.
Ontario physicians could be stripped of their right to exercise religious or moral conscience if a new set of guidelines is accepted by their regulating body next month, critics say.
Doctors across Canada are now allowed to opt out of such things as prescribing birth control or morning-after pills or doing abortions when it goes against their conscience. Physicians are also allowed to refuse to do referrals in such cases.
But a new draft proposal from the College of Physicians and Surgeons of Ontario could change that for doctors in the province.
“I’m really concerned with the new principle that the college is promulgating and that is that doctors do not have the right to be guided in the conduct of the practice by their conscience,” said Joseph Ben-Ami, president of the Centre for Policy Studies, an Ottawa-based think tank. “That’s a sweeping broad principle to establish — and once you’ve established it the field is wide open for further changes.”
For example, he said a doctor might refuse to help a same-sex couple to use reproductive technology to have a child.
“There are a lot of doctors who feel uncomfortable with this and think it’s detrimental to the child’s welfare down the road. The way were reading this draft document is a doctor could be hit with a misconduct” if the new rules are adopted.
Some of the provisions included in the draft document are:
• [A] physician’s responsibility is to place the needs of the patient first, [so] there will be times when it may be necessary for physicians to set aside their personal beliefs in order to ensure that patients or potential patients are provided with the medical services the require.”
• “Physicians should be aware that decisions to restrict medical services offered … or to end physician-patient relationships that are based on moral or religious belief may contravene the Code and/or constitute professional misconduct.”
I admit it, I am here for your children, liberties and certainly your faith, I want it all.
I gotta say, my favorite part of this editorial is it’s purely hypocritical nature and interesting choice of words.
“They are “feeling a real need to convert people,” and preaching an “un-gospel.””
As opposed to Christian missionaries or those .. preaching the gospel?
“crusading across America to proclaim his atheism to newspaper”
Crusades.. yeah, nice, equate Atheists with a bunch of religious nuts who went around slaughtering and raping those who didn’t believe in their favorite fictional character; sounds about right to me.
We’ve warned you about them before on our website—but now they’re on a much more aggressive march all across America. No longer are they just staying in their classrooms or writing books and articles in the comfort of their offices. They are “the new atheists,” and they are aggressively going after your children, your liberties, and your faith!
According to the print media and websites, the new atheists say “evangelism is a moral imperative” to spread their “good news” in “persuading people of the virtues of atheism.” They are “drawing on evolution,” and are vocally “hostile to religions,” especially “fundamentalist Christianity and Islam.” They are “feeling a real need to convert people,” and preaching an “un-gospel.” In one media report, it was stated that “at some point there is going to be enough pressure that it is just going to be too embarrassing to believe in God.”
One of the most outspoken of this new breed of atheists is the vehement anti-creationist Dr. Richard Dawkins of Oxford University in England; another is philosopher, Sam Harris. The Washington Post wrote a major article about Harris and stated: “How exactly the faithful [Christians] will transition to a godless, Good Book-less cosmology is not exactly clear … but he is heartened by countries such as Sweden, where he claims 80% of the populace do not believe in God.”
These atheists are not just publicity seekers. They are very serious about their mission. Dawkins, from England, was recently crusading across America to proclaim his atheism to newspapers, websites, and at public meetings.
Some people might say to me, “But there’s no way Americans will go for atheism. Most people believe in God, even if they don’t take the Bible seriously as AiG does.” Think back to the 1950s. What if someone back then said to you, “Beware, the homosexual movement is on the march—if we don’t do something, ‘gay’ marriages will be legalized across the country.” Almost all of us at that time would have said that there’s no way Americans would ever accept this. Most people believe that marriage is one man for one woman, so, no, this will never happen in America.But as you know, it has happened—and continues to happen!
Interestingly, these new atheists liken their growing movement to that of the gay activists. One stated: “We’re in the same position the gay movement was in a few decades ago. There was need for people to come out. The more people who came out, the more people had the courage to come out. “That’s the case with atheists. They are more numerous than anybody realizes.”
If you think this observation is an exaggeration, just consider the popularity of two recent books associated with these new atheists: The God Delusion by Dawkins and Letter to a Christian Nation by Harris. Both books bitterly attack Christianity. Dawkins is more than just angry, though. He has a purpose, says a reviewer: “the whole book is meant to change people’s minds.”
The God Delusion was #8 on the New YorkTimes bestseller list, #10 on Publishers Weekly, and #2 on the Amazon best-seller rankings in November 2006. At the same time, Letter was #6 on the Times list, and #8 in the Amazon rankings. Meanwhile, an increasing number of atheists are attacking our Christian faith in several major newspapers and websites—with their evolutionary beliefs often presented.
It prompts me to ask: “Why are atheists now getting so much publicity and gaining ground? What’s happened in the culture to allow this?” As we’ve been saying for years, there’s been a change in this culture—at a foundation level. Generations have been indoctrinated by the secular education system and media to build their thinking on human reason, not the Word of God. And at the base of this is the creation/evolution issue.
Evolutionary indoctrination has produced generations (even in the church) who doubt the Bible. Barna Research discovered that of teenagers today who call themselves born-again Christians, only 9% believe there is such a thing as absolute truth. These young people are ripe for “secular evangelists” like Dawkins and Harris.
SAN FRANCISCO — A federal judge says the University of California can deny course credit to applicants from Christian high schools whose textbooks declare the Bible infallible and reject evolution.
Rejecting claims of religious discrimination and stifling of free expression, U.S. District Judge James Otero of Los Angeles said UC’s review committees cited legitimate reasons for rejecting the texts - not because they contained religious viewpoints, but because they omitted important topics in science and history and failed to teach critical thinking.
Otero’s ruling Friday, which focused on specific courses and texts, followed his decision in March that found no anti-religious bias in the university’s system of reviewing high school classes. Now that the lawsuit has been dismissed, a group of Christian schools has appealed Otero’s rulings to the Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco.
“It appears the UC is attempting to secularize private religious schools,” attorney Jennifer Monk of Advocates for Faith and Freedom said Tuesday. Her clients include the Association of Christian Schools International, two Southern California high schools and several students.
Charles Robinson, the university’s vice president for legal affairs, said the ruling “confirms that UC may apply the same admissions standards to all students and to all high schools without regard to their religious affiliations.” What the plaintiffs seek, he said, is a “religious exemption from regular admissions standards.”
The suit, filed in 2005, challenged UC’s review of high school courses taken by would-be applicants to the 10-campus system. Most students qualify by taking an approved set of college preparatory classes; students whose courses lack UC approval can remain eligible by scoring well in those subjects on the Scholastic Assessment Test.
Christian schools in the suit accused the university of rejecting courses that include any religious viewpoint, “any instance of God’s guidance of history, or any alternative … to evolution.”
But Otero said in March that the university has approved many courses containing religious material and viewpoints, including some that use such texts as “Chemistry for Christian Schools” and “Biology: God’s Living Creation,” or that include scientific discussions of creationism as well as evolution.
UC denies credit to courses that rely largely or entirely on material stressing supernatural over historic or scientific explanations, though it has approved such texts as supplemental reading, the judge said.
For example, in Friday’s ruling, he upheld the university’s rejection of a history course called Christianity’s Influence on America. According to a UC professor on the course review committee, the primary text, published by Bob Jones University, “instructs that the Bible is the unerring source for analysis of historical events” and evaluates historical figures based on their religious motivations.
Another rejected text, “Biology for Christian Schools,” declares on the first page that “if (scientific) conclusions contradict the Word of God, the conclusions are wrong,” Otero said.
He also said the Christian schools presented no evidence that the university’s decisions were motivated by hostility to religion.
UC attorney Christopher Patti said Tuesday that the judge assessed the review process accurately.
“We evaluate the courses to see whether they prepare these kids to come to college at UC,” he said. “There was no evidence that these students were in fact denied the ability to come to the university.”
Nothing like teaching your kids good Christian values. Anyone else interested in knowing why they say it’s a “cult” when it’s clearly a form of Christianity? I love how they get shunned as not being Christians simply because then Christianity might be given a bad name.
Baltimore police have obtained warrants charging four more members of what authorities call a religious cult in the death of 2-year-old Javon Thompson, whose body was found in May in a suitcase in Philadelphia. The warrants bring the number of people charged in the boy’s death to five.
Charged with murder in warrants were Queen Antoinette, 40, Trevia Williams, 20, Marcus Cobbs, 21, and Steven Bynum, 42. All but Bynum are in jail on other charges, and the Warrant Apprehension Task Force is looking for Bynum in the New York area, said Sterling Clifford, a spokesman for the city’s Police Department.
With the most recent charges, police have charged all but two known adults associated with the tiny religious group, 1 Mind Ministries, in the boy’s death. The gruesome details of that crime were outlined in a 12-page statement of charges written over the weekend by homicide Detective Vernon Parker.
Police say the five suspects belonged to a small group of adults and children who operated for a time in East and West Baltimore. Police allege that the victim’s mother, Ria Ramkissoon, 21, the first to be charged with murder, and others neglected Javon and allowed the boy to starve to death because they thought he was a demon for not saying amen after he was fed, according to police charging documents.
Javon is believed to have died in December 2006 in a West Baltimore house, according to police charging documents. The cause of death was ruled homicide by unspecified means, according to court papers.
In early February 2007, police say, the group fled to Philadelphia, taking the boy’s body in a green suitcase with wheels. They stayed at various places, settling for about a week at the home of a man the group befriended, according to police. Police found Javon’s body in a shed behind the house in May this year. He was wearing a diaper.
DNA evidence provided preliminary confirmation that the remains are those of Javon, according to a police source close to the investigation. Authorities are awaiting complete results.
In early May, three members of the group - including its alleged leader, Toni Ellsberry, also known as Queen Antoinette - were arrested in Brooklyn, N.Y., on outstanding warrants connected to an unrelated Baltimore case in which they are accused of assaulting a city officer who had gone to their home to retrieve a child involved in a custody dispute. The suspects were returned to Baltimore and held on charges that they had failed to show up for a court date.
God hates dogs and cats. He especially hates you and I. I wonder when God will ban eyeballs, you know, we can’t have people looking at each other, it simply leads to promiscuity.
RIYADH (AFP) - Saudi Arabia’s religious police have announced a ban on selling cats and dogs as pets, or walking them in public in the Saudi capital, because of men using them as a means of making passes at women, an official said on Wednesday.
Othman al-Othman, head of the Commission for the Promotion of Virtue and the Prevention of Vice in Riyadh, known as the Muttawa, told the Saudi edition of al-Hayat daily that the commission has started enforcing an old religious edict.
He said the commission was implementing a decision taken a month ago by the acting governor of the capital, Prince Sattam bin Abdul Aziz, adding that it follows an old edict issued by the supreme council of Saudi scholars.
The reason behind reinforcing the edict now was a rising fashion among some men using pets in public “to make passes on women and disturb families,” he said, without giving more details.
Othman said that the commission has instructed its offices in the capital to tell pet shops “to stop selling cats and dogs”.
The 5,000-strong religious police oversees the adherence to Wahabism — a strict version of Sunni Islam, which also forces women to cover from head to toe when in public, and bans them from driving.
… if you are an atheist and you don’t believe in anything, if you die, what is there to go to? Nothing. You are worm dirt. So for their son to die for nothing… that is pretty hard to get your head around that.
It’s nice to see what a well wishing Christian Military leader has to say about dead Atheist soldiers.
