From: stumper 

Attila < wrote:
> On Thu, 22 Mar 2007 17:45:42 -0400, stumper  in
> alt.abortion with message-id
>  wrote:
>
>> Attila < wrote:
>>> On Thu, 22 Mar 2007 11:02:20 -0400, stumper
 in
>>> alt.abortion with message-id
>>>  wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> If it's obvious that "delusions are harmful,"
>>>>>> why is it impossible that "prayers are answered"?
>>>>> Prove any prayer has ever been answered.  Your proof,
of course, must
>>>>> exclude any other possible explanation.
>>>>>
>>>> I pray that I like to feel better here and now.
>>>> I feel much better already.
>>> I am still waiting for your proof that you in fact *do* feel better,
>>> and that, if so, no other possible explanation can exist.
>>>
>> I just redefined 'prayer' to make it self-evident.
>> No other explanation is required.
>
> Yes, it is.  Self-evident is not proof.
>
>> What makes you think God's existence needs to be proved?
>
> If anything exists it can be proven to exist, and presenting something
> as if it actually exists requires support for that position.
>
> If you assert something exists you must support that assertion or
> admit you make assertions you cannot support, and thereby proving your
> statements should be viewed with suspicion.
>
>> Do you have any idea since when we need to do that?
>
> It needs to be done anytime an assertion is made and then challenged.
> I so challenge any assertion that a god exists, has ever done
> anything, or has any direct effect on reality.
>
> --
> Pro-Choice is Pro-Freedom
>


When someone say "I follow my conscience," do you usually ask him
to prove its existence?

When someone say "I feel lucky today," do you usually ask him to
prove luck's existence?

--
~Stumper

--- BBBS/LiI v4.01 Flag