Abortion is a Satanic Sacrifice

[Imryl]

Spirituality forum rule 11 bans: “Solicitation of personal information (e.g., age, income, or location), beyond that freely offered by members through inclusion in their public profiles”

He’s saying they’re willing, I’m accepting his offer to provide the proof.

What sort of insider information about satanists would you like Alan? You want me to post websites? Seriously, use google. There’s no super secret way Satanists communicate. No super encryption codes to break into the top secret archives.

I was baptized in LaPlata Maryland when I was one year old. Two of my children were baptized at St. Agnes Catholic Church in Catonsville, MD last year, and my youngest was baptized just two weeks ago down in DC.

Their godfather is a religious priest and my spiritual director of about 8 years, whom is now instructing my husband on the Catholic faith, though he has made no commitment to join as of yet.

For more specific information you’ll have to use PMs.

 

[april32010]

Spirituality forum rule 11 bans: “Solicitation of personal information (e.g., age, income, or location), beyond that freely offered by members through inclusion in their public profiles”

Shucks. I wanted to ask you to post a photo of your baptismal certificate and send me the phone number of the parish where you went to RCIA, so I could verify you’ve become Catholic and are no longer satanist.

and this has nothing to do with what was asked

 

[Samson01]

If only it was peanuts instead of popcorn.

 

[AlanFromWichita]

He’s saying they’re willing, I’m accepting his offer to provide the proof.

Sorry I must have missed that.

What sort of insider information about satanists would you like Alan? You want me to post websites? Seriously, use google. There’s no super secret way Satanists communicate. No super encryption codes to break into the top secret archives.

No thank you; I’m not interested any more.

In general I like to know what I can about all sides of issues, and I like to see first hand what each side has to say.

But I’ve grown since that last post. I have insatiable curiosity but I’m no longer curious about that. I’m bored with it now; this thread has been enough action for one epoch.

Alan

 

[Imryl]

Thank God!

 

[AlanFromWichita]

Thank God!

Or as I like to play, Praise to the Lord!

Alan

 

[Samson01]

Anyways, I was talking with my fo-parish Priest about this subject and he explained it as a “anti-sacrament”. He had been outside of an abortion clinic protesting and a woman came up to him saying “how dare you…this is my body”. Sound familar?

 

[Aurora_Maria]

Or as I like to play, Praise to the Lord!

Alan

Is that you playing the piano!? Very nice!

 

[CompSciGuy]

This ought to be good, after someone who says that “alleged facts” constitute my claiming them to be accurate facts.

And doesn’t get it when it’s pointed out to him.

Sigh. Let me introduce you to the dictionary. Reference dictionary.com (no I’m not making it up):

allegation: an assertion made with little or no proof.

“Alleged facts” – statements offered as allegation.

fact: something said to be true or supposed to have happened: The facts given by the witness are highly questionable.

So with or without the “alleged” qualifier I was not at risk for claiming his facts to be true. Facts that are not true can apparently also be facts, according to the dictionary. So I used the word “allege” as a redundant vehicle, to stop the likes of you from reading me wrong. So even with two witnesses, you still say I’m wrong and as far as I can tell without (humbly) doing any additional research.

So now it’s your turn to be wrong. Again. Still.

Here’s a definition of the word “fact,” which, in fact (no pun intended) is the word that you used:

Fact : something that actually exists; reality; truth: Your fears have no basis in fact.

So if it were alleged, then it would not be a fact, but an allegation.
And the way you quoted it:
…instead of facing the facts…
Facing the facts means that you have to accept something that is generally shown to be true.

So with your use of words, along with your continual support of everything that Zachary King has been saying, I am sure you can understand the confusion.

If I believed everything I hear (or read), I would have believed you that I had endorsed the OP claims.

The only reason you don’t accept what I say is because I have been challenging your beliefs. That is to be expected.

I did not. Need we get the dictionary out again to discern the difference between “asking” and “assuming?” If I had assumed, I wouldn’t have asked, silly.

Let me point you again to your quote in post #115, in which you were caricaturing my judgement:

Actually that’s pretty close to what I was thinking, “… here’s a person saying something I haven’t heard before about abortion, and I don’t want to hear abortion is connected to satan or makes satan’s followers happy. Must squelch this voice.”

Here you made the assumption that I didn’t think abortion was connected to Satan.

you

ask a question you typically assume you already know the answer?

That makes perfect sense. Thank you for answering my question.

Oh, and if it’s a contest in nit-picky, I’m pretty anal-retentive, especially when challenged.

Alan
I have tried to be as charitable as I can in this discussion… Again I will say that there is nothing wrong with rejecting a story if 1. it is unreasonable, sensational, or unlikely, and 2. there is not enough evidence to support it. This is what skepticism is.

So far what you have done is to ridicule my criticisms, and then deny your own statements when I bring them up, and then not address anything that I have said.

 

[Lost_Wanderer]

Please rest assured that if Westboro or Jack Chick came on this thread, nobody would demand evidence from them that they have done evil.

Because everyone knows they’'re attention-seeking frauds. What makes your friend Zack here any different?

Actually, LW, prove to me that you’re human and not just a clever software bot. I bet you can’t.

A software bot has as much grammatical understanding as Google’s search algorithms.

Seeing as how I’m in an online marketing group that experiences both on a daily basis, it is my word against yours, literally. Look at how I structure my sentences.

They are not formulaic (or at least on the same, redundant level as a text-spinner).

 

[AlanFromWichita]

So with your use of words, along with your continual support of everything that Zachary King has been saying, I am sure you can understand the confusion.

No, you twisted it again. I said “the facts the OP alleged.” To any reasonable jury member, that does not imply “the facts the OP alleged and therefore since I used the word ‘facts’ I believe them to be TRUE facts.”

Also you’re telling me I’m wrong because I didn’t use YOUR definition. Definitions are an OR situation. Another logic problem on your end. If you’re going to split hairs, get a sharper knife.

The only reason you don’t accept what I say is because I have been challenging your beliefs. That is to be expected.

I neither accept nor reject what you say in terms of satanic truth. I can see, though, that you will jump through any sorts of logical pretzels to give the impression you have prevailed. You tell me that the OP and I said things we didn’t, and when called on it you concoct a non-response. So it does call into question the veracity of what you say about those things we can’t see.

I have tried to be as charitable as I can in this discussion…

Good thing, eh?

Again I will say that there is nothing wrong with rejecting a story if 1. it is unreasonable, sensational, or unlikely, and 2. there is not enough evidence to support it. This is what skepticism is.

No, there is a difference between “considering” a story and “rejecting” it. It’s one thing to say “it is not verified,” and “it is wrong.”

So “rejecting” a story because there is not enough evidence,is foolish. So I disagree with point 2. above. It’s intellectually immature to reject something just because it isn’t proven.

Especially if it is a) reasonable, and b) likely, that these rituals do take place, and in even likely that they take place in the United States.

Please tell me why a story should be doubted just because it’s “sensational?” We’ve had plenty here in Wichita. Did I tell you, for example, that my sister-in-law was stalked by the infamous “BTK Strangler” in Wichita? Want to hear a sensational story? Watch this guy. This is sensational but deadly, literally deadly, serious.

Now you watch all the parts of that court testimony and tell my why it’s such a stretch for me to believe that satanic abortions are being performed in the United States. I’d be surprised if they don’t happen in Wichita on an ongoing basis.

So far what you have done is to ridicule my criticisms, and then deny your own statements when I bring them up, and then not address anything that I have said.

Oh, I’m sorry – you didn’t really mean that, did you?

Alan

 

[AlanFromWichita]

Because everyone knows they’'re attention-seeking frauds. What makes your friend Zack here any different?

Zack is different because NOT everyone knows whether he is an attention-seeking fraud.

A software bot has as much grammatical understanding as Google’s search algorithms.

Seeing as how I’m in an online marketing group that experiences both on a daily basis, it is my word against yours, literally. Look at how I structure my sentences.

They are not formulaic (or at least on the same, redundant level as a text-spinner).

Awesome!

I’ve read about some prestigious contest (for all I know there are many) where humans had to determine whether it was human or bot on the other end. I would love to see more about that kind of action.

Alan

 

[AlanFromWichita]

Is that you playing the piano!? Very nice!

Yes, thank you. :tiphat:

If you liked that, how about a little organ for Hail, Holy Queen?

There are a few wrong notes; hence why I was practicing.

I am so lucky I get to play Mass every Sunday morning at 8, and when the kids are in school at the school Mass Fridays at 8!

Alan

 

[CompSciGuy]

No, you twisted it again. I said “the facts the OP alleged.” To any reasonable jury member, that does not imply “the facts the OP alleged and therefore since I used the word ‘facts’ I believe them to be TRUE facts.”

Also you’re telling me I’m wrong because I didn’t use YOUR definition. Definitions are an OR situation. Another logic problem on your end. If you’re going to split hairs, get a sharper knife.

For goodness sake, give this one a rest.

I neither accept nor reject what you say in terms of satanic truth. I can see, though, that you will jump through any sorts of logical pretzels to give the impression you have prevailed. You tell me that the OP and I said things we didn’t, and when called on it you concoct a non-response. So it does call into question the veracity of what you say about those things we can’t see.

For goodness sakes! Every time I have quoted you, and you have denied it, I have gone back and specifically shown you where you said it! And you say I’m pulling these quotes out of thin air?
Your constantly getting hooked on these silly little things and trying to change your response every time I challenge what you said is distracting from the original point I made - that it is healthy to be skeptical of sensational claims. All you did (originally) was to say that we are too closed minded. I explained again why skepticism is healthy and why we shouldn’t believe something by default simply because it appears to be in line with our beliefs. You have added nothing to the discussion but have attacked little unimportant things in my posts. Will you grow up and get a grip?

No, there is a difference between “considering” a story and “rejecting” it. It’s one thing to say “it is not verified,” and “it is wrong.”

So “rejecting” a story because there is not enough evidence,is foolish. So I disagree with point 2. above. It’s intellectually immature to reject something just because it isn’t proven.

You are the only person who would say that. It is not at all foolish. Because the alternative would be to consider every story that someone brings up. Think of how confused we would be about the truth if this were the case. Do a quick google search for “illuminati” and see how many links to conspiracy theory websites come up. If we considered every one of them then we would never get through them all. At some point we have to develop enough common sense to be able to sift through them.

Especially if it is a) reasonable, and b) likely, that these rituals do take place, and in even likely that they take place in the United States.

Really?
So far Zachary King is the only person I have heard of who claims such a thing. And I have seen his videos and heard a lot of his claims, many of them are over-the-top and sensational; usually when one person claims to have that many such experiences then something is wrong. If we could have another eye-witness… then perhaps I could consider it.

Please tell me why a story should be doubted just because it’s “sensational?” We’ve had plenty here in Wichita. Did I tell you, for example, that my sister-in-law was stalked by the infamous “BTK Strangler” in Wichita? Want to hear a sensational story? Watch this guy. This is sensational but deadly, literally deadly, serious.

The BTK strangler’s existence is confirmed, many people know about him. If a person claimed to have been stalked by the BTK strangler, then I wouldn’t likely question them, as I know the BTK strangler existed, and it is entirely possible that this is true. But if that same person also claimed, for example, to have been abducted by aliens, seen multiple ghosts in his/her lifetime, had secret links to the Illuminati, etc. then I would probably be skeptical of a lot of what he/she says. That’s only natural. Likewise, having heard what Zachary King has said in videos, and seen that much of it is over the top, naturally I have skepticism.

Now you watch all the parts of that court testimony and tell my why it’s such a stretch for me to believe that satanic abortions are being performed in the United States. I’d be surprised if they don’t happen in Wichita on an ongoing basis.

You’ve just linked two completely different and unrelated events and said “because one is sensational, then this other sensational story is likely to be true.” The thing about bizarre stories that are actually true is that, actually, they are rare. But there are an abundance of bizarre stories that aren’t true. Which is why I am skeptical.

Oh, I’m sorry – you didn’t really mean that, did you?

Alan

Go look back at the history of our posts. I don’t want to have to go back and post examples all over again. And I sincerely hope that you will consider whether your behavior is really appropriate for a charitable, professing Catholic.

 

[CompSciGuy]

Alan from Wichita:

I have an urgent message for you.

The Wichita Underground People’s Movement, a secret communist revolutionary group, is planning on staging a coup of the Kansas state government. They are going to parachute in soldiers from Russia, enact martial law, and set up an enormous border defense. They already have clandestine nuclear missile silos buried all over your state and have threatened to send anyone who attacks them into oblivion.

The US federal government and the Kansas state government do not know about the WUPM because our entire government is infiltrated by communist spies who intercept anyone who tries to report on the dealings of the movement. It is the most well-kept secret in American history. I have first-hand knowledge because I am a close acquaintance of someone whose brother is a member of this movement. I cannot report it to the government because the spies will find me before I get to them. It turns out, oddly enough, the only way to safely relay this information is to post it publicly on the Catholic Answers forum. They would totally never think to look here.

I cannot give you any additional information except that the communist takeover will begin on Monday, October 8, 2012 at 6:45 AM. I would give you information to verify these claims but I cannot risk it. After all, what would I gain by lying about this? If you consider yourself a patriot, then you need to start building up an insurgent force. Use the movie “Red Dawn” as a training video. I have already been captured and beaten repeatedly by the WUPM. They let me go because they didn’t want to have to be investigated. Don’t let them do the same to your fellow citizens. Stand up and fight!

 

[InJesusItrust]

How would you prove to non-Catholics that if they weigh the testimony of others carefully, like scientists and doctors who have encountered strange phenomenon, they would accept that miraculous phenomenon exists? You tell them that the Church does verification, and they claim the Church is unreliable. You give them names of people who testify to it, and they insist that these people are frauds because something miraculous will be well known. You tell them that people do not get air time because most people would not believe them, and they want scientific proof.

How do you know that this is not sensationalism? youtube.com/watch?v=qbg_dhI4XCs

Do you think that skeptics will ever accept this, even if scientific proof was given? Or would they try to find ways to hold their position of disbelief? wdtprs.com/blog/2009/10/possible-eucharistic-miracle-in-poland/

 

[Job42]

Hey Zach, remember me? How are you? As for myself I am spiritually weak and losing the battle…

I would like to help you in your ministry somehow if I had the courage or confidence. So many people are blind to what (or who) is staring them in the face, even most Christians.

 

[AlanFromWichita]

Go look back at the history of our posts. I don’t want to have to go back and post examples all over again. And I sincerely hope that you will consider whether your behavior is really appropriate for a charitable, professing Catholic.

I have fully considered it, and I feel very good about this. Thank you for your concern. You are indeed a wonderful Christian Catholic, and I’m glad you have turned away from satanism.

They already have clandestine nuclear missile silos buried all over your state and have threatened to send anyone who attacks them into oblivion.

Funny you say that. Several years ago, as part of the arms reductions race, they were going to destroy some of the silos in Kansas. Of course I had to go see what one looks like and yup, it says “use of deadly force authorized” on the fence!

A Wichita Eagle columnist, Bob Getz, published a spoof letter I wrote about what we could do to put the unused silos to use instead of destroying them. For example, a prison – you’d only need one guard at the top. My coworkers helped come up with ideas. That was almost 30 years ago.

The US federal government and the Kansas state government do not know about the WUPM because our entire government is infiltrated by communist spies who intercept anyone who tries to report on the dealings of the movement. It is the most well-kept secret in American history. I have first-hand knowledge because I am a close acquaintance of someone whose brother is a member of this movement. I cannot report it to the government because the spies will find me before I get to them. It turns out, oddly enough, the only way to safely relay this information is to post it publicly on the Catholic Answers forum. They would totally never think to look here.

I’ve got news for you. Homeland Security is monitoring this and has put you on their hit list. You see, they follow me to wherever my computer is connected because once I failed to send in my pledge for the state troopers.

Also since I had a security clearance and worked on secret projects for the B-52, AF-1, and EC-135, they have been watching me very closely all this time. You should have seen how worked up they got when they found out I’d been thrown in a mental hospital in 1983. Yes, if they use the EC-135 Airborn Command Post to launch the nukes, they will be using radios with display circuits that I designed.

I cannot give you any additional information except that the communist takeover will begin on Monday, October 8, 2012 at 6:45 AM. I would give you information to verify these claims but I cannot risk it. After all, what would I gain by lying about this? If you consider yourself a patriot, then you need to start building up an insurgent force. Use the movie “Red Dawn” as a training video. I have already been captured and beaten repeatedly by the WUPM. They let me go because they didn’t want to have to be investigated. Don’t let them do the same to your fellow citizens. Stand up and fight!

Roger, wilco!

Alan

 

[zackin]

How would you prove to non-Catholics that if they weigh the testimony of others carefully, like scientists and doctors who have encountered strange phenomenon, they would accept that miraculous phenomenon exists? You tell them that the Church does verification, and they claim the Church is unreliable. You give them names of people who testify to it, and they insist that these people are frauds because something miraculous will be well known. You tell them that people do not get air time because most people would not believe them, and they want scientific proof.

How do you know that this is not sensationalism? youtube.com/watch?v=qbg_dhI4XCs

Do you think that skeptics will ever accept this, even if scientific proof was given? Or would they try to find ways to hold their position of disbelief? wdtprs.com/blog/2009/10/possible-eucharistic-miracle-in-poland/

This is beautiful

 

[zackin]

Hey Zach, remember me? How are you? As for myself I am spiritually weak and losing the battle…

I would like to help you in your ministry somehow if I had the courage or confidence. So many people are blind to what (or who) is staring them in the face, even most Christians.

e mail me an we can catch up