The Right Side of the News

Yeah, like Faith I confused Rand with Ron. If anything the story actually advocates for abortions to be legal. When things are illegal there are no rules and standards. We already learned this lesson with prohibition and the war on drugs. With legality comes the light of day and the ability to regulate. We all do better when abortions are not performed in back alleys.
The idea that an illegal abortion was performed in a hospital is quite unbelievable.

No, there's tons of money in Christian movies. Again from Why Christian Movies are BAD | The Problem with Christian Media - Part 2 where Josh Keefe points out that the reason why these movies are so bad is not for lack of money: Face it, they've got a large built-in audience flocking to the theaters eager to be fleeced. And there's a lot of money in that fleece.BTW, Josh Keefe was raised Christian and probably still is one. He was raised on these movies. "God is Not Dead" inspired him to go out and confront all atheists, through which he learned the hard way that that Christian propaganda film had lied to him.In another video (The Problem With Christian Movies: God's Not Dead), he discusses how these films are just sermons devoid of storytelling -- basically, they're to actual film as Chick Pubs tracts are to actual literature. After discussing the failings of "God is Not Dead" at length, including how it not only fails to reach non-Christians but even alienates them with bad depictions of Christians, he contrasts it (at 18 minutes) with a Christian movie, Believe Me, which does succeed at storytelling and become that extremely rare critter, a good movie made by a Christian. Not only that, but for once it's a Christian movie that for once makes Christianity look like it could be something good, thus welcoming outsiders instead of alienating them. Edited by dwise1, : added to last paragraph

BTW. What the flying frick does this have to do with my post? I wasn't discussing Unplanned or abortion or any of that crap. But a troller has to troll. The only reason I responded was because I thought this was a response to the subject of a post. It was not. It was just more trolling by Faith. Another liar for christ.
If you cannot address the actual post how about you not respond to posts. Doesn't that sound like a good and polite idea? What do you know about polite you are a fundie troll.Edited by Theodoric, : No reason given.

Darn it!! There goes another irony meter.

Beginning to understand ... wonderful to see. It's called Cognitive bias:

quote:

---

Cognitive biases are systematic patterns of deviation from norm or rationality in judgment, and are often studied in psychology and behavioral economics.[1]

​

Although the reality of these biases is confirmed by replicable research,[2][3] there are often controversies about how to classify these biases or how to explain them.[4] Some are effects of information-processing rules (i.e., mental shortcuts), called heuristics, that the brain uses to produce decisions or judgments. Biases have a variety of forms and appear as cognitive ("cold") bias, such as mental noise,[5] or motivational ("hot") bias, such as when beliefs are distorted by wishful thinking. Both effects can be present at the same time.[6][7]

​

There are also controversies over some of these biases as to whether they count as useless or irrational, or whether they result in useful attitudes or behavior. For example, when getting to know others, people tend to ask leading questions which seem biased towards confirming their assumptions about the person. However, this kind of confirmation bias has also been argued to be an example of social skill: a way to establish a connection with the other person.[8]

​

Although this research overwhelmingly involves human subjects, some findings that demonstrate bias have been found in non-human animals as well. For example, hyperbolic discounting has been observed in rats, pigeons, and monkeys.[9]

---

Particularly:

quote:

---

Bias blind spot	The tendency to see oneself as less biased than other people, or to be able to identify more cognitive biases in others than in oneself.[25]
Confirmation bias	The tendency to search for, interpret, focus on and remember information in a way that confirms one's preconceptions.[27]
Dunning-Kruger effect	The tendency for unskilled individuals to overestimate their own ability and the tendency for experts to underestimate their own ability.[41]
Focusing effect	The tendency to place too much importance on one aspect of an event.[46]

---

More at (wiki) Cognitive bias. You nailed it. Surprising to me, seeing as Trump supporters seem horridly incapable of identifying horrific liars.EnjoyEdited by RAZD, : table, added classes of bias

So there's nothing to be surprised about here is there? Nobody has any interest in the movie or any of the facts about abortion, all we're getting is whatever you all want to think, already think, have already thought for years. It's just amazing that so many supposedly intelligent people can't come up with anything better.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

We did come up with something better. If you don't want to have an abortion, then don't, and keep your nose out of other people's business.That's not good enough for the assholes of the world who want to force their values on everyone else.

Au contraire! I keep asking what the Bible does actually say about abortion and you keep ducking that question. That's rather telling of you.As for the movie, there's nothing to suggest that it isn't just yet another "true Christian" culture-wars propaganda hack job. We've seem too many of those already. Nothing to see there.

Almost completely agree on all these movies except I haven't seen Ferdinand. You might also enjoy Home and Moana. I also liked Madagascar, Ice Age I, Finding Nemo and Finding Dory.You can add The Imitation Game (Alan Turing) to any list of highly inaccurate historical movies. It was a nice movie, I liked it, but I've read a couple Turing biographies (The Enigma Machine was best) and it was highly romanticized, technically way oversimplified to the point of wrong (although to be fair some technical parts were spot on, and I think they had to oversimplify or they would have left 99% of their audience behind), some parts were out of order, and it somehow manages to tell very little of the story.--Percy

That's your problem. You only listen to the commentaries, never the source.If Trump says something stupid, on video, the commentators claim he didn't say it and you believe them; you don't even want to see the video for yourself. If a Bible commentator contradicts what the Bible plainly says, you believe him; you don't want to read the Bible for yourself. And if some commentator says something about a movie, you believe it without ever seeing the movie for yourself.It's no surprise that you're always wrong about everything.

Right back atcha.

Well that's just the same old same old as I said, nothing new at all. However, if you'd bothered to pay even the slightest attention you might have seen that this is clearly not what anyone is doing. The movie aims to bring to light some facts about abortion that are denied by Planned Parenthood and many others these days, and bringing facts to light leaves it to the audience to decide. Kind of like how Wilberforce kept bringing to light in Parliament the evils of the slave trade in his day until after forty years others started agreeing with him.Nobody has to agree with anything the movie shows, nobody is being forced to do anything, so it's interesting that you just don't want to see what facts are brought to light in this film.As for forcing values on people isn't that what our laws do, laws against murder for instance, laws against doing harm to others, laws against assault and battery and rape and so on? Yet nobody is even proposing a law in this case, just bringing some facts to light you may have failed to take into account in your judgment of these things.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

The woman who wrote the book the movie is based on is a confirmed liar. One of the reasons she left Planned Parenthood told lies about them is because the local forced birther yahoo told her that she could make thousands of dollars in speaking gigs. She has figured out how to fleece the rubes. She is a liar and a grifter. They are not bringing to light facts. They are telling lies and misinforming to push along a radical agenda of forced birth and making contraception illegal. They want everyone to follow their version of one religion.

That kind of personal attack on the woman really requires some evidence. It makes sense of course because by opposing abortion she makes herself a target of the Left which has no compunction about destroying anyone who disagrees with them. I've listened to some of her speeches and I have no reason to think she's anything but truthful.
I look forward to your evidence.Oh and you attack the film too of course, its makers and actors and other supporters who believe it shows the truth that is normally suppressed and has no agenda except saving babies and giving support to pregnant women.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

We have the facts. This article from Slate has the answers for you, if you're interested. The whole thing is a good read, but this is the most relevant part for you: How pro-choice politicians should answer questions about third-trimester abortions.