4 votes

UPDATE: Pro-Abortionist Chants "Hail Satan" While Pro-Lifers Sing Amazing Grace at Austin, TX Protest

"It's been a very interesting day at the Texas State Capitol. Cahnman's Musings hasn't been following the hearing. Instead, we've been participating in the surrounding events. LetTexasSpeak has been doing a live broadcast from the rotunda where women have been sharing their abortion related testimonies. The pro-abortion crowd has responded with repeated chants of "hail Satan." It's taken us all day to get a video recording, but here it is:"

http://acahnman.blogspot.com/2013/07/texas-capital-abortion-...

Original video posted on FB: https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?v=10151551294311896&set=v...

More from the Blaze: http://twitchy.com/2013/07/02/hail-satan-abortion-supporters...

__

I'm agnostic and pro-life, and I don't quite know what to think of these young ladies...

UPDATE: Title has been corrected as my curiosity led me to this additional video which suggests the chant was an isolated case by an individual caught on camera, not the entire crowd:

It appears the protesters protesting the protesters are chanting, "Not just for the rich and white, healthcare is a human right."

The original title, Pro-Abortionists Chant "Hail Satan" While Pro-Lifers Sing Amazing Grace at Austin, TX Protest, was misleading.

___

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

You take the good, you take the bad You take em both

... And there you have... The facts of life

You're right.

We should stop ALL forward progress because it could *potentially* be used for bad things

That is god's will.

I guess the polls are wrong.

Religiosity is on the decline in the U.S. and atheism is on the rise, according to a new worldwide poll.

The poll, called “The Global Index of Religiosity and Atheism,” found that the number of Americans who say they are “religious” dropped from 73 percent in 2005 (the last time the poll was conducted) to 60 percent.

At the same time, the number of Americans who say they are atheists rose, from 1 percent to 5 percent.

The poll was conducted by WIN-Gallup International and is based on interviews with 50,000 people from 57 countries and five continents. Participants were asked, “Irrespective of whether you attend a place of worship or not, would you say you are a religious person, not a religious person, or a convinced atheist?”

The seven years between the polls is notable because 2005 saw the publication of “The End of Faith” by Sam Harris, the first in a wave of best-selling books on atheism by Christopher Hitchens, Richard Dawkins, Daniel Dennett and other so-called “New Atheists.”

“The obvious implication is that this is a manifestation of the New Atheism movement,” said Ryan Cragun, a University of Tampa sociologist of religion who studies American and global atheism.

Still, Cragun does not believe the poll shows more people are becoming atheists, but rather that more people are willing to identify as atheists.

“For a very long time, religiosity has been a central characteristic of the American identity,” he said. “But what this suggests is that is changing and people are feeling less inclined to identify as religious to comply with what it means to be a good person in the U.S.”

Another possible factor may be the number of atheists within organized efforts by American atheist groups to encourage those who do not believe in God to say so publicly. The Out Campaign, a project of the Richard Dawkins Foundation for Reason and Science, was launched in 2007 and has since been endorsed by several national atheist groups.

The current poll confirms a declining religiosity — both at home and abroad — that’s been detected in other polls. The 2008 American Religious Identification Survey found that 15 percent of Americans said they have no religion — different from being a “confirmed atheist,” but nonetheless up from 8 percent in 1990.

Barry Kosmin, the principal investigator for the ARIS report, said he’s skeptical of the new study.

“The U.S. trends are what we have found and would expect, but the actual numbers are peculiar to say the least,” he said. “The drops in religiosity seem too sharp for the time period — people just don’t change their beliefs that quickly. Most of the trend away from religion has demographic causes and demography moves ‘glacially.’”

Specifically, he points to the poll’s finding that Vietnam, while showing a sharp 23 percent drop in religiosity since 2005, also shows no atheists. “Eight million Communist Party members but zero atheists?” he said. “That statistic makes me very doubtful of the accuracy of the survey overall and some of the international comparisons.”

Other findings from the poll include:

— Besides Vietnam, Ireland had the greatest change in religiosity, down from 69 percent to 47 percent.

— China has the most “convinced atheists,” at 47 percent, followed by Japan (31 percent), Czech Republic (30 percent) and France (29 percent)

— The most religious countries are in Africa (Ghana, Nigeria, Kenya), South America (Brazil, Peru) and Eastern Europe (Macedonia, Romania, Armenia).

— Countries with the same percentage of atheists as the U.S. are Poland, Moldova and Saudi Arabia.

http://articles.washingtonpost.com/2012-08-13/national/35491...

Not wrong, just irrelevant.

Skepticism was on the rise in the 18th century as well, and after a few glorious failures like the French Revolution, a lot of people came around and saw things differently. These things ebb and flow my sarcastic friend, and I'll be doing my part not only to keep the faithful convinced, but also maybe reconvert a few poor lost souls who weren't properly prepared to deal with nonsense spewers such as yourself.

As stated before, you guys don't have many children, you're far to hedonistic to really be concerned for the future beyond your own stomach and privates. In the short-term, America will most likely be overrun by superstitious Roman Catholics and Islamic types, but whoever is there at the changing of the guard, your type will likely be little more than a foot note in some future textbook.

Regurgitate all the statistics you wish my little man, you know that a few breakthroughs in medical care will not make you immortal, and unlike the Marxists you're probably not resolved enough to try and use violence to purge Christianity from the world. Just enjoy it while it lasts sweetie pie. ;-)

“My attitude toward progress has passed from antagonism to boredom. I have long ceased to argue with people who prefer Thursday to Wednesday because it is Thursday.” - G.K. Chesterton

Seriously..?

You're comparing NOW to the 18th century?

Dude, we don't live in the 18th anymore. This is an great example of how disconnected you ( and the rest of the religious types) are. I know that you would prefer things to 'be like they were back in the good-ole days."

But this is this is the information age.

Besides the massive amount of awesome cat videos you can watch online, there are also plenty of resources where people can go to find out for themselves that religion is a sham. People don't have to believe the ridiculous nonsense that people try to stuff in their head.

PS. I love how the Roman Catholics and Islamics are superstitious.. BUT NOT YOU!! Oh, no. YOU have the truth on YOUR side.

Please.

Exactly right.

And that spirit of anti-Christ is the spirit of anti-Liberty.

Obedience to God is resistance to tyrants.

my grandmother says the same thing but

the reality is that Christians have gotten their way for decades and now people are finally pushing back and demanding equal rights. so it just feels like anti-Christianity.

Official Daily Paul BTC address: 16oZXSGAcDrSbZeBnSu84w5UWwbLtZsBms
My ฿itcoin: 17khsA7MvBJAGAPkhrFJdQZPYKgxAeXkBY
http://www.dailypaul.com/303151/bitcoin-has-gone-on-an-insan...

Excuse me, gotten their way???

I'm not sure if you're quoting someone else or not, but more than 40 years since Roe vs. Wade and millions upon millions dead as a result is hardly Christianity getting its way. Christianity has been ebbing for the better part of 100 years since the advent of the birth control movement, the anti-theists have been all but running this country with perhaps the exception of the 1950s and early 60s.

“My attitude toward progress has passed from antagonism to boredom. I have long ceased to argue with people who prefer Thursday to Wednesday because it is Thursday.” - G.K. Chesterton

you're excused

we were debating things that are tax payer funded and discriminatory. things like praying over the loud speaker in school and the 10 commandments in courts, tax payer funded discriminatory holiday paraphernalia and celebrations. she was not happy about those things being shutdown. i said her church should fund them then but don't force me to.

i told her the gov should not be involved with all that in the first place. i told her if tax money was used you have to let all the religions pray over the loud speaker and fund all religious celebration activity's. i explained how unproductive it would be to have all religions give a morning prayer over the school loud speaker and class would not start till after lunch in that scenario. she was not thrilled with allowing Muslim prayer over the loud speaker. we agreed that religion is a private matter and is best left to the churches. i don't have a problem with people praying in school as long as they don't interrupt the whole class when doing it.

if you just want to focus on abortion i have some questions about your stance on that too. if that's the case go ahead and go through the comments i already posted in this thread and answer those first as other anti-choice adherents failed to do.

Official Daily Paul BTC address: 16oZXSGAcDrSbZeBnSu84w5UWwbLtZsBms
My ฿itcoin: 17khsA7MvBJAGAPkhrFJdQZPYKgxAeXkBY
http://www.dailypaul.com/303151/bitcoin-has-gone-on-an-insan...

It goes both ways

The religious right wants to impose their style of "liberty" which does not include anyone that does not bow to their moral code. I don't know why it's so hard to understand that people want to be left alone in all aspects of their life. I don't want christians banned form observing their morale code in their own homes, churches, and communities but I also do not want it forced upon me.

The so-called religious right

of the neo-cons are not true Christians, but fake Christians who discovered around 1980 the political utility of affecting Christian faith. Their politicians are not true Christians and the 'Christian' leaders who accomodate them are not true Christians either, it is a cynical act for the purposes of evil. True Christians must uphold Liberty as they understand that there is no earthy authority, the only true authority is Almighty God, and that to each one individually.

Obedience to God is resistance to tyrants.

so the sole reason they do this is for EVIL?!

What a joke! It's about money and power! lol no one else in DC actually believes the christian tripe you people believe...but they are happy to use you as tools for their own deeds, which have NOTHING to do with evil.

You idiot.

The lust for power for oneself over others for selfish ends, breaking the laws of God, IS evil. Do you think people need to believe in evil to do evil?

Obedience to God is resistance to tyrants.

breaking gods law?! bahahahahaha!!!

do you realize how silly that sounds? "evil" is YOUR definition and it stems from your beliefs in bible fairy tales, not mine.

If you don't want to listen to the answer...

Don't ask the question. You challenged his assertion, he answered, and now you're laughing like a retard. I say he pretty well won the argument here. Have fun believing in your own fairytale of retarded fish-frogs and talking monkeys.

“My attitude toward progress has passed from antagonism to boredom. I have long ceased to argue with people who prefer Thursday to Wednesday because it is Thursday.” - G.K. Chesterton

Power and money can lead to great evil, can they not?

The sole reason may not be evil, but it will likely as not will become a primary reason.

"Hence, naturally enough, my symbol for Hell is something like the bureaucracy of a police state or the office of a thoroughly nasty business concern." ~~C.S. Lewis
Love won! Deliverance from Tyranny is on the way! Col. 2:13-15

"evil" is a religious concept, its like calling someone a sinner

if someone doesn't believe in the concept of "sin" then the whole idea of being called a "sinner" is pretty laughable. we'd have less problems if people viewed reality with an objective view instead of a religious one.

instead we have people believing Obama is the anti-Christ rather than a corporate/state figure head.

and the problem is that the solution that religious people usually fall back on is prayer, instead of getting off their butts and doing something.

The belief...

...in no evil, but only pointless variations of material and energy, is also a religious/philosophical concept. If there is no evil, then in the end, Hitler = Jefferson = Stalin = Ghandi -- just pointless, absurd rearrangements of material stuff that don't matter one way or another at all. If we have no intersection in our understanding of right and wrong, good and evil, then we have no foundation to form a society together.

mmm, no. there are people who do bad things but its not "evil"

Talking about devils, evil, angels, demons, spirits, etc it just silly but that's not to say that Hitler wasn't bad or Gandhi wasn't good.

To twist what I said into me "thinking Hitler is no different than Gandhi goes to show you either don't understand a very simple concept or more likely you are purposely trying manipulate the conversation to make me look bad.

There is never a need for religious dogma to "keep society together"

But where do you get...

...your definition of 'bad' from? It is all relative if there is no transcendent reality defining it. And if there is no such transcendent reality, there ultimately is no basis to call Hitler bad or Jefferson good. It's all a pointless absurdity then -- meaningless material stuff.

In honor of it being the 4th :) ...

"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.--That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed."

Is that a religious dogma there, which our Founders invoked when organizing our society? Every statement of what is transcendent or self-evident is a philosophical/religious idea.

I can think of two issues you might be referring to

Abortion and Gay marriage.

without getting into the same old tired debates, one, theoretically at least, involves two people and not one. The other is more about the all mighty government re-defining our words for us.

If a christian insists that the word marriage, means a bond between a man and a woman, I would simply point out that through the millennia, this was understood with little ambiguity. But now. the Gods on high, your almighty government, insist that that definition be changed, and that your children be conditioned to the new definition through the public school system.

There are, of course, Christians who believe all sorts of things and churches who teach all sorts of things. That is called freedom. But when your government decides that the prevailing definition of a word is "immoral", and that that word, which once mean one thing, now must mean another, then that, my brother, is tyranny.

Suffice it to say, it all about the word "marriage" and not about equal rights. For if it were about equal rights, gays most certainly could have that through another, unique new contractual arrangement. But that isn't good enough is it? The definition must be changed. And then, the very images in ones head that come from hearing the word must also be changed. And finally, any word against will be deemed intolerable, whether that word comes from a pulpit, or is spoken across a dinner table.

I think you are confused as to who is forcing beliefs on who.

I think there is a misunderstanding

You seem to think I want to use the force of government to make everything sunshine and rainbows and that is not the case. I want the government to get out of the way so people can decide on their own. There are people on both sides of the coin that are using government to push their agenda and I think we can both agree that this needs to stop.

I will use one of your examples that you brought up which is gay marriage. I think it would be easiest if both sides got the government out of the way. That way each individual can assign whatever definition they want to the term marriage. Or they could make up whatever term they want for themselves. It's pretty sad that we are fighting a war over a word within our government when each individual can just assign that definition for themselves and be happy with it.

As with most things

I will let a human take upon themself the responsibility to judge right from wrong and act accordingly.

Gotta serve somebody

You might be a rock n' roll addict, prancin' on the stage You might have drugs at your command, women in a cage You may be a business man or some high degree thief They may call you doctor or they may call you chief

But you're gonna have to serve somebody, yes you're You're gonna have to serve somebody Well, it may be the devil or it may be the Lord But you're gonna have to serve somebody~ Bob Dylan

"All life is precious." Ron

"All life is precious." Ron Paul
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T1HQboY8Oss

For those who haven't been following

this debate, this bill would restrict access to abortions after 20 weeks. That's a 4 1/2 month old fetus, who, with the right medical care and intervention could conceivably survive outside the womb. It's happened. So I don't care what your religious beliefs are about abortion; if it can survive outside the womb, that's murder.

ok so who is going to pay to keep it "alive" outside the womb??

You want people popping out babies they can't afford and have the gov't foot the bill because you people want to stick your noses in someone elses private life?

That's weird. I thought this site was for people who wanted limited gov't

I say, " Heaven's No!", if we as pro-lifers want ....

"people popping out babies they can't afford", we will be happy to either foot the bill themselves or find adoptive parents to do so! (All punctuation intended) If Churches were given back the duty of taking care of their flocks, as opposed to the government covering everyone who asks it, we would have the poor better taken care of, and we would have more accountability. Besides, this is a fallacious argument, because adoption agencies and others assist in finding homes for babies whose natural mothers choose to put them up for adoption, often without charge to either the mother or the adoptive parents.

Alright, for clarification's sake: I am pro-life! What I am NOT pro is government spending on welfare or warfare. If we simply removed the tax on labor, (AKA the Personal Income Tax) and made adoptions easier, that would solve much of the problem. Because of the abortion issue here, combined with the long wait many adoptive parents have, many adopt children from overseas. We personally know two families who have done so.
(One who tried the 'conventional system' first)

"Hence, naturally enough, my symbol for Hell is something like the bureaucracy of a police state or the office of a thoroughly nasty business concern." ~~C.S. Lewis
Love won! Deliverance from Tyranny is on the way! Col. 2:13-15

natural viability

for me i draw the line at natural viability which i would consider late term abortion.
in the future they will be able to extract the fetus and grow it in a lab so natural viability is the more consistent position over medical intervention.
there is no perfect answer on this issue. i'm pro life for myself but pro choice for others until natural viability with a few rare exceptions.

Official Daily Paul BTC address: 16oZXSGAcDrSbZeBnSu84w5UWwbLtZsBms
My ฿itcoin: 17khsA7MvBJAGAPkhrFJdQZPYKgxAeXkBY
http://www.dailypaul.com/303151/bitcoin-has-gone-on-an-insan...

Correct me if I'm wrong

But this law also severely limits women's access to abortion providers BEFORE 20 weeks also?

it would ban all abortions in West Texas

and close most clinics, as well as restrict use of the clinics allowed to stay open.

Seems so silly for a "limited gov't", "freedom movement" to want the gov't to intervene in people's most private lives and prevent their free will.