XPost: alt.abortion, alt.abortion.inequity, alt.atheism   
   XPost: alt.religion.christian, alt.support.abortion, talk.abortion   
   XPost: talk.atheism, us.issues.abortion   
   From: tonyofbexarremovethis@yahoo.dk   
      
   On Sat, 21 Feb 2004 14:01:11 +0200, "Warnock"    
   wrote:   
      
   >   
   >"Thomas P."  wrote in message   
   >news:475a30tps7u2ofed2321bunemv6s7q8crk@4ax.com...   
   >   
   >   
   >> >****** Only by members wishing to deny it. I put forward an easy 3 step,   
   >> >argument. There are people on earth, we can't create people, therefor   
   >there   
   >> >must be someone who can!   
   >>   
   >> We know that people exist.  We do not know that they were created.   
   >> Your argument assumes the necessity of a creator to prove there is a   
   >> creator, i.e. it assumes its conclusion.  I wonder how many times you   
   >> have been told this.   
   >   
      
   >****** This is where the stalemate comes in, I see no reason why, if there   
   >is reasonable evidence, I can't assume it's conclusion.   
      
      
   There is no evidence at all for a creation.  You have merely assumed   
   that there must be one.  It is very much like the "first cause"   
   argument, which assumes that there had to be a "first  cause" but   
   never bothers to say why that is so.   
      
      
      
      
   Thomas P.   
      
   None of the Emperor's clothes had been so successful before.   
   "But he has got nothing on," said a little child.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)