Recommended Posts

Religion is a belief.

I am agnostic as I cannot prove nor deny a G-d exists.

So they should be allowed to preach what they believe as it has not been dis-proven.

Technically they are making the claim that god can heal so that would mean its up to them to prove that first not the other way around.

Wow. So many haters and not one Christian posting here? God CAN heal. Bash me, slash me, I don't care. Are all the Christians here going to be like Peter and deny him???

Which god can heal, Allah, Zeus, Oden, Osiris, FSM? How is it hateful to point out that facts are lacking when claims like these are made?

Do you believe that the wind blows? Of course you do. You can feel it. If you were a Christian you can feel God and you would know God can heal.

That's based on a belief, not factual evidence. If I imagine hard enough I can feel the invisible unicorn looking over my shoulder. Does that make it any more real?

I notice that they didn't claim that god can cure cancer - apparantly they didn't have enough faith in their god, or did their legal team mention that if they even remotely looked to be claiming that god can cure cancer they would be answering to a real judge and not a imaginary one.

And as I recall praying for people was scientifically tested a few years ago, with the result that people who were seriously ill tended to die more often if they new that they had been prayed for. So not only are their claims breaking advertising standards but they are also scientifically unfounded and so technically a lie.

Do you believe that the wind blows? Of course you do. You can feel it. If you were a Christian you can feel God and you would know God can heal.

This.

As a Pastafarian I can feel God's tentacles and I know God can heal.

  • Like 3

So now I am idiotic? I think this entire thread is idiotic..................

So now banning lying advertisements (which is what this thread is about) is idiotic? I think your religion is idiotic.

/let's continue calling stuff idiotic

I notice that they didn't claim that god can cure cancer - apparantly they didn't have enough faith in their god, or did their legal team mention that if they even remotely looked to be claiming that god can cure cancer they would be answering to a real judge and not a imaginary one.

And as I recall praying for people was scientifically tested a few years ago, with the result that people who were seriously ill tended to die more often if they new that they had been prayed for. So not only are their claims breaking advertising standards but they are also scientifically unfounded and so technically a lie.

As a man of faith from a christian background who now has a semblance of spirituality instead of a religion, I don't think you can test for something like that, I believe prayer is useless. Let me explain, it might be a way to express your feelings spiritually but, God decided way before you prayed what was going to happen and you praying will not change that. Praying for healing is ridiculous, if God wanted you alive, he would not let you die or get sick. We are at Gods mercy and should accept the good and the bad as his will. Prayer should only be used to thank him for our life and as a symbol that we want his guidance.

You can call it flawed all you want. Everyone has the right to believe as they want to, To have your beliefs censored by anyone or any thing is wrong.

Of course everyone can believe what they want, but when it comes to advertising, in the UK they have to be able to PROVE their claims or they can't make them. Period. There are no exceptions to this and it has nothing to do with the religious nature of the claims.

I don't think anybody is arguing that. The original material that was banned said that the group believes that prayer MAY heal. It didn't say "Pray and we'll cure your cancer." - The primary issue is that the ASA seems to want to prevent them from talking about their beliefs on their website.

That's because as of last year, the ASA also governs web advertising as well.

I believe that God can heal... most people. I believe it is the placbo effect!

People of every religion believe that. So they can't all be right. Believing that praying cures you, may actually have a very strong psychological effect. And make you feel recovered.

And also, there is strong evidence, that this 'thought process' also has physiological benefits. Positive attitude can do wonders, and it matters little, which god you are praying to.

I believe that God can heal... most people. I believe it is the placbo effect!

People of every religion believe that. So they can't all be right. Believing that praying cures you, may actually have a very strong psychological effect. And make you feel recovered.

And also, there is strong evidence, that this 'thought process' also has physiological benefits. Positive attitude can do wonders, and it matters little, which god you are praying to.

Perhaps and, as you said, there is some evidence that a positive attitude can help heal physical ailments. However, that's quite different from saying that a supernatural being is actually responsible for any healing that takes place. Just because you've convinced yourself that your imaginary friend exists and can help you doesn't mean that they actually exist.

Perhaps and, as you said, there is some evidence that a positive attitude can help heal physical ailments. However, that's quite different from saying that a supernatural being is actually responsible for any healing that takes place. Just because you've convinced yourself that your imaginary friend exists and can help you doesn't mean that they actually exist.

Please read the last line of my previous post, again.

Religion is a belief.

I am agnostic as I cannot prove nor deny a G-d exists.

So they should be allowed to preach what they believe as it has not been dis-proven.

Proof only works in the positive sense. For something to be true and considered as such, there must be proof in favor or against it, not an absence of proof. There is no proof that pink elephants don't exist (like the complete genome of an elephant demonstrating that pink skin is impossible) but that doesn't automatically mean pink elephants exist because there is proof in favor of it as well. The burden of proof lays with who makes the claims and since they cannot prove what they're advertising (because it's faith and therefore, by it's own nature as such, cannot be proven), the ban is correct and should stand.

And the random bold is just to fit in the formating style of this thread.

And can any of you doubters prove God does not exist? Show me in scientific equation or mathematics formulae that he doesn't. From both point of views, according to scientists, are just theories. It has not been proven that God does or doesn't exist. I theorize that God does exist. Can I prove my theory yet? No. But we are still compiling all available evidence.

Everyday, you hear that scientists have proven things that are in the Bible are fact. It's only time that more things will be proven. Can science ever prove that God exists? I don't know. Will science ever prove the existance of God to be false? I truly hope not.

But back to the OP. Should our lives be censored? Should someone or some governing force be able to control what you say or believe? I as an American, say no. Human Rights. I feel strongly about that, I have fought to protect that very fact. Not just for us here in the States, but every where. I maybe old now, but I woulld not hesitate to put my uniform back on and go where I am ordered.

Human rights should not be violated and when they are, that is called tyranny and tyranny should be crushed.

And can any of you doubters prove God does not exist? Show me in scientific equation or mathematics formulae that he doesn't. From both point of views, according to scientists, are just theories. It has not been proven that God does or doesn't exist. I theorize that God does exist. Can I prove my theory yet? No. But we are still compiling all available evidence.

Everyday, you hear that scientists have proven things that are in the Bible are fact. It's only time that more things will be proven. Can science ever prove that God exists? I don't know. Will science ever prove the existance of God to be false? I truly hope not.

But back to the OP. Should our lives be censored? Should someone or some governing force be able to control what you say or believe? I as an American, say no. Human Rights. I feel strongly about that, I have fought to protect that very fact. Not just for us here in the States, but every where. I maybe old now, but I woulld not hesitate to put my uniform back on and go where I am ordered.

Human rights should not be violated and when they are, that is called tyranny and tyranny should be crushed.

Can you prove God exists?

Can you prove God exists?

Did you not read my entire reply?

Can I prove my theory yet? No. But we are still compiling all available evidence.

But can you prove God's non-existance?

But back to the OP. Should our lives be censored? Should someone or some governing force be able to control what you say or believe? I as an American, say no. Human Rights. I feel strongly about that, I have fought to protect that very fact. Not just for us here in the States, but every where. I maybe old now, but I woulld not hesitate to put my uniform back on and go where I am ordered.

The ASA arent censoring your life, you are free to believe what you want to believe, Christians just like any other business or organisation in the UK are governed by the ASA if they want to advertise.

Its like Coca Cola advertising that their drink can cure cancer and everyone should buy a Coke.

Did you not read my entire reply?

But can you prove God's non-existance?

We arent claiming that God exists, you are, the onus is on you to prove that he does exist.

Everyday, you hear that scientists have proven things that are in the Bible are fact.

... o... k... a... y...

Its like Coca Cola advertising that their drink can cure cancer and everyone should buy a Coke.

As long as you truly believe it to be the case, Lo Tec thinks it's OK to advertise it.

As long as you truly believe it to be the case, Lo Tec thinks it's OK to advertise it.

That is incorrect. I do not believe in blatant lies. Saying "God can heal" is not a lie.Until someone proves God does not exist, I will continue to believe the way I do.

  • Like 1

That is in correct. I do not believe in blatant lies. Saying "God can heal" is not a lie.Until someone proves God does not exist, I will continue to believe the way I do.

Saying "God can heal" is a lie because you have no proof of that.

You can say it to your family or friends during a conversation - at worst you'll get weird looks - but you cannot say it in an advertisement because ads have to be based on verifiable facts to make such bold statements.

What you don't understand is that the bigger your claim, the harsher the regulations.

"XXX makes you look cool" is not a proven fact, but it's OK (be it Coke, God, unicorns...). "XXX cures cancer" is a very bold statement and cannot be made without adequate proof.

If that christian group made "God can help you" ads, they wouldn't be banned.

BTW, your "God exists as long as nobody proves he doesn't" argument is nice, but you can only use it for yourself (and I respect that; it's your beliefs). What atheists condemn is using that kind of logic to force someone else - relatives, children, friends, strangers - to share your faith.

That is in correct. I do not believe in blatant lies. Saying "God can heal" is not a lie.Until someone proves God does not exist, I will continue to believe the way I do.

Please stop with the rhetoric. All this talk about tyranny is silly here. The simple facts are these:

The law allows you to believe what you will.

The law does not allow you to make claims about health and medicine with out being able to prove these are true, it does not fall on the law to disprove your claims.

They are making a claim that could encourage people to stop interventions that have been shown to work for something which hasn't. It doesn't matter if someone can't show it doesn't work but they have to show it does. If they can then there is no problem and they can write their claim in any advertising. The problem is they can't prove it.

This goes for any medical claim, religious or otherwise.

The case does not hurt their religious freedom.

As for saying that God can heal is not a lie. Well you are right. It is not a lie but it is also not a proven fact and so cannot be claimed as such. The law is not saying that it is a lie but you can't claim it as truth either.

If they said 'we believe God can heal' instead of 'God can heal you' then there would be no problem.

There are real cases of religious persecution. It serves nobody's interest to quibble over a situation which is sorted out very easy and does not need to be compared to tyranny to put forward an argument instead of just thinking for a moment.

You can say whatever you want, as long as you are not saying "buy my product because it heals you." In this situation, they are not saying that. So, they are not lying. So to censor a non-ad in this case is wrong and the ASA is wrong in this aspect.

Edit:

I am not trying to force anyone to believe how I do. But when people are forcing the fact that God does not exist is just wrong no matter how you put it.

Now I will leave this thread with this thought: To me and millions of others, God does exist and can heal. I do not care what you call God. I know many Christians, Muslims and other religous and spiritual people are reading this post here at Neowin, know what I say is truth. But this ongoing fight about the existance of God will continue even after any,some or all scientists prove that it is false or correct.

Now I bid this thread farewell.

You can say whatever you want, as long as you are not saying "buy my product because it heals you." In this situation, they are not saying that. So, they are not lying. So to censor a non-ad in this case is wrong and the ASA is wrong in this aspect.

Essentially it is an advert as they are offering a service (to pray for people) and this is how they are telling people about it. It doesn't matter if it is paid for or free (either the advert or the service). If it isn't an advert I don't know what is.

Adverts don't just appear on TV, newspapers, movies and magazines. There is a growing trend of people dressing up adverts as news or opinions or on blogs or other websites. Some people get away with with it but these guys didn't. It doesn't make it right but the ASA needs to work harder on enforcing the law everywhere but it is a huge space and they can only deal with what comes to their attention.

Also people here may be asserting that God does not exist but the Law and this ruling doesn't say this. So we are confusing the issue by even talking about the existence of God part of the discussion on the thread.

You can say whatever you want, as long as you are not saying "buy my product because it heals you." In this situation, they are not saying that. So, they are not lying. So to censor a non-ad in this case is wrong and the ASA is wrong in this aspect.

Edit:

I am not trying to force anyone to believe how I do. But when people are forcing the fact that God does not exist is just wrong no matter how you put it.

Now I will leave this thread with this thought: To me and millions of others, God does exist and can heal. I do not care what you call God. I know many Christians, Muslims and other religous and spiritual people are reading this post here at Neowin, know what I say is truth. But this ongoing fight about the existance of God will continue even after any,some or all scientists prove that it is false or correct.

Now I bid this thread farewell.

Typical Christian, when you cant backup your claims you run away.

418999_357441890942043_186213348064899_1353414_81652658_n.jpg

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Posts

    • AT&T has been spying on US citizens with the NSA for decades.. they just know how to keep it more under wraps.. the evil level is still there.
    • >Improved system sounds when using Windows in dark mode. The story behind that bug would be an interesting one.
    • Edifier S3000MKII hi-fi audiophile grade bookshelf speaker is at its lowest price now by Sayan Sen Yesterday we covered a bunch of Dolby Atmos soundbar deals with several ones from Sony, as well as from JBL, Samsung, Polk Audio, and more. You can check them out in this dedicated piece. Those are not audiophile category speakers though as they are built with home theater use in mind. If you are searching for the former then Edifier has its S3000MKII at its lowest price at the moment (purchase link under the specs table down below). This is a two-way bookshelf monitor speaker designed to produce accurate sound. While it may not produce the best high-fidelity audio possible out there, it should still be significantly better than what you will get on soundbars of this price range. As such it will do justice to high-res audio played back through it. The only thing that may feel lacking is sub-bass as Edifier claims the unit can go down to 38 Hz, which should be enough for studio monitor purposes, but not for deep room-shaking rumbling bass. Where this does excel though is in its treble reproduction. With its super-tweeter, it claims to go as high as 40 kHz in the frequency spectrum, which should offer a sense of "air"yness. This is an active speaker which means it packs its own amplfication. It has a top-notch Class D amp that may be able to rival many Class AB designs too in terms of sound reproduction quality. The technical specs of the Edifier S3000MKII are given in the table below: Specification Value RMS Output Power 256W RMS (Treble: 8W × 2, Mid-Low: 120W × 2) Tweeter Driver 107mm × 107mm Planar Magnetic Tweeter Mid-Low Driver 6.5-inch (179mm) Long-Throw Aluminum Diaphragm Driver Frequency Response 38Hz – 40kHz Signal-to-Noise Ratio ≥ 85dB (A) Bluetooth Version Bluetooth 5.0 Bluetooth Codec Qualcomm® aptX™ HD Wireless Speaker Link Proprietary 5.8GHz wireless connection between speakers Supported Hi-Res Audio Hi-Res Audio Certified, up to 24-bit/192kHz Digital Processing XMOS XU216 Digital Signal Processor Audio Inputs Balanced XLR, Optical, Coaxial, USB Type-B, Line In, Bluetooth Input Sensitivity (USB) 400 ± 50mFFs Input Sensitivity (Optical) 400 ± 50mFFs Input Sensitivity (Coaxial) 400 ± 50mFFs Input Sensitivity (Bluetooth) 450 ± 50mFFs Input Sensitivity (Balanced XLR) 1000 ± 50mV Input Sensitivity (Line In) 600 ± 50mV ADC Capability Up to 24-bit/192kHz DSP Capability Up to 24-bit/192kHz DIX Capability Up to 24-bit/216kHz DAC Capability Up to 32-bit/384kHz XMOS Processing Power Up to 2,000 MIPS Edifier S3000MKII Audiophile Active (Powered) Wireless Speakers: $799.99 (Sold by Edifier US, Shipped by Amazon US) If you do not have the kind of budget to spend on the S3000MKII, you can also check out the Edifier R1280Ts which is right now on sale at just $114 (its lowest price in a very long time). Good to know This Amazon deal is U.S. specific, and not available in other regions unless specified. We only use first-party seller links (at the time of article publishing); ensure that you purchase from a first-party seller link only. Check out Today's Deals on Amazon | or our recent tech deals. Become a Prime member (for Students or SNAP) via Neowin Get Prime Access - Prime for half price (for qualifying Medicaid, EBT, SNAP) Subscribe to Prime Video, Audible Plus, Music Unlimited or Kindle Unlimited via Neowin As an Amazon Associate, we earn from qualifying purchases.
    • > The G 7 Pro supports wireless (XBOX Wireless, proprietary dongle, or Bluetooth) If anybody else's brain translates this to 'it works wirelessly on Xbox', according to the linked product page, it does not.
  • Recent Achievements

    • One Year In
      bernmeister earned a badge
      One Year In
    • Week One Done
      Scoobystu earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • Week One Done
      tuben earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • First Post
      OffsetAbs earned a badge
      First Post
    • Reacting Well
      OffsetAbs earned a badge
      Reacting Well
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      442
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      200
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      155
    4. 4
      FloatingFatMan
      71
    5. 5
      Steven P.
      67
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!