Pro abortionists chant "Hail satan" in response to pro lifer singing Amazing Grace

[Plasmaball]

well that happens in racism from the left....one guy says ******, all of sudden he's wearing sheets and any of his friends are too.....so fuck off

And wow, she had a lip ring......nice......that is classy!

im sure all your friends where sheets. You seem the type.

He doesn't seem like a democrat to me.

i know, thats why i made the comment

 

[thanatos144]

im sure all your friends where sheets. You seem the type.

He doesn't seem like a democrat to me.

i know, thats why i made the comment

Except the KKK were and are democrats....

 

[LadyGunSlinger]

He doesn't seem like a democrat to me.

i know, thats why i made the comment

Except the KKK were and are democrats....

If a white pasty male is a librul- he's allowed to call Obama a Negro with a good dialect or say, "This guy would have been serving us just a couple of years ago." LIBRULS are the true racists... JUST about every racist statement comes out of the LIBRUL community.. See Alec-- but it's allowed because the blacks on the democratic plantation have been brainwashed now for decades using welfare and all kinds of socialist goodies. It's gotten them NO WHERE.

 

[nodoginnafight]

i know, thats why i made the comment

Except the KKK were and are democrats....

If a white pasty male is a librul- he's allowed to call Obama a Negro with a good dialect or say, "This guy would have been serving us just a couple of years ago." LIBRULS are the true racists... JUST about every racist statement comes out of the LIBRUL community.. See Alec-- but it's allowed because the blacks on the democratic plantation have been brainwashed now for decades using welfare and all kinds of socialist goodies. It's gotten them NO WHERE.

There is no doubt that the racists who fought against the black civil rights movement in the south were mostly Democrats. It is also equally certain that when the Democratic Party championed the cause of civil rights, southern Democrats left the party in droves and found the Republican Party more welcoming. (For example: Google George Wallace).

That being said, this juvenile notion that "all things bad spring from 'the other party' not MY party" is moronic. Turning every issue into a partisan debate is what useful idiots do. As long as the power brokers can keep you divided and bickering by party allegiance, then they don't have to actually do the hard work of governing and solving problems - all they have to do is keep blaming the other guys knowing full well that their useful idiots will pick up that ball and run with it rather than addressing (and fixing) real problems.

If everything is a Red v Blue issue to you - you are just part of the problem and are useless in terms of fostering solutions.

 

[LadyGunSlinger]

Except the KKK were and are democrats....

If a white pasty male is a librul- he's allowed to call Obama a Negro with a good dialect or say, "This guy would have been serving us just a couple of years ago." LIBRULS are the true racists... JUST about every racist statement comes out of the LIBRUL community.. See Alec-- but it's allowed because the blacks on the democratic plantation have been brainwashed now for decades using welfare and all kinds of socialist goodies. It's gotten them NO WHERE.

There is no doubt that the racists who fought against the black civil rights movement in the south were mostly Democrats. It is also equally certain that when the Democratic Party championed the cause of civil rights, southern Democrats left the party in droves and found the Republican Party more welcoming. (For example: Google George Wallace).

That being said, this juvenile notion that "all things bad spring from 'the other party' not MY party" is moronic. Turning every issue into a partisan debate is what useful idiots do. As long as the power brokers can keep you divided and bickering by party allegiance, then they don't have to actually do the hard work of governiong and solving problems - all they have to do is keep blaming the others knowing full well that their useful idiots will pick up that ball and run with it rather than addressing (and fixing) real problems.

If everything is a Red v Blue issue to you - you are just part of the problem and are useless in terms of fostering solutions.

Don't pretend to act as if you know me because you don't. You can cram your opinion straight up your stank azz, oh arbiter of what's fair and reasonable. LOL DOUCHE

 

[LadyGunSlinger]

Lastly, in another thread Mud started, I just stated I will never vote for another ESTABLISHMENT republican , Marco Rubio. Paul Ryan, etc again.. so fuck off.

 

[thanatos144]

Except the KKK were and are democrats....

If a white pasty male is a librul- he's allowed to call Obama a Negro with a good dialect or say, "This guy would have been serving us just a couple of years ago." LIBRULS are the true racists... JUST about every racist statement comes out of the LIBRUL community.. See Alec-- but it's allowed because the blacks on the democratic plantation have been brainwashed now for decades using welfare and all kinds of socialist goodies. It's gotten them NO WHERE.

There is no doubt that the racists who fought against the black civil rights movement in the south were mostly Democrats. It is also equally certain that when the Democratic Party championed the cause of civil rights, southern Democrats left the party in droves and found the Republican Party more welcoming. (For example: Google George Wallace).

That being said, this juvenile notion that "all things bad spring from 'the other party' not MY party" is moronic. Turning every issue into a partisan debate is what useful idiots do. As long as the power brokers can keep you divided and bickering by party allegiance, then they don't have to actually do the hard work of governing and solving problems - all they have to do is keep blaming the other guys knowing full well that their useful idiots will pick up that ball and run with it rather than addressing (and fixing) real problems.

If everything is a Red v Blue issue to you - you are just part of the problem and are useless in terms of fostering solutions.

This is proof how stupid democrats are cause they believe this shit. Tell me stupid why would racists assholes switch to the party that was for civil rights and anti slavery??? This is how ignorant you are cause that lie you keep using make no sense.

 

[Pogo]

There are some thing I take at face value.

--- like the title of the OP? The one that dishonestly calls a single person "pro-abortionists" (plural) even though he has no basis to know what that girl's position is or what the context was? You know, the one we're pretending was a valid premise?

Said it before, saying it again: the concepts of "Satan" and "pro-abortionist" have something in common: neither one exists. Some like to run threads on their own bizarre paranoid fantasies. Others like to join in without a critical eye -- at "face value".

I'll state this from a non-religious perspective:

Regardless of the existence of Satan, the theory and ideology of Satan is well established and understood by those of religious conviction and those without.

To quote part of Shakespeare's Rom & Jul:

'Tis but thy name that is my enemy;
Thou art thyself, though not a Montague.
What's Montague? it is nor hand, nor foot,
Nor arm, nor face, nor any other part
Belonging to a man. O, be some other name!
What's in a name? that which we call a rose
By any other name would smell as sweet;
So Romeo would, were he not Romeo call'd,
Retain that dear perfection which he owes
Without that title. Romeo, doff thy name,
And for that name which is no part of thee
Take all myself.

Thus when one invokes Satan, you could replace Satan in the chant "Hail Satan" with any other word that describes REAL-WORLD practices that are unobjectionably evil. Such as:

"Murder."
"Rape."
"Robbery."
"Chaos"
"Deceit."

"Hail Murder" "Hail Rape" "Hail Robbery" "Hail Chaos" "Hail Deceit"

How would any of these be different than chanting "Hail Satan."

In fact, "Hail Satan" is an even more powerful chant because it embodies

ALL OF THE ABOVE CHANTS AND MUCH MUCH MORE, in a single word.

So even a non-religious person should understand the dire implications of chanting "Hail Satan" because whether or not they actually believe in Satan, they most certainly understand the real-world practices that are associated with Satan. There are many Atheists and others of non-religious background who READ THE BIBLE and still consider it a good teacher of morals, even if they don't believe most/any of it in the literal sense.

So be very careful when you say "Satan isn't real, so it doesn't matter."

Corporations aren't real either, they are LEGAL FICTIONs that exist on PAPER, and holy shit ARE THEY POWERFUL, and even the Atheist will admit that even Satan exists on PAPER.

----------------------------------------
I once had someone attempt to rebutt this argument by saying that "Corporations are composed of real-individuals, who belong to the Corporation as a whole."

So I replied:
"However, this organization to which they belong, titled the "Corporation" is a legal fiction, correct?"

"Yes," he said.

Then I inquired further,
"Do you not see how you have actually defeated your own argument, and, at the very least, strengthened mine?"

Him being a generally honest person (and an atheist), replied:
"Yes, ideas can exist as "Philosophical Fictions," was power is derived from real-individuals who "participate" in the established goal of that organization; therefore, Satanic theory exists as a philosophical fiction on paper, but there are many practitioners and participants of the ideology itself, thus granting power to the organization. It is very much akin to FIAT CURRENCY, the very name itself implies "belief," or "fiat" or "infidelity." The paper currency draws its power from the BELIEF of its value, which is its established purpose, to be a widget with innate value, irrespective of the market."

So be very aware of what you mean when you say "lulz s4t4n d03sn't exi$t n00b"

Your reasoning fails at the start.

Sure you can call him Satan, Lucifer, Set, Beelzebub, Donald Trump or whatever name you like; but all of them assume you're renaming something that actually exists.

Your corporation analogy fails because while a corporation (firm, company, etc) has no physical form, it is a concept, in fact a legally defined one. Satan is a concept only to those who find a need to dichotomize "good" and "evil" into anthropomorphic outside forces, rather than the integrated aspects of the whole that they are. IOW just because you look at a forest and choose to see the green of the leaves and the brown of the wood, doesn't mean they're not "trees".

"Satan" ultimately is as valid a concept as the monsters under a child's bed; a useful tool for instilling fear, but having no basis in reality.

 

[Pogo]

Satan exists. It is a concept. It embodiesall the concepts of evil that liberals hold so dear. Infanticide, drug addiction, the normalization of homosexuality are all concepts of evil properly called satanic.

Wait a minute.

Is Satan an actual being or is he a "Concept"?

As a concept, I find greed and destroying the environment to be "Satanic", but I don't think that there's a guy with horns and a pitchfork running about.

there is some sort of cosmic play of good and evil taking place and these words and symbols have power
[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zavbgO1s8io]Gotta Serve Somebody....Robert Zimerman.aka...... - YouTube[/ame]

We did this before in this same thread, so for the second time, this is the most wrongheaded idiotic song Dylan ever wrote. Not only because it entertains this childish monster-under-the-bed fallacy but because the verb in the title insists that all we are is a bunch of drones condemned to "servitude" and ignores the idea of free will. As I said before, fuck that slavish idea.

 

[nodoginnafight]

If a white pasty male is a librul- he's allowed to call Obama a Negro with a good dialect or say, "This guy would have been serving us just a couple of years ago." LIBRULS are the true racists... JUST about every racist statement comes out of the LIBRUL community.. See Alec-- but it's allowed because the blacks on the democratic plantation have been brainwashed now for decades using welfare and all kinds of socialist goodies. It's gotten them NO WHERE.

There is no doubt that the racists who fought against the black civil rights movement in the south were mostly Democrats. It is also equally certain that when the Democratic Party championed the cause of civil rights, southern Democrats left the party in droves and found the Republican Party more welcoming. (For example: Google George Wallace).

That being said, this juvenile notion that "all things bad spring from 'the other party' not MY party" is moronic. Turning every issue into a partisan debate is what useful idiots do. As long as the power brokers can keep you divided and bickering by party allegiance, then they don't have to actually do the hard work of governiong and solving problems - all they have to do is keep blaming the others knowing full well that their useful idiots will pick up that ball and run with it rather than addressing (and fixing) real problems.

If everything is a Red v Blue issue to you - you are just part of the problem and are useless in terms of fostering solutions.

Don't pretend to act as if you know me because you don't. You can cram your opinion straight up your stank azz, oh arbiter of what's fair and reasonable. LOL DOUCHE

So your point is???
I should post opinions that I don't agree with ????
Is that how to make you happy?

Yes, I believe that my opinions are the product of good thought and a fair hearing on all the evidence. And I believe they are correct - just like most other posters on these boards believe their posts and opinions are honest, fair, and reasonable.

I don't pretend to know you - I responded to what you posted. Disagree with my opinion? Fine. Got anything better than sophomoric insults to support your position?

I didn't think so.

 

[The2ndAmendment]

I'll state this from a non-religious perspective:

Regardless of the existence of Satan, the theory and ideology of Satan is well established and understood by those of religious conviction and those without.

To quote part of Shakespeare's Rom & Jul:

'Tis but thy name that is my enemy;
Thou art thyself, though not a Montague.
What's Montague? it is nor hand, nor foot,
Nor arm, nor face, nor any other part
Belonging to a man. O, be some other name!
What's in a name? that which we call a rose
By any other name would smell as sweet;
So Romeo would, were he not Romeo call'd,
Retain that dear perfection which he owes
Without that title. Romeo, doff thy name,
And for that name which is no part of thee
Take all myself.

Thus when one invokes Satan, you could replace Satan in the chant "Hail Satan" with any other word that describes REAL-WORLD practices that are unobjectionably evil. Such as:

"Murder."
"Rape."
"Robbery."
"Chaos"
"Deceit."

"Hail Murder" "Hail Rape" "Hail Robbery" "Hail Chaos" "Hail Deceit"

How would any of these be different than chanting "Hail Satan."

In fact, "Hail Satan" is an even more powerful chant because it embodies

ALL OF THE ABOVE CHANTS AND MUCH MUCH MORE, in a single word.

So even a non-religious person should understand the dire implications of chanting "Hail Satan" because whether or not they actually believe in Satan, they most certainly understand the real-world practices that are associated with Satan. There are many Atheists and others of non-religious background who READ THE BIBLE and still consider it a good teacher of morals, even if they don't believe most/any of it in the literal sense.

So be very careful when you say "Satan isn't real, so it doesn't matter."

Corporations aren't real either, they are LEGAL FICTIONs that exist on PAPER, and holy shit ARE THEY POWERFUL, and even the Atheist will admit that even Satan exists on PAPER.

----------------------------------------
I once had someone attempt to rebutt this argument by saying that "Corporations are composed of real-individuals, who belong to the Corporation as a whole."

So I replied:
"However, this organization to which they belong, titled the "Corporation" is a legal fiction, correct?"

"Yes," he said.

Then I inquired further,
"Do you not see how you have actually defeated your own argument, and, at the very least, strengthened mine?"

Him being a generally honest person (and an atheist), replied:
"Yes, ideas can exist as "Philosophical Fictions," was power is derived from real-individuals who "participate" in the established goal of that organization; therefore, Satanic theory exists as a philosophical fiction on paper, but there are many practitioners and participants of the ideology itself, thus granting power to the organization. It is very much akin to FIAT CURRENCY, the very name itself implies "belief," or "fiat" or "infidelity." The paper currency draws its power from the BELIEF of its value, which is its established purpose, to be a widget with innate value, irrespective of the market."

So be very aware of what you mean when you say "lulz s4t4n d03sn't exi$t n00b"

Your reasoning fails at the start.

Sure you can call him Satan, Lucifer, Set, Beelzebub, Donald Trump or whatever name you like; but all of them assume you're renaming something that actually exists.

Your corporation analogy fails because while a corporation (firm, company, etc) has no physical form, it is a concept, in fact a legally defined one. Satan is a concept only to those who find a need to dichotomize "good" and "evil" into anthropomorphic outside forces, rather than the integrated aspects of the whole that they are. IOW just because you look at a forest and choose to see the green of the leaves and the brown of the wood, doesn't mean they're not "trees".

"Satan" ultimately is as valid a concept as the monsters under a child's bed; a useful tool for instilling fear, but having no basis in reality.

There was a time when Satan existed as a legal concept, ever heard of witch trials, before the separation of Church and State? In many parts of the world Satan, or its respective analogue, exists as a legal concept.

I don't even see why you are trying to disagree with me here, there's nothing "partisan" or "biased" about the above statement. If my name was Lakhota you probably would have given me thumbs up. You're disagreeing for the sake of strife, because my name is 2ndAmendment.

Any "concept" with practitioners and participants projects power and change into the real world, whether it exists legally or not.

 

[RandallFlagg]

Except the KKK were and are democrats....

If a white pasty male is a librul- he's allowed to call Obama a Negro with a good dialect or say, "This guy would have been serving us just a couple of years ago." LIBRULS are the true racists... JUST about every racist statement comes out of the LIBRUL community.. See Alec-- but it's allowed because the blacks on the democratic plantation have been brainwashed now for decades using welfare and all kinds of socialist goodies. It's gotten them NO WHERE.

There is no doubt that the racists who fought against the black civil rights movement in the south were mostly Democrats. It is also equally certain that when the Democratic Party championed the cause of civil rights, southern Democrats left the party in droves and found the Republican Party more welcoming. (For example: Google George Wallace).
That being said, this juvenile notion that "all things bad spring from 'the other party' not MY party" is moronic. Turning every issue into a partisan debate is what useful idiots do.As long as the power brokers can keep you divided and bickering by party allegiance, then they don't have to actually do the hard work of governing and solving problems - all they have to do is keep blaming the other guys knowing full well that their useful idiots will pick up that ball and run with it rather than addressing (and fixing) real problems.

If everything is a Red v Blue issue to you - you are just part of the problem and are useless in terms of fostering solutions.

Yeah...we'll all keep that in mind the next time Bush is getting the blame for everything that has happened in the 5 years of Barry.....

 

[Pogo]

I'll state this from a non-religious perspective:

Regardless of the existence of Satan, the theory and ideology of Satan is well established and understood by those of religious conviction and those without.

To quote part of Shakespeare's Rom & Jul:



Thus when one invokes Satan, you could replace Satan in the chant "Hail Satan" with any other word that describes REAL-WORLD practices that are unobjectionably evil. Such as:

"Murder."
"Rape."
"Robbery."
"Chaos"
"Deceit."

"Hail Murder" "Hail Rape" "Hail Robbery" "Hail Chaos" "Hail Deceit"

How would any of these be different than chanting "Hail Satan."

In fact, "Hail Satan" is an even more powerful chant because it embodies

ALL OF THE ABOVE CHANTS AND MUCH MUCH MORE, in a single word.

So even a non-religious person should understand the dire implications of chanting "Hail Satan" because whether or not they actually believe in Satan, they most certainly understand the real-world practices that are associated with Satan. There are many Atheists and others of non-religious background who READ THE BIBLE and still consider it a good teacher of morals, even if they don't believe most/any of it in the literal sense.

So be very careful when you say "Satan isn't real, so it doesn't matter."

Corporations aren't real either, they are LEGAL FICTIONs that exist on PAPER, and holy shit ARE THEY POWERFUL, and even the Atheist will admit that even Satan exists on PAPER.

----------------------------------------
I once had someone attempt to rebutt this argument by saying that "Corporations are composed of real-individuals, who belong to the Corporation as a whole."

So I replied:
"However, this organization to which they belong, titled the "Corporation" is a legal fiction, correct?"

"Yes," he said.

Then I inquired further,
"Do you not see how you have actually defeated your own argument, and, at the very least, strengthened mine?"

Him being a generally honest person (and an atheist), replied:
"Yes, ideas can exist as "Philosophical Fictions," was power is derived from real-individuals who "participate" in the established goal of that organization; therefore, Satanic theory exists as a philosophical fiction on paper, but there are many practitioners and participants of the ideology itself, thus granting power to the organization. It is very much akin to FIAT CURRENCY, the very name itself implies "belief," or "fiat" or "infidelity." The paper currency draws its power from the BELIEF of its value, which is its established purpose, to be a widget with innate value, irrespective of the market."

So be very aware of what you mean when you say "lulz s4t4n d03sn't exi$t n00b"

Your reasoning fails at the start.

Sure you can call him Satan, Lucifer, Set, Beelzebub, Donald Trump or whatever name you like; but all of them assume you're renaming something that actually exists.

Your corporation analogy fails because while a corporation (firm, company, etc) has no physical form, it is a concept, in fact a legally defined one. Satan is a concept only to those who find a need to dichotomize "good" and "evil" into anthropomorphic outside forces, rather than the integrated aspects of the whole that they are. IOW just because you look at a forest and choose to see the green of the leaves and the brown of the wood, doesn't mean they're not "trees".

"Satan" ultimately is as valid a concept as the monsters under a child's bed; a useful tool for instilling fear, but having no basis in reality.

There was a time when Satan existed as a legal concept, ever heard of witch trials, before the separation of Church and State? In many parts of the world Satan, or its respective analogue, exists as a legal concept.

I don't even see why you are trying to disagree with me here, there's nothing "partisan" or "biased" about the above statement. If my name was Lakhota you probably would have given me thumbs up. You're disagreeing for the sake of strife, because my name is 2ndAmendment.

Any "concept" with practitioners and participants projects power and change into the real world, whether it exists legally or not.

Not in the least. I'm disagreeing that there is any valid basis to anthropomorphize isolated concepts of "good" and "evil" into deities and antideities. That's something I've always rejected, long before this board, long long before there was an internet.

And if you remember, I don't always disagree with you; nor did I imply it was 'partisan' or 'biased'. It isn't; it's just silly. It was as silly for the Inquisitors of the fourteenth century as it is for however it's used now. With apologies to Voltaire, since the devil does not exist, it is necessary for man to invent one; this gives us the capacity to blame our own failures on some outside force: "the devil made me do it" is the bullshittiest statement ever made, and only exists as a get-out-of-jail-free card to avoid having to use the first person: "I fucked up".

Also comes in handy as a pretext for socialized murder at the stake of subgroups we don't understand, as per your witch example. It serves to dehumanize the "other" by association. Isn't it odd that in every war, no matter what side you're on, "God" is on "our" side. For all the evil he's supposed to embody, God has a monopoly on sponsoring war apparently, because nobody ever claims Satan as their ally. Make sense? Only when you accept that "Satan" is nothing but a psychological tool, a tool also known as a wedge.

The devil/Satan/Lucifer et al is a creation born of fear-plus-imagination to try to explain human failings. But that doesn't make "him" any more real than the tooth fairy.

 

[The2ndAmendment]

Any "concept" with practitioners and participants projects power and change into the real world, whether it exists legally or not.

Not in the least. I'm disagreeing that there is any valid basis to anthropomorphize isolated concepts of "good" and "evil" into deities and antideities. That's something I've always rejected, long before this board, long long before there was an internet.

And if you remember, I don't always disagree with you; nor did I imply it was 'partisan' or 'biased'. It isn't; it's just silly. It was as silly for the Inquisitors of the fourteenth century as it is for however it's used now. With apologies to Voltaire, since the devil does not exist, it is necessary for man to invent one; this gives us the capacity to blame our own failures on some outside force: "the devil made me do it" is the bullshittiest statement ever made, and only exists as a get-out-of-jail-free card to avoid having to use the first person: "I fucked up".

Also comes in handy as a pretext for socialized murder at the stake of subgroups we don't understand, as per your witch example. It serves to dehumanize the "other" by association. Isn't it odd that in every war, no matter what side you're on, "God" is on "our" side. For all the evil he's supposed to embody, God has a monopoly on sponsoring war apparently, because nobody ever claims Satan as their ally. Make sense? Only when you accept that "Satan" is nothing but a psychological tool, a tool also known as a wedge.

The devil/Satan/Lucifer et al is a creation born of fear-plus-imagination to try to explain human failings. But that doesn't make "him" any more real than the tooth fairy.

1) It does not matter who does NOT believe in X; it only matters who DOES believe in X.

When fiction X has a substantially organized group of real-life practitioners, their actions reverberate and affect the real-world about them, regardless of who does NOT believe in X.

2) "The devil made me do it." Yeah, you're right, this is a lame excuse, because it also defies the basic principles of Judaism and Christianity.

The Devil cannot Choose for you, he can only tempt you, or negatively influence your choices. In the end, you are the only one who can choose. This is one of the very first lessons in Genesis, when Eve eats the apple. She was tempted by Satan, but Satan did not "mind control" her in eating the apple.

So any time someone uses that excuse, just flash this card at the them and you win.

 

[TwistedSuze13]

Yep...the pro-choice banshees had an ad on Craig's List in Austin saying they would pay $1300. to $2200. a month to join them in protesting.
As soon as they realized pro-life groups had spotted the ad they pulled it, but not before Operation Rescue had archived the ad.

An image of the ad is here with more info :

Leftist Group Pulls Ad Hiring Radical Pro-Abortion Agitators to Oppose Texas Law

Disgusting ?
Absolutely.

Surprising ?
Not in the Least.

 

[JoeB131]

Yep...the pro-choice banshees had an ad on Craig's List in Austin saying they would pay $1300. to $2200. a month to join them in protesting.
As soon as they realized pro-life groups had spotted the ad they pulled it, but not before Operation Rescue had archived the ad.

An image of the ad is here with more info :

Leftist Group Pulls Ad Hiring Radical Pro-Abortion Agitators to Oppose Texas Law

Disgusting ?
Absolutely.

Surprising ?
Not in the Least.

Actually, the ad was looking to hire full time organizers and activists... and they probably had enough applicants.

Provided it wasn't a scam like 90% of everything else on "Dead Hookers List".

 

[thanatos144]

Yep...the pro-choice banshees had an ad on Craig's List in Austin saying they would pay $1300. to $2200. a month to join them in protesting.
As soon as they realized pro-life groups had spotted the ad they pulled it, but not before Operation Rescue had archived the ad.

An image of the ad is here with more info :

Leftist Group Pulls Ad Hiring Radical Pro-Abortion Agitators to Oppose Texas Law

Disgusting ?
Absolutely.

Surprising ?
Not in the Least.

its how they protest.... They hire mobs.

 

[Pogo]

Any "concept" with practitioners and participants projects power and change into the real world, whether it exists legally or not.

Not in the least. I'm disagreeing that there is any valid basis to anthropomorphize isolated concepts of "good" and "evil" into deities and antideities. That's something I've always rejected, long before this board, long long before there was an internet.

And if you remember, I don't always disagree with you; nor did I imply it was 'partisan' or 'biased'. It isn't; it's just silly. It was as silly for the Inquisitors of the fourteenth century as it is for however it's used now. With apologies to Voltaire, since the devil does not exist, it is necessary for man to invent one; this gives us the capacity to blame our own failures on some outside force: "the devil made me do it" is the bullshittiest statement ever made, and only exists as a get-out-of-jail-free card to avoid having to use the first person: "I fucked up".

Also comes in handy as a pretext for socialized murder at the stake of subgroups we don't understand, as per your witch example. It serves to dehumanize the "other" by association. Isn't it odd that in every war, no matter what side you're on, "God" is on "our" side. For all the evil he's supposed to embody, God has a monopoly on sponsoring war apparently, because nobody ever claims Satan as their ally. Make sense? Only when you accept that "Satan" is nothing but a psychological tool, a tool also known as a wedge.

The devil/Satan/Lucifer et al is a creation born of fear-plus-imagination to try to explain human failings. But that doesn't make "him" any more real than the tooth fairy.

1) It does not matter who does NOT believe in X; it only matters who DOES believe in X.

When fiction X has a substantially organized group of real-life practitioners, their actions reverberate and affect the real-world about them, regardless of who does NOT believe in X.

2) "The devil made me do it." Yeah, you're right, this is a lame excuse, because it also defies the basic principles of Judaism and Christianity.

The Devil cannot Choose for you, he can only tempt you, or negatively influence your choices. In the end, you are the only one who can choose. This is one of the very first lessons in Genesis, when Eve eats the apple. She was tempted by Satan, but Satan did not "mind control" her in eating the apple.

So any time someone uses that excuse, just flash this card at the them and you win.

Not sure what this post even means. Does it really matter who believes the 1969 moon landing was staged, if it wasn't staged?

It boils down to this: the existence of "Satan" is as problematic as the existence of "God"; they can be postulated but cannot be proven. That postulation can be adjudged on its merits, and in doing so the existence of Satan/God makes about as much sense as the existence of the tooth fairy, the boogeyman, Santa Claus or monsters under the bed. All are equally undocumentable inventions out of human imagination.

Regardless how many may swallow or not swallow the story, it's silly on its face, so the concept "Satan" can bite me.

When fiction X has a substantially organized group of real-life practitioners, their actions reverberate and affect the real-world about them, regardless of who does NOT believe in X.

I believe you're talking about thoughtforms and prayers. Sure, that psychic energy plausibly has power; if a million people pray to a God that in truth does not exist, arguably that energy still has to go somewhere, and its purpose is not lost. I can agree with that; it's a prime concept of Wicca.

But in this case we're referring to an outside entity's power, i.e. that of "Satan" and what evil "he"* can work. if that outside entity is a figment of the imagination, then it's a nonentity, and therefore has no power to send anywhere.

* (I put "he" in quotes because it's absurd to conceive of Satan as male, since male can only exist in contrast to female. Unless Satan has a mate with which it can procreate baby Satans, it cannot be a "he". Neither can God.)

 

[The2ndAmendment]

Hold on, I got the full video:



What's next, the Libtards are going to round up Pro-lifers and set lions on them, like the Romans did to the early Christians? It almost looks just like that.

 

[G.T.]

like someone else said....


childish, but funny