Statue paying homage to Satan to be unveiled in Detroit

[Skylar]

Not "Satan" -- Baphomet. "Satan" is a creation of Christianism.

I stand corrected. Baphomet. So can you tell me more? Are you a believer of Baphomet?

No. Just a student of mythology. With a nose for bullshit headlines.

It's always fascinated me how so many 'students of mythology' are also Leftists. And how almost inevitably, those Leftist students of mythology end up advocating for and otherwise adhering to the unprincipled, irrational tenets of evil.

What is up wit dat?

I'm really not interested in Baphomet. I just understand he's not the same thing as "Satan". And I don't believe in "evil" as such.

What I'm more interested in is bullshit rhetoric that morphs realities and myths into what's supposed to be an appeal to emotion, yet is nakedly transparent when it shows up. That's why I'm here.

You're welcome.

Can you say that you can look at those who behead innocents and you don't believe in evil?

I've been to a really beautiful lesbian wedding where the mothers of both brides cried and smiled. Where everyone danced and laughed and quite a few drank too much. Its was gloriously unremarkable.

I've heard that described as an abomination and pure evil. And that the two women should be 'eradicated'. So clearly there's a little room for interpretation in the term.

 

[Jackson]

Not "Satan" -- Baphomet. "Satan" is a creation of Christianism.

I stand corrected. Baphomet. So can you tell me more? Are you a believer of Baphomet?

No. Just a student of mythology. With a nose for bullshit headlines.

It's always fascinated me how so many 'students of mythology' are also Leftists. And how almost inevitably, those Leftist students of mythology end up advocating for and otherwise adhering to the unprincipled, irrational tenets of evil.

What is up wit dat?

I'm really not interested in Baphomet. I just understand he's not the same thing as "Satan". And I don't believe in "evil" as such.

What I'm more interested in is bullshit rhetoric that morphs realities and myths into what's supposed to be an appeal to emotion, yet is nakedly transparent when it shows up. That's why I'm here.

You're welcome.

Religion is an interesting synthesis. In almost every case, there's no real Leviathan. God doesn't break ties. So its up to the individual to interpret for themselves. And prioritize or ignore whatever passages they don't like to come up with whatever interpretations best fits what they already believe.

I mean, Mother Theresa and Grand Inquisitor Torquemada both used the same bible. And both felt biblically justified in their actions. As did the Puritians who executed adulterers. Or the Founders who killed gays.

Religion is kind of a Rorschach test where people project upon what they already believe. Its that way for most religions.

That a very interesting last statement. I rather think you have something there.

 

[Jackson]

I stand corrected. Baphomet. So can you tell me more? Are you a believer of Baphomet?

No. Just a student of mythology. With a nose for bullshit headlines.

It's always fascinated me how so many 'students of mythology' are also Leftists. And how almost inevitably, those Leftist students of mythology end up advocating for and otherwise adhering to the unprincipled, irrational tenets of evil.

What is up wit dat?

I'm really not interested in Baphomet. I just understand he's not the same thing as "Satan". And I don't believe in "evil" as such.

What I'm more interested in is bullshit rhetoric that morphs realities and myths into what's supposed to be an appeal to emotion, yet is nakedly transparent when it shows up. That's why I'm here.

You're welcome.

Can you say that you can look at those who behead innocents and you don't believe in evil?

I've been to a really beautiful lesbian wedding where the mothers of both brides cried and smiled. Where everyone danced and laughed and quite a few drank too much. Its was gloriously unremarkable.

I've heard that described as an abomination and pure evil. And that the two women should be 'eradicated'. So clearly there's a little room for interpretation in the term.

Ah, so much for that same old topic. Getting really tired of posters being so righteous and better than others.

 

[Pogo]

Not "Satan" -- Baphomet. "Satan" is a creation of Christianism.

I stand corrected. Baphomet. So can you tell me more? Are you a believer of Baphomet?

No. Just a student of mythology. With a nose for bullshit headlines.

It's always fascinated me how so many 'students of mythology' are also Leftists. And how almost inevitably, those Leftist students of mythology end up advocating for and otherwise adhering to the unprincipled, irrational tenets of evil.

What is up wit dat?

I'm really not interested in Baphomet. I just understand he's not the same thing as "Satan". And I don't believe in "evil" as such.

What I'm more interested in is bullshit rhetoric that morphs realities and myths into what's supposed to be an appeal to emotion, yet is nakedly transparent when it shows up. That's why I'm here.

You're welcome.

Can you say that you can look at those who behead innocents and you don't believe in evil?

Meaning "evil" as a force. Or anthropomorphized "evil" as in Satan (who I don't believe in either).
I just don't do dichotomy. Life is only that simple in a baseball game.

Baphomet doesn't represent "evil". It's far more complex than that.

 

[Skylar]

That's the thing to remember. Whenever you hear about freedom of religion, or religious concience, or religious expression, in almost every case add the word Christian to the front of it. And you'll get the real meaning.

If its a Muslim or a Wiccan or anyone that the wingers don't like.....then they actively fight the very freedom of religion they demand for themselves. Or as the OP himself has said: 'eradicate Islam'.

I've missed the fighting against Muslims and Wiccans. Were there riots and parades I missed?

So you missed Bachmann and other conservative Christians protesting the 'victory mosque' in New York? Or the conservative State legislatures passing laws to keep Sharia out of civil law? Or conservative Christians calling for the eradication of Islam.....or the banning of the Koran in the US?

If you've missed it, I'd be happy to clue you in.

Shouldn't we keep Sharia Law out of civil law?

Shouldn't we keep ANY kind of religious law out of civil law? That's the hypocrisy. The Christian right don't want religious freedom as they describe it. They what CHRISTIAN freedom as they describe it. And would deny other religions the same power they demand be carved out for themselves in the law.

If a Christian judge religious objects with gay marriage and refuses to act in the capacity of his office in a way that violates his Christian principles regarding gay marriage. But a Muslim judge refused to rule in his official capacity in any manner that violates Sharia law.......well shouldn't we keep Sharia law out of civil law?

Its naked hypocrisy. From Victory Mosques to anti-Sharia laws to this thread itself......Christians often demand one special standard for themselves. And another for every one else.

No thank you. When pressed, even most Christians don't support their conception of 'religious freedom'. As its not religion they want to have special status. But Christianity. Exclusively and specifically.

That is an opinion I'm sure the majority with which the majority will agree. Cristians have not called for the eradication of Islam and the Koran has not been banned.

You might want to check with the guy who opened this thread. He's a Christian. And he's called for the eradication of Islam. And the eradication of homosexuals.

As for the banning of the Koran there are state legislators who are trying to do it. And shocker, they're Conservative white Christians.

Then you would agree that the Christian community has not called for the eradication of Islam or even homosexuals. Just one person that you know of. And for a tid bit, one legislator actually put his hand on the Koran to swear to his oath beginning of his service in Congress.

Which Christian community? The execution of homosexuals was the law in every state in the era of the founders. With Christians killing gays for the majority of the history of their faith. Did God change his mind?

Or did Christians change theirs? And if Christians can just 'intepret around' a fucking death sentence.....then what can't they subjectively alter?

We have Christians today who claim God speaks to them. And they call for the eradication of homosexuals. Are they wrong?

And of course, you haven't touched my point about Sharia and Christian dogma. Either both are equally valid in our civl law...or neither are. Which is it?

 

[Skylar]

No. Just a student of mythology. With a nose for bullshit headlines.

It's always fascinated me how so many 'students of mythology' are also Leftists. And how almost inevitably, those Leftist students of mythology end up advocating for and otherwise adhering to the unprincipled, irrational tenets of evil.

What is up wit dat?

I'm really not interested in Baphomet. I just understand he's not the same thing as "Satan". And I don't believe in "evil" as such.

What I'm more interested in is bullshit rhetoric that morphs realities and myths into what's supposed to be an appeal to emotion, yet is nakedly transparent when it shows up. That's why I'm here.

You're welcome.

Can you say that you can look at those who behead innocents and you don't believe in evil?

I've been to a really beautiful lesbian wedding where the mothers of both brides cried and smiled. Where everyone danced and laughed and quite a few drank too much. Its was gloriously unremarkable.

I've heard that described as an abomination and pure evil. And that the two women should be 'eradicated'. So clearly there's a little room for interpretation in the term.

Ah, so much for that same old topic. Getting really tired of posters being so righteous and better than others.

Both have been described as 'evil'. Are they? Its a simple question. Its not a simple answer. Which is exactly my point.

The term is very interpretative.

 

[Syriusly]

So much for freedom of religion. I guess you christians believe that only christians have that right.

I guess people believe that only christians can erect buildings, monuments and statues.

This is America. Everyone can believe as they choose and no one has any right to stop them.

While I don't agree with their faith, I'm an American and we Americans protect everyone's freedom of religion.

They aren't harming anyone and all you christians should stop trying to take freedom of religion from those who don't follow your faith.

That's the thing to remember. Whenever you hear about freedom of religion, or religious concience, or religious expression, in almost every case add the word Christian to the front of it. And you'll get the real meaning.

If its a Muslim or a Wiccan or anyone that the wingers don't like.....then they actively fight the very freedom of religion they demand for themselves. Or as the OP himself has said: 'eradicate Islam'.

I've missed the fighting against Muslims and Wiccans. Were there riots and parades I missed?

Did you see a monum

That's the thing to remember. Whenever you hear about freedom of religion, or religious concience, or religious expression, in almost every case add the word Christian to the front of it. And you'll get the real meaning.

If its a Muslim or a Wiccan or anyone that the wingers don't like.....then they actively fight the very freedom of religion they demand for themselves. Or as the OP himself has said: 'eradicate Islam'.

I've missed the fighting against Muslims and Wiccans. Were there riots and parades I missed?

So you missed Bachmann and other conservative Christians protesting the 'victory mosque' in New York? Or the conservative State legislatures passing laws to keep Sharia out of civil law? Or conservative Christians calling for the eradication of Islam.....or the banning of the Koran in the US?

If you've missed it, I'd be happy to clue you in.

Shouldn't we keep Sharia Law out of civil law?

Shouldn't we keep ANY kind of religious law out of civil law? That's the hypocrisy. The Christian right don't want religious freedom as they describe it. They what CHRISTIAN freedom as they describe it. And would deny other religions the same power they demand be carved out for themselves in the law.

If a Christian judge religious objects with gay marriage and refuses to act in the capacity of his office in a way that violates his Christian principles regarding gay marriage. But a Muslim judge refused to rule in his official capacity in any manner that violates Sharia law.......well shouldn't we keep Sharia law out of civil law?

Its naked hypocrisy. From Victory Mosques to anti-Sharia laws to this thread itself......Christians often demand one special standard for themselves. And another for every one else.

No thank you. When pressed, even most Christians don't support their conception of 'religious freedom'. As its not religion they want to have special status. But Christianity. Exclusively and specifically.

That is an opinion I'm sure the majority with which the majority will agree. Cristians have not called for the eradication of Islam and the Koran has not been banned.

You might want to check with the guy who opened this thread. He's a Christian. And he's called for the eradication of Islam. And the eradication of homosexuals.

As for the banning of the Koran there are state legislators who are trying to do it. And shocker, they're Conservative white Christians.

Then you would agree that the Christian community has not called for the eradication of Islam or even homosexuals. Just one person that you know of. And for a tid bit, one legislator actually put his hand on the Koran to swear to his oath beginning of his service in Congress.

The 'Christian Community' has historically called for the criminalization of homosexual acts up until a few years ago. To this day there are members of the "Christian Community" who call for the death penalty for homosexuals.

 

[Jackson]

I stand corrected. Baphomet. So can you tell me more? Are you a believer of Baphomet?

No. Just a student of mythology. With a nose for bullshit headlines.

It's always fascinated me how so many 'students of mythology' are also Leftists. And how almost inevitably, those Leftist students of mythology end up advocating for and otherwise adhering to the unprincipled, irrational tenets of evil.

What is up wit dat?

I'm really not interested in Baphomet. I just understand he's not the same thing as "Satan". And I don't believe in "evil" as such.

What I'm more interested in is bullshit rhetoric that morphs realities and myths into what's supposed to be an appeal to emotion, yet is nakedly transparent when it shows up. That's why I'm here.

You're welcome.

Can you say that you can look at those who behead innocents and you don't believe in evil?

Meaning "evil" as a force. Or anthropomorphized "evil" as in Satan (who I don't believe in either).
I just don't do dichotomy. Life is only that simple in a baseball game.

Baphomet doesn't represent "evil". It's far more complex than that.

I never believed in Satan but as I aged, I've seen enough to believe in evil, and even Satan. And btw, "Thank you."

 

[NoNukes]

Not "Satan" -- Baphomet. "Satan" is a creation of Christianism.

I stand corrected. Baphomet. So can you tell me more? Are you a believer of Baphomet?

No. Just a student of mythology. With a nose for bullshit headlines.

It's always fascinated me how so many 'students of mythology' are also Leftists. And how almost inevitably, those Leftist students of mythology end up advocating for and otherwise adhering to the unprincipled, irrational tenets of evil.

What is up wit dat?

So many students in general are Leftists.

 

[Syriusly]

You know the State could easily do away with this by declaring that no religious themed monuments will be put on public property.

But that means 'no religious monuments' not just the ones Christians don't approve of.

 

[Jackson]

I've missed the fighting against Muslims and Wiccans. Were there riots and parades I missed?

So you missed Bachmann and other conservative Christians protesting the 'victory mosque' in New York? Or the conservative State legislatures passing laws to keep Sharia out of civil law? Or conservative Christians calling for the eradication of Islam.....or the banning of the Koran in the US?

If you've missed it, I'd be happy to clue you in.

Shouldn't we keep Sharia Law out of civil law?

Shouldn't we keep ANY kind of religious law out of civil law? That's the hypocrisy. The Christian right don't want religious freedom as they describe it. They what CHRISTIAN freedom as they describe it. And would deny other religions the same power they demand be carved out for themselves in the law.

If a Christian judge religious objects with gay marriage and refuses to act in the capacity of his office in a way that violates his Christian principles regarding gay marriage. But a Muslim judge refused to rule in his official capacity in any manner that violates Sharia law.......well shouldn't we keep Sharia law out of civil law?

Its naked hypocrisy. From Victory Mosques to anti-Sharia laws to this thread itself......Christians often demand one special standard for themselves. And another for every one else.

No thank you. When pressed, even most Christians don't support their conception of 'religious freedom'. As its not religion they want to have special status. But Christianity. Exclusively and specifically.

That is an opinion I'm sure the majority with which the majority will agree. Cristians have not called for the eradication of Islam and the Koran has not been banned.

You might want to check with the guy who opened this thread. He's a Christian. And he's called for the eradication of Islam. And the eradication of homosexuals.

As for the banning of the Koran there are state legislators who are trying to do it. And shocker, they're Conservative white Christians.

Then you would agree that the Christian community has not called for the eradication of Islam or even homosexuals. Just one person that you know of. And for a tid bit, one legislator actually put his hand on the Koran to swear to his oath beginning of his service in Congress.

Which Christian community? The execution of homosexuals was the law in every state in the era of the founders. With Christians killing gays for the majority of the history of their faith. Did God change his mind?

Or did Christians change theirs? And if Christians can just 'intepret around' a fucking death sentence.....then what can't they subjectively alter?

We have Christians today who claim God speaks to them. And they call for the eradication of homosexuals. Are they wrong?

And of course, you haven't touched my point about Sharia and Christian dogma. Either both are equally valid in our civl law...or neither are. Which is it?

Neither.

When a "Christian" says God speaks to them I wonder if they are seeing a professional for medication,

 

[Syriusly]

No. Just a student of mythology. With a nose for bullshit headlines.

It's always fascinated me how so many 'students of mythology' are also Leftists. And how almost inevitably, those Leftist students of mythology end up advocating for and otherwise adhering to the unprincipled, irrational tenets of evil.

What is up wit dat?

I'm really not interested in Baphomet. I just understand he's not the same thing as "Satan". And I don't believe in "evil" as such.

What I'm more interested in is bullshit rhetoric that morphs realities and myths into what's supposed to be an appeal to emotion, yet is nakedly transparent when it shows up. That's why I'm here.

You're welcome.

Can you say that you can look at those who behead innocents and you don't believe in evil?

Meaning "evil" as a force. Or anthropomorphized "evil" as in Satan (who I don't believe in either).
I just don't do dichotomy. Life is only that simple in a baseball game.

Baphomet doesn't represent "evil". It's far more complex than that.

I never believed in Satan but as I aged, I've seen enough to believe in evil, and even Satan. And btw, "Thank you."

I believe that there are people who do evil, and I believe that there are people who are evil- but i don't believe in 'evil' as as entity- or of course Satan.

 

[Skylar]

So you missed Bachmann and other conservative Christians protesting the 'victory mosque' in New York? Or the conservative State legislatures passing laws to keep Sharia out of civil law? Or conservative Christians calling for the eradication of Islam.....or the banning of the Koran in the US?

If you've missed it, I'd be happy to clue you in.

Shouldn't we keep Sharia Law out of civil law?

Shouldn't we keep ANY kind of religious law out of civil law? That's the hypocrisy. The Christian right don't want religious freedom as they describe it. They what CHRISTIAN freedom as they describe it. And would deny other religions the same power they demand be carved out for themselves in the law.

If a Christian judge religious objects with gay marriage and refuses to act in the capacity of his office in a way that violates his Christian principles regarding gay marriage. But a Muslim judge refused to rule in his official capacity in any manner that violates Sharia law.......well shouldn't we keep Sharia law out of civil law?

Its naked hypocrisy. From Victory Mosques to anti-Sharia laws to this thread itself......Christians often demand one special standard for themselves. And another for every one else.

No thank you. When pressed, even most Christians don't support their conception of 'religious freedom'. As its not religion they want to have special status. But Christianity. Exclusively and specifically.

That is an opinion I'm sure the majority with which the majority will agree. Cristians have not called for the eradication of Islam and the Koran has not been banned.

You might want to check with the guy who opened this thread. He's a Christian. And he's called for the eradication of Islam. And the eradication of homosexuals.

As for the banning of the Koran there are state legislators who are trying to do it. And shocker, they're Conservative white Christians.

Then you would agree that the Christian community has not called for the eradication of Islam or even homosexuals. Just one person that you know of. And for a tid bit, one legislator actually put his hand on the Koran to swear to his oath beginning of his service in Congress.

Which Christian community? The execution of homosexuals was the law in every state in the era of the founders. With Christians killing gays for the majority of the history of their faith. Did God change his mind?

Or did Christians change theirs? And if Christians can just 'intepret around' a fucking death sentence.....then what can't they subjectively alter?

We have Christians today who claim God speaks to them. And they call for the eradication of homosexuals. Are they wrong?

And of course, you haven't touched my point about Sharia and Christian dogma. Either both are equally valid in our civl law...or neither are. Which is it?

Neither.

When a "Christian" says God speaks to them I wonder if they are seeing a professional for medication,

What if they talk about 'literal demons' and hearing god 'speak to them'? Because those are usually the Christians that are calling for the 'eradication' of other religions, gays, or anyone they don't like.

 

[Jackson]

You know the State could easily do away with this by declaring that no religious themed monuments will be put on public property.

But that means 'no religious monuments' not just the ones Christians don't approve of.

True. And I wouldn't be against that. But don't do the same with the American flag.

 

[Jackson]

It's always fascinated me how so many 'students of mythology' are also Leftists. And how almost inevitably, those Leftist students of mythology end up advocating for and otherwise adhering to the unprincipled, irrational tenets of evil.

What is up wit dat?

I'm really not interested in Baphomet. I just understand he's not the same thing as "Satan". And I don't believe in "evil" as such.

What I'm more interested in is bullshit rhetoric that morphs realities and myths into what's supposed to be an appeal to emotion, yet is nakedly transparent when it shows up. That's why I'm here.

You're welcome.

Can you say that you can look at those who behead innocents and you don't believe in evil?

Meaning "evil" as a force. Or anthropomorphized "evil" as in Satan (who I don't believe in either).
I just don't do dichotomy. Life is only that simple in a baseball game.

Baphomet doesn't represent "evil". It's far more complex than that.

I never believed in Satan but as I aged, I've seen enough to believe in evil, and even Satan. And btw, "Thank you."

I believe that there are people who do evil, and I believe that there are people who are evil- but i don't believe in 'evil' as as entity- or of course Satan.

And I was right there with you until recently. Now I am not sure.

 

[Syriusly]

You know the State could easily do away with this by declaring that no religious themed monuments will be put on public property.

But that means 'no religious monuments' not just the ones Christians don't approve of.

True. And I wouldn't be against that. But don't do the same with the American flag.

Do you think that the American flag is a religious monument?

 

[XploreR]

I read the posts here and I can't believe no one really gets it. These Satanists don't really care about getting their statue up. The want YOU to understand how it feels to have a group you disagree with always putting their statue up over your objections. This is simple stuff people. Raise your consciousness a bit above the level your feet usually occupy. Freedom of religion means no one has the right to inflict their religious beliefs over anyone else publically--not even YOU. Protect yourselves by eliminating ALL religious dogmas from the public arena and let us all believe as we wish privately, where it belongs! Religious belief is between you and your God. It's NOT a public matter.

 

[Jackson]

I read the posts here and I can't believe no one really gets it. These Satanists don't really care about getting their statue up. The want YOU to understand how it feels to have a group you disagree with always putting their statue up over your objections. This is simple stuff people. Raise your consciousness a bit above the level your feet usually occupy. Freedom of religion means no one has the right to inflict their religious beliefs over anyone else publically--not even YOU. Protect yourselves by eliminating ALL religious dogmas from the public arena and let us all believe as we wish privately, where it belongs! Religious belief is between you and your God. It's NOT a public matter.

I agree with your last statements. But I do think they do care to get it up. And, I think they have every right to do so. I am just saying when our history Icons are deemed offensive and ordered taken down, then Baphwhoever gets the okay, we have a glitch in our common sense.

 

[guno]

Here’s the First Look at the New Satanic Monument Being Built for Oklahoma’s Statehouse...

In January the Satanic Temple announced plans to erect a monument glorifying the Dark Lord on the front lawn of the Oklahoma Statehouse. An Indiegogo campaign was launched with what seemed like a somewhat lofty goal of $20,000, but by the time donations ended almost $30,000 had been raised. Now an artist trained in classical sculpture is toiling away in New York, crafting a Baphomet figure sitting beneath an inverted pentagram and flanked by two children gazing upward in loyalty. When it is finished, it will be cast in bronze and, the Satanists hope, eventually displayed in Oklahoma.

The statue is a direct response to the state's installation of a Ten Commandments monument outside the Capitol in 2012. State Representative Mike Ritze paid for the controversial statue with his own money, and therefore it was considered a donation and OK to place on government property. Following that line of reasoning, the Satanic Temple submitted a formal application for their monument.

As Trait Thompson of the Oklahoma Capitol Preservation Commission told CNN last December, “Individuals and groups are free to apply to place a monument or statue or artwork.” The applications are then approved or rejected by the Commission. Unfortunately, the state has placed a halt on issuing permits for any other monuments until a lawsuit filed by the ACLU against Ritze’s Commandments monument is settled.

Nonetheless, the Satanists are building this thing, and I was offered an early peek at the work in progress by Temple spokesperson Lucien Greaves. Greaves told me he has received numerous threats from people who want to attack the sculpture, but that he “wouldn’t expect these outraged and nearly insensible reactionaries to actually know how to assault a bronze monument without severely hurting themselves in the process.” Still, he’s not taking any chances. The Temple is building a mold of the sculpture so they can pop these things out like evil, terribly expensive action figures whenever they need a new one.

“Depending on our insurance policy,” Greaves said, “we may be able to cast two from the destruction of one, expediting our arrival to the next battleground.”

The Temple estimates that the monument will be finished in a few months. Once it’s done, they plan to put it in front of the Oklahoma Statehouse regardless of the the Capitol Preservation Commission’s ongoing battle against the ACLU. They feel this should be allowed because their application was submitted before all the hullabaloo over Ritze’s monument.

“After all,” Greaves told me, “the Ten Commandments still stand at the State Capitol. We are fully willing to place our monument at the Capitol, even while the ACLU suit is fought, with the understanding that a judgment against the Ten Commandments will have ramifications for our monument as well, likely resulting in the removal of both.”

This is what happens when one tolerates Degenerates... where the idiots proclaim that 'discrimination' is wrong.

In fact discrimination is an essential to viability of the Individual and by extension the Culture.

And where a culture loses the means to determine the different, OKA: discriminate, between that which is right and from that which is wrong... thus the inevitable increase in that which is wrong.


Ya see Reader... that is the nature of Evil.

If it pisses you christers off I am all for it!!!

 

[Jackson]

You know the State could easily do away with this by declaring that no religious themed monuments will be put on public property.

But that means 'no religious monuments' not just the ones Christians don't approve of.

True. And I wouldn't be against that. But don't do the same with the American flag.

Do you think that the American flag is a religious monument?

no. lol.