When you have a part of you that you do not like, whether it’s because you do not want to be that way or because others do not want you to be that way, it is possible to externalize that portion of yourself to the point where it becomes “other”.
At that point, it is possible to view this “other” as an external entity, a Demon if you will, that needs to be cast out.
But as I learned; When you try to tear yourself apart to remove the parts you don’t like, the only thing you succeed in doing is to tear yourself apart. And it can take years to put yourself back together again.
If you can. If you can accept that those “others” are really parts of you and make peace with them. If you can face the truth of it.
If you can’t, then your self-created demons will eventually destroy you.
Aw jeez. Why did you have to go and ask that? Now, as a non possesed non gay, I won’t know who the “cool” gays are. And what if you are gay but not sure if you’re possesed, but just want to experiement for a little bit? Are there levels of possesedness?
ETA: Great. Now the Chimera is giving us a new age lecture on demons. I’ll be at the bar.
Yes, but if a suspect were to identify himself as a demon via the alleged possessee’s mouth, would that not be self-incrimination?
Sure, if you were to ask a free-floating demon his name, I can understand how that would be okay. However, since possession of a human host is (in the view of some authorities) a crime, would not the self identification of a demon as a demon while possessing a human host be self-incrimination?
Maybe the super spooky, Secret Squirrel list they keep in the Vatican has more information that Wikipedia is allowed to share. I’ve said too much. skips away
You have to wave paper copies of the image of Ben Franklin (patron saint of fat older guys who got a lot) at them, preferably on identical green bills.
I’d assume you get it where you get your fish license.
I am mildly curious: why is this thread in Teh Pit? I’ve yet to see anything pitworthy in the thread, as entertaining as it has been. To be pitworthy it needs something like this:
You FUCKING ASSHOLES, don’t you REALIZE what an IDIOTIC concept you are using when you abuse a child this way??? You ought to be roasted alive before the rest of your countrymen, in order to exorcise the DAMN-FOOL SHITHEAD DAEMONS that apparently INFEST your STUPID MORONIC BRAINS!!!
There, now it belongs here.
As I understand it, they merely asked the demon to name itself. This is probably analogous to asking that question of a fugitive, where by simply providing the name, he may expose his wanted status and make himself subject to arrest. But that still doesn’t create a Fifth Amendment right to refuse to identify himself; the name itself is not “a link in the chain of evidence needed to prosecute him.” They clearly had reasonable suspicion under Brown v. Texas to assume there was a demon involved – after all, why else would someone be gay? And as the Court said in Hiibel:
