Though, carrot has already touched on this, I don’t need to “prove” that assertion. The egoism angle has already been covered. All I was saying is that lying would not be against the egoist philosophy because, by definition, it puts self gain first. Capiche?
Well, you see… the thing is… what I mean to say is… aw, hell, I can’t defend summertime. I got so sidetracked in the debate with the humorless lezlers (shouldn’t there be a limit on the amount of times someone can use the rolleyes smilie?), that I forgot y’all were having a simultaneous discussion and forgot the context. You’re absolutely right, just about any murderer is going to lie about the crime, regardless of their proffessed religion, so summertime’s point is moot.
Anybody got an archimedes balance? I think we need to measure Monty…
No, I don’t need to “prove” that some Satanists hold an egoist philosophy as we have already covered that ad nauseum. And I don’t need to “prove” that egoists put the self above all because that is how egoism is defined. Therefore, “egoists don’t have a moral problem about lying” is not a radical assertion as it builds on what has already been laid down in the discussion. Try to keep up.
That would what you exemplified in your first post on page one and first post on page two of this thread, Summertime. You tossed something out as though it is a fact, when it’s not a fact. That’s just bad form.
I notice that in another thread you retracted that same error. Feel free to do so here.
Well.
I have read (Johanna Michaelsen’s book) that there are documented cases of people claiming to be satanists killing animals, etc.)
I don’t have the cites handy, but can get them.
I certainly wouldn’t put it past them!
Its almost funny: it feels like its politically incorrect to knock satanists!
They are not upstanding people!
Am I in bizarro world or is it bad to knock anyone at all?
It’s not the issue of being politically incorrect to knock someone; it’s the issue of making assertions without evidence to back up that assertion. “I wouldn’t put it past them” doesn’t constitute evidence; it constitutes prejudice–regardless of the target.
Johanna Michaelson? The anti-halloween lady? I don’t think you can honestly use her as an unbiased source on crime statistics. She doesn’t work in facts; she works in paranoia. Probably thinks the Harry Potter books can teach your kids to summon demons.
A quick google search on “Johanna Michaelson” and “halloween” brought up her essay. My favorite part:
Now that’s just evil. Who gives out freakin’ bananas on halloween?
Later on there are some straight to video movie plot things about covens sacrificing young women and newborns. Her writings don’t have any documented evidence, they just pander to paranoid parents who believe in boogiemen more than their children do. However, I will give her credit for seperating neo-pagans from satanists, even if she got most of the pagan beliefs wrong.
Now you’re really starting to irritate me. There are documented cases of people claiming to be Christians killing people and animals, cases of Hindus killing people and animals, Muslims, Pagans, godless commie pinkos, and little old ladies who knit doilies in their spare time. What is your fucking point?
Promises, promises.
Bully for you. Your ignorant opinions (MY IGNORANT OPINION) are not the issue here.
How’s about you have some evidence to knock them based on their religion first? Then, you can do all the Satanist-bashing you want. Until then, however, you will have to deal with me.
Do you know any?
Not at all. You can try your hand at me all you like. Be my guest. But don’t be bashing people because of your perceptions of their religion, or you WILL be called on it. Unless, of course, it’s something really awful, like Mormonism.
[sub]just kidding, Monty. ;)[/sub]
Summertime, in your first post you misinterpreted the Rede, which I follow. The Rede states, “An It Harm None, Do As Ye Will”. Some authors go on to paraphrase this into “Do As Ye Will is the whole of the law.” It’s reminding people to follow the Rede, which I’ve already explained on page one. It does NOT give me free license to act as I please, quite the contrary. It’s a strict no nonsense rule NOT TO HARM ANYTHING with my actions.
I believe you might be thinking of people who practice Santa Ria as a religion when you state “satanists” sacrifice animals. They have the legally upheld (in the USA) right to HUMANELY kill, cook, and then eat chickens during their rituals, and they do this. The stipulation is that they must kill humanely, and they are checked up on by the ASPCA.
Why don’t you go to this site and read this section? Come back when you have learned more about the religions you are poiinting “the giant finger of immoral criminality” at, ok? You have fallen into the mistaken assumptions that authors have spoon fed you. Those assumptions being a blending of several religions that aren’t Judeo/Christian into one big catagory:SATANISM!!!:eek:
Really, go learn about these religions that you are accusing before you make any more paranoia riddled statements. It won’t taint you, it will give you a better understanding, and hopefully less anxiety too. Isn’t one of the precepts of Evangelical Christianity to learn about the other religions you will be encountering, to better understand, and so as not to offend etcetera?
Here, since my spelling has been in error, I went and found 2 articles about the religion Santeria for you. It’s pronounced Santa Ria though. Sorry for the confusion.
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Summertime * I have read (Johanna Michaelsen’s book)
AHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!! Ah, ahem. wipes tear Oh, sorry. You were saying?
I know! It’s a lowdown dirty shame when an honest bigot can’t do a day’s bashing without these new-fangled PC folks getting on their high horses.
It’s still perfectly okay to knock the ignorant and the prejudiced. Oh, and people who shout out misinformed notions and base all their decisions on what they’ve read in Reader’s Digest.
Wanders in Oh, and the Burning Times, don’t forget those.
For those of you who don’t realize, there was a period in history where unknown numbers of people in the European world were killed horribly because they were thought to be witches. Some sources give a rough estimate of the people who were burned, hung, or tortured to death on the charge of witchcraft as being 9 million during this period.
It was during this time that Pope Innocent VIII wrote his Bull Against Witches in 1484. In 1487 two German monks, Heinrich Institoris Kramer, and Jakob Spranger forged the approbation of the Theological Faculty of the University of Colonge (the appointed censer of the time) for their work the Maleus Maleficarum. An EVIL EVIL book shudder It makes my hands itch to remember even touching it. The forged approval was not discovered until 1898. (My source for this is Raymond Buckland’s work “Complete Book of Witchcraft” I’ve read it in other reliable sources too, but this is the one I have in front of me for fact checking.)
This wicked tome has 3 parts, the first part admonishes the reader that NOT to believe in witchcraft is heresy, and outlines what witches do. The second part tells how witchcraft is worked, and how to combat it. The third part tells how to prosecute witches in the courts. It states that it is perfectly acceptable to listen to testimony from an accused’s “mortal enemy”. :eek: I have read as much of this…thing as I could. I got the translated, work, with the original format preserved through interlibrary loan.
Ok, ranting done. I hope the defense attorney does not actually use the “Satanists did it, not my client!” tactic. IMO it would not only be a bane to pagans, but if the prosecutor is any good at all, and does their homework it will get him laughed out of the courtroom. The above historical events are why I don’t like the flames of suspicion to be fanned, with Paganism, and Satanism interchangeably used.
Drat it! The names of the monks who wrote “The Maleus Maleficarum” are Heinrich Institoris Kramer and Jakob SprEnger, not SprAnger.:smack: I even double checked that spelling in case some of the more dubious Dopers wanted to verify that the book actually exists. Incidentally the name translates to mean “Witch Hammer”.
It’s possible the baby’s body was cut shoulder to shoulder or became wrapped in the tape because of its long submersion in San Francisco Bay, the MSNBC report said, adding that the part of the coroner’s report the network received “doesn’t prove anything one way or another.”
