Ornery.org
  Front Page   |   About Ornery.org   |   World Watch   |   Guest Essays   |   Contact Us

The Ornery American Forum Post New Topic  Post A Reply
my profile login | register | search | faq | forum home

  next oldest topic   next newest topic
» The Ornery American Forum » General Comments » Note there is no separation of coven and state

 - UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!    
Author Topic: Note there is no separation of coven and state
Pete at Home
Member
Member # 429

 - posted      Profile for Pete at Home   Email Pete at Home   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Absent from athiest whining is any mention of the public pagan get out the vote movement for Kerry, including a group "spell" over the election, effected by a group standing on Pennsylvania Avenue. Anyway, here are one of the cuter explanations of the Religious Left about how dark sinister forces turned the election for Bush:

quote:
I started hearing a calm, resonable , and powerful head-voice saying things like "Kerry doesn't have the experience we need in these troubled times." and "Give Bush a chance to make it better."

Anyone who knows me KNOWS these are not my thoughts!

And besides, I voted last week. No, there's no way in Hades these are my thoughts.

Gods-damn it! The f---ing Republicans have got Magical help pumping out a clear, unified, focused broadcast, and you can be sure, every sensitive is picking it up. These are the people most likely to vote Kerry, and I'd like to think they are resolute enough not to be swayed by telepathic subliminal advertising, but it's such a rarely-done thing, and so few people are properly trained these days, that I fear it will be more effective. Just watch and see who says "I was going to vote for Kerry, but for some reason I changed my mind at the last minute."

Who would be doing this for them? Gee, who are the Mages driving around in those black Mercedes and Lincolns with the tinted windows? The ones who live in the mansions with the hell-hounds in the yard and the 7-foot tall hairless black doormen? Every town has some, the bigger the town, the more of these "High Magi" you will find.

I don't recall even the religious right making any links of Kerry to sinister supernatural forces. [Big Grin]
Posts: 44193 | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
towellman
Member
Member # 1462

 - posted      Profile for towellman   Email towellman   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Lol, that's pretty good.

I'll be the first to point out that there were many people who felt God wanted Bush to be president, and some may consider that "irrational" influence to be sinister and supernatural.

Posts: 220 | Registered: Jan 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
kidzmom
Member
Member # 2015

 - posted      Profile for kidzmom   Email kidzmom   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
oh...wow...just......wow...

I remember seeing a little human interest piece a week or so before the election, from some bedroom community in MA. There was a little group of "witches" (looked more like a coffee klatsch than a coven) performing some kind of ceremony to bring positive energy to Kerry. At the time I thought, "uh-HUH". For one thing, I'm not sure any candidate wants to be publicly associated with that (regardless of whether or not they believe in it); the majority of the population isn't quite ready for that. For another, the people I've known who were into spell-casting, screeing, etc. would've rather had their tongues cut out than to perform a ceremony for the 5 o'clock evening news!

"telepathic subliminal advertising"...now there's a strategy for 2008! Just think, it's low-key, subtle, and no one can track you down to demand equal air time! [Wink]

[ November 09, 2004, 01:34 AM: Message edited by: kidzmom ]

Posts: 490 | Registered: Sep 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Pete at Home
Member
Member # 429

 - posted      Profile for Pete at Home   Email Pete at Home   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Funny thing is, that if the ACLU could prove that God was sending mental messages to people to vote for the winning Candidate, wouldn't the Supreme Court have to rule that the election results violated the establishment of religion clause?
Posts: 44193 | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Kilthmal
Member
Member # 547

 - posted      Profile for Kilthmal   Email Kilthmal   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Here is the link to the story above. The comments are great [Smile]
Posts: 728 | Registered: Oct 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
TomDavidson
Member
Member # 99

 - posted      Profile for TomDavidson   Email TomDavidson   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
"Funny thing is, that if the ACLU could prove that God was sending mental messages to people to vote for the winning Candidate, wouldn't the Supreme Court have to rule that the election results violated the establishment of religion clause?"

No. If any superstitious idiot finally manages to prove the existence of a hypothetical God, I would imagine that church/state separation would become a thing of the past altogether. I await such proof eagerly. [Smile]

Posts: 22935 | Registered: Nov 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
oicnun
Member
Member # 1957

 - posted      Profile for oicnun   Email oicnun       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
No. If any superstitious idiot finally manages to prove the existence of a hypothetical God, I would imagine that church/state separation would become a thing of the past altogether. I await such proof eagerly.
If the superstitious idiot finally managed to prove it, would he still be a superstitious idiot? [Confused]
Posts: 7 | Registered: Aug 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
TomDavidson
Member
Member # 99

 - posted      Profile for TomDavidson   Email TomDavidson   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
"If the superstitious idiot finally managed to prove it, would he still be a superstitious idiot?"

Nope. He'd be the greatest scientist in the history of mankind. So I wish him -- or her -- all the best of luck.

Posts: 22935 | Registered: Nov 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
oicnun
Member
Member # 1957

 - posted      Profile for oicnun   Email oicnun       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Tom: I was just wondering if you really think that everyone that believes in a god is a superstitious idiot,but i suppose that would be off-topic in this thread. [Smile]
Posts: 7 | Registered: Aug 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
TomDavidson
Member
Member # 99

 - posted      Profile for TomDavidson   Email TomDavidson   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
I think they're superstitious. I don't think they're all idiots.

I think someone who believes he can prove the existence of God to scientific standards is either the greatest scientist in the world or an idiot, however; which he is depends entirely on the success of the endeavor. [Smile]

Posts: 22935 | Registered: Nov 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
oicnun
Member
Member # 1957

 - posted      Profile for oicnun   Email oicnun       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
lol [Big Grin]
Posts: 7 | Registered: Aug 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Pete at Home
Member
Member # 429

 - posted      Profile for Pete at Home   Email Pete at Home   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
No. If any superstitious idiot finally manages to prove the existence of a hypothetical God, I would imagine that church/state separation would become a thing of the past altogether. I await such proof eagerly.
Really? So by your reasoning, anyone who is convinced of the proof of God's existence should try to eliminate the "separation of church and state"? So you think the founders were a bunch of closet atheists, or that they were unsure of God's existence?
Posts: 44193 | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Pete at Home
Member
Member # 429

 - posted      Profile for Pete at Home   Email Pete at Home   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
I'll be the first to point out that there were many people who felt God wanted Bush to be president, and some may consider that "irrational" influence to be sinister and supernatural.
Funny, when you think about it, this pagan conspiracy theory is just a restatement of the general atheist whinings about the influence of religious values on this election.

As far as I know, God stayed out of this presidential election. I know a lot of people who prayed intently to help them decide who to vote for, and have yet to hear anyone say he gave them a specific answer other than to think it over and make a decision. Generally, God wants us taught correct principles, but then lets us govern ourselves. IMO when Jesus comes to reign on the earth some day, he won't be a micromanager. Brigham Young said that even in the millenium there will be different religions. As I understand, it's only after mortality, at the judgment, that every knee shall bow and every tongue confess.

Posts: 44193 | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
TomDavidson
Member
Member # 99

 - posted      Profile for TomDavidson   Email TomDavidson   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
"So by your reasoning, anyone who is convinced of the proof of God's existence should try to eliminate the 'separation of church and state?'"

Nope. Anyone who believes anyone can be convinced of God's existence should try to eliminate the separation of church and state. If they believe a "proof" exists consistent with the scientific method, they're downright negligent -- even, I suggest, uncharitable -- in not promoting it.

Posts: 22935 | Registered: Nov 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Pete at Home
Member
Member # 429

 - posted      Profile for Pete at Home   Email Pete at Home   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Sure, if you look at only some of the issues and stakes involved, and ignore others. But you are good at that.
Posts: 44193 | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Wayward Son
Member
Member # 210

 - posted      Profile for Wayward Son   Email Wayward Son   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
But don't forget the Babelfish Paradox, Tom: since God wants us to believe in Him through Faith, not Proof, then any Proof of God immediately shows that He does not exist!

So the Truly Faithful would suppress that Proof to please God and prevent the End of All Things. [Big Grin]

Posts: 8681 | Registered: Dec 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Wayward Son
Member
Member # 210

 - posted      Profile for Wayward Son   Email Wayward Son   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Sure, if you look at only some of the issues and stakes involved, and ignore others. But you are good at that.
Could you expand on that, Pete, since that sentence right now makes no sense to me.
Posts: 8681 | Registered: Dec 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Pete at Home
Member
Member # 429

 - posted      Profile for Pete at Home   Email Pete at Home   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Look at the preceding paragraph.

Tom said: "Anyone who believes anyone can be convinced of God's existence should try to eliminate the separation of church and state. If they believe a "proof" exists consistent with the scientific method, they're downright negligent -- even, I suggest, uncharitable -- in not promoting it."

I replied: "Sure, if you look at only some of the issues and stakes involved, and ignore others. But you are good at that."

Tom's statement rests on the assumption that the physical issues of our mortal existence are the only issues. Tom ignores the fact that the very existence of a God that cared enough about us to appear and prove his own existence to some of us, would put our little universe into a much larger context than the one that Tom currently posits, and that the things that Tom now considers to be overriding imperatives, might not be so all-important in the greater scheme of things.

If one knows that there is life after death, why would the considerations of this life be the only considerations?

And no; I'm not talking about the Babelfish paradox [Smile]

Posts: 44193 | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
TomDavidson
Member
Member # 99

 - posted      Profile for TomDavidson   Email TomDavidson   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
*sigh*

Okay, Pete. Let me be more precise.
Assuming that the physical world exists, and is not merely a dream within a dream; assuming that the physical world matters, and is not merely a masturbatory amusement park for spirits; assuming futhermore that God seeks to bring people to Him in this life, and that it would not defeat His purposes to demonstrate His existence to the satisfaction of the world; and so on....

I mean, I can imagine a hypothetical in which God appears to people and tells them, "Now, if you ever tell anyone else about me, you and everyone you tell will be turned into ferrets." In a situation like that, yes, it would be undesirable to share that information.

Posts: 22935 | Registered: Nov 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
JLMyers
Member
Member # 1983

 - posted      Profile for JLMyers   Email JLMyers   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Ha! Ha! Ha! Funny post Tom.

[ November 09, 2004, 09:37 PM: Message edited by: JLMyers ]

Posts: 2007 | Registered: Aug 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Pete at Home
Member
Member # 429

 - posted      Profile for Pete at Home   Email Pete at Home   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
You can assume the physical world exists, and is not merely a dream within a dream; and that the physical world matters, and is not merely a masturbatory amusement park for spirits, and you still miss the point. I said the greater context, not the "real" context. This world is real, but you know that it is not all that is real, right? I mean even an atheist knows that there is more to existence than what he is personally aware of, neh?


quote:
assuming futhermore that God seeks to bring people to Him in this life
What do you mean by "bring people to Him?"
Posts: 44193 | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
TomDavidson
Member
Member # 99

 - posted      Profile for TomDavidson   Email TomDavidson   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
"I said the greater context, not the 'real' context. This world is real, but you know that it is not all that is real, right?"

Um. No, actually. I don't know whether there's more out there than this "world," which is why I'm agnostic. But I've seen no evidence of this fact, nor heard what I consider credible testimony otherwise.

But rather than trying to come up with even more hypotheticals which might theoretically describe situations in which someone is able to prove the existence of God to the entire world but doesn't want to, I'd rather hear from you why you think someone might want to keep that evidence from the public.

Posts: 22935 | Registered: Nov 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
   

Quick Reply
Message:

HTML is not enabled.
UBB Code™ is enabled.
UBB Code™ Images not permitted.
Instant Graemlins
   


Post New Topic  Post A Reply Close Topic   Feature Topic   Move Topic   Delete Topic next oldest topic   next newest topic
 - Printer-friendly view of this topic
Hop To:


Contact Us | Ornery.org Front Page

Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classic™ 6.7.1