Glad you liked it. Was hoping you would.

In reply to this comment by enoch:
that was fantastic.
thanks for the new music kind sir!

14/15 here from an Atheist. Had I not read about this report yesterday and saw the video, I probably would have gotten 13/15 (I would have scored reading passages from the Bible in class as Literature wrong). Otherwise a fairly easy test.
I scored wrong on the questions about the First Great Awakening, which I never knew of.
Clearly though they didn't poll enough people since Muslims seem to be missing from the people who surveyed. Also missing are Pagans, who I would expect to score really high as they tent to read and research a large number of regions... at least if they are serious about it and don't just "dabble in witchcraft" when they are younger. I live in a heavily Pagan area, so it is easy to see what they know and don't know, and my ex's family is Muslim... I would expect them to score a bit better that evangelicals did, and be near the Jews and Mormons...

Somebody should let them know that Christmas was stolen from the Pagans.

Never even heard of Daniel Baldwin. He must be a lesser Baldwin. >> ^EMPIRE:

HOLY SHIT... a Baldwin is involved in this crap. The worst of them all, but still...

And I love how they are all christiany for christmas, but they all have pagan christmas trees.

HOLY SHIT... a Baldwin is involved in this crap. The worst of them all, but still...


And I love how they are all christiany for christmas, but they all have pagan christmas trees.

The big appeal of the X-Men comics is what's usually called "Mutants as a metaphor". Themes of discrimination, isolation, hatred, fear of the unknown, confusion and misunderstanding are all undercurrents of the X-Men story lines. These reflect the real-world tribulations, past and present, of blacks, gays, women, Jews, atheists, pagans and even the average ostracized teenager.

Without ever seeing True Blood, it's pretty obvious that this is "Vampires as a metaphor" and it's probably safe to say that explains its appeal.

Heh, this showed up on the Sift just the next day after I started giving serious consideration to joining the O.T.O.

As it happens, it's the only serious initiatory order with a presence within three hundred miles, so far as I can find. And, having bought a copy of Crowley's Thoth Tarot years ago, I've finally begun seriously studying it. Beautiful artwork, profound symbolism.>> ^gwiz665:

Ultimately Crowley was as hypocritical as the religions he disliked though, creating his own based on Magick and weirdness. As usual the small cults are based on hedonism and sex, and while everyone likes that, it doesn't make for intellectual honesty. Magick isn't real.


Crowley repeatedly cautioned against ascribing objective reality to the phenomena experienced in the practice of magic. Which is why he phrased the first goal of magic in such a ridiculous fashion as "the Knowledge and Conversation of the Holy Guardian Angel." It is absurd, precisely in order to remind seekers that ascribing objective reality to such theories is always absurd. He did all sorts of things like this. He asked followers, for instance, to align their rituals so that "East" in the books always faced his home--indirectly indicating that it was entirely arbitrary what direction one faces.

People who assiduously practice magick really do have visions; experience communication with demons, angels, and gods; experience mystic transport; and realize the integration of the self. The reality of the experience trumps, for Crowley, any "objective" claims.

>> ^enoch:

"do what thou whilt may it harm none" was a traditional pagan saying

Eh, not really. Most pagans prior to the rise of Christianity would have shuddered at the statement, aside from a handful of obscure philosophers. Certainly not Plato, Pythagoras, or any of the other pagan writers so often accorded great spiritual insight.

Though such formulations do begin to make an appearance whenever Paganism arises in post-Christian contexts.

>> ^gwiz665:

"Do What Thou Wilt" an antithesis to Christianity.
Calling that satanism, is making it part of Christianity, since satan only exists in that.


"do what thou whilt may it harm none" was a traditional pagan saying but you can find the same inferrence in almost every religion.
you are correct in the statement concerning satanism,by its very terminology it is..by definition..a christian subset meant to be..as you stated..antithesis.
crowley rose through the ranks of the golden dawn and felt constrained by them.he moved onto a weird amalgamation of enochian magicks and heavily influenced by the rituals of calling and divination found in the book of solomon.

i have read a few books on crowley and either he was brilliant or batshit insane..maybe a combination of both which is most likely.
but for you atheists out there who abhorr religious hypocrisy...crowley is your hero.
he gave the church fits..literally.

Actually, the founding fathers wrote conclusively that our laws and constitution are based on British Common Law which originated BEFORE the Romans invaded, therefore they are PAGAN based laws, not Judeo/Christian based. If we are to be a nation based on the religion our constitution is culled from, you had better start begging Thor for forgiveness and denounce Palin... I mean Loki.

nice post.
look up the true story of st patrick and the pagan women of ireland.
thomas aquinas was a FUCK.
st augustine wrote beautifully and poetically but was ultimately a hypocrite.he liked little boys and girls and whores..lots and lots of whores.
teihard de chardin is one of my favorites but he got in to a boat load of trouble with the church and near the end of his life started to back pedal.cant be having woman be as equal spiritually as men now can we?thats a big no-no in the church,original sin and all that jazz.
conclusion:men are pansies in the face of a strong woman.
it is like boobies have a mystical power.

Side note-God, my response is long... I hate long posts and so hate my own post...

There was a time when I would have insulted you for such a... magical fairytale-type post. However, age has tempered my youthful arrogance and I will attempt to be more respectful.

You have an illusion that is polar opposite from the fanatics who propose that God is our savior and that if everyone follows his word we will all be saved… (Your argument is that the belief in God is our destroyer and that if everyone abandons his word we will all be striving for the betterment of humanity…) You assume that religion is not the excuse for war but the problem itself... If religion is truly the excuse, as I claim, there will be more wars even if religion is abolished and all the wars that have happened, not in the name and constant glorification of God, but for other reasons, will repeat themselves. If religion is the problem, as you state, then wars will dry up and poof, comfort for the world. The betterment of mankind… Um, I need to write a self-help booklet with a title like that…

Think of your ideal utopia... and now, make it real. No wars, no conflict (like trade wars, where entire areas starve out, etcetera,) on massive scales leading to the degradation of other countries. Nothing interesting for the news huh? Just a few murders and social discord now and again? Just near-utopia? No massive riots when corporations cause the subjugation and poverty of millions... No mass rape in Africa? Can someone say boring!

Sorry, I can only respect your opinion so much. I understand your opinion but think it a little wishful thinking. I wish you were right on the money and that religion was the cause, but the rose-colored glasses are not for me. You asked an A/B question and the answer is a mix of A and B-We certainly would invade another planet and try to reason with them. If our terms (The complete surrender of their finate resources and land) of reasoning failed, we would kill them all and take their resources.

Christianity was the excuse we used on the Indians not because we truly believed in god, but because A-It is a form of control and B-It makes us the savior instead of the animal. As I said before, we cannot slaughter because of greed... we need another reason. In other words, religion is a tool and if broken, we will make another one.

Let's look at some wars fought around the world and why... Vietnam? The expansion of communism (Because, we Americans could not abide our competitor actually advancing.) Iraq? Boredom and glory. Rome's barbarity? Conquest. Germany? Racial superiority. The American Civil War? Expansion of Federal powers. The hundreds of mini-conflicts between warring peoples due to poverty? Starvation. The crusades? Religion. Does religion win over in history as the leading cause? Yes. Has religion been involved in the aforementioned wars as a secondary motivator?-No, not even motivator, I mean excuse?-Yes. Germany was supported by the pope and hunted a religious people---for the resources. (Also, just because those nations I used as examples may have been supported by the religious or purported to be religious, they did not fight under the constant "support" or glorification of God. In other words, those wars were fought for religion as much as Iraq was fought because of weapons of mass destruction…)

Will there be something to replace religion on a massive scale if the excuse dies? Yes. Reminds me of the episode of South Park when the world fought a war simply because they could not agree on the name of their all-atheist nation...

We grow bored, we bomb Iraq. We need oil? We take it. We need other resources? Here we come. Government subjects massive amounts of people to poverty? We burn it down. By we, I mean humanity. Oh, Germany is certainly more reasonable than a few hundreds of years ago... cept that whole gassing incident... and I know Africa, a country that sold their own into slavery for the most part, is more reasonable... cept the whole raping and tribal fighting. You know one tribe fights another because they believe male-anal penetration is wrong? Yet male-oral is okay... and the other tribe thinks male-oral is fine, but anal is wrong… so naturally, they both have to kill each other…

So disagree, it’s your right. I just see a lot of "religious" stubbornness in your argument that is equal to the other side's arguments... You are basing your guesses of what might be; I am basing my estimations on what has been...

>> ^Shepppard:
Disagree completely.
If you abolish religion then you have one goal - The betterment of humanity. If everybody is on that same page and not thinking about how their lord and savior will take care of everybody in the afterlife, they'll realize that we need to fix how things are now.
Think about it, no more wars in the name of gods, no people getting killed for changing their beliefs.
Oh sure, there would still be killings of sorts, people come home and find another man with their wife and they snap. But that's never going to change.
As for the Natives of the Americas, I got news for you. They were enslaved and sent to Boarding Schools where they were forced to learn... Christianity.
I'm not exactly done with that either. Truly, you think that the people a few hundred years ago were as reasonable as we are now? Picture this, we master space travel. We find a new world inhabited by Aliens. Do you think Earth would A) Kill them all, and declare it Earth II, or B) Try to trade and reason with them?
I'm pretty sure most of us would vote option B. With time we've gained knowledge. Almost everywhere has drifted away from "They're different then us, so we need to not trust them and/or kill them and claim it as ours."
Muslims are a large exception to this, and that's why it has to change.
>> ^Lawdeedaw:
What I believe most atheists do not comprehend is this—we, the human race, are a species that must believe. It is that simple. Yes, individuals can unlearn belief in the odd and stupid things we think are real, but as a whole we must believe. We believed long before God and Jesus existed, and we will believe long after. We believe in odd and crazy things when we are children because our minds are fascinated by the unknown and this spurs experimentation.
Everyone who acts as though the destruction of religion would sooth the woes of the world is silly. Instead of religion, humanity will/has find/found other ways to reclassify themselves into groups and kill/enslave everyone not in their class. Examples include are but not limited to race, gender, ethnic background, eye color, hair color, wealth, etcetera. This would not decrease with a lack of belief and the reason is simple—because we love to classify. It is a natural survival instinct that is there for the allocation of finite resources. It is easy to kill an infidel in the name of God, however, it is hard to kill the guy next to you because you are bored and/or need his resources. Indians ring a bell? Sadly, the Indians were pagan, but, more importantly, they held our land! Had to die…
See, religion is the crutch that atheists use. I am atheist myself and find that behind the gun, behind the religion, behind the boredom that leads to mania, there is always an insecure killer.

Disagree completely.

If you abolish religion then you have one goal - The betterment of humanity. If everybody is on that same page and not thinking about how their lord and savior will take care of everybody in the afterlife, they'll realize that we need to fix how things are now.

Think about it, no more wars in the name of gods, no people getting killed for changing their beliefs.

Oh sure, there would still be killings of sorts, people come home and find another man with their wife and they snap. But that's never going to change.

As for the Natives of the Americas, I got news for you. They were enslaved and sent to Boarding Schools where they were forced to learn... Christianity.

I'm not exactly done with that either. Truly, you think that the people a few hundred years ago were as reasonable as we are now? Picture this, we master space travel. We find a new world inhabited by Aliens. Do you think Earth would A) Kill them all, and declare it Earth II, or B) Try to trade and reason with them?

I'm pretty sure most of us would vote option B. With time we've gained knowledge. Almost everywhere has drifted away from "They're different then us, so we need to not trust them and/or kill them and claim it as ours."

Muslims are a large exception to this, and that's why it has to change.


>> ^Lawdeedaw:

What I believe most atheists do not comprehend is this—we, the human race, are a species that must believe. It is that simple. Yes, individuals can unlearn belief in the odd and stupid things we think are real, but as a whole we must believe. We believed long before God and Jesus existed, and we will believe long after. We believe in odd and crazy things when we are children because our minds are fascinated by the unknown and this spurs experimentation.
Everyone who acts as though the destruction of religion would sooth the woes of the world is silly. Instead of religion, humanity will/has find/found other ways to reclassify themselves into groups and kill/enslave everyone not in their class. Examples include are but not limited to race, gender, ethnic background, eye color, hair color, wealth, etcetera. This would not decrease with a lack of belief and the reason is simple—because we love to classify. It is a natural survival instinct that is there for the allocation of finite resources. It is easy to kill an infidel in the name of God, however, it is hard to kill the guy next to you because you are bored and/or need his resources. Indians ring a bell? Sadly, the Indians were pagan, but, more importantly, they held our land! Had to die…
See, religion is the crutch that atheists use. I am atheist myself and find that behind the gun, behind the religion, behind the boredom that leads to mania, there is always an insecure killer.

What I believe most atheists do not comprehend is this—we, the human race, are a species that must believe. It is that simple. Yes, individuals can unlearn belief in the odd and stupid things we think are real, but as a whole we must believe. We believed long before God and Jesus existed, and we will believe long after. We believe in odd and crazy things when we are children because our minds are fascinated by the unknown and this spurs experimentation.
Everyone who acts as though the destruction of religion would sooth the woes of the world is silly. Instead of religion, humanity will/has find/found other ways to reclassify themselves into groups and kill/enslave everyone not in their class. Examples include are but not limited to race, gender, ethnic background, eye color, hair color, wealth, etcetera. This would not decrease with a lack of belief and the reason is simple—because we love to classify. It is a natural survival instinct that is there for the allocation of finite resources. It is easy to kill an infidel in the name of God, however, it is hard to kill the guy next to you because you are bored and/or need his resources. Indians ring a bell? Sadly, the Indians were pagan, but, more importantly, they held our land! Had to die…
See, religion is the crutch that atheists use. I am atheist myself and find that behind the gun, behind the religion, behind the boredom that leads to mania, there is always an insecure killer.

>> ^osama1234:

This honestly is the last time, because this crap goes on forever. As someone said, they'll bring you down to their level and beat you with experience.
Please divert your eyes to where i wrote 9:6. If you refuse to read it, I can't help you.
>> ^ChaosEngine:
>> ^osama1234:
...
i'd just expose her argument to be silly and weak as quickly and briefly as I can.
Take for example, she quotes: 9:5 "Fight and kill the disbelievers wherever you find them"...
Well if you actually look at 9:5 in it's entirely:
But when the forbidden months are past, then fight and slay the Pagans wherever ye find them, an seize them, beleaguer them, and lie in wait for them in every stratagem (of war); but if they repent, and establish regular prayers and practise regular charity, then open the way for them: for Allah is Oft-forgiving, Most Merciful.
And just to be uber-clear, let's continue onto 9:6
If one amongst the Pagans ask thee for asylum, grant it to him, so that he may hear the word of Allah; and then escort him to where he can be secure. That is because they are men without knowledge.
....

So it essentially says that you should use every tool at your disposal to kill the unbeliever, but if they "see the light" and convert to your way of thinking, then they're cool? Or did I miss something? Because that's not really an improvement!
Please note that I am in such awe of your debating technique I have decided to adopt it. I too will not be responding to anyone who points out flaws in my argument. As such, I'm right because I say I am. /thread
LALALAALALAALALALAALALALALALALALALAL I'M NOT LISTENING!!!



Dude, why do you ignore verse 9:5... The essential argument is that if join us (see the light) you will survive, but if you are against us then we will kill you. But to keep things in perspective a war was going on at that time.

This honestly is the last time, because this crap goes on forever. As someone said, they'll bring you down to their level and beat you with experience.

Please divert your eyes to where i wrote 9:6. If you refuse to read it, I can't help you.

>> ^ChaosEngine:

>> ^osama1234:
...
i'd just expose her argument to be silly and weak as quickly and briefly as I can.
Take for example, she quotes: 9:5 "Fight and kill the disbelievers wherever you find them"...
Well if you actually look at 9:5 in it's entirely:
But when the forbidden months are past, then fight and slay the Pagans wherever ye find them, an seize them, beleaguer them, and lie in wait for them in every stratagem (of war); but if they repent, and establish regular prayers and practise regular charity, then open the way for them: for Allah is Oft-forgiving, Most Merciful.
And just to be uber-clear, let's continue onto 9:6
If one amongst the Pagans ask thee for asylum, grant it to him, so that he may hear the word of Allah; and then escort him to where he can be secure. That is because they are men without knowledge.
....

So it essentially says that you should use every tool at your disposal to kill the unbeliever, but if they "see the light" and convert to your way of thinking, then they're cool? Or did I miss something? Because that's not really an improvement!
Please note that I am in such awe of your debating technique I have decided to adopt it. I too will not be responding to anyone who points out flaws in my argument. As such, I'm right because I say I am. /thread
LALALAALALAALALALAALALALALALALALALAL I'M NOT LISTENING!!!