Nov 2023 Mod notice:
There may be other, more specific, threads about some aspects of US politics, but this one tends to act as a hub for all sorts of related news and information, so it's usually one of the busiest OTC threads.
If you're new to OTC, it's worth reading the Introduction to On-Topic Conversations
and the On-Topic Conversations debate guidelines
before posting here.
Rumor-based, fear-mongering and/or inflammatory statements that damage the quality of the thread will be thumped. Off-topic posts will also be thumped. Repeat offenders may be suspended.
If time spent moderating this thread remains a distraction from moderation of the wiki itself, the thread will need to be locked. We want to avoid that, so please follow the forum rules
when posting here.
In line with the general forum rules, 'gravedancing' is prohibited here. If you're celebrating someone's death or hoping that they die, your post will get thumped. This rule applies regardless of what the person you're discussing has said or done.
Edited by Mrph1 on Nov 30th 2023 at 11:03:59 AM
The dumbest thing about Trump's statement is that Mc Cain not only was captured, he had the chance to be released by the North Vietnamese but refused because he wanted the rest of the PO Ws to be released too. He endured years of torture because he wasn't going to give up his loyalty for a get out of jail free card. Meanwhile, Trump got a medical defferment to keep out of the draft.
Have you any dreams you'd like to sell?Depends on the Satanist. Satanists are no more unified than Christians, really.
That said, Satanism itself is usually a poke at all conventional religions, but someone from a more conventional religion who treated a Satanist with respect should get the same in return. On the other hand, plenty of the bunch are religion-bashing in general.
Actual devil worshipper Satanists do exist, but are few and far between. For obvious reasons they don't get along with Christians. Also have a tendency to be teens that just want to piss their parents off.
99% of the time when you hear of Satanists, it's these guys. LaVeyan Satanists
, who have nothing to do with Satan other than copting the name and applying it to their own beliefs, which is explicit Atheism, with some vaguely neo-paganistic beliefs attached. Their moral views parallel in some ways, the Sith of Star Wars fame, of all things.
""There can be no more myth of "equality" for all—it only translates to "mediocrity" and supports the weak at the expense of the strong." is an actual quote from one of their books.
Along with some Anarchism thrown in.
Outside their actual church structure, are plenty of members purely for religion-bashing. Any that want statues of Satan built are, Ironically, going against the grain of the actual "Church of Satan", which, itself, does not believe in him.
Honestly, if it hadn't started decades ago I'd think the whole thing was a spawn of 4chan. Deciphering the pattern of oldfags, newfags, cancer, and each pretending to be one of the other is similar.
edited 31st Jan '16 7:50:43 PM by Joesolo
I'm baaaaaaackI can't fault the guys in that article or trying to put statues up or whatever, because every time I've heard about them they've been acting in reaction to prayers during government business or the ten commandments up on government property or some such. So they're just making valid, if snarky, points about the First Amendment.
Does the US not have a larg enough Jedi population to take up this fight?
Shit man, I just realised what the new trilogy might mean for Jediism. Still I doubt the Satanists can claim to have been as many as 0.7% of the population (down to 0.3% in 2011).
edited 31st Jan '16 11:16:31 PM by Silasw
“And the Bunny nails it!” ~ Gabrael “If the UN can get through a day without everyone strangling everyone else so can we.” ~ Cyran
The argument goes, that if you're not completely atheistic you can't be secular, since the mere possibility of religious thought will make you an anathema for the separation of church and state.
I've met a few occult satanists. That was weird. They keep a very low profile.
Si Vis Pacem, Para PerkeleThat seems to be far stricter than necessary a definition, really. The separation of Church and State is generally to keep both those institutions out of each other's business, really, considering all the shenanigans that had gone on in Europe previously.
(Though I know there's many complaints about how effective that's been.)
Heck, you don't even need to really be secular to consider that concept necessary. I'm pretty sure there's debate on how secular/religious/deistic the founders as a whole were.
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
Maybe they just decided that getting too het up about it would be Sithly passionate and went off to meditate instead.
![]()
![]()
So the argument is that we need a religious test for office in order to preserve freedom of religion.
![]()
Just from a practical standpoint, keeping church and state out of each others' business is good for most theists. If it's the reformed baptist church of god, reformation of 1915 in power and you're part of the reformed baptist church of god, reformation of 1879, you're screwed along with all the rest of the heretics and heathens and non-believers.

Edit: Stupid page topper.
edited 31st Jan '16 1:57:32 PM by LSBK