ISF Logo   IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Social Issues & Current Events
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Tags Illinois incidents , satanism , Satanism incidents

Reply
Old Yesterday, 11:55 PM   #321
qayak
Penultimate Amazing
 
qayak's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 12,860
Originally Posted by Thermal View Post
Are you holding contemporary secular celebrants responsible for Roman adoption and amalgamation of Christian/Pagan traditions spanning centuries? Its all Tiny Tina's fault, who came to see the pretty lights? **** her, you say?
As much as you hold these Satanists to be dicks and their actions pointlessly snotty, yes, **** Tiny Tina if Tiny Tina be Christian.
__________________
"How long you live, how high you fly
The smiles you'll give, and tears you'll cry
And all you touch, and all you see
Is all your life will ever be."
qayak is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Today, 06:04 AM   #322
The Greater Fool
Illuminator
 
The Greater Fool's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Scottsdale, AZ, USA, North America, Earth, Sol, Milky Way
Posts: 3,657
Originally Posted by Thermal View Post
Ok. When a nieghbor throws a party and your grandparents weren't invited to previous parties, do you piss on the decorations there, even though you are invited? I mean, turn about is...
If my neighbor throws a big party that flows onto and through my property once a year that lasts a month, and I post a sign 'please think of the neighbors at night and be quiet', I am not being dickish, they are.
__________________
- "Who is the greater fool? The fool? Or the one arguing with the fool?" [Various; Uknown]
- "The only way to win is not to play." [Tsig quoting 'War Games']
The Greater Fool is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Today, 06:08 AM   #323
JoeMorgue
Self Employed
Remittance Man
 
JoeMorgue's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Florida
Posts: 14,799
Originally Posted by Thermal View Post
The government...is not in...this scenario...or in...the OP...story.
Okay I see we've reached the inevitable "Thermal starts writing fan fiction about stuff that the scenario is not about and getting huffy when people won't play in his made up fantasy world" part of the thread.

Okay so before you start making up hypothetical scenario about hypothetical scenario where one party is cartoonishly rude to an innocent second party let me stop you.

This is not being rude to another guest when invited to a party. The Statehouse was not doing the Satanist a favor by graciously letting them put their display next to the good wholesome Christian one. The Satanist haven't accrued a "niceness" debt to the government they have to pay back.

If whatever made up fan fiction hypothetical comes out of your brain next doesn't include a 3rd party who has the Constitutional Mandate to not favor Party 1 over Party 2 in the scenario... it's wrong and I will call you on it.

You keep wanting to make this about "niceness" because you think if you can force people to acknowledge a "They weren't being nice enough about it" hairsplit you win and now you're doing your "Okay but what everything about the situation was different would I be right then?" begging.

It's not about niceness. Nobody but you cares about niceness or pettiness or the validity of the holiday being celebrated as if that's even a thing. This is why nobody is falling into your "SOMEBODY JUST AGREE WITH ME THAT THEY ARE BEING PETTY! AGREE WITH ME ON THAT POINT DAMMIT!" trap, because we aren't going to let you turn this discussion into that.
__________________
"Ernest Hemingway once wrote that the world is a fine place and worth fighting for. I agree with the second part." - Detective Sommerset, Se7en

"Stupidity does not cancel out stupidity to yield genius. It breeds like a bucket-full of coked out hamsters." - The Oatmeal
JoeMorgue is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Today, 06:13 AM   #324
Thermal
Philosopher
 
Thermal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Location: NJ USA. We Don't Like You Either
Posts: 5,520
Fair enough, the party does spill over and get invasive. Do you mean my this analogy that Christmas and other celebrations should be kept private, and not be noticeable to you? Should retailers remove their displays, too, lest they offend thine eyes?

Tell me: how much of the celebrants' excersize of their religion would you like to see suppressed?
__________________
I am looking for other websites; you suck. -banned buttercake aficionado yuno44907
Thermal is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Today, 06:28 AM   #325
Garrette
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Posts: 14,680
This is why I said my disagreement ends at Thermal's conclusion:
Originally Posted by Thermal View Post
The government...is not in...this scenario...or in...the OP...story.

Satanists requested to display their statuary. The Statehouse complied, as they were required to and should have. Govt's role then ends in this Holiday play. Exit, stage left.

Yes, it makes for a neatly canned argument to frame this as a rousing tale of the struggle between religious freedom, social norms, government resisting challenges, and the triumph of the oppressed minority. But Sweet Baby Jesus, that is not what is happening here. The govt is not oppressing anyone. The Christians have not launched the Battle of Armageddon. And no one is stifling the religious expression of pretend religions. Your paper tigers are all sleeping at your paper zoo.
The government is definitely part of the OP and the scenario.


And this is as fine a response to it as there might be:
Originally Posted by JoeMorgue View Post
Okay I see we've reached the inevitable "Thermal starts writing fan fiction about stuff that the scenario is not about and getting huffy when people won't play in his made up fantasy world" part of the thread.

Okay so before you start making up hypothetical scenario about hypothetical scenario where one party is cartoonishly rude to an innocent second party let me stop you.

This is not being rude to another guest when invited to a party. The Statehouse was not doing the Satanist a favor by graciously letting them put their display next to the good wholesome Christian one. The Satanist haven't accrued a "niceness" debt to the government they have to pay back.

If whatever made up fan fiction hypothetical comes out of your brain next doesn't include a 3rd party who has the Constitutional Mandate to not favor Party 1 over Party 2 in the scenario... it's wrong and I will call you on it.

You keep wanting to make this about "niceness" because you think if you can force people to acknowledge a "They weren't being nice enough about it" hairsplit you win and now you're doing your "Okay but what everything about the situation was different would I be right then?" begging.

It's not about niceness. Nobody but you cares about niceness or pettiness or the validity of the holiday being celebrated as if that's even a thing. This is why nobody is falling into your "SOMEBODY JUST AGREE WITH ME THAT THEY ARE BEING PETTY! AGREE WITH ME ON THAT POINT DAMMIT!" trap, because we aren't going to let you turn this discussion into that.

The following is almost right, but the bit that isn't in the almost part is the key bit and egregious:
Originally Posted by Thermal View Post
Fair enough, the party does spill over and get invasive. Do you mean my this analogy that Christmas and other celebrations should be kept private, and not be noticeable to you? Should retailers remove their displays, too, lest they offend thine eyes?

Tell me: how much of the celebrants' excersize of their religion would you like to see suppressed?
Yes, they should be private. No, "private" does not mean stores cannot make those displays.

Until these last few posts, and not having had prior experience with you, Thermal, I was a bit taken aback with the responses you were getting. Now I begin to understand.
__________________
My kids still love me.
Garrette is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Today, 06:29 AM   #326
The Greater Fool
Illuminator
 
The Greater Fool's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Scottsdale, AZ, USA, North America, Earth, Sol, Milky Way
Posts: 3,657
Originally Posted by Thermal View Post
Fair enough, the party does spill over and get invasive. Do you mean my this analogy that Christmas and other celebrations should be kept private, and not be noticeable to you? Should retailers remove their displays, too, lest they offend thine eyes?

Tell me: how much of the celebrants' excersize of their religion would you like to see suppressed?
You can be as dickish as your rights allow. [ETA: to be clear: within the limits of law]
__________________
- "Who is the greater fool? The fool? Or the one arguing with the fool?" [Various; Uknown]
- "The only way to win is not to play." [Tsig quoting 'War Games']
The Greater Fool is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Today, 06:35 AM   #327
Senex
Philosopher
 
Senex's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 5,601
Originally Posted by The Greater Fool View Post
If my neighbor throws a big party that flows onto and through my property once a year that lasts a month, and I post a sign 'please think of the neighbors at night and be quiet', I am not being dickish, they are.
Originally Posted by Thermal View Post
Fair enough, the party does spill over and get invasive. Do you mean my this analogy that Christmas and other celebrations should be kept private, and not be noticeable to you? Should retailers remove their displays, too, lest they offend thine eyes?

Tell me: how much of the celebrants' excersize of their religion would you like to see suppressed?
I, for one, refused to sign the petition to keep the local pagans from performing their neighborhood celebrations skyclad. In fact, unlike the stick in the mud The Greater Fool, I encouraged the naked Wiccan ladies to party late and flow through my yard any time they wanted to. I even kick in a few bottles of wine as long as it's consumed on my property (legal reasons).
Senex is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Today, 06:40 AM   #328
The Greater Fool
Illuminator
 
The Greater Fool's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Scottsdale, AZ, USA, North America, Earth, Sol, Milky Way
Posts: 3,657
Originally Posted by Senex View Post
I, for one, refused to sign the petition to keep the local pagans from performing their neighborhood celebrations skyclad. In fact, unlike the stick in the mud The Greater Fool, I encouraged the naked Wiccan ladies to party late and flow through my yard any time they wanted to. I even kick in a few bottles of wine as long as it's consumed on my property (legal reasons).
The sign said 'be quiet', not 'do not come naked.'
__________________
- "Who is the greater fool? The fool? Or the one arguing with the fool?" [Various; Uknown]
- "The only way to win is not to play." [Tsig quoting 'War Games']
The Greater Fool is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Today, 07:21 AM   #329
Thermal
Philosopher
 
Thermal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Location: NJ USA. We Don't Like You Either
Posts: 5,520
Originally Posted by JoeMorgue View Post
Okay I see we've reached the inevitable "Thermal starts writing fan fiction...<typical get off my lawn rant snipped>...turn this discussion into that.
Oh, no you don't. Just because someone disagrees with you or views things differently, it does not mean they live in an alternative universe. There are no alternate hypotheticals being presented to reframe the OP story. Use that freaking straw you are piling up to feed your paper tigers.

This isn't about niceness, per se. It is about pointlessness. It's about mindless posturing and being contrary to no benefit. It is about shooting yourself in the foot and making an otherwise valid stance and mechanism look petty. The Satanic Temple drops themselves down a notch or two on the credibility ladder by engaging in such things; instead of being a voice where it is needed, they insert themselves where it serves no end other than to be dicks. I would rather they used their facade of being a religion to keep the Ten Commandments from being displayed on state grounds year round, than to portray themselves as mindless killjoys.

Now in between feeding your paper tigers and shining your white patent leather shoes, why don't you cite where I am presenting alternative universe fan fic hypotheticals? Pissant sidebar analogies don't count, as all are using them. Put up or shut up.
__________________
I am looking for other websites; you suck. -banned buttercake aficionado yuno44907
Thermal is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Today, 07:25 AM   #330
Joe Random
Graduate Poster
 
Joe Random's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 1,821
Let's just keep taking the analogy further and further afield till we eventually get to a framing that paints things the way we want.

"So if we all agree that the sentient velociraptor was only in the cave to escape the meteor impact, then obviously the time-traveling Weyland-Yutani android was the one being dickish when he shot the poor dino with his Goa'uld staff weapon. Just like in the OP.".
Joe Random is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Today, 07:32 AM   #331
JoeMorgue
Self Employed
Remittance Man
 
JoeMorgue's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Florida
Posts: 14,799
Originally Posted by Thermal View Post
Oh, no you don't. Just because someone disagrees with you or views things differently, it does not mean they live in an alternative universe.
No you live in an alternative universe when you specifically make up scenarios that omit the key factor in what is being discussed.

Like you did.

Quote:
This isn't about niceness, per se. It is about pointlessness. It's about mindless posturing and being contrary to no benefit. It is about shooting yourself in the foot and making an otherwise valid stance and mechanism look petty. The Satanic Temple drops themselves down a notch or two on the credibility ladder by engaging in such things; instead of being a voice where it is needed, they insert themselves where it serves no end other than to be dicks. I would rather they used their facade of being a religion to keep the Ten Commandments from being displayed on state grounds year round, than to portray themselves as mindless killjoys.
Man you really don't like it when minorities want equality do you? It just really sets you off.

Again nobody cares about politeness or niceness or whatever synonym you're gonna use next to say the exact same thing.

Quote:
Now in between feeding your paper tigers and shining your white patent leather shoes, why don't you cite where I am presenting alternative universe fan fic hypotheticals? Pissant sidebar analogies don't count, as all are using them. Put up or shut up.
The internet tough guy routine you fall into when someone calls you on your argumentative theatrics will never cease to be adorable.

So far just in this thread you've created alternate universes where:

1. Nativity Scenes aren't religious.
2. The Constitution only protects religious freedom of expression when you are celebrating a major holiday.
3. The government is just someone who's invited us into a party at their house and we have to play nice with the other guest.

This is like four or five people now in this thread alone telling you that they see through your "Make up a scenario where I'm right" game. We're not all making stuff up and seeing stuff that isn't there.
__________________
"Ernest Hemingway once wrote that the world is a fine place and worth fighting for. I agree with the second part." - Detective Sommerset, Se7en

"Stupidity does not cancel out stupidity to yield genius. It breeds like a bucket-full of coked out hamsters." - The Oatmeal
JoeMorgue is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Today, 07:40 AM   #332
Thermal
Philosopher
 
Thermal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Location: NJ USA. We Don't Like You Either
Posts: 5,520
Originally Posted by Garrette View Post
This is why I said my disagreement ends at Thermal's conclusion:
The government is definitely part of the OP and the scenario.
As I see it, the State did exactly what it was required to do, and without resistance. They did the right thing, and right away. They did nothing else. Relating to the OP, what role did they continue to play? Not the vague role of oppression throughout history, I mean as it is shown here.

Quote:
And this is as fine a response to it as there might be:



The following is almost right, but the bit that isn't in the almost part is the key bit and egregious:
Yes, they should be private. No, "private" does not mean stores cannot make those displays.
That is somewhat of a sidebar argument. The Greater Fool's analogy referred to a neighbor's party. If the intent was to analogize the government as the neighbor, that was lost on me. I assume for the analogy to make sense, that the neighbors would be christian/secular celebrants going overboard with their festivities to the point where they are overpowering, as evidenced by the inevitable presence everywhere, from grocery stores on down.

If TGF's analogy meant that the neighbor was the government keeping him up at night with their revelry, I concede that was lost on me.

Quote:
Until these last few posts, and not having had prior experience with you, Thermal, I was a bit taken aback with the responses you were getting. Now I begin to understand.
Watch how some posters (not TGF) will walk my position around and subtly reframe it to make the argument about something else. In this case, it looks like State suppression of minority religions will be the paper tiger. The State did not suppress here. I applaud them for doing the right thing without ado.
__________________
I am looking for other websites; you suck. -banned buttercake aficionado yuno44907
Thermal is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Today, 07:45 AM   #333
Thermal
Philosopher
 
Thermal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Location: NJ USA. We Don't Like You Either
Posts: 5,520
Originally Posted by The Greater Fool View Post
You can be as dickish as your rights allow. [ETA: to be clear: within the limits of law]
Agreed. And I have said so since page one. Have I not supported TST's right to do this? Who is throwing the obnoxious party that spills into your yard, in your analogy? For that matter, what is your yard and your neighbor's? Are they both State grounds, or what? If not, you would seem to be criticizing celebrants, no?

eta: and what would 'be quiet' mean?
__________________
I am looking for other websites; you suck. -banned buttercake aficionado yuno44907
Thermal is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Today, 07:51 AM   #334
TragicMonkey
Poisoned Waffles
 
TragicMonkey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Monkey
Posts: 46,641
Originally Posted by Thermal View Post
It is about pointlessness. It's about mindless posturing and being contrary to no benefit. It is about shooting yourself in the foot and making an otherwise valid stance and mechanism look petty.
This is grand master level meta, right here.
__________________
You added nothing to that conversation, Barbara.
TragicMonkey is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Today, 08:07 AM   #335
Thermal
Philosopher
 
Thermal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Location: NJ USA. We Don't Like You Either
Posts: 5,520
Originally Posted by JoeMorgue View Post
No you live in an alternative universe when you specifically make up scenarios that omit the key factor in what is being discussed.

Like you did.
No, the key factor you are claiming does not even exist in this OP. The government acted perfectly. They are not your boogeymen this time. I'll send down some white shoe polish to you for your stocking.

Quote:
Man you really don't like it when minorities want equality do you? It just really sets you off.
Again with the random character assassinations.

There is no unequal treatment of minority anything in this story. Full stop.

Who is living in the alternative universe now?

Quote:
Again nobody cares about politeness or niceness or whatever synonym you're gonna use next to say the exact same thing.



The internet tough guy routine you fall into when someone calls you on your argumentative theatrics will never cease to be adorable.
Not tough guy. It just gets tedious to read your endless complaints about things that are not happening.

Quote:
So far just in this thread you've created alternate universes where:

1. Nativity Scenes aren't religious.
Bull. I have acknowledged, and repeatedly, that they are of course religious. I further opine that they are so trivial as to be viewed as just another plastic decoration by many. This sets you off in a pearl clutching frenzy. Your problem, not mine.

Quote:
2. The Constitution only protects religious freedom of expression when you are celebrating a major holiday.
3. The government is just someone who's invited us into a party at their house and we have to play nice with the other guest.
Bull. The State did exactly what they were required to do, and I applaud them for it. All. Through. The. Thread. Take your paper tiger for a walk.

Quote:
This is like four or five people now in this thread alone telling you that they see through your "Make up a scenario where I'm right" game. We're not all making stuff up and seeing stuff that isn't there.
Oh my god...you're actually taking the 'mob rules' argument again. This is beyond farcical.

Some posters agree with me. Some don't. Many agree with some parts and not others, so we all have a discussion.

Except JoeMorgue. He wants to bitch and moan about alternative universes and assert that the majority decides what is the right interpretation. Just priceless.
__________________
I am looking for other websites; you suck. -banned buttercake aficionado yuno44907
Thermal is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Today, 08:08 AM   #336
JoeMorgue
Self Employed
Remittance Man
 
JoeMorgue's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Florida
Posts: 14,799
*Smiles* I think my point has been made.
__________________
"Ernest Hemingway once wrote that the world is a fine place and worth fighting for. I agree with the second part." - Detective Sommerset, Se7en

"Stupidity does not cancel out stupidity to yield genius. It breeds like a bucket-full of coked out hamsters." - The Oatmeal
JoeMorgue is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Today, 08:09 AM   #337
Thermal
Philosopher
 
Thermal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Location: NJ USA. We Don't Like You Either
Posts: 5,520
Originally Posted by TragicMonkey View Post
This is grand master level meta, right here.
That was a set-up. Party pooper.
__________________
I am looking for other websites; you suck. -banned buttercake aficionado yuno44907
Thermal is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Today, 08:17 AM   #338
Garrette
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Posts: 14,680
Originally Posted by Thermal View Post
As I see it, the State did exactly what it was required to do, and without resistance. They did the right thing, and right away. They did nothing else. Relating to the OP, what role did they continue to play? Not the vague role of oppression throughout history, I mean as it is shown here.


Originally Posted by Thermal
That is somewhat of a sidebar argument. The Greater Fool's analogy referred to a neighbor's party. If the intent was to analogize the government as the neighbor, that was lost on me. I assume for the analogy to make sense, that the neighbors would be christian/secular celebrants going overboard with their festivities to the point where they are overpowering, as evidenced by the inevitable presence everywhere, from grocery stores on down.

If TGF's analogy meant that the neighbor was the government keeping him up at night with their revelry, I concede that was lost on me.



Watch how some posters (not TGF) will walk my position around and subtly reframe it to make the argument about something else. In this case, it looks like State suppression of minority religions will be the paper tiger. The State did not suppress here. I applaud them for doing the right thing without ado.
The short answer is obvious: take the government out of the OP and there is no OP. Take the government out of the responses and there are no responses.

The longer answer follows.

The government did the right thing because after years of pushing for it they are in some cases but notably not all being forced to recognize the constitutional requirement to do so. There are therefore two points being addressed (note that my comments are directed specifically to TST and not others since TST has an explicit purpose that includes this activism):

First: ensure that government compliance becomes the norm and not the exception by continuing to exercise it.

Second: assist with the first by making it plain to the majority religion that non-majority-religion participation in such displays are legal, moral, and inevitable.

Allow me a crude analogy: It is legal but inappropriate for anyone to fart in an elevator, but if the police are called to eject only atheists who fart there while celebrating the Christians who continue to do it, and moreover the larger Christian community continues to applaud elevator-farting Christians while denouncing elevator-farting atheists, then it is not I who am being dickish when I go into a crowded elevator specifically with the intent to fart there.
__________________
My kids still love me.
Garrette is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Today, 08:28 AM   #339
The Greater Fool
Illuminator
 
The Greater Fool's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Scottsdale, AZ, USA, North America, Earth, Sol, Milky Way
Posts: 3,657
Originally Posted by Thermal View Post
That is somewhat of a sidebar argument. The Greater Fool's analogy referred to a neighbor's party. If the intent was to analogize the government as the neighbor, that was lost on me.

[edited]

If TGF's analogy meant that the neighbor was the government keeping him up at night with their revelry, I concede that was lost on me.
It was YOUR analogy, not mine:
Originally Posted by Thermal View Post
Ok. When a nieghbor throws a party and your grandparents weren't invited to previous parties, do you piss on the decorations there, even though you are invited? I mean, turn about is...
I took your party to be a neighbor not government.

Originally Posted by Thermal View Post
Agreed. And I have said so since page one. Have I not supported TST's right to do this? Who is throwing the obnoxious party that spills into your yard, in your analogy? For that matter, what is your yard and your neighbor's? Are they both State grounds, or what? If not, you would seem to be criticizing celebrants, no?

eta: and what would 'be quiet' mean?
Your whole point is that it is a dick move on the Satanists part to do a quiet display. You have said they have every right to do what they did, but they are dicks for doing so at this time of year.

Your party example, as I said, was the neighbors being dicks. The party is Christians everywhere celebrating Christmas regardless how anyone else feels about it. When anyone says "Hey, let's be inclusive" it becomes a war on Christmas, and Christians push harder and further. That is being a dick.

You believe Christmas is not religious because many aspects have become secular. They have become secular because the Christians put it everywhere, and until relatively recently only allowed their own displays. That is being a dick.

Back to your party parable, when the neighbors party pounds into my life, they are being dicks. I don't care if the party is a 200 year old tradition, it's not MY tradition, so expecting my participation is being a dick.

What 'quiet' means is unimportant. What is important for your party parable is the sign was asking them to THINK about their impact on me and my family, and to take it into consideration. The party is yours, and you are looking at my sign and saying I am a dick for not celebrating with you.
__________________
- "Who is the greater fool? The fool? Or the one arguing with the fool?" [Various; Uknown]
- "The only way to win is not to play." [Tsig quoting 'War Games']
The Greater Fool is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Today, 08:34 AM   #340
Thermal
Philosopher
 
Thermal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Location: NJ USA. We Don't Like You Either
Posts: 5,520
Originally Posted by Garrette View Post
The short answer is obvious: take the government out of the OP and there is no OP. Take the government out of the responses and there are no responses.

The longer answer follows.

The government did the right thing because after years of pushing for it they are in some cases but notably not all being forced to recognize the constitutional requirement to do so. There are therefore two points being addressed (note that my comments are directed specifically to TST and not others since TST has an explicit purpose that includes this activism):

First: ensure that government compliance becomes the norm and not the exception by continuing to exercise it.
This was done, and without resistance, and we all applaud it.

Quote:
Second: assist with the first by making it plain to the majority religion that non-majority-religion participation in such displays are legal, moral, and inevitable.
Also done, and done here with no resistance of any kind, even for a pretend religion. Three cheers for the State, doing the right thing, right away.

As I see it, exit stage left for the State WRT the OP. Great performance, well done. So, as I sharpen up my pitchfork in anticipation of protesting the govt stepping on rights...what are they doing wrong, again?

Quote:
Allow me a crude analogy: It is legal but inappropriate for anyone to fart in an elevator, but if the police are called to eject only atheists who fart there while celebrating the Christians who continue to do it, and moreover the larger Christian community continues to applaud elevator-farting Christians while denouncing elevator-farting atheists, then it is not I who am being dickish when I go into a crowded elevator specifically with the intent to fart there.
Please be careful: there is a poster popping in and out that will flat out crucify your ass for such an alternative universe fan fic hypothetical. I expect his howling presently.

Ok: so using your analogy, and of course not over-analyzing it, who in this Op tale is having the police called on them? When the christians and seculars (we keep forgetting about the nonreligious celebrants, don't we?) fart, they are farting to fill the air during a major celebration. All are welcome to fart along, as I see it. Or not fart, if they choose. Or fart differently. Whatever.

Who has called police on the Satanic farters? Saying it happened before is not entirely relevant. That's more of a farting-reenactment. Or maybe like a World Fart II soldier staggering out of the woods thinking the fight is still on.

Who called the metaphorical farting police on the Satanic Temple?
__________________
I am looking for other websites; you suck. -banned buttercake aficionado yuno44907
Thermal is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Today, 09:00 AM   #341
Thermal
Philosopher
 
Thermal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Location: NJ USA. We Don't Like You Either
Posts: 5,520
Originally Posted by The Greater Fool View Post
It was YOUR analogy, not mine:

I took your party to be a neighbor not government.



Your whole point is that it is a dick move on the Satanists part to do a quiet display. You have said they have every right to do what they did, but they are dicks for doing so at this time of year.
Close. I opine that they are doing this for no other reason than to be dicks. That shade of difference is important.

Quote:
Your party example, as I said, was the neighbors being dicks. The party is Christians everywhere celebrating Christmas regardless how anyone else feels about it. When anyone says "Hey, let's be inclusive" it becomes a war on Christmas, and Christians push harder and further. That is being a dick.
Again, no. Being a dick is being pissy for the sake of being pissy. Xmas celebrants are just celebrating. It is a big show, yes. But they are not doing it with the intent of being snotty to anyone else. Another important difference.

Quote:
You believe Christmas is not religious because many aspects have become secular. They have become secular because the Christians put it everywhere, and until relatively recently only allowed their own displays. That is being a dick.
Again, no. There are a ****ton of christians running around, and they like to celebrate xmas. What they did a couple generations ago was wrong. There are still a ****ton of them, and they still like to decorate. That is not oppression, that it just a lot of people who like the same thing. It is not designed to put or keep anyone else down.

Quote:
Back to your party parable, when the neighbors party pounds into my life, they are being dicks. I don't care if the party is a 200 year old tradition, it's not MY tradition, so expecting my participation is being a dick.
Ok. I thought you meant that the everywhereness of christmas stuff was the problem, so I asked if that was extended to retail places. I don't think you would be expected to participate, though, by anyone. Do you feel some kind of pressure?

Quote:
What 'quiet' means is unimportant. What is important for your party parable is the sign was asking them to THINK about their impact on me and my family, and to take it into consideration. The party is yours, and you are looking at my sign and saying I am a dick for not celebrating with you.
The snakey handy thingy is not a sign on the yard asking for respect of boundaries, though. It is walking into the middle of the party and ripping Garrette's fart while wearing a goat head. If TST put signs in their yards expressing a rejection of the season, that is perhaps more analogous to your sign.
__________________
I am looking for other websites; you suck. -banned buttercake aficionado yuno44907
Thermal is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Today, 09:01 AM   #342
Garrette
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Posts: 14,680
Originally Posted by Thermal View Post
This was done, and without resistance, and we all applaud it.
You mistakenly equate the specific with the general.
Even if true, the point is not a stand alone one.


Originally Posted by Thermal
Also done, and done here with no resistance of any kind, even for a pretend religion. Three cheers for the State, doing the right thing, right away.
Not remotely done in the general, and it is arguable that your objections here are a demonstration that it is not done in the specific.


Originally Posted by Thermal
As I see it, exit stage left for the State WRT the OP. Great performance, well done. So, as I sharpen up my pitchfork in anticipation of protesting the govt stepping on rights...what are they doing wrong, again?
You see it wrongly.



Originally Posted by Thermal
Please be careful: there is a poster popping in and out that will flat out crucify your ass for such an alternative universe fan fic hypothetical. I expect his howling presently.
You will be disappointed. My analogy has a governmental stand in.


Originally Posted by Thermal
Ok: so using your analogy, and of course not over-analyzing it, who in this Op tale is having the police called on them? When the christians and seculars (we keep forgetting about the nonreligious celebrants, don't we?) fart, they are farting to fill the air during a major celebration. All are welcome to fart along, as I see it. Or not fart, if they choose. Or fart differently. Whatever.

Who has called police on the Satanic farters? Saying it happened before is not entirely relevant. That's more of a farting-reenactment. Or maybe like a World Fart II soldier staggering out of the woods thinking the fight is still on.

Who called the metaphorical farting police on the Satanic Temple?
Metaphorically, you and the others in Illinois who recognize the legality of the display but disagree with its appropriateness (those who are not you tend to couch their objections in religious terms) are calling the police, though I grant that isn't technically true given that you recognize the legality. You and those others are the target audience (at least part of it).

The proof of it is that there is no objection either to the Christian display or the Jewish display for being inappropriate. "But they're not poking the eye of the other," right? They're just celebrating. That only works if your argument that the display is in effect secular is correct. If it isn't, and the displays are religious, then they are a poke in the eye of every one who doesn't believe in them (given they are on government property) regardless if those people bother to put up a display or not. If your secular argument is correct, then your objection to TST's display falls apart as it, too, is secular even if its message is aimed at another display.
__________________
My kids still love me.
Garrette is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Today, 09:09 AM   #343
Garrette
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Posts: 14,680
Originally Posted by Thermal View Post
Close. I opine that they are doing this for no other reason than to be dicks. That shade of difference is important.



Again, no. Being a dick is being pissy for the sake of being pissy. Xmas celebrants are just celebrating. It is a big show, yes. But they are not doing it with the intent of being snotty to anyone else. Another important difference.



Again, no. There are a ****ton of christians running around, and they like to celebrate xmas. What they did a couple generations ago was wrong. There are still a ****ton of them, and they still like to decorate. That is not oppression, that it just a lot of people who like the same thing. It is not designed to put or keep anyone else down.



Ok. I thought you meant that the everywhereness of christmas stuff was the problem, so I asked if that was extended to retail places. I don't think you would be expected to participate, though, by anyone. Do you feel some kind of pressure?



The snakey handy thingy is not a sign on the yard asking for respect of boundaries, though. It is walking into the middle of the party and ripping Garrette's fart while wearing a goat head. If TST put signs in their yards expressing a rejection of the season, that is perhaps more analogous to your sign.
The bit I highlighted may be the crux of the issue. I agree but disagree. Setting aside that subset which really does mean to push their religion off on everyone else ("Jesus is the reason for the seasons!" and "It's Merry Christmas, not Happy Holidays!" and all that), the subset that sees it merely as them celebrating non-dickishly are comparable to the people who enjoyed the subservient black servants in Shirley Temple movies and pointed to the real life friendship of Bojangles and Shirley Temple as evidence they weren't racist. That's sort of true; most people enjoying those movies (and frankly I did as a child) just took it in stride as a happy depiction of happy people doing happy things; we weren't racist, even though we still used the term "ride ******" if we happened to be the lone person sitting in the back seat when we went on joyrides with our friends because hey I had a couple of actual black friends. Al Jolson in blackface singing Mammy wasn't racist; it was just a celebration of culture, and, hey, we don't mind if the blacks have fun with us when we do it so long as they don't point out anything untoward with it.

As others have said, Christianity is so ingrained that its superiority complex does not need to be waved blatantly to exist. It's simply there, and even the slightest push back gets characterized as dickish.

That's when push back is needed most.
__________________
My kids still love me.

Last edited by Garrette; Today at 09:34 AM.
Garrette is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Today, 09:28 AM   #344
Thermal
Philosopher
 
Thermal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Location: NJ USA. We Don't Like You Either
Posts: 5,520
Garrette:

You make a very persuasive argument. I agree that the highlighted is the crux of the problem, but I would (of course) veer off a little:

Your Bojangles analogy carries the unspoken assumption that there is something tainted about the xmas festivities... that there is something dirty about them being swept under the rug under the guise of celebration. I don't quite agree. The celebration is just that. It does not seek to step on anyone's throats.

So ultimately: is it wrong for a majority of a population to celebrate in a very public way? Is the widespread nature celebration itself a de facto exclusion? And of course, do the majority enjoy the same freedoms as the minority?

eta: your thoughtful posts require much more comment, but trying to keep it short:

You say upthread that if I consider xmas secular, my criticism of TST falls apart. Close, but not quite. Xmas is unique in that it has (and retains) christian origins while solidly slid to the secular. The either/or treatment doesn't work well.

I see the celebration of the religious aspect as being fine, as long as state funds are not being used to promote it (increased electric bills being disputable). Santa on the fire trucks is finding firmer footing in the secular, so as long as the public lodges no objections, vaya con Dios.

Eta: I just reread one of your responses, where I asked if Xmas celebrations should be kept private, and you opined that they should. Considering the freedom of religious expression, are you sure about that?
__________________
I am looking for other websites; you suck. -banned buttercake aficionado yuno44907

Last edited by Thermal; Today at 10:10 AM.
Thermal is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Today, 11:20 AM   #345
The Greater Fool
Illuminator
 
The Greater Fool's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Scottsdale, AZ, USA, North America, Earth, Sol, Milky Way
Posts: 3,657
Originally Posted by Thermal View Post
The snakey handy thingy is not a sign on the yard asking for respect of boundaries, though. It is walking into the middle of the party and ripping Garrette's fart while wearing a goat head. If TST put signs in their yards expressing a rejection of the season, that is perhaps more analogous to your sign.
They Satanic display was exactly asking for respect of boundaries.

The sign / display is not farting. It is exactly analogous to a sign: It's silent. It doesn't DO anything like your examples of actual actions. You liken it to extreme groups like WBC when there is absolutely no similarity.

Again, the Menorah also has a message that is completely unrelated to Christmas. Hanukkah is a minor holiday and is now part of the celebration because of timing. There were no public displays, celebrating, partying for Hanukkah 50 years ago. The display of the Menorah started because of Christmas and inclusion, just like the Satanists display. Jesus, what a dick move.

Non-Christians and actual secular celebrants that honestly are not celebrating a religious event, those that honestly want to be inclusive, would not be upset in the least by this display. I can see why Christian zealots would see it as a dick move. I honestly can't see secular folks reacting that way.
__________________
- "Who is the greater fool? The fool? Or the one arguing with the fool?" [Various; Uknown]
- "The only way to win is not to play." [Tsig quoting 'War Games']
The Greater Fool is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Today, 11:34 AM   #346
Garrette
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Posts: 14,680
Originally Posted by Thermal View Post
Garrette:

You make a very persuasive argument. I agree that the highlighted is the crux of the problem, but I would (of course) veer off a little:

Your Bojangles analogy carries the unspoken assumption that there is something tainted about the xmas festivities... that there is something dirty about them being swept under the rug under the guise of celebration. I don't quite agree. The celebration is just that. It does not seek to step on anyone's throats.

So ultimately: is it wrong for a majority of a population to celebrate in a very public way? Is the widespread nature celebration itself a de facto exclusion? And of course, do the majority enjoy the same freedoms as the minority?

eta: your thoughtful posts require much more comment, but trying to keep it short:

You say upthread that if I consider xmas secular, my criticism of TST falls apart. Close, but not quite. Xmas is unique in that it has (and retains) christian origins while solidly slid to the secular. The either/or treatment doesn't work well.

I see the celebration of the religious aspect as being fine, as long as state funds are not being used to promote it (increased electric bills being disputable). Santa on the fire trucks is finding firmer footing in the secular, so as long as the public lodges no objections, vaya con Dios.

Eta: I just reread one of your responses, where I asked if Xmas celebrations should be kept private, and you opined that they should. Considering the freedom of religious expression, are you sure about that?
Just saw the bit you added in an edit and which I have highlighted.

Yes, I am sure about it, but I suspect we are using definitions of private. I mean privately funded, executed, and attended. I do not mean kept quite or hidden or out of the sight and hearing of all others. Of course, that means I don't have an exact line on one side of which a display is acceptable and on the other side of which it is not.

It's like my neighbors across the large backyard, beyond the treeline and fenceline, and in their barn. Occasionally some of them get together and have what I suspect they think is a band. Frequently I hear it. Less frequently it is louder than I would like. Never has it actually been obtrusive. If they brought the band to the property line at 3 am, cranked up all the amps to max, shone spotlights on my bedroom window, and began to play Thunderstruck, they would be violating my personal definition of private. Whether it violates the legal definition, I do not know. So far, they have violated neither, I'm sure.

ETA: As to the secular bit, I think you misread me. I did not say (or at least did not mean to say) that if you consider Christmas secular your argument falls apart; I said (or meant) that if you consider the Christmas display that the TST display is next to secular then your argument falls apart. I stand by that.
__________________
My kids still love me.

Last edited by Garrette; Today at 11:36 AM.
Garrette is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Today, 12:17 PM   #347
Thermal
Philosopher
 
Thermal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Location: NJ USA. We Don't Like You Either
Posts: 5,520
Originally Posted by The Greater Fool View Post
They Satanic display was exactly asking for respect of boundaries.

The sign / display is not farting. It is exactly analogous to a sign: It's silent. It doesn't DO anything like your examples of actual actions. You liken it to extreme groups like WBC when there is absolutely no similarity.
You have said that before: I am not equating the groups. I am equating their excuse to be 'offensive', citing religous freedom of expression.

Quote:
Again, the Menorah also has a message that is completely unrelated to Christmas. Hanukkah is a minor holiday and is now part of the celebration because of timing. There were no public displays, celebrating, partying for Hanukkah 50 years ago. The display of the Menorah started because of Christmas and inclusion, just like the Satanists display. Jesus, what a dick move.
And again, that shows inclusiveness if anything. Not the trampling of minority religions being lamented here. Also, Judaism is a real religion. It is not the FSM or variants.

You keep walking my argument around, knowingly or not. TST is not a real religion, although their farce facade serves a great purpose. There was no purpose here, other than to be jerks. If you argue that the purpose was that although the inclusive thing was fought and won, but that we must remain ever vigilant, I would ask if we need to keep sending the National Guard in to escort black students to white schools. Hey, that was during the sixties too. Is that your position?

Quote:
Non-Christians and actual secular celebrants that honestly are not celebrating a religious event, those that honestly want to be inclusive, would not be upset in the least by this display. I can see why Christian zealots would see it as a dick move. I honestly can't see secular folks reacting that way.
And I can.

Secular celebrants: Cool tree. Pretty lights. Hey, what's this snakey handy thingy? Are these guys celebrating something, too? Solstice or whatever? No, they're just here in the middle of festivities to poke other people in the eye? What dicks.

And before you start with oppressed religions, they are neither oppressed nor a religion.
__________________
I am looking for other websites; you suck. -banned buttercake aficionado yuno44907
Thermal is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Today, 02:06 PM   #348
Thermal
Philosopher
 
Thermal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Location: NJ USA. We Don't Like You Either
Posts: 5,520
Originally Posted by Garrette View Post
Just saw the bit you added in an edit and which I have highlighted.

Yes, I am sure about it, but I suspect we are using definitions of private. I mean privately funded, executed, and attended. I do not mean kept quite or hidden or out of the sight and hearing of all others. Of course, that means I don't have an exact line on one side of which a display is acceptable and on the other side of which it is not.

It's like my neighbors across the large backyard, beyond the treeline and fenceline, and in their barn. Occasionally some of them get together and have what I suspect they think is a band. Frequently I hear it. Less frequently it is louder than I would like. Never has it actually been obtrusive. If they brought the band to the property line at 3 am, cranked up all the amps to max, shone spotlights on my bedroom window, and began to play Thunderstruck, they would be violating my personal definition of private. Whether it violates the legal definition, I do not know. So far, they have violated neither, I'm sure.

ETA: As to the secular bit, I think you misread me. I did not say (or at least did not mean to say) that if you consider Christmas secular your argument falls apart; I said (or meant) that if you consider the Christmas display that the TST display is next to secular then your argument falls apart. I stand by that.
Ok, so we are back to your crux issue: is a majority celebration inherently exclusive? Wrong, in a word? In other words, are those who do not wish to participate actually being suppressed by the majority? That is what you seem to be suggesting. Jews, as The Greater Fool notes, dont care all that much. Kwanzaa is not exactly on fire with participants. Solstice revelers seem few and far between. So who's necks are the Xmas celebrants stepping on?
__________________
I am looking for other websites; you suck. -banned buttercake aficionado yuno44907
Thermal is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Today, 02:28 PM   #349
Garrette
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Posts: 14,680
Originally Posted by Thermal View Post
Ok, so we are back to your crux issue: is a majority celebration inherently exclusive? Wrong, in a word? In other words, are those who do not wish to participate actually being suppressed by the majority? That is what you seem to be suggesting. Jews, as The Greater Fool notes, dont care all that much. Kwanzaa is not exactly on fire with participants. Solstice revelers seem few and far between. So who's necks are the Xmas celebrants stepping on?
It may not be intentional, or perhaps it is, but you keep leaving out the "government supported" (or similar wording) bit. Few people give a rat's ass or an elevator fart about the neighbor's ostentatious Christmas display; I know I don't. Heck, I enjoy them. I could argue that suppression is irrelevant and that in the US at least I need only argue constitutionality.

As to the suppression bit, as I have at least hinted at before, its government-form is not always the target. There are those who object to TST displays regardless if it they are formed as pokes-in-the-eye or as actual celebrations of knowledge. There are those who insist on putting up the Ten Commandments regardless of SCOTUS findings. Those people are as much a target as anyone else, and this is assuming that there is absolutely NO bit of celebration in TST's display, which I don't actually accept.

You are demanding a perfection of attitude from TST while ignoring the imperfect behavior and exclusive culture which led to the current protests; the fact that the dominant culture has become less imperfect and the government has begun to act as it always should have does not mean those annoying little protesters should now back off for the good of all and the dignity of the display.
__________________
My kids still love me.
Garrette is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Today, 02:33 PM   #350
The Greater Fool
Illuminator
 
The Greater Fool's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Scottsdale, AZ, USA, North America, Earth, Sol, Milky Way
Posts: 3,657
I had a detailed response that I lost. Just as well.

The Satanists are a real religion. I'll grant that most religions are revelations granted via psychosis, dreams, ignorance, desires for power, grabs for control, lies, and I assume occasionally some good intentions. Whereas the Satanists are attempting a thoughtful, rational, and evidence based knowledge as the foundation of their organization. I understand how to the former the latter is not a religion. Regardless of how or why the Satanists have created their organization, they have as much a right to choose 'religion' as a description as the thousands of other religions out there.

Having equal access to State grounds has been a battle fought for years by other non-Christian groups. People have lost property, lives, civil and criminal trials to get here. Claiming this is an example of inclusiveness by the dominant Christian culture is delusional at best.

Comparing the Satanists in the OP to WBC is even more nonsensical. Any comparison of WBC to the Satanists is nonsense because they have nothing in common. Not belief, not purpose, not actions. In point of fact, WBC being Christian aligns them more closely to mainstream Christianity. WBC is louder and more aggressive than most Christian sects, but the doctrines are the same, and the beliefs are the same.

Christianity has dominated the public sphere so long they still believe they own it, and that any contrary action is being a dick. "Happy holidays" is an attack on Christmas. "Inclusive" is allowing other religions participation. "Inclusive" is allowing other religions participation, as long as the message doesn't offend. Of course, not toeing the Christian line is offensive.
As the saying goes, it's mighty white of Christians to allow the Satanist display. Sadly, this situation illustrates how skewed cultural Christian perspectives are, that a small statue inscribed "Knowledge is the Greatest Gift" can cause otherwise rational people to think this is a dick move.

This situation is a prime example of how a positive message is a dick move. Unreal. Ooooh, it has a snake. We know snakes are evil in our holy book, so it's a finger in the eye. Jesus.
__________________
- "Who is the greater fool? The fool? Or the one arguing with the fool?" [Various; Uknown]
- "The only way to win is not to play." [Tsig quoting 'War Games']
The Greater Fool is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Social Issues & Current Events

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 02:38 PM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.