That’s like asking why so many like to conflate Santa with Saint Nicholas. Satanism is a direct response to Christianity and intentionally co-opts its imagery and theology to make that response. It’s not coincidence that Satanism is named after the Adversary and that it uses imagery inherited from occultists accused of devil worship - they’re by design a stick to poke the church establishment with.
Megyn Kelly: afraid to google the ten tenants! Fear and a closed mind.
…but it’s only obvious that she is bad at her job to those who have the courage to be honest with themselves and think things out for themselves instead of automatically “going along”. But to the Faux News bobble heads, she is wonderful b/c she is part of their team and that’s all that matters to them: affirming their perception.
I think that’s a universal trait for humans. It’s not confined entirely to the American right wing.
And even before that, she’s so dang purty!
Nobody has a choice about relying on heuristics and informally inductive guesswork much of the time. We just don’t have the data, the storage, or the computational capacity.
The interesting differences are between those who are willing and able to treat their collection of heuristics and inductive guesswork as a stopgap measure, to be modified as the situation warrants; and those who treat it as authoritative, the situation to be re-interpreted as it warrants.
A man of wealth and taste; who is pleased to meet you and wishes to play a guessing game, I presume?
what puzzles me, though, is the nature of his game.
of course she won’t google the 7 tenets of the satanic church. she one of the millions who deny the rights of others in the simplistic religious idea that god said, they believe it, and that’s that.
i can tell you one of the tenets without looking. that would be a belief in an evidence based reality any part of which may be challenged and changed by other evidence. for example, many fundamentalist christians believe the world is 6,000-10,000 years old when clearly it is not.
I always try to figure out where someone on TV is located by the skyline behind them, so I’m guessing Lucien Greaves was actually in Boston (or maybe they just fudged it and he’s in . . . Salem . . . ?)
Anyway, he gets props for having that one dead eye. She’d probably shit herself if he was actually in the studio with her.
I wonder if the milky eye is an affectation, or real? It’s exactly the kind of cosmetic quirk I’d expect from the Satanic Temple’s spokesman, but I have no idea whether it’s a happy accident he just so happens to have a milky eye, or if it’s just a contact lens or a scar done intentionally.
… I just paused and did a google search, as far as I can tell, the only people talking about his eye are the end-times-obsessed fundies who seem to be saying that his milky eye is part of the mark of the beast or something, and that he’s the antichrist. Hilarious panic about how a characteristic he shares with literally millions of people on the planet proves he’s out to kill all the christians, when in reality, he’s just out to troll the fuck out of them and get some lulz while also forcing the government to treat everyone fairly.
Also, no horns/pitchfork:
Ezekiel 28:12-18: “Thus says the Lord GOD, You had the seal of perfection, Full of wisdom and perfect in
So, more Vertigo comics Devil…?
OMG, I just figured out who the devil actually is:
“If scientific analysis were conclusively to demonstrate certain claims in Buddhism to be false, then we must accept the findings of science and abandon those claims.”
Dalai Lama XIV,
The Universe in a Single Atom: The Convergence of Science and Spirituality
There is no way she or FOX care what her viewers think, the value of her arguments are not in how well they’re made but that she, the talking head on TV, is making them. The point is to tell people what to think, and they were told that no matter how much sense the “other” makes, you should just ignore them and keep on being wrong, cause then you win.
The script only fails if you deviate from it.
I wondered if she was unable to deviate from the script because she has absolutely no experience dealing with someone whose opinions differ from her own. I also wondered if what she was saying was really her opinion or if this is simply the opinion she’s paid to have.
Baphomet: He really gets their goat!
So, what is our incentive for internalizing the values of any random presenter we may see? They aren’t paying me to be duped, are they? What do I do if they can’t even sufficiently articulate their own position?
Win what exactly?