Well, Woden was a war god. English and Saxon kings believed that Woden, and the Asa generally, granted them power, victory, and worldly prosperity, and they expected Christ to grant the same things if they were going to convert. So Christianity changed. Which is why most English-speaking Christians speak of holiness, that is the favor of the Asa, instead of what might be witchiness [the etymologies are unclear]. In contrast, given similar languages and similar forms of paganism but different circumstances of conversion, Gothic-speaking Christians spoke of weihs instead of hailags.
2 Likes
My gosh, I wonder what would happen if you could get this guy to understand modern cosmology and the weight of instrumented measurements that act as the basis of it. I mean to understand the nature and scale of the universe as we understand it now ā¦ to think that in a univrse structured along the lines we think of it as being; comes down to a person like you and me flitting about that bast univese trying to get other beings like us to mate when weāre not supposed to, and steal each otherās promisary notes (money), stuff, labor and lives, or to say bad things. I mean think about it, do you think Satan makes a stop in the Hydrogen atmosphere of Jupiter every once and a while? Or perhaps explores the methane lakes of Titan, or the water ocean underneath the ice crust? Let alone Europa. Thatās a world view one could only find in a comic book. Or the Supreme Court of the United States of America. Thatās insane to think that a universe is created in order to run morality exercises on a small planet. Thatās just crazy.
But what if the devil is real? If weāre lucky, heās more along these lines. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jSt0nDMw5bk ā¦ I could dig that satan if for anything the insight that āHell is a city like Newark.ā. Watch the shirts.
6 Likes
As of 2007 the Churchās official stance is basically āwe donāt know, but we hope unbaptized infants get into heaven.ā
2 Likes
Scalia is saying that absence of evidence can be explained by Satan getting wilier; thatās unrelated to saying that absence of evidence is evidence of presence.
Militant atheist: One who aggressively proselytizes for atheism, with active disrespect to folks who believe anything else. If you prefer evangelical atheist, Iāll accept that as a synonym.
(Iāve described my own position on that topic in the past, so I wonāt repeat it here ā but suffice it to say I disrespect only those who insist that their beliefs should automatically let them dictate morality to others.)
1 Like
I suspect heād just consider them āwrongā, and hope to convince them of that.
Speaking of ignorant, itās pretty clear youāve either never read Scaliaās opinions or lack the integrity to fairly evaluate them. The guy is obviously brilliant, and the clarity and persuasiveness of his writing is what makes him a particularly devastating ideological opponent (as opposed to Thomas, who does seem to be largely ignored).
There are a lot of legitimate reasons to disagree with Scalia, but your drive-by libelous smearing is pretty pointless and will speak only to those who already agree with you.
3 Likes
I have a friend whoās a lawyer, and Catholic, and Italian, and a Republican, and he hates Scalia on every level.
Also in that interview, Scalia says he doesnāt read very much and that heās a Fox News/Washington Times/AM radio kind of guy, which explains why his opinions have featured wingnut urban legends and fairy tales. Because when people in their 70s listen to AM talk radio, they sound senile even if they arenāt.
9 Likes
āDrive-by libelous smearingā? Hereās one of Scaliaās brilliant decisions: Citizens United which said ācorporations are peopleā and enables unlimited political spending by corporations, associations, and unions in the name of the first amendment (freedom of speech). If youāre a US citizen and youāre not a billionaire and you think your vote is equal to the power of the Koch Bros. etc. Iām sorry but youāre an idiot. And I hate to call people names. Please accept my apology. I just donāt know any other way to express how you canāt see how that ruins what little is left of our democracy.
11 Likes
Scalia is saying the devil is wily and using Democrats and other left leaning US citizens to send us all to hell in a hand cart in the name of mild health care reform, like Obamacare.
Who said that?
In a word, no.
Citizens United was not a Scalia opinion: the majority was written by Kennedy, the concurrence by Chief Justice Roberts, and the dissent by Stevens. I hope that pointing this out doesnāt make me an idiot.
I donāt agree with Scaliaās jurisprudence, but this doesnāt mean I think he is either a āright wing tool,ā āworking for the Koch Bros.,ā or ignorant and stupid. It simply means I think he is wrong.
2 Likes
Name one militant, atheist on the Supreme Court.
2 Likes
Or in congress, or in any state legislature, or in any elected office, anywhere in the world.
3 Likes
Hey, all Iām saying is that people should read Scalia opinions before you demonize his intellectual abilities. Your friend probably hates Scalia more than he hates Thomasāwho is also Catholic and even more conservativeāand this is probably of how compelling, and thus dangerous, Scalia is. Scalia sometimes seems out of touch (especially with technology: I recently heard him repeatedly refer to ālong linesā when he meant āland linesā), but thereās nothing approaching senility in how he communicates.
Also, please let me know which of his opinions āhave featured wingnut urban legends and fairy tales.ā
Okay. I donāt like evangelists of any stripe much. That said, most of the time I hear the expression āmilitant atheist,ā itās being used to describe anyone who wants to maintain strict separation of religion and any expression of state authority. They always paint that as trying to dictate morality to others, when in fact itās simply trying to prevent anybody from using coercion to dictate morality to others.
15 Likes
As a federal judge who took an oath to defend the Constitution and if Scalia respected the separation of church and state he shouldnāt have even breached the subject. He isnāt a theologian, either, but he seems to have an extremely high opinion of himself and his half-baked deep thoughts.
1 Like
Just because the man has beliefs does not exclude him from making unbiased decisions about Constitutional issues.
3 Likes
I meant Scalia was one of the justices who supported Citizens United and, I might add the recent decision to overturn the Voting Rights Act.
History will prove he was a tool for the Koch Bros. as well as ignorant and stupid.
3 Likes
