Verisoph

That's why you don't like Christmas anymore? Maybe you're just too worried about what other people do. Or, maybe not - that's something only you can decide. Um, not meaning to be rude or anything, but I feel I should point out that you said that as a child Christmas seemed magical to you because of happy decorations, family fun, and of course presents from Santa. There's no mention of the positive message of Christ there.

Have a happy day!

Too bad you didn't think of it a couple of days earlier, you could have tried it out at Bendigo's party.

Wow! That's quite a provocative piece of work, RevRainbow. I had seen nothing sacred, and the things that were glorious had no glory and the sacrifices were like the stockyards at Chicago if nothing was done with the meat except to bury it... Abstract words such as glory, honor, courage, or hallow were obscene. ~Ernest Hemingway - A Farewell to Arms

Yes, you would able to tell them that, but whether or not telling them that actually convinces them of anything remains to be seen. It will help if you don't mention to them that you became ordained online, for free, and that in less than three minutes, they can become ordained, too, regardless of their beliefs. As a citizen of the US, you have the right to be your own religious authority. That carries a lot more weight than ordination by any church. Good for you! A lot of people in the ULC try very hard to speak for everyone. BTW: Welcome to the forum!

Sounds to me like one of those things where you won't know how it will go until you try. You can stand up in court and testify that it is a sincerely held personal belief, but you can't say that it is a belief of the ULC. Anyone can get ordained by the ULC just by asking, including people who think they must be clean shaven in order to be spiritually pure. So, citing your ordination isn't likely to bolster your case. Rather, it just might make you look desperate, and end up prejudicing a judge or jury against you. I think you'd be better off calling attention to other religions that have guidelines regarding facial hair; Islam, Judaism, Amish, etc. Even the Biblical story about Samson might help since that is somewhat similar to your belief (the power of hair). .

That's pretty amazing!

Hey! How do you know about that? Were you trick-or-treating at my house last night? I should have known that kid in the Llama suit was too big to be a real kid. No, I didn't hear that, so I did a seach for it, and sure enough, it was on Pat Robertson's website. It has since been removed, but here it is cached. Pretty scary stuff there: I had no idea. And to think that for years I've been friendly with several witches. I think it might be okay if he's a human incarnation of God.

Times are tough, and candy ain't cheap. That's why this year I passed out little packets of Taco Bell sauce that I've been saving for the last several months. "Whatcha want, kid, hot or mild?"

Happy Candy!

Great work, RevRainbow!

Yes, of course I'd want to know, and if I knew, then of course I'd be a believer. But, that doesn't mean I'd become a worshipper. If I knew God existed, and I knew he behaved the way a lot of people say he does, I wouldn't like him. I might even become a fanatic in the pursuit of finding a way to hold him responsible for crimes against humanity.

semi-nutritious, pseudo-delicious California Smellie With Nuts.

carefully swept the dog crap into her glowing, multi-purpose light sabre/pooper scooper. With a twinkle in her eye and a slight grimace distorting her delicate visage, she proceeded to dump the odoriferous nuggets into her.....

Happy Diwali, Luis!

Get well quickly, RabbiO, you're missed on the forum.

?

I used to chase abductees all over the ship with my raygun set to a moderate pain level. My parents were always ragging me about how uncivilized it was for me to play with my food. They weren't fooling anybody, though. I saw them laughing their dorsal suckers off when they thought I wasn't looking. .

Hmmm, when I made my post, I hadn't thought about it like that. I kinda figured that if anything, I'd turned him into a poopbunny, and the poopbunny is what would turn into a real bunny. If he became part of me, then what turned into a real bunny would be me. That's even scarier. To be honest, I was never a very good friend to my chocolate bunny. I thought about eating him quite often.

I got a chocolate bunny for Easter when I was a kid. He smelled so good, I wanted very much to eat him, but I wanted to play with him, too. I rose above my base instincts, and he became my toy. I had him for a couple of months. Eventually, I came to think of him more as a friend than a toy. One day he got kind of warm, and then dirt got stuck all over him. I tried to clean him up, but my efforts were futile. So I ate him. I hope he doesn't come back as a real rabbit - I'll bet he'd still be mad about being eaten.

Before I begin, I would like to say that the more you try to define or explain art, the further you get from what it is about art that makes it art. I'm going to give this a shot anyway. Do you think there is a difference between the source of art which expresses and the source of art which decorates? No. In either case, the source is a person or a group of people. Frankly, I'd be hesitant to label someone's art as being either art that expresses or art that decorates. Art is always an expression, but not all art is suitable as decoration. A lot of art isn't in a medium that can be used as decoration (music, poetry, dance, etc) Is one more inspired than the other? Without being the person who created it, I couldn't say. Is the source of inspiration the subconscious or a spiritual source or something else? I would say primarily the conscious mind. But I can't speak for anyone other than myself. I wouldn't dream of disputing whatever an artist says about his or her own source of inspiration. If different sources are possible, would you consider some to produce invention and others art? Almost all art IS invention. Invention can certainly be art. What about the source of art appreciation? Is there a spiritual influence? Do you mean always, or sometimes? Michelangelo's painting on the ceiling of the Sistine Chapel is obviously appreciated by many people for spiritual reasons, but I wouldn't say that all art appreciation is a spiritual thing. If the source of a religion is inspired writings, would you consider that religion to be a work of or collection of art? Writing is a form of art. When writing anything, some kind of inspiration is necessary. That said, I do not consider religion to be art - religion is something else entirely. Is art a universal capability of humans, or are some people unable to produce or appreciate it? I think everyone has the ability to produce and enjoy art. Some people don't enjoy art as much as others. Some people don't enjoy as much variety of art as others. The art produced by some people is more appealing to greater numbers of people than the art produced by others. Some people produce art that appeals to themselves only, but that doesn't make it not art. Can only artists be human? Or do you recognize non-human art, such as something expressed within a wilderness scene, or by an animal or flock, or even an entire ecosystem? There is much beauty in nature but that falls outside any definition of art with which I'm familiar. That's rather like calling Mt. Fuji architecture. The definition that I commonly apply to the word "art" is twofold; 1) a picture, 2) a form of creative human expression, often with the goal of entertaining or/and stimulating thought. If someone wants to define it differently, that's cool by me. It's not worth arguing over. Would such art be accidental or channeled somehow from a spiritual source? No, see above Does the sky make art, either by cloud or stars? No, see above. Can a computer be programmed to express original art? Computers are often programmed to produce original art in the form of pictures. But, that's "producing" original pictures, computers don't actually "express" anything, computers simply run programs. Can a computer be programmed to appreciate art? No, a computer doesn't have the emotional makeup necessary to appreciate anything. A computer could be programmed to rate art according to a particular criteria, but that's not the same thing as appreciation.

Today (September 19th) be International Talk Like A Pirate Day! Arrrgh, tis time to let yer pirate colors fly once again, me hearties. Read about it har. Aye, me parrot concurs.

Perhaps you could get some help with that from Kathy Bates. Mary Stewart's pretty old, I think she probably wouldn't put up much of a fight. I doubt she'd need to be hobbled.

Barnacle geese? Yuck! I think I'd rather fast than eat things called barnacle geese. I just looked up barnacle geese, and it seems that in medieval times they were thought to be the offspring of driftwood. Seems to me that if they wanted to eat them that bad, it would have made more sense to just declare them to be wood again, instead of seafood. From Wikipedia: The natural history of barnacle goose was long surrounded with a legend claiming that they were born of driftwood: Nature produces [bernacae] against Nature in the most extraordinary way. They are like marsh geese but somewhat smaller. They are produced from fir timber tossed along the sea, and are at first like gum. Afterwards they hang down by their beaks as if they were a seaweed attached to the timber, and are surrounded by shells in order to grow more freely. Having thus in process of time been clothed with a strong coat of feathers, they either fall into the water or fly freely away into the air. They derived their food and growth from the sap of the wood or from the sea, by a secret and most wonderful process of alimentation. I have frequently seen, with my own eyes, more than a thousand of these small bodies of birds, hanging down on the sea-shore from one piece of timber, enclosed in their shells, and already formed. They do not breed and lay eggs like other birds, nor do they ever hatch any eggs, nor do they seem to build nests in any corner of the earth. The legend was widely repeated in, for example, Vincent of Beauvais's great encyclopedia. However, it was also criticized by other medieval authors, including Albertus Magnus. That sounds like a pretty good idea. Atypical, but good. If they hadn't ditched that rule, I'd be in favor of extending the end of Lent to the beginning of Advent, and the end of Advent to the beginning of Lent. (Don't get the wrong idea, it's not like there are hordes of Catholics clamoring to hear what I think they should do with their religious seasons) I don't know, all I can say is, "Good riddance!" I never decided anything of the sort. How come no one ever comes to me when these important decisions are being made? My friends all know that when they lend money to me they shouldn't the principle, let alone any interest.

It's nice that they can dink around with the meaning of 'sunrise to sunset' whenever they'd like. I guess Islam isn't so different from other religions, after all. You must fast on Friday... fasting means don't eat meat... fish ain't meat... oh the heck with it, eat whatever you want on Friday. When a fatwa is issued which says that smoking light cigarettes is okay because that's not really smoking, then perhaps I'll give Islam a closer look.