That’s what IO9 called If Footmen Tire You, What Will Horses Do?, a bizarre, unintentionally hilarious, weird film from the 70′s.
This 1971 film was directed by exploitation film director Ron Ormond. Prior to surviving a plane crash in 1968, Ormond’s oeuvre consisted mostly of films like the science fiction sleazefests The Monster and the Stripper and Mesa of Lost Women.
[...]
If Footmen Tire You, What Will Horses Do?, which is based on the teachings of the fire-and-brimstone Reverend Estus Pirkle, depicts a United States under the thrall of Communist overlords. This is no flight of fancy, mind you. The film claims that if miniskirts, rock-and-roll, premarital sex, and other forms of secular fun are not replaced by nationwide piousness, the United States will be taken over by a Red fifth column by 1973. Once the Commies are in power, they’ll brainwash us with uncreative chants and uncomfortable benches.
#58 CursedSir – “There is NO source that attributes that to Epicurus.”
Bobbo doesn’t need me to to come to his defense but, due to the vagaries of international time zones, I’m awake. No source to Epicurus? How about WikiQuotes which includes a couple of references? http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Epicurus
Yes, other sites say there is some dispute but the quote is so often attributed to ole Epi that it has become known as The Epicurean Paradox.
By the way, you’re right in that we don’t have anything specifically written by Epi to prove it was his original thought. We do have writings from about 1,800 years ago (Lactantius) that attribute it to Epi. Google “Epicurus quotes” and you can find a few hundred other attributes to Epicurus.
However, the important thing is the words. Why do you object to the thought experiment? You call it “rot” and “shit.” Onstead of attacking Bobbo for a generally accepted attribution, why not tell us what logical fallacy you find in the paradox? Address the message not the messenger.
So, in the time it too me to craft my reply, Bobbo posted his own.
“God stands outside logic.” Yes, I’ve heard that one. From an Irish priest.no less. We were sitting on the roof of the diocese building in Luanda, watching the nighttime sky and the far away flashes of artillery like distant heat lightning. We were also working diligently to empty a bottle of single malt. Between sips, we discussed the mysteries of almost everything. Another priest (who I believe had a headstart on us) also added that “God created logic so we probably don’t understand all the rules.”
I had to admit there is no response to those statements. Once you bring faith into an argument, the subject is closed.
Well Animby–you posted the same support a few months ago to the same complaint. I hope it wasn’t Cursor back then as well?
I’m going to give it about a year before I post the answer that really irritates me but in my view is the best possible answer. Its in the territory you note, but more irritating.
Do you find it (what?) that people can be as transparently incompetent as Cursor is in his posting on this issue? Seems to me he is more intelligent usually? But forget cursor. Who is it that “thinks” like this. How do they call it thinking?
Are they kidding? Ha, ha. My private joke referenced above. Yep, its hard for me to believe==in god or in hooman stupidity, and yet the evidence is before us constantly. How’s that for an ambiguous antecedent?
“Dost thou think, because thou art virtuous, there shall be no more cakes and ale?”
Malvolio, Twelfth Night
Bobbo – I actually appreciate the person who caused me to do the research the first time. I learned a lot. Some about Lactantius, for instance. Interesting character.
But Cursor kind of ticked me off. As you say, he’s usually more cogent in his replies. I don’t always agree with him but I do enjoy reading his thoughts. But this thing with Epicurus? It doesn’t take much of a Google search to find citations. Probably even Bing and Yahoo! will get you the answer.
But, more to the point, why argue the author when it’s the thought that counts?
“I’m going to give it about a year before I post the answer that really irritates me but in my view is the best possible answer.” A year?!?!? Hell, I might be dead by then. Of course, if I am, Houdini and I will try to get in touch and let you know the answer.
Well, in the meantime Animby, I gave you the second best answer I have heard and you heard it but did not rank it.
Why don’t you rank it and provide the best answer that you have heard? Much like your alter ego, we could probably post our most private revelations and at the end of a thread like this only 5-6 people might know, and none really care. having our cake and eating it too.
Probably doesn’t matter to begin with==I just don’t like giving out what I think is the best answer, the best answer but still defective, and then have THAT answer come back at me.
Still, just talking about it reduces my irritation over it. Just what “the talking cure” is all about?
The new thread is about Pepsi referencing Catholic services puts me in mind of a scene late in this movie with the Neo Nazi’s putting their boots on a painting of Jesus. Made me “cringe” a little bit and made me think it was a bit “off” for this fundie to deface the image of Jesus in the name of Artistic Authenticity. And 527 killings, that was no problem, blood all over the place.
But no sex. Some subjects are just unmentionable.
Silly Religious People ((not to be redundant)).
Bobbo – Personally, I don’t think there is a decent answer. Probably the best I’ve heard, though, was that god is capricious by nature and stands outside the understanding of mere mortals. However, another way of saying capricious is schizophrenic. Not exactly but …
I’m reminded of an old Star Trek episode where god was a child playing with his universe. The god of most religions is certainly capricious and childlike. If not schizo.
Animby–thats pretty close, but actually offensive to me is: as god is all three things at once, we mere humans just don’t understand the nature of evil. ie: EVERYTHING we see is in our own personal benefit. I think it has very much to do with life being but a lesson that serves us well in the afterlife. How that is supposed to interact with/inform the “soul” is beyond my theology.
These personal god based religions make no sense from start to finish, and the more you know about them, the worse they get. Cracks me up. I reject god in grammar school because it didn’t make any sense and adults more intelligent to me write books on god’s plan for us all. It just doesn’t fit in a rational world. And that is something very important to come to grips with.
I just trumped myself.
According to the email fwds coming from churchgoing relatives I’ve been receiving, this is just like what’s being preached to them every Sunday.
Fear is a very persuasive emotion.