Scalping is discouraged on this forum, and so shouldn't all pro scalping posts also b

[Blackthornone]

You are out of control dude.

Well, there is Devil in his screenname, and his attitude is rather amoral. Being a satanist doesn't mean animal sacrifice necessarily or any of that ritual stuff. It's an attitude.



"Atheistic/Deistic Satanism
[edit] LaVeyan Satanism
Main article: LaVeyan Satanism
LaVeyan Satanism is a religion founded in 1966 by Anton Szandor LaVey. Its teachings are based on individualism, self-indulgence, and "eye for an eye" morality. Unlike Theistic Satanists, LaVeyan Satanists are atheists and agnostics who regard Satan as a symbol of man's inherent nature.[8] According to religioustolerance.org, LaVeyan Satanism is a "small religious group that is unrelated to any other faith, and whose members feel free to satisfy their urges responsibly, exhibit kindness to their friends, and attack their enemies".[9] Its beliefs were first detailed in The Satanic Bible and it is overseen by the Church of Satan.
[edit] Symbolic Satanism

Symbolic Satanism[10][11] (sometimes called Modern Satanism) is the observance and practice of Satanic religious beliefs, philosophies, customs and rituals.[12] In this interpretation of Satanism, the Satanist does not worship Satan in the theistic sense, but is an adversary to all spiritual creeds and religions, espousing hedonism, materialism, Randian Objectivism, antinomianism, rational egoism, suitheism, individualism, Nietzschean and some Crowleyan philosophy and anti-theism." from the Wikipedia
After I skimmed the Church Of Satan website, it seems like Satanism in general might appeal to him. In actuality this is a serious question out of curiosity. I'm not joking.
Symbolic Satanism seems to fit him well.

Doesn't the following sound somewhat like him?: "but is an adversary to all spiritual creeds and religions, espousing hedonism, materialism, Randian Objectivism, antinomianism, rational egoism, suitheism, individualism, Nietzschean and some Crowleyan philosophy and anti-theism." Except perhaps for suitheism

I believe this applies :Objectivism is the philosophy created by the Russian-American philosopher and novelist Ayn Rand (1905–1982).[1] Objectivism holds that reality exists independent of consciousness; that individual persons are in direct contact with reality through sensory perception; that human beings can gain objective knowledge from perception through the process of concept formation and inductive and deductive logic; that the proper moral purpose of one's life is the pursuit of one's own happiness or rational self-interest; that the only social system consistent with this morality is full respect for individual rights, embodied in pure laissez faire capitalism;" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Objectivism_(Ayn_Rand)

I apologize if I am mistaken on this. If he says he isn't, I'll accept that, but I have talked to Satanists online before, and I get a rather similar vibe from him.

 

[316what]

(psst...herring is a fish)

psst....I know....I hit wrong smiley.

 

[EVILFACE]

Scalpers are now spawns of satan, awesome.

 

[BadMoon]

Scalpers are now spawns of satan, awesome.

 

[Blackthornone]

psst....I know....I hit wrong smiley.

"A red herring is an idiom referring to a device which intends to divert the audience from the truth or an item of significance.[1] For example, in mystery fiction, an innocent party may be purposefully cast as highly suspect through emphasis or descriptive techniques; attention is drawn away from the true guilty party."
Wikipedia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_herring_(idiom)

 

[Blackthornone]

Scalpers are now spawns of satan, awesome.

No, just terrestrial demons of commerce... :emperor

 

[karamazov80]

The purpose of law is not to dictate moral standards; it is to protect the rights of the citizens who live under it.

Perhaps from a theoretical perspective, but this does not hold in practice, sadly. Laws are all-too-frequently made to satisfy those with money/power, and to pacify an ill-informed and short-sighted electorate.

 

[SnakeDoctor]

Well, there is Devil in his screenname, and his attitude is rather amoral. Being a satanist doesn't mean animal sacrifice necessarily or any of that ritual stuff. It's an attitude.

"Atheistic/Deistic Satanism
[edit] LaVeyan Satanism
Main article: LaVeyan Satanism
LaVeyan Satanism is a religion founded in 1966 by Anton Szandor LaVey. Its teachings are based on individualism, self-indulgence, and "eye for an eye" morality. Unlike Theistic Satanists, LaVeyan Satanists are atheists and agnostics who regard Satan as a symbol of man's inherent nature.[8] According to religioustolerance.org, LaVeyan Satanism is a "small religious group that is unrelated to any other faith, and whose members feel free to satisfy their urges responsibly, exhibit kindness to their friends, and attack their enemies".[9] Its beliefs were first detailed in The Satanic Bible and it is overseen by the Church of Satan.
[edit] Symbolic Satanism

Symbolic Satanism[10][11] (sometimes called Modern Satanism) is the observance and practice of Satanic religious beliefs, philosophies, customs and rituals.[12] In this interpretation of Satanism, the Satanist does not worship Satan in the theistic sense, but is an adversary to all spiritual creeds and religions, espousing hedonism, materialism, Randian Objectivism, antinomianism, rational egoism, suitheism, individualism, Nietzschean and some Crowleyan philosophy and anti-theism." from the Wikipedia
After I skimmed the Church Of Satan website, it seems like Satanism in general might appeal to him. In actuality this is a serious question out of curiosity. I'm not joking.
Symbolic Satanism seems to fit him well.

Doesn't the following sound somewhat like him?: "but is an adversary to all spiritual creeds and religions, espousing hedonism, materialism, Randian Objectivism, antinomianism, rational egoism, suitheism, individualism, Nietzschean and some Crowleyan philosophy and anti-theism." Except perhaps for suitheism

I believe this applies :Objectivism is the philosophy created by the Russian-American philosopher and novelist Ayn Rand (1905–1982).[1] Objectivism holds that reality exists independent of consciousness; that individual persons are in direct contact with reality through sensory perception; that human beings can gain objective knowledge from perception through the process of concept formation and inductive and deductive logic; that the proper moral purpose of one's life is the pursuit of one's own happiness or rational self-interest; that the only social system consistent with this morality is full respect for individual rights, embodied in pure laissez faire capitalism;" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Objectivism_(Ayn_Rand)

I apologize if I am mistaken on this. If he says he isn't, I'll accept that, but I have talked to Satanists online before, and I get a rather similar vibe from him.

This is absurd.

(1) I cannot speak for him -- but I am a devout Christian (Baptist, specifically) ... and see no moral or ethical problem with profiting from the resale of toys. Failure to subscribe to your contrived "ethics" surrounding toy profiteering is not an indicator of Satanism. Get a grip.

(2) Ayn Rand was a capitalist, and wrote a good book or two ... but she was also a bit of a nut. Her unique brand of objectivist capitalism was openly hostile to religion and morality. She is hardly representative of all capitalists (just as you are hardly representative of all people with "ethics"). William F. Buckley, a Catholic libertarian/conservative capitalist, knew Ayn Rand, and thought Rand was a hedonistic loony, and her followers tantamount to a cult. Having read quite a bit of Buckley in my time, I am also quite confident Buckley would've had no moral problem with people reselling toys for a substantial profit.

(3) The fact that people disagree with your contrived and ridiculous notion of "ethics", does not mean that they disavow the concept of ethics as a whole ... they may just disavow your bizarre notions thereof.

I have seen no reason to believe that your groundbreaking work in the emerging field of "ethics in the resale of toys and concert tickets" is pulled from any worthwhile or recognized source of ethics or morality. You're just making this stuff up as you go ... and, I'm starting to think you're doing so just to yank people's chains.

They're just toys. Pull yourself together.

SnakeDoc

 

[LOTRFan]

Scalpers = nephilim.



Funny how when these threads pop up every year or so everyone is so quick the blame scalper/flippers etc, and it takes a few pages before anyone really realizes that the manufacturers themselves are equally responsible for creating the climate. I for one am not complaining about said climate, I want "limited edition collectibles."

See you all in a year for the next round of "the pointless scalper" debate.

 

[barryo]

im selling this thread for $75...............sooooo......LOCK IT UP........:chew

 

[ProgMatinee]

not sure what you're seeing LOTRFan. IMO 90% of the people that post in these threads have no problem at all with scalpers. its usually just the 1 person that created thread complaining.

 

[Commtech]

Why hasn't this crap thread been locked?

 

[jinxx]

Beneath the surface is only for those with true grit.

Nothing excites me more than watching opposing intellectuals go at it. You guys totally earned my respect.

 

[Skiman]

Nothing excites me more than watching opposing intellectuals go at it. You guys totally earned my respect.

Nothing repels me further....

 

[lcummins]

Good grief -- its an action figure, not Michaelangelo's Sistine ceiling...

Now you're doing the same thing you are saying BT is doing... trying to push his opinion on others. You're opinion is that collectibles are trivial and don't compare to say... the Sistine Chapel... well that is your opinion. I could care less about the Sistine Chaple, or Picasso's Sunflowers, or most other "works of art" that the general public think so highly of. If the "value" of a Dr. Doom PF and Picasso's Sunflowers painting were the same, I'd pick the Doom each and every time! At their "current" value, I'd pick the Sunflowers painting... and sell it to buy 1000's of collectibles more than just the Doom!


Here is my problem... just who decided what "greed" was... and that it is bad... or what is right and wrong... etc, etc, etc. It was a human being somewhere who first decided something was wrong or immoral, or greedy... why was he right? He wasn't. The "majority" of people just happened to believe it also. Does that make it right? No.

All of our "beliefs" are just made up constructs by mankind to help mankind describe and try to understand the world around him.

 

[Commtech]

Here is my problem... just who decided what "greed" was... and that it is bad... or what is right and wrong... etc, etc, etc. It was a human being somewhere who first decided something was wrong or immoral, or greedy... why was he right? He wasn't. The "majority" of people just happened to believe it also. Does that make it right? No.

All of our "beliefs" are just made up constructs by mankind to help mankind describe and try to understand the world around him.

Lonnie: Wether you meant to or not, now you are starting to step on the very sensitive and dangerous territory of... religion. I would stay away from that. That will make this thread explode completely.

 

[Skiman]

Now you're doing the same thing you are saying BT is doing... trying to push his opinion on others. You're opinion is that collectibles are trivial and don't compare to say... the Sistine Chapel... well that is your opinion. I could care less about the Sistine Chaple, or Picasso's Sunflowers, or most other "works of art" that the general public think so highly of. If the "value" of a Dr. Doom PF and Picasso's Sunflowers painting were the same, I'd pick the Doom each and every time! At their "current" value, I'd pick the Sunflowers painting... and sell it to buy 1000's of collectibles more than just the Doom!


Here is my problem... just who decided what "greed" was... and that it is bad... or what is right and wrong... etc, etc, etc. It was a human being somewhere who first decided something was wrong or immoral, or greedy... why was he right? He wasn't. The "majority" of people just happened to believe it also. Does that make it right? No.

All of our "beliefs" are just made up constructs by mankind to help mankind describe and try to understand the world around him.

So why does everything taste like chicken, do we really know what chicken taste like?

What if it's more of a squirrel kind of meat...

 

[Blackthornone]

Nothing excites me more than watching opposing intellectuals go at it. You guys totally earned my respect.

I think I'm now smitten.

 

[BadMoon]

Lonnie: Wether you meant to or not, now you are starting to step on the very sensitive and dangerous territory of... religion. I would stay away from that. That will make this thread explode completely.

Nahhhh! We all know that "yes we can" guy makes all the rules and decides whats right and whats wrong.

 

[Skiman]

Nahhhh! We all know that "yes we can" guy makes all the rules and decides whats right and whats wrong.

Al Gore....