Conference hydra::dejavu

    An AA doesn't mean much more than someone stuck through a two year
    degree. It's not important.
    
    However, IMHO, disregrading the alledged Satanic messages, the writer
    has a valid point. Repeating any litany backward, from the socalled
    "Lord's Prayer" to the pledge of Alligence causes the mind to take
    notice. Ever see advertizements printed upside down in magazines?? It
    works well enough to pay to do it.
    
    Unfortunately for the writter he has not established the fact that the
    mind can _interpret_ backward lyrics. Saying them backwards involves
    the mind which has previously understood the litany. Listening to them
    being played backwards without awareness of their presence voids the
    whole argument.

I agree with Mikie's conclusion, and would also add that the primary 
negative effect of backwards-masking is on the creators of the music 
rather than on the listeners.  Also, backwards-masking should probably 
not be considered the same as "subliminal messaging."  Subliminal 
messaging can work, but it works in forward motion and has to do with 
perceptual sensitivities that we do not necessarily consciously 
recognize as they are working.  The mind perceives on varying levels of 
subtlety, but in "perception mode" it doesn't automatically reorganize 
or reverse the input. I think the subject probably gets more attention 
than it warrants.

Jeff

    Well, speaking as someone who spent most of his teenage life listening
    to Led Zeppelin, Black Sabbath etc I can say their alleged subliminal
    messages missed me by a mile.
    
    I'm still not convinced that some of the claimed "messages" even exist
    - at college a group of us spent a day playing records, that our
    evangelist flatmate had branded as evil, backwards. I remember hearing
    snatches of the Hallelujah chorus on an E.L.O. track ( can't remember
    which one ) but we spent a long time playing "Stairway to Heaven"
    backwards and found nothing... very peculiar as Robert Plant used to 
    introduce it as a "song of hope".
    
    Drivel, pure drivel.
    
    Dave.

    Well then, it stands to reason that if you play the theme song to 
    "Rosmary's Baby" backwards, it must be "Onward Christian Soldiers",
    right?

    I love it.  I once heard (on NPR) that the theme song to Mr. Ed was
    back-tracked satanic music.  Just like Doug, I lived off of Led Zepplin,
    the Doors and yes (save my soul) Black Sabbath.  Still like them from
    time to time.  Mostly, I think it is drivel.  If you look at the lyrics
    to "Stairway To Heaven" (played forward) they are cohernt, very well thought
    out and convey a specific message.  I can't imagine how one would go about
    composing lyrics in a way that they conveyed complicated coherent messages
    played in either direction.  Back then, I too played a number of songs 
    backwards and couldn't make anything out it (of course, I haven't tried
    Mr. Ed yet ;-).  Anyway, poo-poo. 

    I do find it interesting that Mr. Crowley and LeVay made it onto so many
    album covers (do they get royalties? ;-).  It only shows the artists'
    facination with things that are out of the ordinary and difficult to fit 
    into a nice little box.  Most of us in here fall into that category (look 
    at the Crowley note).  Hey! maybe we should try to reconstruct the replies 
    in this conference backwards!  No tellin'!

    Per Roger Daltry, "Long live Rock!"

    Terry

    
    This particular topic has been addressed several times in the CHRISTIAN
    conference, should anyone be interested in reading about it from that
    particular perspective.
    
    Cindy

    Heard more drivel on the news tonight.  Here in the Atlanta area, 
    the Cobb County School System (Atlanta suburban area) has ruled that
    schools are not allowed to display witch decorations in the schools
    or on school property over Halloween.  Their reasoning is that the 
    witch is a symbol of a specific religon and as, a result, can't be
    displayed.

    Terry  

    Re .6 (Terry):
    
    By that logic, during Christmas, no creche scenes should be displayed.
                 
    >.................................... Their reasoning is that the 
    >witch is a symbol of a specific religon and as, a result, can't be
    >displayed.                             
     
    That can be seen both as a precedent (recognition of Witchcraft as a
    religion by secular authority) and as an overereactive restriction.
    Does this mean all "religious" symbols will be barred from school
    property?  I can see the ACLU getting into this ....
    
    Steve Kallis, Jr.

    re:            <<< Note 1149.7 by LESCOM::KALLIS "Time takes things." >>>
                             -< here we go ..... >-

    �    By that logic, during Christmas, no creche scenes should be displayed.
                 
     That's absolutely correct, and also my stance...   When the USSC
    ruled on just such a case (I believe it involved the city of
    Providence), the court ruled that it was permissible to
    use public monies for the display of nativity scenes because
    those scenes had become *secular symbols*  (my emphasis BL).
    
    Otherwise, it would definitely be a case of the state using public
    money to sanction a particular religion...  (how come very few
    municipalities display jewish symbols in observance of channukah?
    or any number of other religions/observances?)
    
    Thank ATI for the ACLU.
    
    /bruce

RE: .6 (Terry), .7 (Steve K.), .8 (bruce)
    
    There have been two relatively recent decisions on this issue, one
    I think from a case in Pittsburgh, the other from a case in Providence,
    though I don't remember which is which.
    
    In one a "public" creche was allowed, not because it was a secular
    symbol -- unlike Santa Claus and a pine tree you would have a very hard
    time arguing this -- but because it was accompanied by a menorra and
    by a variety of generic seasoal symbols.  It was thus ruled that it
    appeared only as *part* of a non-sectarian display and was not
    therefore using public money/property to promote a particular religion.
    
    In the other case a creche scene *was* banned because it stood alone
    and was therefore a clear promotion of a particular religion.
    
    I think these decisions are right on the money -- no religion is "safe"
    if any religion is given public preference either directly or
    indirectly.
    
    I think that the decision about the display of Halloween witches is
    either wrong, or its right for the wrong reasons.  Halloween itself,
    although religious in origin is clearly now a non-sectarian celebration
    (I would say the same for Thanksgiving, and more questionably for
    Christmas *as it is celebrated by some*).  The display of witches are
    *not* symbols of the Wiccan religion -- they have to do with a fiction
    which is not part of the Wiccan religion.  Why one might call for their
    banning is that they are considered by some Wiccans (and some
    non-Wiccan feminists, male and female) as offensive stereotypes of
    Wiccans -- the exact opposite of the reason sited in .6.
    
    					Topher

    Re .9 (Topher):
    
    >..............The display of [Hallowe'en symbolic] witches are
    >*not* symbols of the Wiccan religion -- they have to do with a fiction
    >which is not part of the Wiccan religion.          
    
    Or, for that matter, other real witch movements.  Bonewits identifies
    at least Wiccan, Famtrad, Neotrad, and Gothic [Satanic] types of
    witches, and none of these uses the "traditional Halowe'en" witch
    costume.  The closest identifiable "witch" to do so was the Wicked
    Witch of the West in the movie version of _The Wizard of Oz_.
    
    Thus, oddly, while promoting one or another symbol of real witchcraft
    would be against the spirit of the "no preference" rulings, the
    traditional witch symbol of Hallowe'en is really a secular one.
    
    Steve Kallis, Jr.

    Reply to .6 and .7,
    
    Here is lil' ol' Colorado Springs, District 11 has prohibited students
    from wearing witches and devils costumes.
    
    We though about writing the school board but then thought that it was
    nice in that they refused to continue the negative sterotype that
    typically halloween costumes present. Thanx District 11.

    Re .11 (Mikie?):
                  
    >Here is lil' ol' Colorado Springs, District 11 has prohibited students
    >from wearing witches and devils costumes.
    
    So does anyone have a Cthulhu costume? :-)
    
    Steve Kallis, Jr.

    Re.12 (Kallis)
    
    OK Steve, what does a Cthulhu (costume) look like?  
    
    8<;^)
    
    Cindy

    Re .13 (Cindy):
    
    >OK Steve, what does a Cthulhu (costume) look like?  
    
    Cthulhu. ;-)
    
    To get a full appreciation of the Big C, read H. P. Lovecraft, esp.
    "The Call of Cthulhu," a novella.  He's big, squishy, squid-headed,
    with tentacles; he sleeps under the sea in the sunken city of R'yleh.
    
    Steve Kallis, Jr.

    Re:  <<< Note 1149.12 by LESCOM::KALLIS "Time takes things." >>>
        
                  
    >>Here is lil' ol' Colorado Springs, District 11 has prohibited students
    >>from wearing witches and devils costumes.
    >
    >So does anyone have a Cthulhu costume? :-)
    
    Shinola! I'll have to contact them write away. B^)
    

                           
    Re.14 (Kallis)
    
    Steve, 
    
    One of these years I'm gonna learn how to not set you up.  (;^) 
    Thanks for the pointer.
    
    On Cthulhu - hm...at first reading it sounds like Medusa.  (Hey! 
    Another costume idea!  With *real*.......).   S=>;^)
    
    Cindy

    re -.1
    
    Humor is fine but..........
    
    The "sacrificing milk carton kids" was tasteless and offensive.
    Some of us know families of those missing children.  Please be more
    sensitive.
    
    JL
    

    re -.18
     I'm sorry I offended you. I believe some clarification is in order.
    When I wrote that note, it was originally in another notesfile in a 
    topic about rock music.Someone kept inserting replies referring to
    satan sacrificing "milk carton kids",which clearly had nothing what-
    soever to do with rock music.That paragraph,taken in context, was meant
    as a little jab at the author of those notes.
     When I copied it verbatum into this note, it didn't occur to me that
    it would not only be puzzling, but possible offensive.If anyone would
    like me to edit .17, please feel free to contact me at my mail node,
    and I will modify any offensive text.
     Again,I apologize for any offensiveness.(Except to satan.I fully meant
    any insult he got)
                                    -Dave E.

     Howdy, folks.
    Satan here.Please excuse the mess, we just sacrificed a couple of 
    politicians,and the cleaning crew dosen't get here 'till second shift.
     You know I've just been perusing this notes file,and I've really got
    to laugh.I'm responsible for evil rock music lyrics? Look, I'm as busy
    as the next devil, but c'mon, kids, let's get real.If I did half of all
    the evil things I'm blamed for,I wouldn't even have time to keep my 
    televangelists in line, let alone pay my gas bills!
     You wanna hear about my experiences with rock musicians? What a bunch
    of DEADBEATS!! I've had it with the music biz. They give evil a bad
    name.You talk about Ozzie...I've been heping him uot since the Black
    Sabbath days,but if I need a favor, is he anywhere to be found? NOOOO!
     And this has been going on for years. Mozart just built the entire new
    west wing by hand, and that barely scratches the surface of what he 
    owes.Billie Holliday has HER eternity cut out for her, I can assure
    you.And just WAIT until I get my hands on Jerry Lee Lewis!And I don't
    care WHO his cousin is.
     Anyway, you get the idea.I'm out of the picture as far as rock"music"
    goes.And as for all the other festering evil in the world, it seems you
    silly little creachers are doing just fine without my help,thank you 
    very much.I've got plenty to keep me occupied right here. Like, boiler
    number five over in Dante's section just blew again,( if it's more de-
    fective parts, there's going to be HELL to pay...) and that bore 
    Fallwell is on hold on line three, so I've gotta go.
     It's been nice chatting with you. And, oh yes..I'm into the tube now.
    Be sure to catch my new show," I Love Lucy-fer".
                                     Caio for now. Love 'ya, sweetheart...
                                                    the big "S"

    re.20:
     Hey!
    why "politicians"?Some of us know people who are friends of people who
    know Dan Quayle!How about civil servants, or maybe automobile insurance
    agents?
                                         -Miffed & Peeved

>    ..... Some of us know people who are friends of people who
>    know Dan Quayle!

Hey! Aren't you violating some rule here in this notesfile? I mean: we *are*
tolerant, but it seems you're testing us right now...
:-):-):-)

Arie

    Invoking the name of Dan Quayle is a taboo? Gee, sorry!
                                              -Totally Humbled