Org Mobile Site
Thread: It's a puzzlement
Here's one for all the family - a real life example of the Leprechaun conundrum:
Filipino 'dwarf' judge loses case
Now, can the theologians amongst us explain to this simple soul why Judge Floro gets canned for believing in dwarven advisors, whereas if he expressed the belief that his god guided his decisions, he would no doubt be destined for the Supreme Court.
Like many other parts of the world, Filipino courts require one to swear on a holy book to one's god that testimony given will be truthful. How is the validity of that unprovable, supernatural superstition stronger than the dwarves of law? Is it weight of numbers - ie because x number of people believe in y, it holds moral authority over z? Or length of tradition?
I am genuinely intrigued.
*having lit the blue touch paper, stands well back*
Filipino 'dwarf' judge loses case
Spoiler Alert, click show to read:
Now, can the theologians amongst us explain to this simple soul why Judge Floro gets canned for believing in dwarven advisors, whereas if he expressed the belief that his god guided his decisions, he would no doubt be destined for the Supreme Court.
Like many other parts of the world, Filipino courts require one to swear on a holy book to one's god that testimony given will be truthful. How is the validity of that unprovable, supernatural superstition stronger than the dwarves of law? Is it weight of numbers - ie because x number of people believe in y, it holds moral authority over z? Or length of tradition?
I am genuinely intrigued.
*having lit the blue touch paper, stands well back*
What, no replies yet? 
No. Not yet.
To be sure, a puzzlement it is.
I thought that it was the title.
It is probably because we don’t know which kind of dwarves he spoke to. The deep Dwarves who don’t believed that humans exit, of the one who mixed with us… Dwarves coming from Thub (Terry Pratchet) or from the Lord of the Rings?
No theological explanation(s) can be given without the book (preferably holy) of reference…
No theological explanation(s) can be given without the book (preferably holy) of reference…
Every fool knows that dwarves are evil (not to mention smelly, rude and generally obnocious), so I support their decision.
All about the majority. If the majority beleeved in mystic dwarves than he would be headed for power. Sadly for him, they do not. Simpel as that.
Banquo - try more expensive bait.
How did he get to be a judge in the first place if mystic dwarves were making all his decisions for him?
We all have a little dwarf telling us what to do all the time. The bigger the dwarf the better.
No wonder the other judge needed a dwarf pump.
No wonder the other judge needed a dwarf pump.
I hope your not implying what I think you are implying 
Originally Posted by Byzantine Prince:
We all have a little dwarf telling us what to do all the time. The bigger the dwarf the better.
We all have a little dwarf telling us what to do all the time. The bigger the dwarf the better.
The voices in my head that make my decisions decided (nearly unanimously) that they are not, in fact, dwarves ... so, not all of us, no.It would help if the thread-starter, our fine ghost, had used an appropriate title. In fact, I only checked the thread because it was started by B's Ghost. Had it been a less entertaining or less respected member, I would have skipped it entirely.
As for the Tpoic:What about Justices who "Consult with Jesus"? Is it any less ridiculous to worship a pagan "human manifestation" of God?
Dwarves, Jesus, ghosts, ancestors, bleh. It's all the same to me.
As for the Tpoic:What about Justices who "Consult with Jesus"? Is it any less ridiculous to worship a pagan "human manifestation" of God?
Dwarves, Jesus, ghosts, ancestors, bleh. It's all the same to me.
Amazing. Besides, it doesn't matter where it is that he finds the wisdom to make decisions, it only matters that he can make sound decisions. Then again, it's not my job, so fire away.
Originally Posted by Eclectic:
It would help if the thread-starter, our fine ghost, had used an appropriate title.
You're right of course. I was in a lighthearted mood, and used the phrase oft exclaimed by the King of Siam in the 'King and I' when confronted by a cultural oddity. I should have been more descriptive with the title.It would help if the thread-starter, our fine ghost, had used an appropriate title.
However, I didn't really expect the thread to go anywhere. I guess I had faintly hoped I might generate a good-natured discussion on why one person's supernatural advisor is a psychosis, whereas someone else's confers standing and trust. But I guess the Backroom is in holiday mood or something - not even Tribe' could get a full-on frothing thread going this weekend.
Originally Posted by Eclectic:
Dwarves, Jesus, ghosts, ancestors, bleh. It's all the same to me.
However, with your response, you rather finished off the thread. Dwarves, Jesus, ghosts, ancestors, bleh. It's all the same to me.
To me, your arguments on behalf of your eclectic faith have always been compelling, the moreso because you don't evangelise, and you pretty much knocked any weak attempt on my behalf for controversy into a cocked hat.I'll get my coat.
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO