Punaweb gets roasted

[Chunkster]

What? Tiffany griped about her critics for twenty minutes and didn't threaten to sue anyone who doesn't recognize her journalistic genius? She must be losing her touch. I expect more from her.

[TomK]

Carol - I do agree. This seems to be a new form of a "roast" or Tiff doesn't quite understand the concept. Insulting other candidates and Puna residents without giving them an opportunity to defend themselves is morally unsound and doesn't bode well for future ethical behaviour on the council. There's part of me that finds this whole thing absurdly comical and the other part worries about how a large part of Puna is going to be represented in the council.

[missydog1]

I was looking at the questionnaires on BIC on my iPhone earlier (where the ads load first) before the articles, and so I noticed the ad for the event and looked more closely at it.

It was titled Roast 4 Puna rather than Roasting Tiff. Here is a link to just the graphic so you can see for yourselves.
http://bigislandchronicle.com/wp-content/ads/roast.jpg

I guess you are right that Tiff doesn't have the same idea of a Roast, that is she used it wrongly, because a Roast is defined as a a counter to a Toast, and it is has been noted here an irreverent series of offerings from various individuals towards ONE person who is the Roastee.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roast_(comedy)

The ad says they will be "poking fun at non-controversial subjects."
It does not say anything about making fun of the other candidates or calling the posts on the Politics forum here "E-Trash." []

I would call her segment on Punaweb posters a lampoon, not a roast:

quote:

---

lampoon: publicly criticize (someone or something) by using ridicule, irony, or sarcasm.

---

Lampoon lacks the element of underlying affection that comes with a Roast. This was purely a put down by cutting and pasting people's words so as to try to make them sound ridicule-worthy.

I would like to see the segment on the other candidates.

[TomK]

"Although I realize many on this forum will agree with the sentiment of "Tiff" and her supporters, I did think it was interesting that she and her supports thought the idea of any of those present at the "roast" (Hawaiians?) would think the idea of being Christian laughable."]

Oink - look, I'm an atheist, I have no problem telling people that, but I don't go with people agreeing with Tiff's sentiment. I don't think people's religious beliefs are laughable and they are quite within their rights to hold their beliefs. I've never had a problem with that. I know the odd person here that doesn't think that way, but most atheists have no problem with people's religious beliefs.

What is strange, though, is the dismissive attitude Tiff has to Christians yet seems to believe, instead, in a volcano goddess (Pele) which she calls a deity. It's in the link leilanidude gave. Remember, she also seems to believe that astrology is real, a psuedo-science that originates from mediaeval times and has its roots a long time before that and is actually scientifically testable and has never passed any of those tests.

So, Christianity is wrong but instead there's a goddess living in the volcano. Anyone here familiar with scientology?

I apologise if I offended anyone here with my remarks, but the illogical premise of there being no Christian god but instead there is a goddess in a volcano bothers me just a little bit.

[pahoated]

quote:

---

Originally posted by TomK
So, Christianity is wrong but instead there's a goddess living in the volcano. Anyone here familiar with scientology?

I apologise if I offended anyone here with my remarks, but the illogical premise of there being no Christian god but instead there is a goddess in a volcano bothers me just a little bit.

---

Not a valid comparison. Scientology is a very new religion, the Hawaiian religion which defines their culture is ancient and the roots go back to Sanskrit and Hinduism. Religion is defined as belief in a superior being. As Descartes said, "I think, therefore I am", which basically defines a human as a being. However, it was this universe that formed this lesser being and that being can choose to recognize a superior being behind existence.

Christianity isn't "wrong". It is just proving to be more a result of a composite god-being derived from many god-beings around at the time. The tale of Mithras has all the elements attributed to Yeshua and precedes the Yeshua tale by many years. With Christianity, there are holy ghosts, demon spirits, angel spirits, and even the lost prodigal son spirit, Lucifer.

The problem is Christianity has been engineered to be a white god for the white people and the rallying point to commit aggression against every other religion and race, which as the chosen ones, is the manifest destiny of the chosen people. That bull gets old after a few hundred years, and only leads to more conflict.

It is just a fact of history that the Hawaiian religion worked for them for a thousand years until they rejected it in favor of Christianity, and that decision is leading to the gradual extinction of the Hawaiian people. Of course, this validates Christianity as the more "correct" religion since it is obviously superior to the savage, heathen Hawaiian religion. Might makes right and more might makes more right. All that is important is who wins. It doesn't matter who loses because they are losers.

"This island Hawaii on this island Earth"

[csgray]

PT: "the Hawaiian religion which defines their culture is ancient and the roots go back to Sanskrit and Hinduism"

Can you give us a reliable source to verify this information?

Carol

[birchl]

tomk - me too!! i am 'christian', and i believe in the warm and fuzzy, all loving, unity of creativity.blah blah. in the bible i read there is no problem with acknowledging pele...just don't put her first!! its cool. i can believe in both. i can believe in neither. i can believe in an undefined intelligent design, but i cannot believe in pele and not believe there is more than one god, and if there is more than one god there must be a 'greater GOD'. that premise is how the whole missionary thing works.

#10048;

[oink]

Wow! I certainly wasn't trying to start a religious debate and I don't expect much agreement with my views on such matters. I'm neither prophet, judge, teacher or biblical scholar. However, if anyone wants to cordially discuss my views I'll attempt to do so, off site. Send me an e-mail through the forum and then look for a bounced return possibly in your spam. It will contain the correct e-mail.

Pua`a
S. FL
Big Islander to be.

[missydog1]

Part 1 is posted audio only:

E Trash part 1
http://youtu.be/WXAxQq1uXNE?t=15m48s

Part 2
http://youtu.be/WXAxQq1uXNE?t=1h3m30s

TomK, apparently you live in the UK?
And I live in Honomu. (After knowing me for three years she thinks that?)

[TomK]

I missed that, Kathy. Yes, I've been found out. I set up a very expensive piece of kit here so I can project a hologram of myself in Puna and at work in Hilo and on the mountain. Jeez, now I've been caught out I'll have to dismantle the lot. Booking my flights from the UK right now.

Oink - wasn't trying to get into a religious debate, just the ridiculous notion that Christianity is laughable but it's quite sensible to worship a deity living in a volcano instead. The scientology bit came in because, well, that includes something about a volcano as well. It wasn't meant as an analogy between Hawaiian religious beliefs and scientology.