Devil call love dating
I would confide that “what is bad is good and what is good is square.” In the ears of the young married I would whisper that work is debasing, that cocktail parties are good for you.
I would caution them not to be “extreme” in religion, in patriotism, in moral conduct.
If I were the Devil, I would encourage schools to refine young intellects, but neglect to discipline emotions; let those run wild.
I’d designate an atheist to front for me before the highest courts and I’d get preachers to say, “She’s right.” With flattery and promises of power I would get the courts to vote against God and in favor of pornography.
Whenever someone responds to my critique of the culture in which we live with what they believe to be a deep conundrum or contradiction, my first thought is, “Wow.
You have absolutely no respect for me as an intellectual being.”) – and yes, I know that you devil’s advocates out there want to argue that intellect and its associated innovation is valuable to the propagation of our species – but I do think that we should respect one another for And when you regurgitate the status quo to us – reestablishing the norms that we’re trying to move past by interrupting our thought processes in asking us to reconsider ideas that we’ve already contemplated deeply – you’re signaling to us that you don’t trust our ability to think critically.
I would make divorce acceptable and easy, even fashionable.
It was written and popularized by national radio commentator and syndicated columnist Paul Harvey, who from the mid-1960s onwards featured it in both media many times over the course of his long career, periodically updating it to incorporate current trends.
In an odd twist, though (and the reason this item is rated as a “mixture”), one of the most widely Internet-circulated versions of “If I Were the Devil,” as reproduced in the “Example” block above, is not from Paul Harvey.
Because, ya know, we so desperately need to know what men think about women’s lives, particularly in regards to how our pain isn’t valid and how a little bit of “common sense” will help us understand just how not oppressed we are – otherwise we’re being misandrist feminists who are only interested in (a legitimate debating tool where one speaks for a perspective not currently present in an attempt to get someone else to, after taking into consideration this new information, reconsider their viewpoint) with feminists aren’t actually doing that at all.
So, just in case positioning oneself as legal counsel to Satan isn’t concerning enough, I want to lay out why, especially as feminists and social justice advocates, we roll our eyes at so-called “devil’s advocacy.” We know that in reality, you’re actually probably just about to do one of these four things.