Talk:Magic (card game)

From Conservapedia
Jump to: navigation, search
! This article is within the scope of WikiProject Religion, an attempt to build a comprehensive guide to Religion-related articles on Conservapedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit this article, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion. Conservlogo.png

Has Dave Hunt written any analysis of this? He is quite good at finding occult influences and mapping them out. - NewCrusader

Wikiproject Religion?

I honestly don't understand how this "game" falls into religion. Would anyone be kind enough to explain it to me? Thank you, JakeM 13:26, 9 September 2008 (EDT)

I agree, and I think the same argument could be made for the "satanism" category. HelpJazz 13:50, 9 September 2008 (EDT)
I don't think that we actually "need" that WikiProject template here. In fact we could probably "remove" it. Sideways 13:52, 9 September 2008 (EDT)
Since Deborah put it there, I would think it should be up to her or another member of the wikiproject to remove it. Or "remove" it, as the case may be. HelpJazz 13:58, 9 September 2008 (EDT)
Speaking of people who make other people laugh... Aziraphale 17:19, 9 September 2008 (EDT)

It might not be Satanism, but surely we have to keep in some reference of its occult ties. --WPalmer 17:28, 9 September 2008 (EDT)

Reference, yes (though I disagree that there are any real ties); category, no. HelpJazz 17:34, 9 September 2008 (EDT)
You can disagree all you want; it doesn't make it any less true. --WPalmer 17:56, 9 September 2008 (EDT)
Nor does asserting make it more true... HelpJazz 18:03, 9 September 2008 (EDT)
There are mountains of evidence on my side and nothing but denial on yours. --WPalmer 18:29, 9 September 2008 (EDT)
Then write them; nobody's stopping you. HelpJazz 18:31, 9 September 2008 (EDT)

Wow, wait. Mountains of evidence towards what, M:tG's occultism? And no evidence against? Nice, WPalmer, I haven't wanted to post in I don't know how long. What've you got, I will happily share the equivalent evidence against. I promise, I won't leave you hanging in a wasted effort. Lay it out, I'll work with you to suss out the evidence on both sides.

With anticipation,

Aziraphale 18:35, 9 September 2008 (EDT)


I'm not messing with Ed Poor's edits, but the actual name of the game is "Magic: the Gathering." "[T]he Gathering" isn't a subtitle, addendum, or anything else, it's part of the title of the game. Yes, it is often called "Magic" for short, but that doesn't change what the name of the thing is. Perhaps someone with some clout would like to change this. Or not... Aziraphale 17:22, 9 September 2008 (EDT)

I'm not going to change anything, but I'd like to point out that points listed for the 5 colors seem a bit negative. One should also remember that Fire represents freedom, emotion, and art, Green represents life, nature, and the love of living things, White represents not only order, but the belief in something higher than yourself (see the the Exalted rule), and the good of others over yourself. Blue represents Intellect, and self control. I admit that black is probably (unfairly) portrayed as evil. The only positive trait I can even tenuously link to it is tenacity. CRealist 16:51 4/23/09

Removing edits on the talk page

Do you have that kind of authority Palmer? --IanG 16:17, 7 October 2008 (EDT)

I am within my rights. I am sure if you want to take it up with Bugler or Aschlafly they will agree with me. --WPalmer 16:53, 7 October 2008 (EDT)
Well Bugler undoubtedly.--IanG 17:03, 7 October 2008 (EDT)
Also, please do not disrespectfully call me "Palmer", that's my last name. You could say "Mr. Palmer" or just "Will" if we're on friendly terms. --WPalmer 16:14, 7 October 2008 (EDT)
It's a military habit. No disrespect intended, it's just the only name I knew to call you by.--IanG 16:23, 16 October 2008 (EDT)
Hello, WPalmer,
I'm sorry that you feel my comment was "pointless posturing." I assure you, there are two sides to the question of Magic's supposed evil influences. A discussion is very much in order before committing to that line in the article, and rather than engage in an edit war in the article itself I think that it can be constructively worked out in the talk page. :::Note that despite your inactivity for nearly a month, I made no move to edit the article without the discussion happening first; hopefully this will convince you of my good faith to hold a forthright conversation on the subject.
Again, I'm looking forward to you making the positive case regarding M:tG's occult ties. Aziraphale 10:53, 8 October 2008 (EDT)

OK, seriously now

I feel like I'm getting close to a 90/10 violation. Having waited since the 9th of September for constructive engagement regarding this page, I'm going to start making substantive edits shortly. This isn't a threat, I'm happy to talk about it first, but this is beginning to smell a lot like "if I ignore it he'll just go away." Regards, Aziraphale 19:09, 16 October 2008 (EDT)

I'll be watching you like a hawk!!! ;-) HelpJazz 19:36, 16 October 2008 (EDT)


I played Magic from 1997-c.2008 in paper form, and still play it for free online occasionally. As a heads-up, I'll be filling this page with my knowledge of such. I'm aware of its history (Dark Ritual, the pentagram on Unholy Strength, etc.), but since those days, Wizards has been bought out by Hasbro, which tries quite hard to be politically neutral for the most part. The lifting of the ban on Demons is something I disagree with, and I never did get along with their fabrications of what Angels are.

There are also multiple versions of iconic/popular cards out there. I don't own anything with sacrilegious art, flavor text or names. --Pious (talk) 23:37, 22 July 2016 (CDT)

I'll look forward to reading your input! Once again, I know almost nothing about the topic, so I'll look forward to learning a bit about it. I would be leery of a game with a premise such as this, but it may be much more neutral now that it sounds, as you said. --David B (TALK) 01:09, 23 July 2016 (EDT)
It's basically Hasbrow's cash cow now, so they try to remain neutral in order to maximize their demographic. There is a card type called Sorcery however- the lore explains this as part of being in an alternate universe where non-religious magic exists as opposed to actual Satanic sorcery. Again, thanks for taking an interest in me! --Pious (talk) 00:15, 23 July 2016 (CDT)
Heads-up: due to unexpected work constraints (three people have to take off work in an already short-staffed area), I'll be updating the color alliances, and maybe their axes, on Monday. You're correct in presuming it's more neutral now, ever since Hasbrow took over --Pious (talk) 01:42, 24 July 2016 (CDT)