The history of Satan worship shows very dark and dangerous practices. In early
records of the Pagan faith and other Satanic organizations, blatant attacks on
the Judeo-Christian Ten Commandments and adherents show the propensity for
un-neighborly behaviors including the ritual killing of "sacrifice"
victims, often selected for political reasons, think Abraham of the Old
Testament. The philosophy being: the more innocent the victim and
the bloodier the method, the better. If God has shown us ways to get along,
Satan does exactly the opposite. In the history of the world, as people have
turned their backs on God's basic instructions for humanity, the Ten
Commandments, they have devolved into primitive and violent cultures. Why not
take the high road and "love thy neighbor as thyself?" There is power in
The group wanted attention. They got it, silly as it was.
I'd say the Harvard students proved their point about freedom of religion:
it doesn't exist as a rule. One must be of an "approved" religion.
What is the origin of Satan if not the Christian religion and the Bible. In
Mormonism he is the brother of Jesus, if one has a problem with Satan perhaps
they should take it up with god who in Mormonism is the father of the two. I
think it is probably the devil in man himself that causes mans troubles, but
maybe it wouldn't be a bad idea to hold a few ceremonies to ask Satan to
back off a bit, for those folks that believe in that kind of thing.
scwoz - "The truth is these young people have no idea that they are messing
with real powers . . "The first time I come across a credible
first-person account (by which I mean an account from someone without an obvious
political or religious trench to defend), I might consider that Satan is more
than just the ultimate boogeyman held up to scare the insecure masses into
obedience. Until then . . OH, NO; LOOK! SATAN!!Just kidding.
Gotcha.The Wraith: "You may find it disrespectful, offensive, or
rude but you should still fight for it to be expressed."Wellllll
. . not really. "Freedom of speech" also allows people to object when
they feel they're being mocked. I'm with you to a point, but I'm
not going to fight for it "to be expressed." I would tell these people
flat out to stop the nonsense; they're not being provocative, they're
being immature tools. I WOULD object to the government attempting to arrest or
prosecute them, but that's not the case. I don't believe a university
should feel obligated to allow any group whatsoever to use its facilities.
That's not a free speech issue.
gze"What, exactly, is different in this scenario?"You tell us, what would be different if the KKK wanted to hold such a meeting
at Harvard? Would you be quick to defend that?
RE: The Wraith, I do not agree with what you have to say, but I'll defend
*“to the death” your right to say it , *You Would really defend
Satanism to the death? The better explanation appears to be that the
variously worded quote is the product of Evelyn Beatrice Hall, writing after
Voltaire, who attempted to capture the essence of Voltair's views on
censorship.Aleister Crowley on Human Sacrifice: XXX rated But,I
Censored it, would you?. Peter and the apostles answered, "We must obey God
rather than men!(Acts 5:29).Now the Spirit speaketh expressly, that
in the latter times some shall depart from the faith, giving heed to seducing
spirits, and doctrines of devils; 1 Timothy 4:1. E.g..,Air Force
Academy adapts to pagans, druids, witches and Wiccans Officials say an $80,000
Stonehenge-like worship center underscores a commitment to embrace all
Sorry the quote is from Evelyn Beatrice Hall, not Voltaire.
@SharronaI do not agree with what you have to say, but I'll
defend to the death your right to say it ~ VoltaireI'm glad we
have the right to free speech. So I respond to you with a resounding YES that I
will defend a person's right to free speech even if I don't agree with
that speech. There are things people can say that violate the law (you
can't incite violence against a specific person, you can't say you
have a bomb on an airplane) and I support limits such as these.Otherwise I support the rights of people to express their beliefs even if I
find the belief repugnant. I despise racism but I will support the right of a
group like the KKK to organize and express themselves. I would never burn a U.S.
flag in protest but I support the right of people to do that. This is what is
known as supporting the Constitution even when it's difficult.
RE: The Wraith, you should still fight for it to be expressed?The
Father of Modern Satanism". Crowley's wicked life and his intimate
association with Freemasonry are both well known 33° Mason, " he asked
people to call him "The Beast 666." Crowley believed that he was
literally the anti-messiah During the first World War, Crowley transferred his
activities to America." He was expelled from Italy because authorities
accused his disciples of sacrificing human infants in occult rituals.
Charles Manson family member Susan Atkins As a former associate of Anton
LaVey’s(Church of Satan)who danced for him and spent personal time with
him before joining the Manson family,Atkins was privy to conversations with
LaVey before he became popular. “Anton as a Satanist does
believe in the God of the bible but he refused to worship him and made a
conscious decision to worship Satan instead.”In flaming fire
taking vengeance on them that know not God, and that obey not the gospel of our
Lord Jesus Christ." —2nd Thessalonians 1:8
@JasonStevenson - The article seems to correctly identify Pres. Faust as a
woman:"Harvard President Drew Faust said in a statement that the
black mass "abhorrent" and "flagrantly disrespectful and
inflammatory."She also said ..."
I seem to recall that when the issue was opening a government meeting with
prayer, Christians admonished non-Christians to be respectful and/or leave the
room. They also stated that since non-Christians did not believe in the diety
being addressed, it should not bother them; they should simply consider it a
small waste of time.What, exactly, is different in this scenario?
In the U.S.A. to allow one religion in the public square means all religions are
allowed in the public square. Satanism is a religion like it or not. The only
practical position is to allow no religion in the public square. Religion
belongs under ones own tree and vine as our county's forefathers intended.
@Mountanman;How is this not about religious freedom? Respect is
earned, and as far as I can see, no religion (neither Christianity, Islam,
Satanism, etc.) has earned any respect. Your gods are all warmongers.
As a liberal I would support both the satanists in their right to hold this mass
or the right of any other group to mock any other religion including Islam.
Satire and parody have a long and honorable role in human history. I am greatly
distressed when I see extremists from any religion respond with violence to
someone drawing a religious in a cartoon for example. I believe in supporting
the rights of freedom of speech and freedom of expression even if that speech or
expression mocks something I hold sacred. You may find it disrespectful,
offensive, or rude but you should still fight for it to be expressed.
@ Ranch. This isn't freedom of religion it is mocking Christian religion,
period. Respect is (or used to be) a mark of civility. How come they or you
don't mock Islam, just Christians? Hypocrites!
So much for conservatives standing up for "religious freedom". It only
matters if it is their "religious freedom". Hypocrites.
The Satanic club needs a new name. By definition, Satanic implies supernatural.
It's defined that way. If they don't believe in the supernatural as
they say, this sounds more like a group of atheists that are trying to make a
point but who are not being up front about their beliefs (or lack thereof).
Can you imagine what would occur in the guise of academic freedom a group of
students wanting to know what it was like to be in the early 20th century south
and decided to hold a cross burning so they could examine it cross culturally.
The truth is these young people have no idea that they are messing with real
powers and not just what they believe is third world fears of charms and good
luck tokens. No matter what the reason celebrating Satan and even talking about
him as we are doing does nothing but empower him in ways we can’t imagine.
For those who remember, Thou shalt have no other gods before me, thou shalt not
make unto thee any graven image or any likeness of anything that is in heaven
above or earth beneath...Thou shalt not take the name of the Lord thy God in
vain...Thou shalt love the Lord with all thy heart and with all thy soul, and
with all thy mind...thous halt love thy neighbor as thy self.
@Chris B:So you're calling the left hypocritical because in a
fictional scenario you've imagined, you've imagined that the left
would have reacted in a different way?Strawman fallacy.
Harvard President Drew Faust happens to be a woman.The author of this
article assumed she was a man. Dr. Faust is a well-known historian of the
Civil War and the American South,and the author of six books, including
"Mothers of Invention: Women of the Slaveholding South in the American Civil
War" (University of North Carolina Press, 1996).
I wonder how many of those who defended this as free speech would have been so
quick to defend a similar event mocking Islam as just good old fashioned free
speech?I'm Catholic and although this event wouldn't have
bothered me, the hypocritical left is what bothers me.