[RD] After School Satan

A

AppleDumplingHead

Emperor
Joined
Oct 29, 2016
Messages
1,171
Don't you need to be at least loosely affiliated with Christianity to be "Satanist"? I mean, if Christianity, or whatever Judeo-Christian religion, didn't exist to purvey the concept of Satan, Satan wouldn't exist, right?

Is this just a liberal lampooning of religious dedication, or do you think it's serious?

How would you feel if you found out your son, daughter or grandchild participated in "After School Satan" programs?

How long until some unhinged evangelical loses it and attacks these people? Wouldn't it be the will of God?


Not a catchy enough tune to make me feel like dancing. Maybe this.


I think they're clowns, and I'm generally a religiously tolerant person. I think it's a farce to make a point and I think it's dangerous that they may affect impressionable young minds. I think they don't care. Is that maybe the whole point, the apathy, the opposite of love?
 
What i hate is the cultural appropriation of the staff/symbol of Hermes, for this Satan figure :)

"After school satan" itself makes it obvious it is a joke; i mean there aren't any "after school Christ" or similarly titled programs, no?

Anyway, i suppose the teacher could just leave some Ghost playing and do other stuff.

 
Last edited:
Satanism itself is a joke religion, intended to mock Christianity. But Satanic organizations have gradually become bastions of liberal thought and action aimed at countering religious conservativism, so these "after school Satan" are real in that that's their intended action.
 
How does one establish that what is being called a religion isn't a religion under legal definition? It seems to me this issue came up with Scientology, and it's not recognized as a religion in most of the world. How did that happen and how can we subject this Satanism to such a litmus test? Another question, I guess, is "should we", because I realize I'm biased.
 
I like it. It has an appealing acronym for children and is yet to be sufficiently mainstream as to blindly brainwash them when compared to other things.
 
LaVeyan Satanism is actually atheistic and materialistic, with no actual worship of Satan as a divine being. It seems to call itself Satanism mostly to define itself as the opposite of Christianity and scare/provoke Christians in the process. People who attempt to start after-school Satanism are almost certainly the LaVeyan provocative atheist type, rather than being into theistic Satanism.
 
Bootstoots said:
LaVeyan Satanism is actually atheistic and materialistic, with no actual worship of Satan as a divine being. It seems to call itself Satanism mostly to define itself as the opposite of Christianity and scare/provoke Christians in the process. People who attempt to start after-school Satanism are almost certainly the LaVeyan provocative atheist type, rather than being into theistic Satanism.
Click to expand...

So, is it missing qualifications that would make it a religion? Is it actually a veiled hate group?
 
How you define "religion" is inherently vague. There's no list of qualifications that determines whether something is or is not a religion. The same is true of most words we use, for that matter. I think most people would probably tend to say "no" on whether LaVeyan Satanism is a religion, but there are some of the components of a religion - for instance, the use of rituals and ceremonies and some belief in magic. "Hate group" is also vague, but I'd say "no" as well. There is at least no hatred for specific groups of humans, and there doesn't even appear to be hatred for religious people so much as for religion itself. Read the Wiki article for more details.
 
Bootstoots said:
It seems to call itself Satanism mostly to define itself as the opposite of Christianity and scare/provoke Christians in the process.
Click to expand...

Your words.

What the heck is an "opposite of christian" religion, anyway? That makes no sense. I mean, it makes sense you say it, but not any sense from a standpoint of founding it.

"Hurrr. My religion is anti ur religion. Hurrrr"

And I bet it is. I bet this is exactly how it goes, but they can't just stand up and say it because they're cowardly little punks that might have their status stripped if they say what they really believe. That's not religion at. all.
 
It makes a loose sense. Christianity, stripped down, shares across its denominations mostly two things - a call for the regard of self to be subservient to the divine, and a call for the regard of self to be subservient to others. So, roughly, God > other humans > self. Idea being if everyone did this things would be more Godlike, forgiving, redemptive, harmonious, etc. LaVey rejects divinity then turns the outward-facing enlightenment of Christianity on its head by focusing inward(roughly) instead. The idea being that if everybody focuses primarily on enlightening and improving themselves, they'll all be more Godlike and empowered and harmonious, etc.

If you want to take your cracks a better criticism would be theology of compassion vs. philosophy of self. Still not perfect, but closer I think. Unless somebody better versed in either Christian theology or LaVeyanism wants to take me to school.
 
The Bible was put out by God to tempt humans to follow God instead of Satan. God has tricked many innocents into eternal damnation.
 
warpus said:
I mean, there's a very easy way to get all of this stop. Get religion out of your government and out of your schools.
Click to expand...
What constitutes the line between religion and culture? I would like the government to get out of culture altogether. The government should not be a means to better culture or even elevate those in control to a higher cultural level. But that has been the way of history since humans figured out they could "lord" it over other humans. The US was supposed to be religious free, but when the government became the arbitrator of culture, which in most of human thinking is indistinguishable from religion, then government is going to get back in bed with religion one way or the other.

The democratic liberal socialist view mocks trickle down governmental support, but they are the ones who want the government to control everything. If the government is in control, everything is going to "trickle down". Local government should take care of local needs, and the remainder should trickle up for national protection as a whole. Once that bridge has been crossed and burned, there is really no way to go back, except remove government altogether and start over again with no central control.

Religion is considered culture with a spiritual known or unknown for the most part, and it seems the control is only for those who are told they do not have knowledge and need another human to provide that knowledge.

God is claimed to be known by some, and others claim that God either does not exist or cannot be a known at all even if a God does exist. Diversity comes from personal opinion or knowledge, and the chance that there are more than two humans who can agree on anything.

Do you have a sure fire way of removing the spiritual component to humanity or all unknowns for that matter? Then you have to convince all other humans that your particular brand of life is worth living and dying for.

The US government still does not declare God as a way of life, but every time it takes over how a human is to live in the present culture, it gets one step closer to telling a human how to define life and how God fits into that life or in some cases is not allowed to fit at all.
 
Bootstoots said:
LaVeyan Satanism is actually atheistic and materialistic, with no actual worship of Satan as a divine being. It seems to call itself Satanism mostly to define itself as the opposite of Christianity and scare/provoke Christians in the process. People who attempt to start after-school Satanism are almost certainly the LaVeyan provocative atheist type, rather than being into theistic Satanism.
Click to expand...
In one of the many religion-themed threads here in OT some time ago (don't recall offhand if it was last year or this year) someone brought up the "Church of Satan" and told me to check it out because it was atheist.

Out of very mild curiosity I did check it out (since the notion of any kind of atheistic church is absurd), and discovered that it's nothing more than a cult designed to separate its followers from as much money as they can be convinced to "donate" either through bequests or by buying the required/approved "literature."

As an atheist, I don't believe in any deity, spirit, saint, or any other supernatural beings. That includes Satan. He's just a figment of somebody's imagination, made up to scare people into conforming with the customs of the time and place.

timtofly said:
What constitutes the line between religion and culture? I would like the government to get out of culture altogether. The government should not be a means to better culture or even elevate those in control to a higher cultural level.
Click to expand...
So you're against government (taxpayer) funding of public swimming pools, art galleries, libraries, and sports facilities (just to name a few cultural things)? I'm honestly surprised that a Civ player would say this. You know how bad the civil disorder can get if you don't build enough museums and churches and recreational facilities... :run:

I've made an effort to build up an eclectic personal library of both fiction and nonfiction, but it's taken me decades and there are still many books and other resources I'd like to have but can't afford. So yay for municipal and provincial funding of public libraries. Even though it's still not enough and in my city you don't get to use certain services there unless you pay extra for an annual membership.

Ditto art. I can't afford to own an original Group of Seven (they sell for millions at auction), but I do have a very nice collection of my grandmother's paintings and various other art I've purchased on eBay, Etsy, and deviantArt. If I want to appreciate a Group of Seven picture or other Canadian art not produced by my family or the Canadian artists whose pictures I buy, I need a museum or art gallery. Again, thank goodness our government agrees that such things are culturally valuable and directs some funding that way.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom