LaVeyan Satanism

edited July 2008 in General
Wherein Panda tells us as much about LaVeyan Satanism as she possibly can.

First she will start with a brief history of Satanism en generale, followed by a history of Anton LaVey and why he thought his brand was better. The meat of the lesson will be filled with information about The Church today including, but not limited to:
  • Their hierarchal structure
  • Geopolitical distribution, along with percentage of population
  • Political involvement, if any
  • Prominent LaVeyan Satanists
  • Stated objectives of The Church
  • Panda's personal experiences
  • The Church in the future

Each bulleted item constitutes a lesson and will be cut up into one post a piece. All topics may not be covered, but I encourage them to be. Discussion will follow each lesson (AKA post) until Panda posts a new lesson. For reasons of expediency discussion on each lesson will end when the new lesson begins. Discussion of the entire course may begin once Panda says the course is over.

I could have looked up all this junk on some alt.yahoo bullshit, I'm sure, but I prefer to hear it from the horse's mouth. Plus, Panda, you'll become more informed on the aspects of your religion that you were rusty on.
«1

Comments

  • edited July 2008
    Wherein Panda tells us as much about LaVeyan Satanism as she possibly can.

    Uhh, 'scuse me what? >_>

    Hahah I'll do it if you really want me to xD
  • edited July 2008
    Wikipedia doesn't sufficiently cover the topic?
  • edited July 2008
    Hey! I just read about this on Wikipedia about 2 hours ago:D

    Edit: But I still would love to hear what Panda has to say about it.
  • edited July 2008
    Wikipedia can also be changed by biased people and people who know nothing of the topic xD
  • edited July 2008
    I'm guessing Panda is a dude, judging from the enlarged text... but regardless, I would be very interested in this. I read about it on Wikipedia, but as stated, that information isn't always completely accurate. I eagerly anticipate your first lesson.
  • edited July 2008
    Bah, no-one asks me about my Deistic Agnosticism
  • edited July 2008
    I did, Bruce, because I lurrrrrve you.
  • edited July 2008
    *eats a pancake*
  • edited July 2008
    That had better be a psuedo-theological pancake, or you're off topic.
  • edited July 2008
    Just as long as it's not a frackin' cracker.
  • edited July 2008
    Hahah well if you guys really want me to, ill do it.

    but right now I have a horrific Hangoveresque migrane so im going to sleep.
  • edited July 2008
    Fair warning, Panda:

    Recordare, Jesu pie,
    quod sum causa tuae viae:
    ne me perdas illa die.

    Quaerens me, sedisti lassus:
    redemisti Crucem passus:
    tantus labor non sit cassus.

    Juste judex ultionis,
    donum fac remissionis
    ante diem rationis.

    Ingemisco, tamquam reus:
    culpa rubet vultus meus:
    supplicanti parce, Deus.
  • edited July 2008
    If Panda will confirm that it is male, I will edit my first post. And yes, please, explain away.

    Mario, Wikipedia's great, but I didn't go to it right away for a reason. I'm not just interested in learning about Satanism - I'm also interested in learning about Panda.

    Any :objection:s?
  • edited July 2008
    Pandas know kung fu.
  • edited July 2008
    Just as long as it's not a frackin' cracker.
    To be fair, Bill Donohue is a dick and to catholics, the communal wafer isn't symbolic of Jesus' flesh, it is the flesh of the savior. Transubstantiation and all that.

    Whether you agree with it or not, throwing a brick through a church window isn't as much of a dire insult as stealing a communal wafer.

    Guy's being a douche and fanning the flames, it would have died down by now if he wasn't throwing wood on the fire.
  • edited July 2008
    I also have beef with that rant. It IS a very serious sin according to catholics to take the body of christ without being catholic. Don't ask me WHY, but it is. So for him to start bashing catholics for something like that... it's not like the issue was a surprise attack on that one guy. Although I don't consider myself catholic now, I was brought up til I was around 10 years old in a catholic church, and I'm pretty sure they specifically addressed it each time before communion by saying "Do not take the wafer if you are not Catholic."

    So I'm pretty sure that guy who took the cracker and didn't eat it was specifically trying to piss off the catholic church, and the church isn't completely overreacting. The guy knew what he was getting into, and did it specifically for that reason.

    EDIT: First time I read through the articles I mainly just read the first half, but after going abck and reading through all of the first one it seems like the student genuinely didn't realize the trouble he was going to create. Still wrong for not knowing it, but I would disagree with actually punishing him for it. STILL. It is a big deal for the Catholic church, and despite what some people believe, you can't just break a huge rule in someone's religion and then expect them to be perfectly okay with it. ...I don't like Bill Donohue.
  • edited July 2008
    Even if it's a relatively enforced code it's still just a cracker and they honestly dont have to make such a big deal about it. Seriously though, this thread is about LaVeyan Satanism, why we preachin' 'bout them Katho-licks.
  • edited July 2008
    I'm with Javier on this one. *eats a pancake*
  • edited July 2008
    Mmmm, pancakes. *eats a waffle*
  • edited July 2008
    But it's not just a cracker :-/ Thats the whole point.
  • edited July 2008
    Who likes pancakes? Me, I like pancakes. *om nom nom.*
  • edited July 2008
    Well, if it were a bunch of Catholics jumping up and down and being just fussy about a cracker, transubstantiation or no, then yes I would agree the professor is fanning the flames. But the guy that took the cracker was actually receiving death threats.

    To make it perfectly clear, these people were WILLING TO MURDER IN THE NAME OF GOD.

    I have a very big problem with that, and I approve of the professor bringing the knowledge of some peoples' fanatacism to light, mocking them or no.
  • edited July 2008
    It might not be just a cracker, but it's still a cracker, if one cracker is taken without being eaten it won't destroy the church, and it is a plain ole' cracker, symbolism or not.
  • edited July 2008
    The thing is, the wafer may be extremely important within the religion (I was actually raised Catholic, went to Catholic school, went to church every Sunday for most of my life and was even an altar boy for a little while but the whole transubstantiation bit always seemed silly to me) but outside of it it's just a cracker. If the church had excommunicated the guy, prevented his descendent from being baptised for seven generations, or any other form of punishment within the context of the religion I'd have no problem with it; but demanding someone's expulsion from their school or worse, making death threats, goes well beyond that.

    You cannot have religious freedom if you allow religious groups to enact real-world punishments for someone not taking their beliefs as seriously as they do. There's very little difference between that and conversion by force.
  • edited July 2008
    I agree with DI, mostly. I do think this guy was intentionally looking for controversy, however. So I'm not really that outraged. Ehn.

    Also, and I'm just my expressing my opinion of a philosophical system and not of any of its adherents, LaVeyan Satanism is bullshit and basically a LARP game for pretentious atheist philosophers. The underlying tenets aren't really objectionable to me (and have really nothing to do with Satan at all, even on a metaphorical level -- existentialism and secular humanism could fit the bill just as nicely) but the intentionally confrontational attitude and self-righteous condescension toward actual religious beliefs make it a petty, immature and negatively-defined group of loudmouthed malcontents who contribute nothing. Also, many LaVeyan Satanists are Randian Objectivists, which further enhances the imperious self important ham fisted internet jerk image that they have created for themselves.
  • edited July 2008
    Well, I didn't want to be the first to say it, but my only contact with Satanists were kids trying to rebel against their WASP parents.
  • edited July 2008
    I agree with DI, mostly. I do think this guy was intentionally looking for controversy, however. So I'm not really that outraged. Ehn.

    Also, and I'm just my expressing my opinion of a philosophical system and not of any of its adherents, LaVeyan Satanism is bullshit and basically a LARP game for pretentious atheist philosophers. The underlying tenets aren't really objectionable to me (and have really nothing to do with Satan at all, even on a metaphorical level -- existentialism and secular humanism could fit the bill just as nicely) but the intentionally confrontational attitude and self-righteous condescension toward actual religious beliefs make it a petty, immature and negatively-defined group of loudmouthed malcontents who contribute nothing. Also, many LaVeyan Satanists are Randian Objectivists, which further enhances the imperious self important ham fisted internet jerk image that they have created for themselves.


    Ah, the wonders of having a Religious Studies student on tap.
  • edited July 2008
    Serephel wrote: »
    But the guy that took the cracker was actually receiving death threats.

    To make it perfectly clear, these people were WILLING TO MURDER IN THE NAME OF GOD.

    Oh God, save me from your followers.
  • edited July 2008
    Well.


    A] Yeah I'm a guy, thought it was kinda obvious but ok :]

    B] I vote we just let this thread die because I can tell McJake is obviously fired up about this and I don't wanna be on anyone's bad side. So let's just all go back to the general discussion forum, and forget this ever happened, k? I'm sorry I opened my mouth in the first place. x.X
  • edited July 2008
    Again, to catholicism it's not SYMBOLIC of the savior, it is LITERALLY the savior. During communion the wafer IS the body of Christ, and the wine IS the blood of Christ and they only look like wafers and wine.

    Just saying. I'm not saying they were right in sending out death threats, but it's a pretty big deal in the religion.