Krieger

They don't all believe in Satan, that is why some of them want to be there. There are lots of Buddhist atheists too...

Vorkosigan

Well then for fuck's sake I hope they show up in Dockers and dress shirts. You know whoever has flashy, disgusting shallow messages is going to get millions of fotos taken. Just like those gay marches where they always get the outrageous drag queens and ignore the guys in jeans and t-shirts. Maybe we should promulgate a dress code.

RichardMorey

Satan was chosen to represent Satanism (in LaVey's sense) not for his existence but for the power of the symbol itself. Satan is the opposite of Christ in Christian Mythology; therefore Satanism is the opposite of Christianity. Where, to LaVey, Christianity was a set of beliefs that enslaved the mind, body, and will, Satanism is the opposite of that: hedonism.

The label Satanist does not necessarily have to do with believing in an actual Satan.

Satanism as actual worship of Satan is (and continues to be, largely) an invention of the Christian church that better allowed the persecution of religions like those practised by the British Isles' inhabitants before the Christians came.

At least, that is my understanding.

Novowels

Bah.

I find it mind-numbing that so many so-called "freethinkers" have the same misconeptions about Satanism as fundies. Next they'll be going after agnostics for "not really being atheists."

Sad.

Must be a human condition where we can only form small groups. Atheism's just getting too big, gotta denominationalize it all now.

So how long until we get people coining the phrase "True Atheist?" See you all at the Southern Atheist convention. Non-denominational atheists need not apply.

Truly sad.

-William

excreationist

RichardMorey:
...Satanism as actual worship of Satan is (and continues to be, largely) an invention of the Christian church that better allowed the persecution of religions like those practised by the British Isles' inhabitants before the Christians came...

Well one of the Satanic groups mentioned was <a href="http://www.theorderofperdition.com/main.ftm" target="_blank">The Order of Perdition</a>.
from their <a href="http://www.theorderofperdition.com/info/principles/body_principles.ftm" target="_blank">Principles of Belief</a> page in the "Information" section:
In their <a href="http://www.theorderofperdition.com/info/mission/body_mission.ftm" target="_blank">Mission Statement</a> they say that they don't sacrifice humans or animals though.

They also have an inverted demonic red pentagram with demonic goats skulls on each side as a logo.

The other Satanic group, <a href="http://www.satan4u.8m.com/" target="_blank">The United Satanic Covenire</a>, has a goat's head on top of an inverted pentagram and ying-yang(?) symbol with numbers such as "6, 6, 6".
<a href="http://pub49.bravenet.com/faq/show.php?usernum=4142856930&password=&catid=3249&a ction=showcat" target="_blank">Their FAQ</a> - "...we're like most atheist organizations out there, we tell the truth about religion and we push for equal rights of all religions..."

Anyway, that second group says that they're an atheist organization and that Satan is a myth - but it seems like they like to practice Satanic rituals. I think a more appropriate name for the group would be something like "The Satanic Mythology Enthusiasts".

excreationist

Novowels:
I find it mind-numbing that so many so-called "freethinkers" have the same misconeptions about Satanism as fundies. Next they'll be going after agnostics for "not really being atheists."...

I think that we'd all accept that some or most modern Satanists don't really believe in the supernatural and "majick".

But what the problem is about is what the public thinks about Satanists. I think the general public would see Satanists as being trouble-makers and deviants - and devil-worshippers... (and the second Satanic group mentioned DOES do Satanic rituals...)

Anyway, if the Satanists were there, either the atheists being interviewed would have to say that the Satanists in the march aren't that bad and that those Satanists don't believe in a literal Satan... or they could discourage the Satanic groups and maybe avoid that problem.

If the atheist groups have to try and educate the public about the Satanic marchers, I think many people in the public would miss the main message but just hear the bit about some atheists being open Satanists. And their beliefs that atheists like bad things would be reinforced.

Edit:
Definitions for "satanist":
from <a href="http://www.dictionary.com/search?q=Satanist" target="_blank">Dictionary.com</a>:
- A very wicked person
- an adherent of Satan or Satanism

(no entry in dictionary.msn.com)

Definitions for "satanism":

from <a href="http://www.dictionary.msn.com/find/entry.asp?search=satanism" target="_blank">dictionary.msn.com</a>:
the worship of Satan, especially as a parody of Christian rites

from <a href="http://www.dictionary.com/search?q=satanism" target="_blank">Dictionary.com</a>:
- The worship of Satan characterized by a travesty of the Christian rites.
- Profound wickedness.
- The evil and malicious disposition of Satan; a diabolical spirit.
- the worship of devils (especially Satan)

from <a href="http://www.m-w.com/cgi-bin/dictionary?book=Dictionary&va=satanism" target="_blank">Merriam-Webster</a>:
1 : innate wickedness : DIABOLISM
2 : obsession with or affinity for evil; specifically : the worship of Satan marked by the travesty of Christian rites

<a href="http://www.m-w.com/cgi-bin/thesaurus?book=Thesaurus&va=satanism" target="_blank">Merriam-Webster</a> says this in their thesaurus about satanism:
the worship of Satan usually marked by the travesty of Christian rites &lt;interpreted satanism as an offshoot of the belief in two coequal and coeternal principles of good and evil&gt;

So ALL of those definitions, except for possibly part of that last one define Satanism as being about devil worship or being evil!

People that call themselves Satanists need to understand that dictionaries don't usually define the word how Satanists have tried to redefine the word...

It is like a group calling themselves Christians then saying "Oh, we don't *really* believe in Christ, we just do rituals and like reading the Bible and things"... so they might be atheists who attend church who are interested in the Bible... kind of like me - I sometimes go to church and sing about how much I love God, etc, but that is all a part of the ritual... I don't think it makes proper sense to call myself a "Christian" though!

[ August 17, 2002: Message edited by: excreationist ]</p>

wildernesse

Satan is the opposite of Christ in Christian Mythology; therefore Satanism is the opposite of Christianity.

Do all religions have polar opposites? What is the opposite of Hinduism? Can we invent one? pretty please?

--tibac

Novowels

While I'm a naturalist, and therefore do not believe in "majick" per se, I do not hold that as a part of my atheisim. (which is, simply, that I do not believe in any god/s.) You can have magic, or magick, or majick, or however you want to spell it without gods.

I don't care if the general public thinks agnostic = homosexual. Are we going to not allow gay agnostics to go to the march so they don't "enforce the stereotype?" We aren't going to get away with brushing Satanists off like we can sweep them under the rug.

I have no problem saying that Satanists aren't "that bad." If I manage to make it to the march, bring the interviewers on. I'd rather get people talking about the truth than hiding it. There is no progress when you hide things. What happens years from now when atheists are accepted and Satanists aren't, and they have their own march?

"Look Jeb, there's them Satan-worshippers."
"Oh, it says here that they don't really worship no Satan Martha!"
"They must be like those durned atheists!"
"Yer right Martha, get my boomstick, they were a-lyin to us back then when they said they weren't like the Satanists!"

Last time I checked a Websters it gave the definition of atheist as "immoral" and "evil." But you know, we atheists shouldn't try to redefine that....

Guess we better tell <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/religion/religions/atheism/isms/christianity.shtml" target="_blank">these guys</a> to knock it off then.

-Novowels
(edit: closed UBB quote tag)

[ August 17, 2002: Message edited by: Novowels ]</p>

Krieger

The American Heritage Dictionary:

Atheism: 1.a. Disbelief in or denial of the existence of God or gods. b. The doctrine that there is no God or gods. 2. Godlessness; immorality.

Oops! Looks like we can't call ourselves atheists anymore...

Edit:

Godless: 1. Recognizing or worshiping no god. 2. Wicked, impious, or immoral.

Hmm, wait, isn't our march called the "Godless Americans March on Washington"? We better rename it!

[ August 17, 2002: Message edited by: Krieger ]</p>

Bible Humper

If the word "agnostic" was actually a synonyn for homosexual, don't you think it would be much more productive for agnostics who wanted to dispel the myth to change the name?

The word "Satanist" is much worse than your "agnostic" example anyway, because the thing that Satanists are denying (Satan) is built right into their name unlike "agnostic". The average Joe is not going to imagine that a Satanist is anything other than a devil worshipper. The news is not going to include an expose on the LeVey philosophy to clear things up.

Wow, this march is doomed. There is no way that any sound-bite of yours will dispel the association between "Satanist" and "Satan" in the mind of Joe Sixpack.

If the Satanists are interested in acceptance, a good start would to be finding a name that actually describes them, like "LeVeyian" or something.

If atheism was called "immoralism" or "evilism", the analogy would be good. Alas, this is not so.

[ August 17, 2002: Message edited by: Splashing Colours Of Whimsy ]</p>