Alonzo Fyfe

Like it or not, people will form their opinions on a brief few moments of exposure. Most of that opinion will be based on what they read into what they see. If they see Satanists associated with Atheists, then Atheists will literally be demonized. We will be the enemy. 90% of the population will then take as their top priority to oppose anything and everything the marchers say they are for.

Stephen Maturin

Your concern is perfectly legitimate, of course, but you seem to be assuming that politicians will take us seriously (or at least be more inclined to do so) if the satanists stay home. Judging by what happened in Congress after the 9th Circuit's Pledge decision, that assumption is more than a little dubious, IMO.

Captain Pedantic

As I posted on the other Satanism topic, there are various things about Satanism which are not "evil" - one of them being, according to one Satanist I spoke to, the fact that the Satan of their religion is not necessarily the same as the Satan of the Christian religion.

This makes sense to me, because there are a lot of parts of the Christian religion which were appropriated from older religions.

As I said in the other topic, while I am not a godless American, I think that Satanism should only be excluded from the march or any other "godless" gathering if the people in charge are also prepared to exclude Buddhists, Taoists and all forms of paganism. If they are, fair enough. But if the objection is to the supposedly "evil" connotations of Satanism, I think you should surely look at what you're saying. If you don't believe in the evil of the 666, or the inverted pentagram, or the image of Satan, then why do you care if such things are displayed?

Corwin

They care because they don't want to anger the fundamentalists.

Personally I no longer give a shit. It's not like appeasement has been doing a damned thing for us in recent years. We walk on eggshells to preserve the feelings of deluded fanatics, and get a steady flow of attacks and disrespect in return.

Screw 'em. If they don't like it they can damned well lump it. I'm done worrying about their feelings.

DougI

I highly doubt any Satanists will show up at the march. The website probably represents five kids who were bored and put up the page (quite well done though). It is a lot like the KKK endorsing a Republican candidate though, nobody quite cares for their endorsement.

Alonzo Fyfe

I care because the direct result of this action will be to ensure that atheists drop from second-class citizens to third-class citizens. It will fan the flames of hate, generate a misunderstanding that will put our children and ourselves in danger, give christian conservatives control of the government and, through them, control of the judicial branch who will come to see programs that force our children to renounce atheism in school to be necessary for the wellbeing of our society.

And people who do not care about the harms their actions may cause are simply not the type of people I care to associate with.

And this has nothing to do with not wanting to anger the fundamentalists. It has everything to do with wanting to promote the truth, rather than propogating a dangerous fiction.

[ July 10, 2002: Message edited by: Alonzo Fyfe ]</p>

Caelestis Impius

I agree completely Alonzo Fyfe

I feel that the presence of any religous folks (be they Pagans, Satanists, or Chrisitans) at the rally would only serve to degrade the cause. Satanists are see in many people's eyes (I admit: including mine) as wackos or rebellious teenagers simply trying to get attention, make a buck or ruffle some feathers (sorry for the cliches) and in some people's eyes true godless people are seen the same way. This should be a time to show the people of the nation that there are a large number of godless in the nation that aren't wackos or rebellious teens.

I also think it morally defeats the purpose of the rally, Satanists are not godless, perhaps anti-god but still unable to rise above religious mythology.

fando

I find this whole debate very amusing. There is some misinformation about Satanism floating around. Allow me to offer some perspective.

I was once part of a largish group of college students whom openly wore the regalia of Satanism. We ate in a dining hall that had an upside down pentagram, held mock-rituals, wore offensive T-shirts and did a lot of things that really offended many people, including sensible atheists. You probably don't want to hear about some of the stuff we did, but suffice to say that we never went overboard and ate babies. (Of course, we would always talk about that.) It was all a large joke, a pretend thing. We did it to mock the Christians in our school. And we succeeded mightily. Yet, I don't think a single one of us would call themselves a Satanist except to offend our intended victims.

Despite our nature, we did encounter the so called real Satanists from time to time. It turns out that these groups are by and large incoherent. There is no one Satanism. Each group has a different credo. Some were like us, others had wonky belief systems, and one or two actually participated in debauchery and blood rituals. It is fruitless to speak of Satanism in general terms, the very word has been reinterpreted to meaninglessness.

Keep in mind that I am talking about college-aged people. The other Satanist groups were around the same age, especially those that were fairly active. The few teen groups that we encountered were simply reactionary rebels and were hardly serious about their antics. I recall one Satanistic teen who shied away when I described what my friends did. If you're going to make value judgements on Satanists, remember that they are most likely to be intelligent, possibly misguided, adults.

As for those Satanists who care about the Godless March, I'm certain that they are sincere in their motivations and will most likely behave themselves. Those consumed by vice and vile will probably not care to attend. However, I won't be surprised if a few show up with the intent to commit mayhem as I used to.

[ July 11, 2002: Message edited by: fando ]</p>

Buffman

marylandnaturegirl

How many protest marches have there been since the passage of the "U.S. Patriot Act of 2002?"

<a href="http://truthout.com/docs_02/04.06D.JVB.Patriot.htm" target="_blank">http://truthout.com/docs_02/04.06D.JVB.Patriot.htm</a>

(Extract)
Section 802 of the Act, borrowing from the definition of international terrorism contained in 18 USC 2331, creates the federal crime of "domestic terrorism."

[]Among other things, this section states that acts committed within the United States "dangerous to human life that are a violation of the criminal laws" can be considered acts of domestic terrorism if they "appear to be intended" to "influence the policy of a government by intimidation or coercion," or "to intimidate or coerce a civilian population."

[]This provision applies to United States citizens, as well as aliens.

[]One must ask what kind of legal standard this is. "Appear to be intended"? How does one determine that? This leaves tremendous latitude in the hands of zealots and paranoiacs. If a Senator wrote Ashcroft that he wanted documents from him, for all we know Ashcroft might think that the Senator was breaking the law and appeared to intend to influence policy.

[]This is not as far-fetched as you might think, given Ashcroft's interpretation of executive privilege. He appears to think (!) that any public request for information from him is an illegal incursion on his "right" to secrecy. In addition, with the Administration's views of what constitutes national security, who knows but that it even might view such a request as "dangerous to human life."

[]In commenting on this provision, Nancy Chang of the Center for Constitutional Rights writes: "Vigorous protest activities, by their very nature, could be construed as acts that 'appear to be intended ... to influence the policy of a government by intimidation or coercion.' Further, clashes between demonstrators and police officers and acts of civil disobedience - even those that do not result in injuries and are entirely non-violent - could be construed as 'dangerous to human life' and in 'violation of the criminal laws.' Environmental activists, anti-globalization activists, and anti-abortion activists who use direct action to further their political agendas are particularly vulnerable to prosecution as 'domestic terrorists.'"
(End extract)

DarkBronzePlant

In reading this discussion, I don't think it's about passing value judgements on Satanists. It's about:

1. Whether Satanists really are "godless" (it is a Godless March, after all)
2. The overall potential positive or negative consequences their attendence might have.

I guess it comes down to what the point of the march is in the first place. If the point is to mock Christians, then hey, the more Satanists the better. But somehow, I don't think that would be a very admirable or constructive goal.

[ July 11, 2002: Message edited by: DarkBronzePlant ]</p>