Christianity...Wicca...Satanism.

[Broomstick]

I just that believe I should take responsibility for my actions and think about the consequences of my actions, both spiritually and earthly, and the fallout that will affect my Kin, regardless of wether what of my actions harm only me. What we do around us alway effects one other person, regardless if It only hurts you or me. That is something believe I should be taken into consideration in any Religion.

Read a little closer.

"An' it harm none, do what ye will."

Note the bolded word.

In other words, you can do whatever the fuck you want, only so long as it doesn't harm anyone. That includes your family, friends, neighbors, and anyone else. This philosophy, especially when it includes the idea of negative actions reflecting back on you three-fold, absolutely encourages personal responsibility and the avoidance of harming yourself or others.

How the fuck does the Wiccan philosophy not take into consideration possible harm to others? That's the whole fucking point!

I'd just like to point out that "harm none" also includes yourself, as you are someone.

I'm not trying to prove my religion is right or wrong. That's not my intention. What My intention is to say my two cents on the subject on Satanism and Wicca.

And your two cents, as far as Wicca goes at least, is that you didn't think very hard about what "do what you want as long as it doesn't hurt anybody" means.

[/quote]
Agreed.

Perhaps those two cents should have been spent on finding out more about the basics of Wicca prior to expressing an opinion on it...?

[Broomstick]

All of the sudden, I'm thinking of converting.

If you do decide to take up either one, be very careful. You'll encounter a number of "Fluffy" wiccans, who like to make up shit like being the reincarnation of "blank" important person hundreds/thousands/etc of years ago, and they'll likely make claims that their religion is the oldest in the world, etc. So to sum it up, there's just as many whackaloons in Wicca as there are in Christianity, just a different flavor of whackaloon.

Personally, I've always wondered at how we can get 500 reincarnations of King Arthur or Maid Marian at a gathering but why there seems to be a definite lack of reappearances by "Wartknees the Stable Boy" or "Repungia of the Chamber Pot Emptying Crew"

[Broomstick]

Isn't Satanism just a protest religion to Christianity?

Yes and no. It sorta started that way but the focus wasn't really being 'anti-christian'.

Yes, it was.

You can't have Satanism without Christianity.

They don't worship 'evil' per se. They are materialsitic hedonists.
+http://www.churchofsatan.org/

The home site gives more info on it.

I believe that's Anton LeFey's group, isn't it? Definitely one of the tamer versions of "Satanism".

And I'd like to reemphesize that - it's one version of Satanism. There are other Satanists out there unconnected with them who are most definitely people you do NOT want to meet in any way.

[Broomstick]

Wicca's what you say you believe in to piss off your parents.

And that was so damn frustrating in my case, as my parents supported my decision. What's the use of rebelling when the Old Farts don't react with horror?

Then again, that was over 30 years ago when a little witchcraft seemed to pale in comparison to drugs and anti-war protests degenerating into riots... come to think of it, not that different from now in many ways...

It's also for people that like to pretend they can cast magic missile. It's more of a fashion trend then a religion really.

Oh, horrors! -- I'm fashionable??? When the hell did THAT happen? Omigosh, I have to do something to keep my Outsider status, maybe get a tattoo... oh, wait, that doesn't work anymore either....

You know, Spyder, I'll agree there are some fucking retards who adopt the trappings of Wiccanism and various other fringe belief systems as an act of rebellion, but there's also a group of folks who actually bought into the belief system for other reasons and know damn well that they won't be lobbing fireballs or other bizarro horseshit. Of course, we're harder to see because we don't wear pentacles the size of dinner plates and we've discovered that acting somewhat normal leads to a higher income and standard of living, so we sort of blend into the scenery more. But don't piss us off, or we just might not suppress the urge to turn you into a frog and use you as a doorstop.

[EmperorSolo51]

I didn't mock them for watching those shows as I was a BTVS and Charmed fan before they respectively "jumped the shark.

Out of curiosity, when did Charmed jump the shark for you? For me it was the death of the Source of ALL EVIL, which they vanquished more or less like any other demon or warlock. Then there comes those Avatars, Belthazor strengthened by orders of magnitude, Titans...

Charmed Jumped the Shark for me during the 'O my Goddesses' Episodes. BTVS jumped the shark for me when Buffy went to college.

[Mobiboros]

You can't have Satanism without Christianity.

No, you can't. I never said you could. I said it wasn't anti-christianity. Technically Satanaists are Christians, they just support the other side.

I believe that's Anton LeFey's group, isn't it? Definitely one of the tamer versions of "Satanism".
And I'd like to reemphesize that - it's one version of Satanism. There are other Satanists out there unconnected with them who are most definitely people you do NOT want to meet in any way.

Yeah, First Churchers are very tame. Materialstic hedonists. Satan is more a metaphor for "Earthly" things for them.
But you're right it is only one version and yes there are people I'd have been better off not having met among that crowd. But I could probably say that about most religions I've encountered.

[Max]

What you should ask the person claiming that is to provide evidence for the supposed immorality of Satanism and Wicca. A hundred bucks says the guy knows nothing about the two faiths he's bashing.

Further into the debate I asked if he could provide any evidence for his assumption.

It sounds as though you're saying I am to find fault with them and compare them to other morals. What evidence could be provided for morals? They aren't measured; they are percieved; such as what one views as right and wrong may differ to another person. In this case, there would be no evidence to provide other than my own (if any), and then who could say that would be evidence?

Furthermore, how can you prove this?

Does this sound like he's evading the question and turning it around on me? Isn't that some sort of fallacious logic tactic?

When I pressed the issue that Christianity has been the basis for a lot of human attrocities in history, I got this...

Here, you're blaming Christianity. But humanity comes before everything else. Christianity didn't burn villages. Christianity didn't murder thousands of people. Christianity cannot even be held in your palm. You may perhaps define it as an essence or something more... a part of the human mind; something that is believed. The morality being a part of this... people only choose to accept it - and should you not believe in "God", then you can understand that people created this morality, and there is no one to blame but ourselves as a society.

But it was humans that burned villages. Humans that murdered thousands of people. It was done in the name of someone or something, and perhaps encouraged... but ultimately, humans made their own decisions. Killing can be made acceptable to people in so many ways other than Christianity - for example... being a soldier. In Psychology, we call this the reaction formation defense mechanism

Isn't he creating a strawman or something there?

[Mobiboros]

Killing can be made acceptable to people in so many ways other than Christianity - for example... being a soldier. In Psychology, we call this the reaction formation defense mechanism

Isn't he creating a strawman or something there?[/quote]

I'll allow others better versed in debating fallacies to explain why this person is so very wrong. However, I'll address this.

This isn't reaction formation. Reaction Formation is advocating a stance opposite to how you actually feel because you feel guilt over what you feel. An example would be the sterotypical preacher who advocates abstinance and rails against fornication that is later caught in bed with an underage prostitute. Basically Reaction Formation is the psych term for hypocrisy.

Soldiers, however, are conditioned to kill. They are purposefully depersonalized and conditioned to do what they need to do. They aren't hypocrites. Technically they aren't taught that "Killing is ok" anyway, they are taught that "Killing is necessary to defend greater causes sometimes".

[Junghalli]

No, you can't. I never said you could. I said it wasn't anti-christianity. Technically Satanaists are Christians, they just support the other side.

What's the deal with that? Do they consider the Bible anti-Satan propaganda or something and think he really isn't such a bad guy when you get to know him? Because, I don't want to offend anyone here but actually worshipping Satan as he is described in Christian mythology (the living spirit of evil) seems a little weird for a non-evil person to be doing.

[Nephtys]

No, you can't. I never said you could. I said it wasn't anti-christianity. Technically Satanaists are Christians, they just support the other side.

What's the deal with that? Do they consider the Bible anti-Satan propaganda or something and think he really isn't such a bad guy when you get to know him? Because, I don't want to offend anyone here but actually worshipping Satan as he is described in Christian mythology (the living spirit of evil) seems a little weird for a non-evil person to be doing.

Like I think previously said. Partially it's the 'protest' is why people are calling themselves that. The other part is I guess an argument that materialism and hedonism are not worse than blind devotion and pointless punishments. Still, it doesn't stop them from sounding like a bunch of stupid, whiny kids with dreams of meaningless rebellion.

Just what I figure from reading so far.

[Spyder]

You know, Spyder, I'll agree there are some fucking retards who adopt the trappings of Wiccanism and various other fringe belief systems as an act of rebellion, but there's also a group of folks who actually bought into the belief system for other reasons and know damn well that they won't be lobbing fireballs or other bizarro horseshit. Of course, we're harder to see because we don't wear pentacles the size of dinner plates and we've discovered that acting somewhat normal leads to a higher income and standard of living, so we sort of blend into the scenery more. But don't piss us off, or we just might not suppress the urge to turn you into a frog and use you as a doorstop.

I've yet to meet a Wiccan with even remotely enough mana points to turn me into a frog. You'll need to complete more side quests.

[Mobiboros]

No, you can't. I never said you could. I said it wasn't anti-christianity. Technically Satanaists are Christians, they just support the other side.

What's the deal with that? Do they consider the Bible anti-Satan propaganda or something and think he really isn't such a bad guy when you get to know him? Because, I don't want to offend anyone here but actually worshipping Satan as he is described in Christian mythology (the living spirit of evil) seems a little weird for a non-evil person to be doing.

Meh, depends who you ask really. Not every christian book describes Satan as evil, so some go with that. Others see it as a counter to christianity. Others see it as Satan was wrongfully accused. Others see it as 'evil' in the lame sense and do it cause it's 'kewl'. Some really are sick and commit crimes. You get the full gamut of 'satanists'.

Really, there's no good way of describing Satanism as it's even more loose a term than christianity.

[Nephtys]

You know, Spyder, I'll agree there are some fucking retards who adopt the trappings of Wiccanism and various other fringe belief systems as an act of rebellion, but there's also a group of folks who actually bought into the belief system for other reasons and know damn well that they won't be lobbing fireballs or other bizarro horseshit. Of course, we're harder to see because we don't wear pentacles the size of dinner plates and we've discovered that acting somewhat normal leads to a higher income and standard of living, so we sort of blend into the scenery more. But don't piss us off, or we just might not suppress the urge to turn you into a frog and use you as a doorstop.

I've yet to meet a Wiccan with even remotely enough mana points to turn me into a frog. You'll need to complete more side quests.

I /have/ however, met Wiccans in a Barnes and Noble who tried to cast spells upon me for making cynical remarks about them and the 'Alternative' shelf as I walked by. I assume I'm still not a newt because of my Satchel of +7 Bullshit Resistance.

[Stark]

I don't want to hijack, but I have a question to put to you guys.

My research was years ago (20th century, natch) but I never found any mention in any source of any non-CoS 'satanists' beyond angry protest-teenagers. All claims of some organised, 'evil' satanic group have been utterly baseless as far back as my research went (late 19C). The only non-CoS 'satanists' I've ever met have had their beliefs deconstructed, and they're cut from the same cloth as angry-goths and angry-punks et al. If there is a significant, organised 'nasty' brand of satanism, it has evaded detection by all published literature. Does it exist?

This is what I get for taking a 4th year philosophy course. Easy, but full of real nutbars.

[Broomstick]

You know, Spyder, I'll agree there are some fucking retards who adopt the trappings of Wiccanism and various other fringe belief systems as an act of rebellion, but there's also a group of folks who actually bought into the belief system for other reasons and know damn well that they won't be lobbing fireballs or other bizarro horseshit. Of course, we're harder to see because we don't wear pentacles the size of dinner plates and we've discovered that acting somewhat normal leads to a higher income and standard of living, so we sort of blend into the scenery more. But don't piss us off, or we just might not suppress the urge to turn you into a frog and use you as a doorstop.

I've yet to meet a Wiccan with even remotely enough mana points to turn me into a frog. You'll need to complete more side quests.

Oh, fine, be that way -- I'll just settle for flying over your house and dropping shit on your head or something.

[Broomstick]

I've yet to meet a Wiccan with even remotely enough mana points to turn me into a frog. You'll need to complete more side quests.

I /have/ however, met Wiccans in a Barnes and Noble who tried to cast spells upon me for making cynical remarks about them and the 'Alternative' shelf as I walked by. I assume I'm still not a newt because of my Satchel of +7 Bullshit Resistance.

Gotta be careful... the US did have a "Newt" elected to Congress a few years back....

I've always wondered why Mrs. Gingrich named her son "Newt"....

[Broomstick]

I don't want to hijack, but I have a question to put to you guys.

My research was years ago (20th century, natch) but I never found any mention in any source of any non-CoS 'satanists' beyond angry protest-teenagers. All claims of some organised, 'evil' satanic group have been utterly baseless as far back as my research went (late 19C). The only non-CoS 'satanists' I've ever met have had their beliefs deconstructed, and they're cut from the same cloth as angry-goths and angry-punks et al. If there is a significant, organised 'nasty' brand of satanism, it has evaded detection by all published literature. Does it exist?

I don't know about organized, but I have met some genuinely evil nasty people involved in black magic and mumbling about Satan, mostly back when I had to interact with convicted felons as part of my job. They weren't teenagers, and although they were angry sorts I wouldn't describe them as "goth" or "punk".

I imagine that an "organized" group of genuine Satan-worshippers would be like a coven of Sith - prone to internal attrition until you're down to one or at most two.

[wolveraptor]

It sounds as though you're saying I am to find fault with them and compare them to other morals. What evidence could be provided for morals? They aren't measured; they are percieved; such as what one views as right and wrong may differ to another person. In this case, there would be no evidence to provide other than my own (if any), and then who could say that would be evidence?

Furthermore, how can you prove this?

What evidence could be provided for morals? It's a fucking religion. I have yet to find a religion that does not tell you what or what not to do. Ergo, it sets up certain rules as its code of ethics. Whether or not they are actually moral can be determined by logic based off one axiom: that harming other human beings is wrong. Wiccanism says that you must not harm other people. That seems to fit in nicely, doesn't it? Harm can be easily measured,

Let's look at Christianity on the other hand; ....hmmm, seems like a shitload of dumbass restrictions and rules. Why the hell does God care if Jimmy John Jacobs gets up early every Sunday and blathers on about how great some carpenter who lived 2000 years ago was? Why can't people be gay? Why can't people have sex out of wedlock, as long as it's between two consenting adults and is guarded against STDs?

Yes, it seems Christianity's code of ethics is morally flawed.

Here, you're blaming Christianity.

No shit.

Christianity didn't burn villages. Christianity didn't murder thousands of people.

That's moronic. It was used as a tool for encouraging people to do so. Christianity is flawed for different reasons, but the fact remains it can be used as a dangerous motivating force. Furthermore, the specific xenophobic nature of Christianity, and the zealotry it brought with it, made it perfectly adapted for use as a war-motivation tool.

*snip pointless diatribe about "free will".

Yes yes, we all know that indoctrination in a fiercely fanatical religion in no way affects your judgement and capacity to make choices without bias.

Wow, is just me, or did all the fundies suddenly lose their debating skill?

[Spyder]

Oh, fine, be that way -- I'll just settle for flying over your house and dropping shit on your head or something.

I've got a SAM battery that gets +5 vs witches and undead.

[speaker-to-trolls]

Wow, is just me, or did all the fundies suddenly lose their debating skill?

It's just you. How can you lose something you never had in the first place?

[Broomstick]

Oh, fine, be that way -- I'll just settle for flying over your house and dropping shit on your head or something.

I've got a SAM battery that gets +5 vs witches and undead.

You know the difference between my statement and your statement is that I actually can and do fly... whereas I seriously doubt you have an actual SAM in your possession.

[mr friendly guy]

Here, you're blaming Christianity. But humanity comes before everything else. Christianity didn't burn villages. Christianity didn't murder thousands of people. Christianity cannot even be held in your palm. You may perhaps define it as an essence or something more... a part of the human mind; something that is believed. The morality being a part of this... people only choose to accept it - and should you not believe in "God", then you can understand that people created this morality, and there is no one to blame but ourselves as a society.

But it was humans that burned villages. Humans that murdered thousands of people. It was done in the name of someone or something, and perhaps encouraged... but ultimately, humans made their own decisions. Killing can be made acceptable to people in so many ways other than Christianity - for example... being a soldier. In Psychology, we call this the reaction formation defense mechanism

Sounds like a no true scotsman fallacy to me. Applying his logic, any good deeds Christianity claims, won't be due to Christianity, it will be due to humans.

Also any evil acts by people of other religions, eg terrorist acts from Islam Fundies, weren't due to Islam, it was due to humans. See, humanity comes first before anything else.

[Max]

It sounds as though you're saying I am to find fault with them and compare them to other morals. What evidence could be provided for morals? They aren't measured; they are percieved; such as what one views as right and wrong may differ to another person. In this case, there would be no evidence to provide other than my own (if any), and then who could say that would be evidence?

Furthermore, how can you prove this?

What evidence could be provided for morals? It's a fucking religion. I have yet to find a religion that does not tell you what or what not to do. Ergo, it sets up certain rules as its code of ethics. Whether or not they are actually moral can be determined by logic based off one axiom: that harming other human beings is wrong. Wiccanism says that you must not harm other people. That seems to fit in nicely, doesn't it? Harm can be easily measured..

See, I went that route already. However after I recieved about 3 posts directed at me for being obtuse (?) and offensive, I got this one...

Morals are subjective, therefore, it seems to you that they're morally flawed. Unless of course you're implying that you're the universal progenitor of morals, in which case I'd like to have proof. There are innumerable different kinds of outlooks on Ethics as a whole, and how it relates to morality, so pigeonholing something to only one view while discarding all the other relevant and active views in the world is foolhearty and downright wishful thinking in making your argument easier.

The whole premise for this argument is stemming from my playing devil's advocate and defending wicca and satanism as not being immoral. These people are giving me a migraine....

How some of you guys actually go to Christian boards to debate and not walk away without needing a mental massage is beyond me. lol