LibriumArcana.Games

Relating to the 'Pentagram' debacle, we were also dragged into several minor and miniature arguements about Pentagrams = Satanism, and that they are evil because of it. But it seems to me that a lot of people have no clue whatsoever as to what Satanism actually does, and why it exists as an entity.

Satanism does not have rituals or magicks, but doesn't prohibit them provided that they are beneficial to you, and don't particularly harm other people. That's all it is, self-promotion in life, without the hypocrisy of 'help all others and make them see the true light'. It is very literally a narcissistic, yet almost satirical 'philosophy'.

There are Nine 'commandments' to the Philosophy (remember that these were written by Anton LaVey, known for his rhetoric, so don't take them all at true face value): (Emphasis mine)

• 1. Satan represents indulgence instead of abstinence.
  2. Satan represents vital existence instead of spiritual pipe dreams.
  3. Satan represents undefiled wisdom instead of hypocritical self-deceit.
  4. Satan represents kindness to those who deserve it instead of love wasted on ingrates.
  5. Satan represents vengeance instead of turning the other cheek.
  6. Satan represents responsibility to the responsible instead of concern for psychic vampires.
  7. Satan represents man as just another animal, sometimes better, more often worse than those that walk on all-fours, who, because of his “divine spiritual and intellectual development,â€Â

Here is the thing, Satanism as concieved of by whatshisname, is a relatively recent development. Satan Worship or classical withcraft is what most people refer to when they say Satanism and they worship satan in his very much literal form.

The brand of "Satanism" you're refering to Darkarne has very little to do with the worship of the Bibical Satan. To my mind to be bluntly honest it's a bunch of kids who got togather cooked up their own way and then for some strange reason decided to pick the most shocking name they could go with. Alot of "Satanist" I've known (yes, I've known and had discussions with satanist, try not to faint) are more modern day hedonist with a strange love for scaring mommy and daddy than anything else. They also seem to have a love for whining how oppressed they are (I've been to countries where having the wrong religion can get ya hanged or worst, not impressed.) These kids (if I call you a kid it has nothing to do with your age and everything to do with your behavior) are harmless attention seekers for the most part. Before anyone decries that they're not seeking attention... THEY'VE NAMED THEMSELVES AFTER THE ENEMY OF THE LARGEST RELIGIOUS GROUP IN THE NATION THEY LIVE IN, OF COURSE THEY'RE TRYING TO GET NOTICED!

And yes there are other brands of Satanism which do have something to do with worshipping the Bibical Satan, but they're not Hollywood sytle, black robe cults either. Nor are they blood drinkers from a Jack Chick tract. That doesn't mean I would trust them with the kids alone however. But I've never seen them in the 1st world.

I could also make the cqase that LeVay style satanohedonism is in fact destructive if practiced.

I could also make the cqase that LeVay style satanohedonism is in fact destructive if practiced.

No more destructive than Fundamentalist Christianity. I'd actually say that the LaVey style of Satanism is much more productive (if not the best) for building a stronger society, if a little heartless while doing it. I also find it ironic that most of the strongest proponents of Christianity are quite capitalist, when it is in fact Satanism which seems to fit more in line with Capitalism. And Jesus Christ himself was quite communist.

It's just a subtle irony I noticed.

Christ was more of a socalist I find. He had no problem with people profting off of their labor and did not call for an end to socal classes. He just felt that it was soceities responibility to look after the least fortunate. Which is reflected in the fact that most Christian churches do run limited charities and that the Catholic Church devotes large sums of time and money into charities. (the agruement with the Catholic Church is over wheter they devote as much as they should or could, not that they don't try to help).

Do I consider Satanism evil? Depends on the sort it is. If it's the LaVey-esque modern hedonism, meh. If it's the worshipping-the-Goat-Headed-God sort? As long as they behave I don't have any major issues with it.

And I will note that one should be careful about making claims such as:

Dakarne wrote:

I could also make the cqase that LeVay style satanohedonism is in fact destructive if practiced.

No more destructive than Fundamentalist Christianity. I'd actually say that the LaVey style of Satanism is much more productive (if not the best) for building a stronger society, if a little heartless while doing it. I also find it ironic that most of the strongest proponents of Christianity are quite capitalist, when it is in fact Satanism which seems to fit more in line with Capitalism. And Jesus Christ himself was quite communist.

It's just a subtle irony I noticed.

A.) How is fundamentalist Christianity destructive compared to Satanism?

B.) How is LaVey-esque Satanism 'productive'?

C.) What's your point with the capitalist/communist comments?

A.) How is fundamentalist Christianity destructive compared to Satanism?

It is non-progressive, and restrictive upon the individual. It also promotes a very irrational and non-scientific outlook upon life, and follows a 6000 year old novel with every event as being true, rather than just an old fairy tale.

B.) How is LaVey-esque Satanism 'productive'?

If you help someone at every given turn (as per Socialism or Communism), they don't learn anything through it other than: "If I can get help with this, I don't need to do it anymore." Whereas if a person works themselves into a decent position in life, he learn a lot, and develop skills which 'working together' doesn't quite achieve. Independence from your friends, and more individualism rather than the lot of us being a bunch of sheep is rather more progressive and productive than restricting humanity to the dark ages.

But, even then, I'd say that abandoning these two entirely and adopting something a little more Taoist would be a better stance, but Satanism is the 'lesser of two evils', so to speak.

C.) What's your point with the capitalist/communist comments?

Just an irony I noticed, nothing more.

Dakarne wrote:

A.) How is fundamentalist Christianity destructive compared to Satanism?

It is non-progressive, and restrictive upon the individual. It also promotes a very irrational and non-scientific outlook upon life, and follows a 6000 year old novel with every event as being true, rather than just an old fairy tale.

The problem is that Satanism does almost the exact same thing. The only difference is that is not restrictive to the point where some could say it's too much.

B.) How is LaVey-esque Satanism 'productive'?

If you help someone at every given turn (as per Socialism or Communism), they don't learn anything through it other than: "If I can get help with this, I don't need to do it anymore." Whereas if a person works themselves into a decent position in life, he learn a lot, and develop skills which 'working together' doesn't quite achieve.

Nope, one of Christianity's philosophies is to indeed teach. Ever heard the parable of "You can give a man a fish and feed him for a day or you can teach him to fish and feed him all his life"?

Independence from your friends, and more individualism rather than the lot of us being a bunch of sheep is rather more progressive and productive than restricting humanity to the dark ages.

False with comparing it to restrictions to the dark ages. However we once again fall under the problem of Satanism seems quite often to push for too much individuality. In dogma God and Satan are to be opposites. If Jesus was a Socialist I'd say that would make Satan an anarchist.

But, even then, I'd say that abandoning these two entirely and adopting something a little more Taoist would be a better stance, but Satanism is the 'lesser of two evils', so to speak.

I do agree with the first point, or not even that so much as finding the happy medium within both. However if you could please provide evidence things Satanism has done that has assisted society? I know Christianity has keeping Western Europe together and from falling even further under it's belt. Not to mention the large number of assistance programs.


Now if I may.

1. Satan represents indulgence instead of abstinence.

Ok, this could lead to problems of hedonism, compulsions, and an addiction for stealing (Name escapes me at the moment).

2. Satan represents vital existence instead of spiritual pipe dreams.

Standard "My religion is better than yours" stuff.

3. Satan represents undefiled wisdom instead of hypocritical self-deceit.

Um, I call bull on this considering Satan is known as "The Great Deciever" for a reason.

4. Satan represents kindness to those who deserve it instead of love wasted on ingrates.

Care for only one's self and immediately considering all others who ask for assistance to be wastes of space.

5. Satan represents vengeance instead of turning the other cheek.

Which worked so well in hundreds of very bloody and ultimately unneccesary wars and would make things so much better now, really.

6. Satan represents responsibility to the responsible instead of concern for psychic vampires.

Psychic, vampires? Is he talking about the weak and unlearned again?

7. Satan represents man as just another animal, sometimes better, more often worse than those that walk on all-fours, who, because of his “divine spiritual and intellectual development,â€Â

The problem is that Satanism does almost the exact same thing. The only difference is that is not restrictive to the point where some could say it's too much.

Since society has laws, based upon rationality and reason, and Satanism is 'further the self', you wouldn't quite get very far if you were to break these laws, would you?

Nope, one of Christianity's philosophies is to indeed teach. Ever heard the parable of "You can give a man a fish and feed him for a day or you can teach him to fish and feed him all his life"?

But it also teaches that gays, lesbians, etc. are evil.

False with comparing it to restrictions to the dark ages.

It was just a figure of speech, there's the fact that gays, lesbians, bisexuals, free-thinkers, evolutionists, pro-intellectualists and many other people would kind of chafe under the rule of Christianity.

However we once again fall under the problem of Satanism seems quite often to push for too much individuality.

Possibly. But too much is better than none.

In dogma God and Satan are to be opposites. If Jesus was a Socialist I'd say that would make Satan an anarchist.

Which is completely and utterly false. Philosophical Satanism has completely nothing to do with religious dogma. It is a philosophy which takes upon a name.

I do agree with the first point, or not even that so much as finding the happy medium within both. However if you could please provide evidence things Satanism has done that has assisted society?

Has it been allowed to? Or has it merely been quashed by the whole Satan = Evil vibe coming from Fundie Nutjobs?

I know Christianity has keeping Western Europe together and from falling even further under it's belt. Not to mention the large number of assistance programs.

The progression in modern society is an abandonment of Christianity.

Ok, this could lead to problems of hedonism, compulsions, and an addiction for stealing (Name escapes me at the moment).

So, freedom to enjoy life = will definitely go to extremes?

Standard "My religion is better than yours" stuff.

Which involves no belief system.

Um, I call bull on this considering Satan is known as "The Great Deciever" for a reason.

What reason? And proof that, beyond a name, Philosophical Satanists actually worship Satan?

Care for only one's self and immediately considering all others who ask for assistance to be wastes of space.

A subjective analysis.

And kindness 'to those who deserve it' doesn't mean, kindness only to the self, it means kindness to those who deserve it.

Which worked so well in hundreds of very bloody and ultimately unneccesary wars and would make things so much better now, really.

So justice should not be sought. So you should forgive murderers rather than seek true justice?

Psychic, vampires? Is he talking about the weak and unlearned again?

It means that it rejects the typical "I'm insane, but not really" or "I'm posessed, but not really" lark, and makes a person completely accountable for their own actions.

And this is a good thing, how? The reason for most religions is to seperate ourselves from this animalistic nature so as to thrive. This would lead us back into destruction.

It means that humanity is worse than animals, and they treat humanity as such. And 'survival of the fittest' is only a natural reaction.

Yeah, but I doubt he's been the reason it's kept in business. I'd say it was more the promise of eternal life the quick and easy way then fear of Satan.

You forget that LaVey had a sense of humour. He was known for being a rhetorical and metaphorical person, apparently.

You've yet to point out anything bad without resorting to ye olde 'Christian Dogma'. Which doesn't apply, whatsoever, to Philosophical Satanism.

But it also teaches that gays, lesbians, etc. are evil.

Wrong. That's a subject of division. The Metheodist church for example has a gay bishop. And several minsters across the nation preformed gay weddings. Try to keep the brush from getting to big.

Now if I may.

Quote:
1. Satan represents indulgence instead of abstinence.


Ok, this could lead to problems of hedonism, compulsions, and an addiction for stealing (Name escapes me at the moment).

This did not use Christian Dogma.

Quote:
5. Satan represents vengeance instead of turning the other cheek.


Which worked so well in hundreds of very bloody and ultimately unneccesary wars and would make things so much better now, really.

This did not use Christian Dogma. Try again Dakarne this time address the agruemtn rather than dismissing it Elfdart sytle.

Wrong. That's a subject of division. The Metheodist church for example has a gay bishop. And several minsters across the nation preformed gay weddings. Try to keep the brush from getting to big.

I was actually referring to Fundie Christianity, I'm sorry if I didn't quite clarify on that one.

Dakarne wrote:

Wrong. That's a subject of division. The Metheodist church for example has a gay bishop. And several minsters across the nation preformed gay weddings. Try to keep the brush from getting to big.

I was actually referring to Fundie Christianity, I'm sorry if I didn't quite clarify on that one.

Fundamentalist anything is dangerous, because it requires adherence to dogma over reality.

Fundamentalist anything is dangerous, because it requires adherence to dogma over reality.

True, but it was merely the statement that, although Satanism (unkempt and unleashed upon the unrational without warning and preperation) can be dangerous, it's certainly less dangerous than Fundamentalist Christianity, as Satanism is quite agnostic in overall makeup

Dakarne Fundalmentist Christianity is not anywhere near the majority of Christianity, even if it's the loudest. To be blunt, I find your attempt to pretend that the vast majority of Christianity doesn't exist and focus on a regional group of sects isolated in small part of North America a rather dishonest way to compare religons.

To give an example, I ran into a group of men in the 3rd world who decided the only real explanation for the state of things was that Satan was stronger than God and they should than pray to the strongest. They behaved in a manner that could only be considered criminal. However if I ignored the North American/Western European majority of those who claim Satanist beliefs and focused on just that group, you would be screaming your head off and rightly so.

Dakarne wrote:

Fundamentalist anything is dangerous, because it requires adherence to dogma over reality.

True, but it was merely the statement that, although Satanism (unkempt and unleashed upon the unrational without warning and preperation) can be dangerous, it's certainly less dangerous than Fundamentalist Christianity, as Satanism is quite agnostic in overall makeup

That's because people try to ram three or four different things under the moniker.

1) The philosophical movement named Satanism. That is, that of the Opposer. Basically a movement devoted to questioning and opposing the norms of society.

2) Church Of Satan, as established in the 20th century, which is nothing more than a parody of Catholicism. How this could be dangerous beyond being a personal hedonist is beyond me.

3) The psudeo-religion of the might-makes-right idiots in Africa and other such war torn regions.

4) Actual worship of Satan, which has never been confirmed by a reliable source, and thus may well be a myth.

Dakarne wrote:

Which worked so well in hundreds of very bloody and ultimately unneccesary wars and would make things so much better now, really.

So justice should not be sought. So you should forgive murderers rather than seek true justice?

Note that the 'commandment' you stated requests vengeance, not justice. Not exactly the same thing.

Dakarne Fundalmentist Christianity is not anywhere near the majority of Christianity, even if it's the loudest. To be blunt, I find your attempt to pretend that the vast majority of Christianity doesn't exist and focus on a regional group of sects isolated in small part of North America a rather dishonest way to compare religons.

It wasn't as much a comparison, as a mere example...

Fundamentalist Christians aren't the only illogical idiot Christians on the planet, take a look at the Protestant vs Catholic dispute going on over in Ireland.

However if I ignored the North American/Western European majority of those who claim Satanist beliefs and focused on just that group, you would be screaming your head off and rightly so.

But it was merely a question of 'is Satanism evil?', nothing more.

I must state that the Fundamentalist Movement isn't reviled openly by the common man in the street (aside from mere irritation with them), whereas Satanism is constantly decried as evil.

Note that the 'commandment' you stated requests vengeance, not justice. Not exactly the same thing.

But it is bound by rules of the common law. You cannot murder someone with your vengeance, but you can certainly give someone a good black eye for punching you in the face.

Dakarne wrote:I must state that the Fundamentalist Movement isn't reviled openly by the common man in the street (aside from mere irritation with them), whereas Satanism is constantly decried as evil.

....And 40% of the man on the street thinks the world is less than 10,000 years old. What's your point? That the common man is a bit dim? Yes, we knew that.

....And 40% of the man on the street thinks the world is less than 10,000 years old. What's your point? That the common man is a bit dim? Yes, we knew that.

I suppose I made myself look worthy of my old SDN title there...



Ah well... I never was known for my debating skills.

No, Satanism is not evil. The 'commandments' are fine by me and I guess any rational person would find no problem with those. In fact, those are nothing than personal freedom.


As for hedonism, I fail to see why it will be destructive as long as you don't screw others. For example, yes, I will endanger others if I drive home drunk from the bar, but if I decide to take a taxi instead?

Or how about sexual freedom? As long as I stay responsible (using condoms, or make sure I won't impregnate someone without her consent), then I guess it is fine.

Comrade Tortoise wrote:I could also make the cqase that LeVay style satanohedonism is in fact destructive if practiced.

What is LeVay style satahedonism? Does it encourage us to screw others? If that's the case, then the perperator should be arrested for breaking the law, but not for satanism itself.

No, Satanism is not evil. The 'commandments' are fine by me and I guess any rational person would find no problem with those. In fact, those are nothing than personal freedom

I am rational, and have very distinct problems with a good many of them. These commandments put a moral value on seeking pleasure. It turns desire for self gratification into an ethical imperitive, seeking gratification beyond all other concerns. So, lets take a look at what would happen if generally applied to the population.

Every time hedonism becomes prevalent in a society, it stagnates and collapses. When the people become so wrapped up in their petty pleasures, they stop producing, and they stop looking out for eachother. The same result will happen if Satanism (in the incarnation listed above) were generally adopted

So, lets go through each of these commandments on their face and see what they would lead to.

1. Do not give opinions or advice unless you are asked.

Political discourse stops, peer review of research ceases, and essentially all debate in any field ends. It doesnt take a rocket scientist to determine how we would be fucking ourselves over if we did this.

Remember, satanism elevates this to a religious commandment, not a matter of choice.

2. Do not tell your troubles to others unless you are sure they want to hear them.

Well, there goes reporting crimes, coming out to one's parents, trying to get help with financial troubles, psychological therapy, informing you sexual partner that you are HIV positive... DO I really need to go on, or do you get the point?

4. If a guest in your lair annoys you, treat him cruelly and without mercy.

So it is OK to torture someone who annoys you in your home? Really? Well, I suppose I will just have to order that rack, scourge ,and iron maiden combination set from the Inquisition Monthly cataogue

5. Do not make sexual advances unless you are given the mating signal.

WTF

What is this mating signal?



Oh WAIT! I got it!

6. Do not take that which does not belong to you unless it is a burden to the other person and he cries out to be relieved.

No more taxation. Nuff said

7. Acknowledge the power of magic if you have employed it successfully to obtain your desires. If you deny the power of magic after having called upon it with success, you will lose all you have obtained.

Magic... riiiiight

10. Do not kill non-human animals unless you are attacked or for your food.

No more biomedical research

11. When walking in open territory, bother no one. If someone bothers you, ask him to stop. If he does not stop, destroy him.

Do you know how many murders would happen on subways systems alone?

1. Satan represents indulgence instead of abstinence.

SOmetimes abstaining is better than indulging. Case in point, drugs. If taken to it's logical end, this ideology would result in the death of productive society as everyone feels religiously obligated to indulge themselves and becomes addicted to crack

4. Satan represents kindness to those who deserve it instead of love wasted on ingrates.

Lets not try to pull druggies and anorexics from the brink or ruin. Nope, lets not even bother with those ingrates! [/sarcasm]

5. Satan represents vengeance instead of turning the other cheek.

I demand satisfaction! Pistols at dawn!

8. Satan represents all of the so-called sins, as they all lead to physical, mental, or emotional gratification.

Yes, murder, rape, adultery, theft, dishonesty. All of those things we wish we could do, but thank god are prohibited by sane religions and ideologies.

But not this one. Oh no, in this one they are encouraged!

As for hedonism, I fail to see why it will be destructive as long as you don't screw others. For example, yes, I will endanger others if I drive home drunk from the bar, but if I decide to take a taxi instead?

Your analogy fails when you analyze hedonism. hedonism does not call for any form of responsible behavior. it is the antithesis of responsible behavior. A hedonist would go on a binge of unprotected sex fueled by drugs, and may or may not take a taxi home. A hedonist seeks pleasure over all other things; as a philosophical or moral obligation. An individual or a society built upon such a foundation will crumble

What is LeVay style satahedonism? Does it encourage us to screw others? If that's the case, then the perperator should be arrested for breaking the law, but not for satanism itself.

Take a look at what is written above. That is what Antonin Levay wants,and I gave you the results. never said they should be arrested for beleiving it, but they suyre are a worthless waste of oxygen if they practice it, and frankly, the ideology itself can lead to nothing but ruin.

Comrade Tortoise wrote:

No, Satanism is not evil. The 'commandments' are fine by me and I guess any rational person would find no problem with those. In fact, those are nothing than personal freedom

I am rational, and have very distinct problems with a good many of them. These commandments put a moral value on seeking pleasure. It turns desire for self gratification into an ethical imperitive, seeking gratification beyond all other concerns. So, lets take a look at what would happen if generally applied to the population. <global snippeage>

The problem is: you interpreted those commandments literally. Mind you, many religions can be disturbing if you interpret their commandments and verses literally. Let's take a look at Christianity for example:

The first set of Ten Commandments, Exodus 20:2 to 20:17 (King James version):

ii. Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image, or any likeness of any thing that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth. Thou shalt not bow down thyself to them, nor serve them: for I the Lord thy God am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children unto the third and fourth generation of them that hate me. And shewing mercy unto thousands of them that love me, and keep my commandments.

What happens to religious tolerance?

The second set of Ten Commandments (Exodus 34:12 to 34:26, King James version):

Take heed to thyself, lest thou make a covenant with the inhabitants of the land whither thou goest, lest it be for a snare in the midst of thee: But ye shall destroy their altars, break their images, and cut down their groves: For thou shalt worship no other god: for the LORD, whose name is Jealous, is a jealous God: Lest thou make a covenant with the inhabitants of the land, and they go a whoring after their gods, and do sacrifice unto their gods, and one call thee, and thou eat of his sacrifice; And thou take of their daughters unto thy sons, and their daughters go a whoring after their gods, and make thy sons go a whoring after their gods.

What should the Christians do to the Buddhists, or the Hindus? Ah, I see the words now: "destroy", "break", and "cut down".

Luke 14:26

"If any man come to me, and hate not his father, and mother, and wife, and children,and brethren, and sisters, yea, and his own life also, he cannot be my disciple." (14:33)"

Deuteronomy 13:13-19 NLT:

Suppose you hear in one of the towns the LORD your God is giving you that some worthless rabble among you have led their fellow citizens astray by encouraging them to worship foreign gods. In such cases, you must examine the facts carefully. If you find it is true and can prove that such a detestable act has occurred among you, you must attack that town and completely destroy all its inhabitants, as well as all the livestock. Then you must pile all the plunder in the middle of the street and burn it. Put the entire town to the torch as a burnt offering to the LORD your God. That town must remain a ruin forever; it may never be rebuilt. Keep none of the plunder that has been set apart for destruction. Then the LORD will turn from his fierce anger and be merciful to you. He will have compassion on you and make you a great nation, just as he solemnly promised your ancestors. "The LORD your God will be merciful only if you obey him and keep all the commands I am giving you today, doing what is pleasing to him."

Guess how many cities should be nuked if their population ain't Christian? This really makes Osama Bin Laden look like a boy scout.

Deuteronomy 22:28-29 NAB:

If a man is caught in the act of raping a young woman who is not engaged, he must pay fifty pieces of silver to her father. Then he must marry the young woman because he violated her, and he will never be allowed to divorce her.

Woohoo!!! I guess I should start collecting fifty pieces of silver and going out and rape the first chick I meet. Gimme' a break.

Exodus 31:12-15 NLT:

The LORD then gave these further instructions to Moses: 'Tell the people of Israel to keep my Sabbath day, for the Sabbath is a sign of the covenant between me and you forever. It helps you to remember that I am the LORD, who makes you holy. Yes, keep the Sabbath day, for it is holy. Anyone who desecrates it must die; anyone who works on that day will be cut off from the community. Work six days only, but the seventh day must be a day of total rest. I repeat: Because the LORD considers it a holy day, anyone who works on the Sabbath must be put to death.'

Maybe next Sunday I should go to a local McDonald's and go postal at the costumer service. Literally.

Isaiah 14:21 NAB:

Make ready to slaughter his sons for the guilt of their fathers; Lest they rise and posses the earth, and fill the breadth of the world with tyrants.

Do I need to say anything on this one?

2 Samuel 12:11-14 NAB:

Thus says the Lord: 'I will bring evil upon you out of your own house. I will take your wives while you live to see it, and will give them to your neighbor. He shall lie with your wives in broad daylight. You have done this deed in secret, but I will bring it about in the presence of all Israel, and with the sun looking down.'

Then David said to Nathan, "I have sinned against the Lord." Nathan answered David: "The Lord on his part has forgiven your sin: you shall not die. But since you have utterly spurned the Lord by this deed, the child born to you must surely die."

Baby-killing. Need I say more?

Ezekiel 9:5-7 NLT:

"Then I heard the LORD say to the other men, "Follow him through the city and kill everyone whose forehead is not marked. Show no mercy; have no pity! l them all – old and young, girls and women and little children. But do not touch anyone with the mark. Begin your task right here at the Temple." So they began by killing the seventy leaders. "Defile the Temple!" the LORD commanded. "Fill its courtyards with the bodies of those you kill! Go!" So they went throughout the city and did as they were told."

Kill the men, women, and CHILDREN.

Leviticus 20:13 NAB:

"If a man lies with a male as with a women, both of them shall be put to death for their abominable deed; they have forfeited their lives."

Mind you, Ben, according to the Bible, YOU should die as well.

Comrade Tortoise wrote:

As for hedonism, I fail to see why it will be destructive as long as you don't screw others. For example, yes, I will endanger others if I drive home drunk from the bar, but if I decide to take a taxi instead?

Your analogy fails when you analyze hedonism. hedonism does not call for any form of responsible behavior. it is the antithesis of responsible behavior. A hedonist would go on a binge of unprotected sex fueled by drugs, and may or may not take a taxi home. A hedonist seeks pleasure over all other things; as a philosophical or moral obligation. An individual or a society built upon such a foundation will crumble

Wrong. Hedonism does not call for responsible behaviour, but it is NOT the anthithesis of responsible behaviour either.

Miriam-Webster online dictionary wrote:Main Entry: he·do·nism
Pronunciation: 'hE-d&n-"i-z&m
Function: noun
Etymology: Greek hEdonE pleasure; akin to Greek hEdys sweet -- more at SWEET
1 : the doctrine that pleasure or happiness is the sole or chief good in life
2 : a way of life based on or suggesting the principles of hedonism

My example stands: if I decide to get drunk and drive afterwards, I will be put in jail and the pleasure and happiness I'm seeking is gone.

Pleasure-seeking is what naturally drive us to behave; it is a very NATURAL thing. After all, that is what the principle of "stick and carrot" is based upon.

Also note, Comrade Tortoise, that LaVey's methods were directly meant to be non-literal. Any literal taking of his words, specifically the 'mere guidelines', is rather stupid, wouldn't you say?