Scientology vs. Satanism: Which is the Bigger Blight?

August 16, 2006 by
Matt Chalupsky  
Matt Chalupsky
Matt Chalupsky
  • Published Content: 12
  • Total Views: 22,420
  • Fans: 0
View Profile | Follow | Add to Favorites
Single page
Font Size
Read comments (65)
More topics
Is  |  Satanism  |  The Crusades  |  Xenu  |  Heaven's Gate  |  The Iii  |  L. Ron Hubbard

Both "Religions" Are Crazy, but Which One is MORE Crazy is the Question

INTRO:
First off I would like to say that although I technically don't answer to any religion, I consider myself more Christian than anything. Second I'd like to state that all religions are somewhat crazy. Every belief system has its parts that make us (or at least the ones who don't follow blindly) scratch our heads, but Scientology and Satanism are "religions" that are beyond crazy, and what's crazier still is that they have followers. First I'll analyze each so that everyone is on the same page.

SATANISM:
This little religion/philosophy was developed by Anton Szandor LaVey in 1966 (LaVey was 36). He proceeded to publish "The Satanic Bible" in 1969 followed by several other books based on Satanism and the occult. Most people though misunderstand Satanism. Most Satanists don't worship Satan or any diety for that matter. They do believe that supernatural powers and beings have influence in our lives, but they do not subject to any form of worship. Satanism isn't as crazy as most people think, although it is based on VERY selfish principles. Satanists revel in the human animal and choose to embrace feelings such as lust, revenge, and pride rather than condemn them. They believe this things are natural and that humans shouldn't be embarraced of what we are at our core, and they do have a point.

Page: 1 2 3 Next »
 Print   Save Read comments (65)   Next piece
Related Video
   
RelatedRecommendedFeaturedMore By This Source
Scientology and Christianity
A short comparison between Scientology and Christianity
By nick.nvbs1988@gmail.com  |  Published 10/6/2006  |  Read more »
The Truth About Scientology
Think you know what Scientology's all about? Read the first in a series of articles exposing the truth about Scientology.
By Nadirah Skye  |  Published 10/6/2006  |  Read more »
What I Think About Scientology
What a minor critic thinks about the Church of Scientology
By nick.nvbs1988@gmail.com  |  Published 10/3/2006  |  Read more »
What I Think About Scientology
A small critic's rambling about the Church of Scientology.
By nick.nvbs1988@gmail.com  |  Published 10/3/2006  |  Read more »
What is Scientology, Anyway?
What is Scientology, anyway? Is it a science, religion, or some mixture of both? After hearing about it for days I finally decided to get the information from the source rather than the news media.
By Kal El Dracula  |  Published 7/8/2005  |  Read more »
Tom Cruise: Blackmailed Homosexual Scientology Cult Slave
The "Church" of Scientology is a big money scam that steals the minds and funds of its followers. Scientology is different from older cults in the respect that it attempts to be high tek, cutting edge, and cool.
By ChristianPeper  |  Published 9/7/2006  |  Read more »
Related information
TakeawaysDid You Know
  • Both religions are crazy.
  • Scientology is crazier.
  • Use your brain.
 
Comments 1 - 10 of 65 Next >>
Comments
Type in Your Comments Below

UUhh what about Lisa McPherson?
Add a Comment

Posted on 03/28/2009 at 10:03:59 PM

With your satanism comments, as its a very individualist organisation, i cant speak for anybody but myself, but as far as i can see from my texts and talks with other satanists is that we know we cant do everything we want all the time. Even in rituals to help us get what we want, la vey writes that you have to choose goals that are attainable. We live our lives the way we want to (as best as is possible) and dont actively recruit new members. You either know you are, or you arent. And in all honesty, i think it is much better that we dont, as the less of us there are, the more there is to go around! Its easier for us when you all go about believing in out of date guilt-trips. And the church of satan pays its taxes, and thinks all religions should. You missed that out. It's a pointless article, and if i went about saying (rather than just thinking) Catholics, Protestants, Bhuddists, Hindus etc were members of crazy religions, someone would at some point try and harm me. Out of sa
Add a Comment

Posted on 11/16/2006 at 1:11:00 PM

Hi Tom, You are so right. Everyone will not agree on this issue. You are also right that I am not always correct. And I have no problem saying so. However I am not sure what your point is here. You don't have to be always correct to see right and wrong. and I think the people who read here can do this if they see all sides. Like scientology.com, xenu.net and xenutv.com
Add a Comment

Posted on 09/13/2006 at 11:09:00 AM

The subject at hand is a lost cause. everyone beleives that THEY are right. No one is COMPLETELY correct, now are they?
Add a Comment

Posted on 09/13/2006 at 9:09:00 AM

Hi Steve, I guess I am going to get the last word here. And since your facts are off that's not such a bad thing. You say they didn't know what his reason for being out there was, of course they did. First off he had a huge sign saying just why he was out there. Next I have seen tapes of members who were sent out to handle him and him explaining why he was there. You can see this at xenutv.com. To put up a web site saying he was trying to flim children for an unknown reason was just wrong no matter how you look at it. OK I have to say I am getting really tired of the comparing Nazi's to critics here. I see it time and time again. One man filming is a lot different from putting on an SS outfit and I would hope you could see that. But the website put up on him was full of lies Steve and instead of stopping him all it did was make a few more critics. The bottom line here is that if scientology is going to claim to be a church and receive the tax breaks its time for it
Add a Comment

Posted on 09/07/2006 at 7:09:00 PM

Ok Steve, your last post is just so wrong in so many ways. First to lump it in with people who harass other regions is very misleading. He as harassing no one. He was filming on a public street. He had been for some days. I have seen the flim and the members of scientology were the ones doing the harassment here. For you to say an eye for an eye tells a lot here. Why don't you go to xenutv.net and see for yourself? But to set up false front groups to quite critics will never be ok. And everyone sees that. It wasn't just an overzealous member, it was many members. And for a group that prides its self on human and civil rights they only seem to do so for their own. I have spent a lot of times looking at all sides on this issue. And when a critic crosses the line I have never had a problem saying so. I understand you defending your church. But you should also be able to criticize its behavior when its wrong. If scientolgy is to survive change must come from the inside.
Add a Comment

Posted on 08/31/2006 at 2:08:00 PM

...I'm afraid it's poetic justice that this fellow got a taste of his own medicine from an overzealous member. Maybe he'll think twice the next time. And not for nothin' Jerald; but I think this time he was really showing his ass to get it.
Add a Comment

Posted on 08/29/2006 at 6:08:00 PM

What I'm saying Jerald is that the "eye for an eye, tooth for a tooth" belicosity assigned to Scientology doesn't jibe with anything I've personally experienced, and if it did the jails would be full of Scientology members: That's my point. I think in any group that's gotten big enough, you'll find an occaisional overzealous member who runs afoul of the law: they are not representative of the majority or common but I admit they can be trouble despite their good intentions. Do you give them the boot, or do you try to handle them? Depends on the offense. It's a liability to hang onto a thug or worse yet, convicted felons (who are debarred) - it's another story when someone is involved in a street altercation that escalates into a physical confrontation. While his would be forgiven had this protester harrassed a Synagogue, Mosque or any major church, it's precious ammunition for a critic. Scientology has enough critics: New ideas get attacked. It's happened to every religion.
Add a Comment

Posted on 08/29/2006 at 6:08:00 PM

Steve, There's no real way to know how many members of scientology have gone to prison. Except for the high profile cases there's no way to know who is a member or not when they are arrested. Are you saying the behavior of members as seen on xenutv.com is ok? That telling someone they are hiding crimes, asking if they have killed or raped someone today is ok? Are you telling me the Religious Freedom Watch and Cleveland Safety League sites are ok? Spreading rumors about critic's is ok? Sorry Steve but "fair game" does still go on. And downplaying an assault by a member of scientology only because the guy wasn't hurt says a lot here. How about his human rights? The right to peaceful protest. The website scientology made for him makes him look like a child molester and that's just wrong. You seem like a good person Steve who I could like and sit for a cup of coffee with. But how can you justify this kind of behavior?
Add a Comment

Posted on 08/29/2006 at 11:08:00 AM

I also disagree with you - the treatment/handling of an "SP" (suppressive person) has nothing to do with retaliation or exacting a vendetta: It has to do with handling such a person's hostility, or in getting him off your lines where he can't be injurious: Another item out of context. But if indeed, Scientology goes after people to inflict "injury"(?) unless it's in self-defense, the solution is simple: Arrest, Indict, Prosecute, and Jail: There's your solution. To date Jerald, how many Scientologists are sitting in jail for criminal activity? Only one guy arrested for a bad breath fight, and the plaintiff had no injuries.
Add a Comment

Posted on 08/29/2006 at 8:08:00 AM

Comments 1 - 10 of 65 Next >>

Have more to say?
Become a Source on AC