Find » Opinion/Editorial » Scientology vs. Satanism: Which is ...

Scientology vs. Satanism: Which is the Bigger Blight?

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

By Matt Chalupsky, published Aug 16, 2006

Published Content: 11 Total Views: 14,174 Favorited By: 0 CPs

Contact Subscribe Add to Favorites

Embed:

Rating: 2.8 of 5

Font

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 »

More by Matt Chalupsky

View all »

You may also like...

Takeaways

Both religions are crazy.
Scientology is crazier.
Use your brain.

Did You Know?

L. Ron Hubbard was convicted of felony fraud in France, but ran and went into hiding rather than serving his time. Good role model, eh?

Comments

Comments 1 - 15 of 65

Next >>

Steve K

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

jerald

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

ToM

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

jerald

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

jerald

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

Steve

...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

Steve

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

jerald

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

Steve

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

jerald

As for Fair Game being stopped. Here is what L Ron Hubbard had to say about that Steve. " HCO Policy Letter of 21 October 1968 CANCELLATION OF FAIR GAME The practice of declaring people FAIR GAME will cease. FAIR GAME may not appear on any Ethics Order. It causes bad public relations. This P/L does not cancel any policy on the treatment or handling of an SP. LRH:ci:cden L. RON HUBBARD Founder by L. Ron Hubbard" As you can see they only stopped using the words "fair game" They didn't stop the actions.

Add a Comment

Posted on 08/28/2006 at 7:08:00 PM

jerald

Steve, This is what fair game is. " Fair game. May be deprived of property or injured by any means by any Scientologist without any discipline of the Scientologist. May be tricked, sued or lied to or destroyed." This is from L Ron Hubbards writings. I didn't take it out of context as if you go to xenutv.com you will see its still being done. How else would you explain the Religious Freedom Watch and Cleaveland Safety League sites? You are right that no one in the group every sues each other. Thats because if someone does they are put out of the church. Most of this you can see on videos at xenutv.com or read what ex members have to say at xenu.net. But people who are new to this should also go to scientology.com to see all sides here.

Add a Comment

Posted on 08/28/2006 at 7:08:00 PM

Steve

Jerald, This is yet another pinched loaf recycled by the same propagandists. The reality is we live in a society where people use the legal system to fight dirty. As I said before in another forum: Too much dissonance will collapse a group. Scientology members do not go suing each other - they submit to the internal remedies of arbitration available within the church. "Fair Game" simply meant that if you were no longer a Scientologist, you were no longer subject to arbitration, but to the same laws of the land. And yes, litigants do fight dirty - even without violating the law. The policy was canceled because of adverse publicity when taken out of context, as you're doing now. There is no policy in the church that exhorts or mitigates breaking the law.

Add a Comment

Posted on 08/28/2006 at 5:08:00 AM

jerald

Steve, I think i mistook your posts for Gregs when it came to the links. And i am sorry for that mistake. We agree on some things here but part ways over the meds. They do make a long term differance in some people. They do save lives and families. And in most cases they are ment for short term use to go along with therpy. These drugs work when used right. I will stand with you and yell to the heavens they are used way to much for to many who really don't need them. But thats reason to clamp down on the abuse, not stop all of it. And that is what scientology is trying to do. As for scientology being a blight. I do agee that is it somewhat in its behaviors. As long as scientology dismisses the mentally ill and goes after critics as it does it is a blight. Fair Game should not exsist in any church as it does here. I know you are following the writings of hubbard and you have every right to do so. But for scientology to survive it must grow up and change the bad parts.

Add a Comment

Posted on 08/27/2006 at 8:08:00 PM

Steve

And Jerald, regarding psychiatric drugs: From my point of view, they probably can temporarily relieve some unwanted behavioral symptoms but they are a chemical crutch with many side effects. I view them as obsolete and potentially dangerous. You'd be hard pressed to find any Scientologist on a psychiatric drug for anything.

Add a Comment

Posted on 08/27/2006 at 3:08:00 AM

Steve

...goals is amorality. They want to erase the concept of right and wrong. Read the APA's own literature, call and ask them. I surely will attack such a philosophy and resist their mishandlings and destruction of civilization that they promote.

Promote this content by clicking on the bookmark icons below.
	Facebook LinkedIn Yahoo My Web StumbleUpon Buzz		Myspace Digg Technorati Netscape		Twitter Del.icio.us Slashdot Reddit More Bookmarks »

Send to: (separate e-mails with commas) Your name: Your e-mail address:		Additional note: