Satanic child abuse beyond belief.

a reply to: Noinden

Try again. It is clearly stated in the video that "children don't make up stories". Children DO make up stories. This has been established in the the entire Satanic Panic era.

Could you not pretend to know what you're talking about?

Everything a child says derives from experience. The question is: is it from T.V - i.e. something watched, or heard in conversation. Or - more frighteningly - stuff like this actually exists.

Just because some people confabulate, does not mean ALL people confabulate.

Another thing you don't take into account, is some of us KNOW satanists. They don't act in that manner for the most part. At least not any more so than any other human.

Your views - or anything you say, is just not credible.

LaVeyan Satanism involves the practice of magic, which encompasses two distinct forms; greater and lesser magic. Greater magic is a form of ritual practice and is meant as psychodramatic catharsis to focus one's emotional energy for a specific purpose. These rites are based on three major psycho-emotive themes, including compassion (love), destruction (hate), and sex (lust).[4] Lesser magic is the practice of manipulation by means of applied psychology and glamour (or "wile and guile") to bend an individual or situation to one's will.

How do you expect anyone to trust you, when Satanism entails deceiving other people, i.e. by speaking to their emotions.

It takes a remarkably - and depressingly - dissociative mind to repeatedly lie - to pretend that virtuality, what you think or feel - is just "as true" as anything else.

Read the post above this one: regardless of what you think, your brain creates you - and your brain, in turn, was created over evolutionary history (you being just the most recent bearer in the last 500,000 or so years since we've had this neurological complexity) out of processes of MUTUAL ENLIVENMENT.

Hence, Satanism is truly a remarkably repugnant distortion of reality - and it's even more pathetic when people like you come out and try to convey the "goodness of satanists" when the problem is precisely the indoctrination into the "fun" of misleading other people.

Aye.

That's the issue Noinden: you do not acknowledge how reasonable it is to distrust you - when you're saying things about a religion (satanism) that is based in individualism, nihilism, and manipulation of other people for your own personal advancement.

Satanism is anything but 'spiritual'; it depends on a lunatic fantasy about a realm beyond the real world - when the real world and its very specific dynamics actually CREATES your capacity for thinking, feeling and perceiving. Can you see, then how you mental-infections work? Is it not likely that - just as viruses are undesirable for the functionality of the body - so too mental viruses - or delusional belief systems that ignore the fundamentally ecological/relational nature of the world we exist within?

That's it. Your brain is designed to "make your experience coherent" i.e. affectively relaxed. If you do something evil - and this evil was done with known others - you only feel good, or have the capacity to feel good, because of the confabulated explanation you share with others and yourself. Even when you assault goodness, the goodness of reality still gives you "a taste of goodness" simply because you do things with other Humans. And - fundamentally - our brain is an inter-subjective organ: not some personal machine 'we' control. That's the delusion: that just because Human awareness can dissociate, that it has, so the gnostic believes, lost touch with the logic of its historical self-generation as a biodynamical system.

No. The body allows you to construct yourself - and you are never, ever, ever, outside the realm of cause and effect.

Sorry - if that may be something you rely upon to make yourself feel better about the life you've lived, but cause and effect takes precedence to the narratives Humans tell themselves.

a reply to: Astrocyte

I am not pretending to know anything. As a Neopagan I am very familiar with the idea of "Satanic Panic". I've seen the consequences of the "moral majority" using it as an excuse to accuse with out evidence.

Satanic ritual abuse has been discredited. There is no credible evidence that there has been a wide spread systematic conspiracy.

Thus, I return to that intial video, is a load of dingoes kidneys.

originally posted by: Char-Lee
a reply to: Greggers

You didn't read the information how do you think he learned this? Proof now there is a problem when no one perdues it because they protect the perverts. Think what you will.

Kinsey’s 1948 and 1953 books on human sexual behavior contain tables of information about sexual responses in children as young as 2 months old. Several tables record how long the children needed to be stimulated to achieve “orgasm,” and others record how many orgasms the children achieved in given periods of time.
Read more at www.wnd.com...

www.wnd.com...
Protected!

“He was giving me orgasms and timing it with a stopwatch,” White told WND. “I didn’t like it, I went into convulsions, but he didn’t care. He said all little girls do this with their daddies, they just don’t talk about it.”

White was 7 when her father began abusing her.

“There’s no question that Kinsey broke a number of laws and conspired to break a number of laws to conduct his faux research,” said Matt Barber, a law professor and associate dean at the Liberty University School of Law.

Read more at www.wnd.com...

If any of this stuff REALLY happened, the author's lawsuit would not have been dismissed with prejudice. For those unfamiliar with legal parlance, that means the court was able to make a final determination as to the merits of her case -- and there was NONE.

I've read lots of nonsense about Kinsey's research before. There are a lot of perverts who claimed they were doing work for "Kinsey" as a way to justify their perversions. There are also attention seekers fabricating stories, and perhaps a false memory or two (as is also common with satanic panic, coincidentally enough).

What we don't have is a single charge brought, nor a conviction, nor an admission, nor any allegations that can be traced back to any of the above.

originally posted by: Noinden
a reply to: Astrocyte

I am not pretending to know anything. As a Neopagan I am very familiar with the idea of "Satanic Panic". I've seen the consequences of the "moral majority" using it as an excuse to accuse with out evidence.

Satanic ritual abuse has been discredited. There is no credible evidence that there has been a wide spread systematic conspiracy.

Thus, I return to that intial video, is a load of dingoes kidneys.

You are correct on all counts.

History has shown, over and over, that the people who entertain these outlandish stories are the REAL monsters.

I cite:

1) The Salem Witch Trials
2) The slaughter of supposed witches in Europe
3) The Satanic Panic of the 1980s, which put the West Memphis 3 in prison for a crime they did not commit

a reply to: Greggers

Indeed, I've yet to see an actual "satanic conspiracy" with facts involved Mind you Levey Satanism is pretty much the only religion which states "don't be a dooche" as a way to behave

originally posted by: Noinden
a reply to: Greggers

Indeed, I've yet to see an actual "satanic conspiracy" with facts involved

Mind you Levey Satanism is pretty much the only religion which states "don't be a dooche" as a way to behave

What people don't realize is that the Church of Satan doesn't actually believe in Satan. A religious practice to appease a being they don't believe in makes no sense.

Most so-called Satanists are atheists who take pride in getting a rise out of Christians, mostly so they can engage them in a high brow discussion about how Satan is merely a symbol selected due to its opposition to the church.

a reply to: Greggers

While this is very true. I've yet to meet an actual "Satanist" of the type these conspiracies talk about. I walk in esoteric and occult circles. Church of Satan, Temple of Set etc sure. The other sort? Nah.

a reply to: Greggers

If any of this stuff REALLY happened, the author's lawsuit would not have been dismissed with prejudice.

No need for me to say anything more. You know the facts you know what he had in his books and you know he either fabricated the information or obtained it.

I actually am praying for you and feel saddened by you. The fact that there is so much blatant and clear cause to see what these people have done and are doing and you choose to try and exonerate them. No the courts have not prosecuted them that it not evidence of innocence at the least. You are on the right side...for now.

originally posted by: Noinden
a reply to: Greggers

While this is very true. I've yet to meet an actual "Satanist" of the type these conspiracies talk about. I walk in esoteric and occult circles. Church of Satan, Temple of Set etc sure. The other sort? Nah.

Seek out Mark Passio. a former priest for the church of Satan appointed by Anton Lavey himself. Mark Passio has been exposing the occult for a few years now. And his work exposes the satanists in high places along with the techniques they use.

There are a few things I disagree with Mark on, but others he is spot on. His library and research is massive, so it may take awhile to look through it all.

a reply to: SoulSurfer

I kn ow about mr Passio to be honest Mark is just trying to make a name for himself. Which LaVey and Aquino (Temple of Set) were also trying to do. I'm not sure he's quite the member of the CoS he says he was, and LaVey would appoint anyone in the final years for a price

I've no skin in that game, I'm a Polytheistic Pagan, so I just smirk at their politics. This in the end is what it is ... politics.

Most "Satanists" are individuals connected to no group at all. Many are also Atheists.

Satanism is not about the worship of Satan. Many don't even believe in Satan. Satanism is about worship of the self. The "Creation" of public Satanism was literally a ideological scapegoat created by Christians. This is cited in Wikipedia.

Satanism existed primarily as an accusation by various Christian groups toward perceived ideological opponents, rather than a self-identity.

In otherwords, Satanism was mock created by Christians as a to say "We are not this." and to give people a religious tool for attacking organizations. Most Satanism of the past was accusation, not self-proclaimed practice.

The practitioners of Satanism today, separate themselves from these past notions, and Christian-defined Satanism. Because it's a real organization based off a mythical one however, there are many denominations now and a variety of different practices that are not representative of each other.

The core concepts kept, is the part about worshiping the self.

More Wiki ex's:

The word "Satan" was not originally a proper name but rather an ordinary noun meaning "the Adversary"; in this context it appears at several points in the Old Testament.

For instance, in the Book of Samuel, David is presented as the satan ("adversary") of the Phillistines, while in the Book of Numbers it appears as a verb, when God sends an angel to satan ("to oppose") Balaam.

The terms "Satanism" and "Satanist" are first recorded in the sixteenth century, when they were used by Christian groups to attack other, rival Christian groups.

originally posted by: Char-Lee
a reply to: Greggers

If any of this stuff REALLY happened, the author's lawsuit would not have been dismissed with prejudice.

No need for me to say anything more. You know the facts you know what he had in his books and you know he either fabricated the information or obtained it.

I actually am praying for you and feel saddened by you. The fact that there is so much blatant and clear cause to see what these people have done and are doing and you choose to try and exonerate them. No the courts have not prosecuted them that it not evidence of innocence at the least. You are on the right side...for now.

Your "feeling sorry for me" is merely an attempt to talk down to me. It is not appreciated, and I do not need you to feel sorry for me.

I, for one, am sorry that upon failing to support any of your claims with actual evidence, you've resorted to such low-brow tactics.

You are correct on one point -- there is no need for you to say anything more.

a reply to: Greggers

Don'tcha just love when some one "prays for you"? Usually it is an unasked for act. It implies that these people are more moral than the person they are praying for

Back on topic Is it just me, or do very few people in this thread (and site?) understand what Satanism means? It is as if they are awaiting the Spanish Inquisition (and the comfy chair) to save us all?

originally posted by: Noinden
a reply to: Greggers

Don'tcha just love when some one "prays for you"? Usually it is an unasked for act. It implies that these people are more moral than the person they are praying for

Back on topic

Is it just me, or do very few people in this thread (and site?) understand what Satanism means? It is as if they are awaiting the Spanish Inquisition (and the comfy chair) to save us all?

a reply to: Noinden

Don'tcha just love when some one "prays for you"? Usually it is an unasked for act. It implies that these people are more moral than the person they are praying for

No it implies they care.
I think as far as "Satanism you are seeing a narrow picture when in fact it has so many faces and names.

a reply to: Char-Lee

Just for the record, as a Non Abrahamic spiritual person. Don't pray for me, I will take that as a declaration of war. Your God is not my God (I have many). I'm not a pacifist

So no it does not imply they care, it is a violation of the other persons spiritual rights.

originally posted by: Noinden
a reply to: Char-Lee

Just for the record, as a Non Abrahamic spiritual person. Don't pray for me, I will take that as a declaration of war. Your God is not my God (I have many). I'm not a pacifist

So no it does not imply they care, it is a violation of the other persons spiritual rights.

Whew well I just said a prayer for you hope you don't up and combust or something

a reply to: Char-Lee

Just out of curiosity. Would you touch someone with out permission? It is the same. So combust? No, but game on

originally posted by: Noinden
a reply to: Char-Lee

Just out of curiosity. Would you touch someone with out permission? It is the same. So combust? No, but game on

Yes certainly I would if they needed help
For prayer I have permission from one greater than you