Scientology vs. Satanism: Which is the Bigger Blight?
Both "Religions" Are Crazy, but Which One is MORE Crazy is the Question
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.
Now the downside. These beliefs are very alluring and we would all love to act on our own selfish and natural impulses. The problem though is that this way of living would make for an unstable daily life. If we all just did what we wanted without worrying about others or the consequences the world would fall into chaos. The scary part is while people don't label themselves as followers, they are followers in terms of their lifestyle. Humans grow more selfish, lustful, and violent every day, and this is somewhat frightening as it follows the Revelation to John in the Christian Bible. The other downside is their religious ceremony known as the Black Mass. This ceremony is bizarre, hateful, and boderline insane. Physcologically it is very unhealthy as it causes people to dwell on the people and things they hate and envision those things being destroyed.
While misunderstood by most, Satanism gives no structure or rules to life. While some followers do choose to adopt some kind of moral code, it mostly advocates to do what you want because you want to. Not a good thing for the individual or society.
SCIENTOLOGY:
Everyone's heard of this, errrr, unique "religion." Started by science fiction writer L. Ron Hubbard in 1952, scientology has grown to have a fairly large following worldwide, including many famous celebrities. It's basic tennants include many bizarre beliefs including condemning pschiatry (although anyone who follows this definetly needs phychiatric help, if not a padded room), the belief that humans are eternal beings called thetans who have lived past lives even on other planets, and for a one time fee and years of auditing Scientology can make you truly happy.
Where to start? First off, say it with me, SCIENCE FICTION. I don't know about you, but if a science fiction writer tried to tell me about how psychology is evil and with their help I can have super powers as long as I distance myself from family and friends who don't share my beliefs I'd kick him and run away. This...whatever it is is so insane, bizarre, and stupid that if I was given the choice between this or joining the Heaven's Gate people, I'd go with the latter. They say that psychology/psychiatry is evil and responsible for things like World War I and the September 11th attacks, but let's look their special process called auditing. You hold onto these metal rods that send electricity through your body (sounds fun, right?) while somebody asks you questions to help you work through past traumatic events. That sounds eerily familiar to psychology, which they say is abusive and dangerous. I don't even want to get into their belief in aliens, the Intergalactic Federation, and the evil Lord Xenu.
Even more fun are the celebrities that have fallen into the pit of pure insanity. There's Tom Cruise who acted like a monkey on cocaine on Oprah, Isaac Hayes who played Chef on South Park until they made fun of Scientology (it was okay to make fun of every religion except for his own, and the episode had to be banned following threats to Viacomm that Tom Cruise wouldn't promote Mission Impossible III), and Jenna Elfman who recently yelled the question "Do you rape babies?!?" at director John Roeker in downtown L.A. for wearing a "Scientology is Gay" t-shirt. While very entertaining, somehow they don't seem to be very good at casting their religion in a positive light.
ANALYSIS:
Do I HAVE TO? Okay. This is a no brainer. While both are crazy the answer is clear and a little scary. Scientology is slowing down the progress of mankind. The fact that people are actually dumb or desperate enough to actually follow these wackos scares me more than the fulfilling of apocalyptic prophecies. The main point I want people to take away though is to actually think about what you believe in. Both of these make nice claims but neither deliver (Satanism says you can do what you want, which you can't; Scientology says they'll give you magic powers, but they don't). All religions have their own areas that are a little out there, but at least they don't make wild claims that they can't fulfill. It is my hope that this stage of religious insanity is just another phase in history (think of the Crusades, thow shalt not kill unless they're not Christian), and that soon some giant supernatural hand will come down and smack all these people back to reality.
Published by Matt Chalupsky
I'm a multi-instrumentalist in my 20s and I am currently living in Highlands Ranch, Colorado. View profile
- Top 10 Influential Science Fiction WritersList with descriptions of the ten most influential science fiction writers ever.
- Science Fiction and the Classic NovelA look at two of the best science fiction novels of all time, Frankenstein, and The Time Machine
- How to Write "Bad" Science FictionA brief guide to creating such technically awful science fiction that it becomes a million-seller.
- A Technological Mirror: Emerging Trends in Science Fiction Film & TelevisionA brief look at the social commentary present in science fiction since the invention of the computer during the 20th Century.
How to Write Really Bad Science FictionMore instructions to help aspiring authors make the leap from bad science fiction to really bad science fiction.
- Attention Colorado State University Students, Here is a Guide to Articles on Assoc...
- Science Fiction Writer Arthur C Clarke Dies
- An Exclusive Interview with Science Fiction Writer Melinda Snodgrass
- Karl Marx, the Journalist, Religious Moralist, Prophet and Science Fiction Writer
- How to Become a Science Fiction Writer
- Writing Tips to Make Your Science Fiction Stories More Exciting
- How to Write Science Fiction
- Both religions are crazy.
- Scientology is crazier.
- Use your brain.
61 Comments
Post a CommentUUhh what about Lisa McPherson?
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
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
The subject at hand is a lost cause. everyone beleives that THEY are right. No one is COMPLETELY correct, now are they?
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
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.
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.
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?
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.
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.