From: locklin@henry.ece.cmu.edu (Scott Locklin)
Newsgroups: alt.satanism
Subject: Re: Some notes from the Satanic Bible
Date: 13 Aug 92 19:37:17 GMT
Organization: Electrical and Computer Engineering, Carnegie Mellon

In article <UeW22Y200Uh7I4LX4r@andrew.cmu.edu> Raymond Craig Feeck <rf1o+@andrew.cmu.edu> writes:
>Howdy!
>
>I read with great interest the post by John Brengman on his thoughts
>about the Satantic Bible and the purpose of "real" Satanism.  I have
>never had the opportunity to read the Satanic Bible (I still have to get
>throught the Koran and the Book of Mormon) but I had heard similar
>things about the book, i.e. that Satanism taught that man should be put
>as supreme.  Quite frankly I am quite delighted by the frankness with
>which Satanism states this axiom.  I find it refreshing as most people
>seem to live that way, but all the while try to deny it and put on some
>sort of front which resembles Christian morality.  
>
>One thing really disturbs me about the post, however, and I would like
>for someone to please clarify the point for me.  This is an exerpt from
>Mr. Brengman's original post...
>
>>     The biggest thing that struck me about the Satanic Bible is that Anton
>>LaVey states that the Satanic Church espouses the view that MAN is the ruler
>>of his fate. The use of Satan is a tool to use in the betterment of personal 
>>power. In the book, I was more aware of the Satanic Church's use of Satan to
>>balance out the propaganda thrown out by all of the christian churches in 
>>general. Why? Because these churches are the greatest stumbling block to the
>>quest of personal power over others. The Satanic does not believe in "Turn the
>>other cheek." Instead: "if someone hits you on your left cheek, smash him on
>>his right."
>
>
>If I am right, than Lavey and all Satanists believe that one shoudl live
>for oneself, and not care about the well being of others.  That personal
>sataisfaction and power are what are important.  Not only do Satanists
>live for themselves, but they reject all Christian morality.  
>
>It is this point which confuses me.  Mr. Brengman later writes:
>
>>     A person may engage in any type of sexual behavior he/she decides
>to do so
>>long as it involves consenting, human adults. This stipulation excludes rape,
>>sexual abuse of children, and bestiality. (And it totally conforms with state
>>laws.)
>
>
>  If Satanism is the antithesis of Christianity, why should only sex
>between consenting adults be okay.  The abuse of kids, bestiality, and
>rape are all condemned by the Bible.  In fact, Western condemnation of
>these acts has its roots in Christian morality.  In fact, almost all of
>traditional  morality in the West has its roots from the Bible. 
>Shouldn't Satanism do away with these last remaing barriers?  
>
>Any physchologist will tell you that the prime motivation for rape is a
>power motive, not a sexual longing.  If the purpose of Satanism if for
>people to seek personal power, shouldn't rape be not only accepted, but
>lauded?
>
>Lastly, what does it matter if the code of Satanism conforms with state
>laws?  Christianity makes a big stink about obeying one's authoritites,
>civil or otherwise.  Why should Satanists care?
>
>If anyone could help me with this question, I would be most grateful.
>
>
>Craig Feeck
>Carnegie Mellon University