Harvard allows Satanic black mass

originally posted by: beezzer
a reply to: Gryphon66

Since when is disliking a "teaching event" wrong?

This is what I'm finding more and more in society.

You are free to do whatever "teaching event" you like.

But it has become socially unacceptable to even dislike the practice.

Why does any of us have to like and/or accept such practice.

Do whatever you wish!

Beat yourself in the head with a hammer!

But there will be those of us who feel that hitting yourself in the head with a hammer is wrong.

Yet it is politically incorrect for us to NOT participate/admire/like/approve of such a practice.

It's not about not liking it or liking it. You are free to have whatever opinion you want about it. No one is telling you otherwise. It is YOU who keep insisting that we keep telling that you have to like this thing. All YOU have to do is respect that a private institution is allowed to do whatever they want regardless on your feelings of the matter.

a reply to: Krazysh0t

Bullspit!

I caveated that at my initial post as was insulted and lambasted for not being more "open-minded" about this "teaching event"!

Face it, in todays society, in our "Facebook" culture, you have to "LIKE" everything that is in the cultural spotlight, regardless of your own opinions.

It's okay to have an opinion, but watch your ass if it isn't in the majority!

Oh NOES! 'Cause that'll be reviled!

a reply to: beezzer

TBH i revel in the thought that my ideas are controversial and not with the mass.

I may not be correct, well hardly ever, but if it makes a few people think for a few more minutes before saying something inherently common and mainstream, then i have done my duty.

I like to cause and provoke thought even if its left field and dumb.

a reply to: beezzer

Well if that was the case, it certainly wasn't by me. I know we got into a tiff yesterday, but I never held that opinion so if you thought that about me then you misunderstood where I've been coming from this whole thread. My entire point the entire course of the thread has been that this a private institution trying to do a something so they get the final say on if it goes through or not. For instance, I think it is sad that the school caved to the Christian pressure and canceled the mock mass, HOWEVER I respect their decision to do so since again they are a private institution and can do what they want.

If this were a public institution then it would be a different story. Though I must say, that I see no harm in a mock mass done for educational purposes even at a public university. Public universities have religious study classes all the time for educational purposes, this would have been no different.

understand a small portion of the anxiety, frustration, rage, etc., that a "non-member" of that majority faith might feel while embeded in that culture, i.e. churches on every corner, Jesus on every bill-board, public prayers offered "in Jesus name" ... etc

I wonder what a psychiatrist would jot down in their notes if a patient came in and said they see Churches on EVERY corner . .. . Jesus on EVERY bill-board . . .and reported that they were anxious, frustrated and enraged by it.

I guess we could get rid of Churches, (I'm not sure how we get rid of the imaginary ones on "every corner" that are only in the patients head), outlaw and mention of Jesus in public, and remove all the Jesus bill-boards, ( which I'm guessing exist, though I've never seen one).

Or we could just treat the patient, maybe there's a pill for it?

I understand the value and applaud the idea of the separation of Church & State to a reasonable and common sense degree, but not in the out right closeting of people of religious faith.

Seems to me that that there are a lot of deep psychological issues among some of the anti-Christian zealots. Thanks for pointing that out Grypon. If for nothing else but practical reasons, it makes more sense to treat their mental illness/issues than to ask Society to re-work itself in order to indulge them in their delusions.

originally posted by: imwilliam

understand a small portion of the anxiety, frustration, rage, etc., that a "non-member" of that majority faith might feel while embeded in that culture, i.e. churches on every corner, Jesus on every bill-board, public prayers offered "in Jesus name" ... etc

I wonder what a psychiatrist would jot down in their notes if a patient came in and said they see Churches on EVERY corner . .. . Jesus on EVERY bill-board . . .and reported that they were anxious, frustrated and enraged by it.

I guess we could get rid of Churches, (I'm not sure how we get rid of the imaginary ones on "every corner" that are only in the patients head), outlaw and mention of Jesus in public, and remove all the Jesus bill-boards, ( which I'm guessing exist, though I've never seen one).

Or we could just treat the patient, maybe there's a pill for it?

I understand the value and applaud the idea of the separation of Church & State to a reasonable and common sense degree, but not in the out right closeting of people of religious faith.

Seems to me that that there are a lot of deep psychological issues among some of the anti-Christian zealots. Thanks for pointing that out Grypon. If for nothing else but practical reasons, it makes more sense to treat their mental illness/issues than to ask Society to re-work itself in order to indulge them in their delusions.

You completely misunderstand how Separation of Church and State works if you think it works like the above. First off, Jesus billboards certainly do exist and they certainly aren't a violation of separation of church and state. A Christian is legally able to purchase space on a billboard advertising Jesus (and if you haven't seen one, you aren't looking hard enough. I don't even live in the bible belt and I've seen them). This is a private transaction and therefore not under the purvey of the state. A non-Christian has no business trying to get the government to remove these billboards.

HOWEVER, if the same Christian who bought billboard space for Jesus, tries to lobby government to prevent a Satan billboard, then that would be a violation of Separation of Church and State if the government acts on it, not to mention a violation of the 1st amendment for religious freedom. The same situation still stands if it were a Satanist with a paid billboard trying to prevent a Christian from purchasing one.

All Separation of Church and State matters for is for government buildings, actions, and events. It's pretty simple really. If the government is involved with it (money, public schools, the pledge, laws, etc) then religion shouldn't be involved. If the government ISN'T involved, then religion can be involved as much as they want, but as LONG as they don't try to legally prohibit another religion from doing the same.

Therefore if there existed a time when churches were on every corner, jesus billboards far as the eye can see and all sorts of Christian paraphernalia everywhere (in non-state sponsored locations) there would be nothing your hypothetical guy in your post could do, short of going on medication or moving.

Everyone seems to have missed the point here.
What is a double negative? What is a mockery of a mockery really mocking?
It really isn't a difficult logical sequence people...

The catholic church practices a pagan ritual involving sacred objects.

Satanists (people following an opposing belief system) took this ritual and formed their own ritual to mock and degrade the object of the original. This ritual is directly aimed at the catholic church.

The Satanic temple, made up of atheists (again, people following an opposing belief system from the other two), intended to take the ritual that Satanists practice, and "parody" it under the banner of "education". This was a mock black mass. It mocked the satanic practice of rape and human sacrifice. It was not aimed at Catholics, but Satanists.

Many of the comments here are correct. The knee jerk reaction of many Christians about this was unwarranted and was out of fear, which Christians are taught not to do, and yet it is human nature to react in fear. You who accuse them are just as guilty of that than anyone else so you have no grounds on which to make judgement.

I seriously wonder about the civil leaders who put a stop to this based on "religious" grounds. They are supposedly smart and thinking people, so what "religion" are they basing their objection on? It can't be Christian because I've already pointed out that this has nothing to do with Christians.

So who are these objectors really? What are their beliefs really? Flip off your Christian hate switch for a second and really think about what's going on here people. Apart from the noise regarding catholic ritual talismans, it has as much to do with Christianity as it does Buddhism.

a reply to: Biigs
It's getting to the point where if there is a general consensus on any given topic, I'll immediately take the opposing view simply because it goes against the grain of political correctness.

*gods*

How I despise that term!

It is a tool for the weak!



I will respect anyone with an opposing viewpoint. We're all different. It's normal and natural to disagree.


But simply support any given view because of political correctness and that person has lost any hope of ever gaining my respect.

originally posted by: beezzer
a reply to: Biigs
It's getting to the point where if there is a general consensus on any given topic, I'll immediately take the opposing view simply because it goes against the grain of political correctness.

*gods*

How I despise that term!

It is a tool for the weak!



I will respect anyone with an opposing viewpoint. We're all different. It's normal and natural to disagree.


But simply support any given view because of political correctness and that person has lost any hope of ever gaining my respect.

I disagree!!!!!

Ha joking, i agree, some times i will say things even i dont believe just to make them think.

a reply to: Krazysh0t

Re-read my post, in the context of a reply to the quote I included. There isn't any disagreement between your post and my post about what Separation of Church means or how its meant to work.

The quote I included went far beyond Separation of Church and State and that is what I was addressing and reached basically the same conclusion you did:

Therefore if there existed a time when churches were on every corner, jesus billboards far as the eye can see and all sorts of Christian paraphernalia everywhere (in non-state sponsored locations) there would be nothing your hypothetical guy in your post could do, short of going on medication or moving.

That would have been more apparent if I'd included a link to the original post where the quote appeared, usually that's automatic, not sure what went wrong there. Does cloud the issue a bit though. I'll be more careful in the future.

a reply to: imwilliam

Ok, I understand. I've been having some problems replying to people this morning too. One of my replies was at first attributed to someone else in a thread all because I had originally wanted to respond to them first but changed my mind before hitting post.

Do you know what a real black mass is?

where do you draw the line, people would be in an uproar if the KKK held a rally, a black mass mocks the Catholic mass and is about hate.

And I am not Catholic, btw.

aren't progressives all about stopping hatred aimed at any and all groups?

if Westboro were to hold a rally or there was to be the burning of a Koran, same difference.

I once started a topic on atheism, the athiest were sure offended.


www.abovetopsecret.com...

If you are really concerned about this specific group then I think a visit to their website is in order and look at their campaigns.

Just like Hitler, this group seeks to advance their agendas through advocating for "the children".

They have even proclaimed May 15 to be "protect children day". May 15 is the date of old Beltane where children are passed through the fire as a sacrificial offering for protection and blessing.

May 15 is indeed all about the children. It's just not quite what one would assume.

a reply to: UnderGetty

I believe I just read that the Black Mass was cancelled. As a Christian I obviously won't condone worshiping Satan however as an American I am disappointed that these people weren't able to worship as they please. As long as they aren't breaking any Harvard rules or hurting anyone I don't see why this isn't allowed. Christians should be allowed Bible Studies, Muslims should be allowed prayer time, and Satanists people should be allowed to have gatherings as long as they all are following the laws/rules.

originally posted by: Stormdancer777
Do you know what a real black mass is?

Do you? I posted links earlier in the thread that basically said that what the "traditional" black mass is that everyone seems so scared of, is really just a product of Christian fear mongering. Here's the link again.

THE BLACK MASS

where do you draw the line, people would be in an uproar if the KKK held a rally, a black mass mocks the Catholic mass and is about hate.

The KKK has rallies all the time on public land. They get permission just like everyone else does to do their protests. Naturally upset people protest this, but what the KKK are doing isn't illegal.

And I am not Catholic, btw.

As I don't know who you were responding to I'm just going to skip this point.

aren't progressives all about stopping hatred aimed at any and all groups?

Doesn't apply to me cause I'm not a progressive.

if Westboro were to hold a rally or there was to be the burning of a Koran, same difference.

Same difference for what? Westboro pickets soldiers' funerals (among other things they picket), none of them have been arrested or barred from doing this by any government officials. The only people getting in their way are other private citizens ALSO exercising their right to be there.

I once started a topic on atheism, the athiest were sure offended.


www.abovetopsecret.com...

Atheists are human too and can be offended just like Christians can. Are you trying to say that only Christians are allowed to have thin skin or something? Finding examples of your opposition doing the same failings as you doesn't justify your actions, it just shows that those people are also wrong and may even be hypocrites. But is this so bad? Everyone is a hypocrite at some point in their life, the idea is to recognize and minimize the hypocritical behavior.

originally posted by: imwilliam


I wonder what a psychiatrist would jot down in their notes if a patient came in and said they see Churches on EVERY corner . .. . Jesus on EVERY bill-board . . .and reported that they were anxious, frustrated and enraged by it.

You know, that's a great point! I just bet you that any psychiatrist worth their diploma (i.e. that hadn't been educated in a correspondence school or bible college or something similar) would realize that statements like that are metaphorical and hyperbole and would know to look to the deeper understanding that feelings of alienation can result from the simple fact that not everyone shares the beliefs of the dominant culture. I would put even more money on a bet that a real psychiatrist wouldn't offer a diagnosis based on a biased and simplistic knee-jerk reaction.

But, it is an excellent point! I wonder what our hypothetical psychiatrist would say about an individual who absolutely believes that snakes, donkeys and burning bushes can speak in actual human voices, or that one can hear disembodied voices from the sky, or that walking sticks can transform into snakes, or that dead bodies come back to life. What do you think the psychologist would say? paranoid schizophrenia? delusional disorder? psychotic hallucinations?

It's really worth thinking about, isn't it?

I guess we could get rid of Churches, (I'm not sure how we get rid of the imaginary ones on "every corner" that are only in the patients head), outlaw and mention of Jesus in public, and remove all the Jesus bill-boards, ( which I'm guessing exist, though I've never seen one).

I don't think personally that any Churches need to be closed, I'd just like to see the Constitution upheld. But that's just me. You seem to be the expert on delusions, imawillbam ... maybe you have some ideas that are not as ludicrously extreme as what you present here?

I really don't think that Jesus should be outlawed in public under any circumstance ... I've always liked his hair.

I understand the value and applaud the idea of the separation of Church & State to a reasonable and common sense degree, but not in the out right closeting of people of religious faith.

Right, but it's okay to cheer on "the good guys" when other religious faiths besides yours are closeted? I don't know, iamwilliam, that doesnt' really seem reasonable or a matter of common sense to me.

Seems to me that that there are a lot of deep psychological issues among some of the anti-Christian zealots. Thanks for pointing that out Grypon. If for nothing else but practical reasons, it makes more sense to treat their mental illness/issues than to ask Society to re-work itself in order to indulge them in their delusions.

I'm not sure what basis you have for diagnosing "deep psychological issues" or who you're referring to with "anti-Christian zealots." I will hazard to guess that anyone who believes strongly in the literal interpretations of just about any of the world religions I know of should be very careful about throwing the mental illness/delusional rock very hard ... you know, the old maxim about folks who live in glass houses and all?

But you're welcome, willhami ... any time.

I just read that the black mass was nixed!
www.washingtonpost.com...
I think this was all a farce (or a satirical joke) in any case.

Anyone can see a Satanic Mass by the Church of Satan on YouTube.
There's one barely exposed female breast (which is why I won't post it) but nothing criminal or mocking of other faiths is shown.
Sure, they define opposing doctrines, but they don't mention any specific religions and politics.
Even if it did, faiths have been mocking each other, calling each other "anti-Christs", or accusing each other of child sacrifice and whatnot for ages.
I actually found this Satanic mass quite tedious, and not too different from sitting in a church every Sunday and hearing variations of the same drivel, and enduring the same boring salutations.
Maybe other people, even humanists, need some ritual in their lives and call it a kind of "Satanism", but I found I'd rather not torture myself with any of it.
I mean, attendance is not compulsory.
I'd rather make my own rituals, which I actually enjoy, like coming on ATS.

Nothing against all Christians, or any faith, but Satanic-panic has been very harmful.
I'm thinking of cases where parents actually had their kids removed, based on hysteria and false allegations.
In South Africa there are very real witch-hunts, and a discourse of witches and Satanism has entered politics, often with very worrying and racist connotations (especially against the white minority).

In other parts of Africa children who are suspected of being witches have been tortured and abused, and untold thousands have been orphaned.
I expect American evangelicals to take at least part of the responsibility for this, since many of these ideas were prompted by their "spiritual warfare" teachings.
They must come and help with the mess they helped to create in Africa.

In Uganda there are now draconian laws against gay people, and even their own families and friends can be punished for not reporting suspected homosexuals.
This too has been partly blamed on American evangelicals, and I don't know how they can even speak of "freedom" when the conspiracies and paranoia some of these people spread can turn a country into a police state with the worst features of Marxism and Nazism, where people must denounce their own family!
When they bring their ideas to other countries they should consider the ramifications.
Maybe they never intended all of this (I'd like to think that nobody religious is that evil), but to me any sane person can think before he talks and consider the possible consequences.

On the other hand, some Christian organizations were also the first to expose the frauds in the Satanic-panic.
Cornerstone Magazine by the Jesus People, for example, first exposed Mike Warnke, John Todd and others as frauds.
An evangelical organization against cults (Personal Freedom Outreach) also first exposed Rebecca Brown.
Although no religious organization that's been around for a while is squeaky clean of abuse and predators, I think there have been sound-minded Christians too, who were very concerned that the growing (and increasing) bizarreness of some fundamentalist Christianity might eventually lead to mass defections.

More astutely market-minded stalwarts like Pat Robertson have already distanced themselves from Young Earth Creationism, so there's many types of Christians, and some don't consider each other as legitimate.
I mean, if Chick Publications could repeatedly offend Catholicism without having their affiliated organizations banned, then why should any other group have an event banned, who might or might offend it?
(And until now nobody has seen the mass of this specific group to see what it actually entails?)

Well, the university I attended allowed all kinds of religious organizations and events (the only one that was banned in theory was a cult called The Church of Christ, although it still proselytized).
Under a free speech charter, as long as no laws are broken, this black mass should be totally legal.
Of course, students back then had other other concerns, like being teargassed and beaten by the cops for opposing apartheid.

originally posted by: Nyiah
My god, look at the responses in this thread. The fearful pleas of imbeciles cowering in the corner, "Protect us, Jeebus, from those different from us!" Cowards. Logic tells me I should stop before I get myself in trouble, but I can't help myself this time. As has been pointed out, this is a private school that can do as it pleases, and this wasn't the only demonstration that was to be held, and yet, it's the scariest? You poor frail withering things, quaking in your boots you are. Do you have any idea how comical you look? How much credibility you remove from Christianity? (not that it has much left) Is something only worthy of study & learning if it has a Christian's approval?

Asinine responses, absolutely asinine. Your fear and mock offense is only important to you. Don't you have a church you can pray it out in instead of wailing over other religions' practices being studied? Or are you peddling irrational ignorance here to make learning about anything as difficult as possible for the sake of being difficult?

yeah, then why the publicity of this from them?

wasn't this black mass crap practiced behind closed doors?

would they have sacrificed a lamb or a chicken? on camera?!

probably not, eh? don't piss off PITA.

they were shut down as trolls, as they should.

originally posted by: Biigs
Why is everyone so bothered about what other people do in their private time?

Dont kill anyone or break any laws and you can praise to the heck you like in my opinion. I dont care for it myself, so i simply dont go to such things and i dont stay up at night wondering what they might be doing.

Start sacrificing animals and killing people and then i do care, till then leave em alone you nosy bleeps.

did you read what abdul jabbar just wrote?

everyone should be a vigilante against what we don't like.

salem will be our next capital.

Satanic black mass 'postponed indefinitely' amid outcry

www.catholicnewsagency.com...