It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


NEWS: Navy approves first ever Satanist

page: 1

log in


posted on Oct, 24 2004 @ 10:02 PM

Chris Cranmer, 24 has been officially recognised as the first registered Satanist. The naval technician will now be allowed to practice Satanic rituals on board the vessel approved by the captain of HMS Cumberland, and is now lobbying the Ministry of Defence to make Satanism a registered religion.

Former Tory minister Ann Widdecombe said she was "utterly shocked" by the Royal Navy's decision.

"Satanism is wrong. Obviously the private beliefs of individuals anywhere, including the armed forces, are their own affair but I hope it doesn't spread."

She added: "The Navy should not permit Satanist practices on board its ships.

Please visit the link provided for the complete story.

Related NewsLinks
Religion and Ethics

I donít actually see a problem with this as long as he doesnít in any way harm the ship or its crewmembers or stop them from doing their job.


posted on Oct, 24 2004 @ 11:25 PM
The guy that runs the local head shop was the second Wiccan approved by the Army; it didn't seem like he or his predecessor encountered any real resistance, it simply hadn't been done before.

Anyway, LaVeyan 'satanists' are relatively harmless critters that follow a sort of ur-religion named only for sensational value... they don't beleive in God or satan at all.

posted on Oct, 25 2004 @ 03:26 AM
here's the thing. satan is the symbol of pure evil. anymore consideration than this is confuscation.
anton levy may have just glommed onto the biblical name for sensationalism, but we are talking about setting a precedent of allowing the navy to be viewed as a sanctuary for the father of darkness. beliefs aside, this just doesn't look good. maybe we ARE 'the great satan'.

surely, the fundamentalists can point and laugh and say, 'i told you so', now.


posted on Oct, 25 2004 @ 09:03 AM
While I agree that this sets something of a sensitive precedent, I have to say that it was the only constitutional thing to do. The law makes no distinctions on grounds of metaphysical morals, and if that guy wants to go get torpedoed, more power to him

new topics

top topics

log in