Page 1 of 3 123>
Topic Options
#20598 - 02/17/09 07:06 AM Eleven Satanic Rules of the Earth
Zoid Offline
member


Registered: 01/24/09
Posts: 109
Loc: USA - New Jersey
We didn't have a thread on the Eleven Satanic Rules of the Earth, so now we do. Any discussion of any of the Eleven Rules would be on topic here.

My interest this morning is in the tenth, "Do not kill non-human animals unless attacked or for your food."

I concur with this whole-heartedly, as I am quite fond of non-human animals. I eat them, as I see no reason not to, since animals eating one another is as old as the amoeba. I certainly would kill anything that intended to do me harm.

But I would add this to the tenth rule: " - and don't eat any species that is endangered unless you will starve otherwise."

In my view, someone who violates the above is guilty of the ninth Satanic sin, lack of aesthetics, as anyone who can't appreciate the beauty of a species of animal is a philistine of the basest and most boorish variety.

As for those who violate the original wording of the tenth rule, such as those who fish for sharks so they can cut off the fins and sell them as health remedies or virility enhancers, or who hunt rhinoceri so they can cut off the horns for similar purposes, I accuse them. They stand accused by me of breaking the tenth rule and committing the ninth sin, and though they neither know nor care, my wrath is upon them, my financial strength is arrayed against them, and perhaps I will go further than this, as I continue to ponder subtle and sophisticated manifestations of the second degree antisocial, and opposition to the social more by which the accusation of murder is only applied to the slayers of humans.


Edited by Zoid (02/17/09 07:30 AM)
Edit Reason: Zoid corrected the sense of the final sentence by adding the word "committing" before the words, "the ninth sin."

Top
#20600 - 02/17/09 07:46 AM Re: Eleven Satanic Rules of the Earth [Re: Zoid]
XauriEL Offline
stranger


Registered: 02/16/09
Posts: 9
Loc: Saskatchewan, Canada
I'm curious as to how people view animal testing in scientific/medical experiments, vis. the tenth rule.
My personal intuition is that human testing is more reasonable, as it would reveal more about the human reaction than even chimps do. This would be a good use for various worthless parasites.
Thoughts?
_________________________
The Crash is Coming

Top
#20601 - 02/17/09 07:48 AM Re: Eleven Satanic Rules of the Earth [Re: Zoid]
spiderbreeder Offline
member


Registered: 11/29/08
Posts: 300
Loc: Sydney,Australia
I totally agree that the people killing animals for anything other than food is a violation of the tenth rule indeed.

All these shark fin plunderers, whale/dolphin murderers, and tiger penis thieves etc are definitely violators of the ninth sin.

Not only are they totally disregarding the aesthetic qualities of the species they are killing, they are also totally disrupting the planet's natural balance factor- they're not only pushing certain species into extinction, they are in effect doing the same to the entire planet by stuffing up the eco-system.

If I am starving, and stuck out in the middle of nowhere, and my only chance of survival was to kill so I could eat, I would do it.

If anyone or anything invaded my space with harmful motive, I would kill them without hesitation, and go down the "acting in self defence" road...

On a darker note , the situation above is probably the only time( other than serving in the Army etc) that you could literally murder a repugnant human being and get off, scott free.
_________________________
REGIE SATANAS!

Top
#20602 - 02/17/09 08:02 AM Re: Eleven Satanic Rules of the Earth [Re: Zoid]
Diavolo Offline
RIP
stalker


Registered: 09/02/07
Posts: 4997
I'm not a big Laveyan, not saying I don't see value in certain things he wrote but a part of what was inserted in the SB is what I consider societal houseniggery.

If one considers morals to be solely subjective, one can't suddenly start preaching objective ones. Those rules about harming children and killing non-human animals are just embarrassing when you look at the whole picture. Of course they had to be added to create a schism with traditional Satanism as described in lore and fixated into religious minds but again, it is social houseniggery nonetheless. Maybe required in the day but nowadays something I find utterly unnecessary. Of course I look at Satanism or the LHP from an individual perspective and see no need to put my shoulders or energy under the movement as a whole. To a degree because the movement as a whole, in its most common shape, implies compromise which, as usual, is always at the expense of the Self.

So what is so wrong with killing or eating endangered species? Actually nothing. Species die off all the time and have done so since the start of life. Whether the reason is climate change, destructive mutation, bad luck or humans; it does not matter. We are a part of nature and we can't prosper without it being at the expense of other organisms or species. Is it wrong to eat an endangered species? No, absolutely not. That is as wrong as only eating steak and letting all the other meat go to waste. We do that a lot and see no harm in butchering an animal for those unique parts we prefer. And no, the rest isn't all consumed by others out there.
There is no value difference between a cow and a shark. Availability does not make something more valuable, we humans tend to grant value to things less common but it's an artificial marker. A lion will eat the last antelope without thinking twice.

So I can't subscribe to those moral imperatives passed on to us by the SB. If someone wants to kill animals for pleasure, lust or use in ritual, that's their decision and whether I like that or not can't have any effect on it being an objective moral or not.

D.

Top
#20606 - 02/17/09 09:52 AM Re: Eleven Satanic Rules of the Earth [Re: Diavolo]
XauriEL Offline
stranger


Registered: 02/16/09
Posts: 9
Loc: Saskatchewan, Canada
I don't just follow the Satanic Rules of the Earth I was 'told to'. They are guidelines to help live a long, happy, self-fulfilled life. They really have to be seen in conjunction with the rest of the philosophy, particularly the Satanic Sins.

My own perspective is that the majority of the philosophy is an outgrowth of the Satanic Sins, particularly of the primary sin, Stupidity (which the other sins are implicit in). Like it or not, the world has no qualms about killing you or destroying you emotionally. Self-discipline is not about doing what's 'right' by society's definition. It's about weighing risks against rewards, effort against effect. I see the Rules of the Earth not as hard-fast 'universal laws' but as guidelines to common situations where the potential risk outweighs the possible rewards, or vice versa; situations where the potential effect is not worth the required effort.

Taker the ninth rule 'do not harm little children'. Every time you hurt or kill someone you make enemies of them (if they survive) and everyone who cares about them. Harming someone if it's not necessary to do so, if they're not harming or threatening you, is a stupid move. Children are in the vast majority of cases not capable of threatening an adult; sure, there are situations where you have to take the kid out to save your own life, but in the general scheme of things, harming children is simply unnecessary. Therefore whatever you think you might get out of harming them, there can't be that many situations where it's not outweighed by the fact that now you've got 10-100 times as many people gunning for you. Even if they're an orphan with no family, odds are *someone* out there is going to care enough through pure sympathy to come after you and take you out. That being said, go ahead and kill as many children as you think you need to. Just don't be surprised, or expect sympathy from me, when you suffer the consequences of your stupidity.
_________________________
The Crash is Coming

Top
#20609 - 02/17/09 10:03 AM Re: Eleven Satanic Rules of the Earth [Re: XauriEL]
Diavolo Offline
RIP
stalker


Registered: 09/02/07
Posts: 4997
Guidelines huh? That's probably why people talk about breaking them or sinning against them. You call them guidelines, I call them moral rules. Seeing how people respond to criticism upon them, I think I'm closer to the truth.

D.

Top
#20621 - 02/17/09 03:46 PM Re: Eleven Satanic Rules of the Earth [Re: Diavolo]
Dan_Dread Offline
stalker


Registered: 10/08/08
Posts: 3810
Loc: Vancouver, Canada
I have always seen the statements/rules/sins not as rules or guidelines, but as identifying traits. Rather than a rulebook to be adapted to, these writings are to either be agreed with or not. If you see your own behavior set and morality embodied in what is written, without having to change or adapt, you just might be a Satanist.

The type of person that does not find these rules objectionable or constraining, but rather as normalcy and plain common sense, may even be that rare human phenotype that has been labeled as 'Satanist'.

_________________________
ADM
ideological vandal

Top
#20624 - 02/17/09 04:17 PM Re: Eleven Satanic Rules of the Earth [Re: Dan_Dread]
Diavolo Offline
RIP
stalker


Registered: 09/02/07
Posts: 4997
Your identifying traits are moral rules Dan. It's not because one names it differently that the content changes. Guidelines can't be broken. Identifying traits, rules and laws require conformity. Satanism by nature can't be of a conformist nature and it cannot wield with moral premises. So it is plain silly to uphold them as a must follow or suffer punishment in whatever shape.

Laveyan Satanism as created in the day is a moral philosophy. It doesn't matter if rebellion or non-conformity is upheld, the very nature of certain aspect of it are conformist and moral to the core. It's of course not in your face like other religions but nonetheless it is there. The sins or rules are prime examples of it, whether they make sense or not.

In my opinion everything in life is situational. Therefore it is rather silly to create limitations one isn't sure one can uphold. I don't believe in that shit. Don't harm children and the non-human animals stuff is plain silly. We sin against them all the time, if it isn't direct, it is indirect. I've set out my arguments about one of the rules before so I am not going to repeat them here. I assume if people think about it, they might realize that such rules are only there for the feel-good and that they have no intrinsic value at all. But of course, such feel-good rules, who's going to object against them at all? No sane human one might assume. Well, everyone that thinks a bit longer about them and can get past the obviousness of them might see it differently. Still, like nice little memes they are repeated all the time without anyone every wondering the actual value or content. And if someone does, instead of thinking about the criticism, all I see is a defense of the rules. It's weird, you know, us being free-thinkers and such.

D.

Top
#20627 - 02/17/09 05:01 PM Re: Eleven Satanic Rules of the Earth [Re: Diavolo]
Dan_Dread Offline
stalker


Registered: 10/08/08
Posts: 3810
Loc: Vancouver, Canada
 Quote:

Identifying traits, rules and laws require conformity

Is it really conformity to fall in line with your own natural behaviors and beliefs? I would call it self-honesty myself.

Personally if I found the tenets and descriptions of what constitutes a Satanist limiting or out of character, I would probably find a new, more accurate label for what I am and how I believe. Or maybe just use none at all.
_________________________
ADM
ideological vandal

Top
#20631 - 02/17/09 05:18 PM Re: Eleven Satanic Rules of the Earth [Re: Diavolo]
XauriEL Offline
stranger


Registered: 02/16/09
Posts: 9
Loc: Saskatchewan, Canada
So the rule is, 'you're not allowed to follow any rules'?

I choose which 'rules' I will follow, and when to bend or break them, depending on my needs and desires. I find the LaVeyan Rules of the Earth to be a valuable touchstone as far as what kind of behaviour will rationally maximize my happiness and fulfillment in life without unduly impinging my personal freedom and bringing the least reasonable amount of blowback on me from the society and the reality we live in. I can certainly imagine situations in which I would break any or every one of the Rules, for instance if I was beset by child soldiers who were intent on murdering me I would more than likely have to hurt or even kill them to keep myself alive. That doesn't alter the fact that killing children, for the most part and in the vast majority of circumstances, is a really stupid thing to do. Stealing is a stupid thing to do. Forcing sex on someone who doesn't want it is stupid. Trying to give your advice to people who won't listen is stupid and a waste of time. Killing endangered animals without reason upsets the balance of the ecology in ways that end up coming back against you, therefore it is bloody stupid.

Nonconformity for the sake of nonconformity is nothing but foolish relativism. No, I am not required by my avocation of Satanism to withold my judgment of the stupid actions of others. In fact quite the opposite, my judgment is the only one that matters within my existence. Everyone follows rules, if you really think you don't you come off as somewhat deluded. You follow the rule of not jumping off 100 story buildings. Guidelines can and should be broken when necessary; they are not commandments. But in the vast majority situations you will encounter in your everyday life, following them is a good way to stay alive, stay focused, and get the advantage over people who follow stupid rules or don't think they're subject to the dictates of reality.
_________________________
The Crash is Coming

Top
#20633 - 02/17/09 06:08 PM Re: Eleven Satanic Rules of the Earth [Re: XauriEL]
Diavolo Offline
RIP
stalker


Registered: 09/02/07
Posts: 4997
I'm going to be nice in my reply. You're from Saskawatcha-land or something and maybe you do have other manners of reading and interpreting things.

You wield the word stupid a lot, which is humorous because a lot of what you are ranting about here got very little to do with what I wrote. What I said is that those rules are moral rules and because morals are subjective, people should decide for themselves if they follow them or not. Your previous rant about killing children and such was all nice and swell but as an argument against my comment about the morality of a rule, a bit stupid. Next you mention how you choose to follow or bend every rule as you see fit, suddenly agreeing with my argument from before but now accusing me of saying that I claim none should follow any rule at all. Again, and I'm going to spell it: S U B J E C T I V I T Y D O E S N O T I M P L Y T H O U S H A L T. It implies you can. Obama was right; yes we can.

D.

Top
#20651 - 02/17/09 08:45 PM Re: Eleven Satanic Rules of the Earth [Re: Diavolo]
6Satan6Archist6 Offline
stalker


Registered: 10/16/08
Posts: 2509
Please forgive all the multi-quoting, there was a lot said here, some more intelligently than others – in my opinion – that I would like to comment on.

 Originally Posted By: XauriEL
I'm curious as to how people view animal testing in scientific/medical experiments, vis. the tenth rule. My personal intuition is that human testing is more reasonable, as it would reveal more about the human reaction than even chimps do. This would be a good use for various worthless parasites. Thoughts?


Personally I am against animal testing, even if only due to my own “morality”. Human testing is often done, and you can even get paid for it! Sometimes, though, there can be unpleasant side effects. Your suggestion that it (product testing), “ would be a good use for various worthless parasites.” The problem with that being; who decides what qualities define a worthless parasite? I could make the argument that a rat is a worthless parasite. That aside – what makes you think you could force this upon anyone? Wouldn’t that be just as “wrong” as forcing an animal to undergo the very same testing?

Instances of non-human animal testing have been quelled over the years, however; the testing will continue unless it is made illegal, or it becomes no longer economically viable. Good luck getting that legislation passed. I am sure the major of the companies that do test on non-human animals, especially pharmaceutical companies, keep the palms of government officials well greased to insure that any such legislation is snuffed out before it could even get off the ground. Unless P.E.T.A organizes a hostile take-over of the government.

 Originally Posted By: XauriEL
I don't just follow the Satanic Rules of the Earth I was 'told to'. They are guidelines to help live a long, happy, self-fulfilled life.


Are you implying that without these “guidelines” one wouldn’t be able to “live a long, happy, self-fulfilled life”? I am positive that are millions of people out there who are quite happy of your life that have never even seen a Satanic Bible, let alone need it in order to enjoy their lives.

Xians say the very same thing about their bible, as I am sure members of other religions do as well. They aren’t anymore correct in saying that than you were, and for the exact same reasons.

 Originally Posted By: XauriEL
So the rule is, 'you're not allowed to follow any rules'?


No. The rule is: do what works for you. Whether it be following all the rules, some of the rules, or none of the rules. Just be aware that there are consequences for our actions. Be the consequences good or bad we will be subject to them should we so choose to undertake whatever action bares said consequences.

 Originally Posted By: XauriEL
killing children, for the most part and in the vast majority of circumstances, is a really stupid thing to do.


That should say killing anyone, for the most part and in the vast majority of circumstances, is a really stupid thing to do. You also go on to mention that stealing from, and forcing sex on other people is stupid; yet you don’t specify children.(e.g. stealing from children/forcing sex on children)

I just find it funny that one would have a qualifier while the others do not.


 Originally Posted By: XauriEL
Killing endangered animals without reason upsets the balance of the ecology in ways that end up coming back against you, therefore it is bloody stupid.


Species die off all the time. Something like 90% of all the species that have ever lived on earth have gone extinct. We will to eventually, and you can be damn sure that no “higher life form” will ever put us on some list. The Dodo went extinct, man was the cause of that. I don’t hear anyone complaining about it. Nor do I see anyways that it “came back against” anyone. In fact, I can’t think of an instance where a species going extinct had a negative impact on our life. Perhaps someone else can think of one?

I can, however, think of an instance where a species going extinct had a positive impact on us: the dinosaurs. It has been said that if the cataclysmic event that wiped out the dinosaurs had not happened; there would be a good chance they would be the dominant species on the planet. If that were the case you wouldn’t be able to bitch about animal testing because you would be too busy trying not to become some velociraptor’s next meal.

 Originally Posted By: XauriEL
You follow the rule of not jumping off 100 story buildings.


No, but I am mindful of the laws of gravity. \:D

 Originally Posted By: Diavolo
If one considers morals to be solely subjective, one can't suddenly start preaching objective ones. Those rules about harming children and killing non-human animals are just embarrassing when you look at the whole picture. Of course they had to be added to create a schism with traditional Satanism as described in lore and fixated into religious minds


Well said. Especially concerning the rule of not harming little children. I doubt if there is anyone Satanist or otherwise that would think it be wrong to harm child solely because TSB says that it is so. The majority of people, I think, would avoid that because their own morality, with outside influence or not, deems it to be wrong. This of course would not apply to sociopaths or other people who get off on doing such things.

I would think that the main reason that not harming little children was specifically outlined as a “rule” is as D has already pointed out; to distance LaVey’s vision of Satanism from what most of society would view Satanism as (i.e. some sort of fringe cult that sacrifices newborns to Satan).
_________________________
No gods. No masters.

Top
#20655 - 02/17/09 09:00 PM Re: Eleven Satanic Rules of the Earth [Re: Diavolo]
XauriEL Offline
stranger


Registered: 02/16/09
Posts: 9
Loc: Saskatchewan, Canada
Who's talking about morality?
I'm not.
I'm talking about making reasonable choices in order to have a successful life.
I'm talking about the way I see the LaVeyan precepts. I don't see them as moral prescriptions. I see them as algorithms to be applied to the situation at hand. Obviously I'm speaking only for myself.
It's not 'conformity' to die when you fall off a 100 story building. Reality is not subjective.
You mentioned the ninth rule, so that's the example I used. I don't recall saying anything about whether it was moral.
I really could not care less what 'moral' choices you make. If morality is absolutely subjective, it's a meaningless term with no relevance to what I'm talking about.
 Quote:
Guidelines can't be broken. Identifying traits, rules and laws require conformity. Satanism by nature can't be of a conformist nature and it cannot wield with moral premises.

 Quote:
So the rule is, 'you're not allowed to follow any rules'?

 Quote:
... suddenly agreeing with my argument from before but now accusing me of saying that I claim none should follow any rule at all.

That's what I understood you to say. It seemed to me that you were specifically invalidating my choice to follow the 'guidelines' I choose to undertake. Pardon if I misapprehended, but your sentence structure is unclear.

Thank you for being 'nice' as far as it goes, but you seem to be arguing with something other than what I'm saying.
The flippant, disrespectful reference to my place of residence is not appreciated. Please engage with me, not with your ignorant preconception of what I am.
_________________________
The Crash is Coming

Top
#20657 - 02/17/09 09:01 PM Re: Eleven Satanic Rules of the Earth [Re: Diavolo]
Zoid Offline
member


Registered: 01/24/09
Posts: 109
Loc: USA - New Jersey
 Originally Posted By: Diavolo
If one considers morals to be solely subjective, one can't suddenly start preaching objective ones.


In my view there is no such thing as a moral dimension to the universe. The Superego is a disease. The Ten Commandments are mind-rape. My parents were jackasses and what they taught me was poisonous.

This doesn't stop me, however, from refusing to perform and refusing to let others perform behaviors that I abhor. This is precisely why I had previously drawn attention to what I talk about as Satanic Heart. Good is what I'm emotionally positive toward. Evil is what I'm emotionally negative toward. And yes, this is the epitome of subjectivity. I consider the notion of objective values to be an oxymoron.

If Person X makes ready to shoot a harpoon at a humpback whale in my presence, I will use force to stop that from occurring. If Person X is a better fighter, I will lose and fail; otherwise, I will win and succeed. In taking this action, I will make no claims of morality, God's will, lessons from my parents, or any other pretense at being guided by objective truth. I like whales; I don't like whale-harpooners; I protect the first and resist the second because my heart compels me to do so.

Whenever free agents come near one another, there is the possibility of collision. Sub-atomic particles collide. Air currents collide. Tigers and antelopes collide - if the tiger is fast enough. Collision and freedom do not contradict one another. Quite the contrary.

The Eleven Satanic Rules of the Earth are my emotions written down. They are my heart on paper. If they weren't, I would reject them. If Person X has a heart that rejects the Eleven Rules, then Person X and I will collide. This is natural. This is life. I uphold Person X's intrinsic freedom to oppose me. I will also punch Person X repeatedly in the face. There is no contradiction.

In the end this boils down to that well known principle, might is right. That principle, might is right, is the unspoken foundation of all law. Laws bind because might says so. Behind every law is a gun. Even our election laws are secured by might. If our armed forces rejected an election, it would stand rejected, because against our armed forces there is no feasible recourse. Democracy exists because the military permits it to. This is true in every country.

 Originally Posted By: Diavolo

So what is so wrong with killing or eating endangered species? Actually nothing.


Right and wrong don't exist at all. But wrath exists, and ofttimes carries a gun.

 Originally Posted By: Diavolo

There is no value difference between a cow and a shark.


Objectively there is no value difference between any two things we could name, because objective value is an oxymoron. Speak of emotion, and might, and then the shark may come to be seen as more valuable than the cow.

 Originally Posted By: Diavolo

A lion will eat the last antelope without thinking twice.


Not if I shoot the lion. An odd scenario, to be sure, since lions are more threatened than antelopes, but I take your hypothetical as I find it.

Top
#20659 - 02/17/09 09:41 PM Re: Eleven Satanic Rules of the Earth [Re: 6Satan6Archist6]
XauriEL Offline
stranger


Registered: 02/16/09
Posts: 9
Loc: Saskatchewan, Canada
 Quote:
The problem with that being; who decides what qualities define a worthless parasite? I could make the argument that a rat is a worthless parasite. That aside – what makes you think you could force this upon anyone?

Fair question. From Dictionary.com: Parasite n. 2. a person who receives support, advantage, or the like, from another or others without giving any useful or proper return, as one who lives on the hospitality of others. Make of that what you will.
I don't believe I mentioned the issue of force here. I meant to imply that parasites deprived of their support might well be glad to be useful as human test subjects rather than being left to starve. Apparently I need to practice my clarity and concision.
 Quote:
Are you implying that without these “guidelines” one wouldn’t be able to “live a long, happy, self-fulfilled life”?

No, I don't believe I said that. I think these particular guidelines, among others, are merely a human reflection of the realities of the universe we live in. That is, they are rationally discoverable from first principles. Anyone who has a happy life, the more power to them, obviously they're doing something right. I don't see the SB as 'received wisdom' but rather as a human laying out his (admittedly at times flawed) reasoning on why it's a good idea to act a certain way. I wouldn't try to enforce those rules or convert anyone to them, though I often marvel at the circumstances people bring on themselves from failing to understand the consequences of their actions.
 Quote:
I just find it funny that one would have a qualifier while the others do not.

I would say the rule is specifically applied to children because children are specifically powerless to do the things that would justify harming them. Whereas there are a vast array of circumstances that would justify hurting or killing another adult. Similarly, I can't think of any circumstance offhand where whatever someone gets out of rape could possibly be worth the kind of shit they bring back on themselves. But I can certainly imagine circumstances where taking something away from someone that they didn't want or can't handle could be both to their benefit and to mine (which was the specific principle I was referring to).
 Quote:
Species die off all the time ... I can’t think of an instance where a species going extinct had a negative impact on our life.

Edible fish stocks are declining to the point where people are losing their jobs. You might like jellyfish but I prefer tuna. However it goes beyond just the immediate impact. Ecologies are complicated nonlinear systems where minor disturbances have major effects. When one species goes extinct others replace it who are capable of surviving and thriving on whatever killed the unfortunate one. When you fill the ocean with poison, it creates fireweed. The death of the dodo didn't have adverse effects, true; but then, the dodo was in isolated population in a relatively closed system (that's why it became so stupid). It was a one off. That case doesn't tell us a lot about the ecosystem as a whole.
 Quote:
I can, however, think of an instance where a species going extinct had a positive impact on us: the dinosaurs.

I wasn't aware that was the direct result of human activities. Let's not get anthropic here.
_________________________
The Crash is Coming

Top
Page 1 of 3 123>


Moderator:  Woland, TV is God, fakepropht, SkaffenAmtiskaw, Asmedious, Fist 
Hop to:

Generated in 0.03 seconds of which 0.001 seconds were spent on 28 queries. Zlib compression disabled.