EtuMalku
Abn Iblis ابن إبليس
Thank you
I'm not about to waste my time on you. Get your facts straight, read a book.
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
LaVeyan Satanism
- Thread starter VoidCat
- Start date
Good, go away and stop wasting my time with your whining. You have no argument to the contrary, anyway, and you know it.
VoidCat
Use any and all pronouns including neo and it/it's
Nothing will stop disabled folk from existing they'll be born no matter what and they aren't less then tho some things indeed may be impossible for them to do. My problem is eugenics is slippery. What is deemed better? What is deemed stronger? Many think I shouldn't reproduce cuz of my autism. Ever. I was told as a kid that my genes are poor by a nurse cuz of the Family history of schizophrenia and autism and I should never pass those genes on.
Disabled folk in the past cuz of the idea only the strong should reproduce have been forcabily sterilized against their will and it's still legal to do so in many states. If we should only reproduce with those deem better then certain folks then it also logically follows those who aren't talented and such those who are less then such as the disabled shouldn't reproduce.
Last edited:
I wouldn't take it too personally as most of the people who spout that garbage will never have children, anyway.
Peter Gilmore and his wife, Peggy, don't, as far as I know. I guess that's natural selection.
Last edited:
VoidCat
Use any and all pronouns including neo and it/it's
I was told I shouldn't reproduce by my aunt. She's raised kids. But thats not the point. The point is this idea that disabled folk are less then is very prevalent. Just look at how folks go on about Covid. Tons of folk many I know said it only affects the chronically ill and the disabled so we shouldn't worry about it. So no one seems give a **** if disabled folk died. And this whole online thing? Us disabled folk have been fighting for classes and more things to be done online for years. We were always told not possible too much work. But the moment abled bodied folk needed it it happens overnight and guess what? I bet companies won't allow it for the disabled once covid ends. There's so many issues facing the disabled community regarding politics that my political affilation has turned into not wanting disabled folk to die due to healthcare changes and other things. And NO ONE gives a ****.I wouldn't take it too personally as most of the people who spout that garbage will never have children, anyway.
It's cuz of this kind of rhetoric. That disabled folk are less than. That we are suffering and might as well not be alive. So yeah I take it personally. Cuz what covid and such has taught me is one thing for certain: folks would rather people like me not exist.
I'm in much the same boat as you on this. With my awful family history on both sides, my mental health issues and addiction issues, etc. they wouldn't want me reproducing, either. But they can shove it.
VoidCat
Use any and all pronouns including neo and it/it's
Sorry to hear that
Eh, no worries. Life is life.
This is both scientifically incorrect and a slippery slope that opens the door to embracing Nazism and other highly discriminatory and pseudoscientific ideologies.
eugenics | Definition, History, & Facts
I have long viewed certain forms of Satanism, including some within the LaVeyan variety, as contrarian for the sake of contrarianism, intentionally provocative in ways that aren't intellectually or morally useful, and extremely hateful and prone to abusive thinking.
The apologetics for eugenics in this thread solidify my impression.
epronovost
Well-Known Member
No it does not follow. Eugenics, at least in its more mild and popular amongst the medical community of the first half of the 20th century, is interested in preventing the spread of hereditary disease like certain cancer types, hemophilia, schizophrenia, diabetes of type 1 and other disease of the sort. It doesn't concern itself with talent or non-hereditary disease like most cancers, type 2 diabetes or depression. Talents aren't hereditary; they are acquired through education. Intelligence itself isn't very highly hereditary so aren't really under the influence of eugenics. Eugenics cannot impact those positively. Of course the fact that most disease, even genetical disorders, derive from many factor makes the potential contribution of eugenics extremely low to completely null at the very best. Eugenics is a bit like trying to cure everything with antibiotics; it just doesn't work. Yet, it doesn't follow that all forms of eugenics necessarily lead down to the most crazed version of it where selection goes down to barely hereditary traits.
Shadow Wolf
Certified People sTabber & Business Owner
That's literally everyone. I can't work at a factory with my knees. But not many factory workers can build a robot. I can. And Stephen Hawking made us all look like aretards.
But even "normal" people. Not many doctors know how to work on their car, and they often have the worst hand writing out there. Someone who excels in English may suck at math, while the Mathematician can't diagram a sentence to save his life.
That's the reality of disability. Even those deemed "disabled" have advantaged and disadvantages. Just like everybody else. That's not going anywhere. Even where we have scientific selected breeding and genetic engineered organisms, evolution still exists, it still happens, and thwarts plans of progress and better.
VoidCat
Use any and all pronouns including neo and it/it's
It's a leap many have made. Look I'm ok with some mild forms of eugenics. Like aborting a child if they are going to suffer long and painfully or if they are going to die soon after birth. But saying folk should reproduce only with the strong does and has resulted in folks thinking disabled folk shouldn't reproduce cuz of their genes. After all disability can be inherited.
My mom had schizophrenia by the way. Should i have not been born cuz the chance I could end up with it?
Last edited:
epronovost
Well-Known Member
Not necessarily. Schizophrenia is hereditary, but largely "recessive" and can vary in terms of intensity. If both your parents had schizophrenia to a severe degree, then I don't think it would have been wise for them to be parents as they would almost certainly be incapable of being responsible parents, especially to a child who is most likely to have schizophrenia. It's all a question of degree. What are "the chances" precisely and what are the predictable consequences. That's why I don't believe much in eugenics. It's almost impossible to apply in a real medical setting with a reasonable degree of efficiency. It's the sort of idea that sounds good on paper in many circumstances, but is almost impossible to apply in real life.
I'm sorry, if you wanted someone to confirm or infirm the value of your existence, I'm afraid I can't do that; only you can and that's probably for the best in my opinion.
VoidCat
Use any and all pronouns including neo and it/it's
this is part of why I have a problem.
Kooky
Freedom from Sanity
One possible reason I could think of is that it's total bollocks based on an extremely bad, counterproductive, and potentially dangerous understanding of the underlying science of genetics.
I don't find it a useful habit to build into my psyche. I don't want to be a manipulative cuss.
Viker
Your beloved eccentric Auntie Cristal
I view my experience with LaVeyan style Satanism as that for the time it was the only ride in a one trick pony town, so to speak. There was no real internet, resources or alternative back then. I saw it as that I felt I had to get to the next floor this is one of the steps up. The whole experience had left me burnt to underwhelmed. There's way more out there.
As many have noticed by now, this is why I have distanced myself from mainstream Satanism. I still don't care if others call me a Satanist. It's no big deal. I prefer my own way now. Got my own bag of cats to swing around.
As many have noticed by now, this is why I have distanced myself from mainstream Satanism. I still don't care if others call me a Satanist. It's no big deal. I prefer my own way now. Got my own bag of cats to swing around.
VoidCat
Use any and all pronouns including neo and it/it's
oof. I kinda let out a years worth of pent up rage partly out in one post...
I honestly was not in the mood to argue against eugenics tho I expected it to be brought up when I posted this thread.
Oh well
Sorry @Saint Frankenstein for snapping at you.
VoidCat
Use any and all pronouns including neo and it/it's
Imma also going to apologize to @epronovost and @Aštra’el
Too while im at it. I was not in the mood and honestly shouldn't have been arguing. I wasn't too rude to y'all. But I couldve put more thought into my replies if I hadnt let my emotions get the best of me and had a more intelligent discussion. I could've had better arguments and may have been more willing to actually listen to yall's views and understand more of what is being discussed.
It didn't help it was late last night...i get grouchy after a certain time and my thoughts significantly decline.
Too while im at it. I was not in the mood and honestly shouldn't have been arguing. I wasn't too rude to y'all. But I couldve put more thought into my replies if I hadnt let my emotions get the best of me and had a more intelligent discussion. I could've had better arguments and may have been more willing to actually listen to yall's views and understand more of what is being discussed.
It didn't help it was late last night...i get grouchy after a certain time and my thoughts significantly decline.
Last edited:
Social Darwinism promotes the rich, powerful, smart, cheaters, and famous. It means that whoever prospers survives, and those who don't prosper don't survive.
Welfare promotes the poor. America has been keeping the poor alive for a long time. Some gripe that the poor have more kids than the rich, so, with social darwinism undone, the stupid are beginning to outnumber the smart.
Jesus promoted the poor. He healed the sick (so believed in universal health care, but perhaps not exactly like Obamacare). He fed the hungry and railed against churches that closed their doors to the hungry while buying expensive bobbles.
It is difficult for the rich to have a good life if they don't have things like refrigerators. If only the rich could afford refrigerators, only a few refrigerators would be manufactured. This is the problem in starving third world countries....even the rich can't afford luxuries because so few are made.
The saying is: "a rising tide floats all ships." That is, if the entire economy is doing well (for example, if everyone can afford a refrigerator) then the cost of refrigerators and availability of refrigerators allows the rich to own them as well.
Consider the instance of Texaco striking oil in South America. The locals thought that they would be like uncle Jed (Beverly Hillbillies). But, Texaco made a deal with the chief, so the chief could afford a generator and TV for his thatched hut, and all of the other thatched huts didn't have a TV. The chief had the richest thatched hut in the village. Texaco spilled carcinogenic (cancer causing) chemicals in the water, the jungle died off, the animals died, the kids got cancer, so Texaco paid the families of the late cancer victims $500 each. I wonder how many people would be willing to lose their lives in horrible agony for $500?
When wealth is not shared, everyone suffers....even the chief.
China currently enslaves little kids to cut production costs. This is the opposite of social darwinism, and it is economically viable (though immoral). Presidential hopeful, John Kerry, wanted to end trade with countries that enslaved workers and harmed kids. This would mean that American workers would no longer compete for wages with enslaved kids who earn 25 cents per day. So, perhaps Detroit (the car making capital of the world) would no longer be a ghost town? When W. Bush allowed factories to outsource to foreign countries to take advantage of cheap foreign slave labor, the US economy fell into a deep recession (year 2008), though President Donald Trump was trying to bring US companies back onto US soil (though no longer owned by the US).
All stocks are internationally owned....so helping a company doesn't help America.
Hotten's list of "Persons of Quality," was a list of the rich, not a list of the moral and good. Thus, slavers were on the list, as were ruthless corporate tycoons. For example, Andrew Carnegie was a steel tycoon who had been dirt poor, and forced to work as a kid. He hired kids to reach into machinery where adult arms were too big, while machines were running, and often their little arms would be ripped off. So, he fired the $1/day kid and hired another $1/day kid to take his place (one that was not missing an arm....yet). Carnegie couldn't take his money to heaven (no one can...and one can't bribe their way into heaven). So, Carnegie did the next best thing....he made elaborate and decorative libraries that bore his name. It was a publicity stunt to ensure that everyone remembered the name Carnegie. It was not a donation from his heart, it was a donation to bolster his reputation for years to come. Carnegie might be a man of quality.
The rich are the ones who rule the world. They can even convince the poor to vote away their constitutional rights. For example, people, today, allow HMOs to prevent lawsuits, and instead they must arbitrate, with the HMO as the judge of the arbitration. Often the HMOs rewrite the complaints then say that they are nonsense. The right to sue is in the Constitution, and said to be an unalienable right.
When social Darwinism puts the rich in charge, they don't follow the teachings of Jesus.
Following the teachings of Jesus might result in a large group of people who refuse to work (because they get aid regardless of whether they work or not). This is the problem with Socialism, and Jesus preached Socialism.
The alternative is a mixture of Capitalism and Socialism (which is how the US government worked after WW II before tax was dropped for the rich. It was a very prosperous time.
Hitler used National Socialism, and his economy was great, but he was a dictator (which had nothing to do with Socialism....which is sharing).