Satanism

Satanism Sociology/Psychology I am hoping I can somehow make this seem like a psychological report without making it lose any of it's important details. My goal in writing this paper is to hopefully make people understand and agree that Satanism is not a "Devil Worshipping," animal mutilating, child scarifying cult organization. The psychological thing comes in when people say Satanism is wrong or evil, they hear the word Satan and automatically assume that it must be bad. They make these assumptions without even taking the time to find the facts and understand them. I'll start off by saying that Satanists do not worship the devil! A Satanist believe that he or she as an individual rule their own destiny and are the god of their own lives. Satanism is a religion based on the reality that man is an animal, like all others. They choose to separate themselves from a society where natural behavior is suppressed and the strong support the weak. The average Satanist disagrees with much of Christianity. In many ways Christians are considered the enimies. Christians say Satan is a fallen angel, not a God. All religions have gods and demons, some of which are forbidden by a typical society. Satan is one among these, originally conceived by the Hebrews, long before the birth of Jesus. Most Satanists are familiar with the teachings of Christianity, and have read the Bible or part of it. They simply consider the Bible to be false and disregard it much like Christians would disregard books which represent the foundation of another religion. Satanism is not considered a religion for the white race and should not be confused with or grouped together with skinheads, The KKK, Nazi's, Neo-Nazi's, or people who support white power. Satanists are not teenage vandals, not gang murderers, not psychopathic murders, not child molesters or vicious rapists. Satanists do not sacrifice young children or animals. The ninth and tenth of the Eleven Satanic Rules of The Earth forbid this, in fact, animal sacrifices are primarily used in the Afro-Caribbean syncretistic religions such as Voodoun, Candomble', and Santeria. Child Sacrifices are used in Television and by journalists to improve ratings. A Satanist does not practice baby breeding or child molestation. Evidence does not support what is said to occur. If the number of murders said to be committed by Satanists' was accurate some bodies would have been found by now. Members of the Church of Satan are involved and advanced exactly as their own desires, abilities, and accomplishments dictate. There are no set activities, meetings, or contacts. A new member comes into the organization ideally with his or her own goals and plans of achieving them. When being brought to the church of Satan new members are told to not let anyone tell you what to believe or what to do. Advice or recommendations are one thing; orders or commands quite another. Remember that you are a free being, not a pawn in someone's power fantasy. They believe the weaker elements of society should serve the stronger elements of society or perish. Satanists support any means of returning to the order of Darwin's Natural Selection Process, this is inclusive of elimination of welfare to selective sterilization of those weaker elements. Weak elements are determined by performance and intelligence, not race or religion. So where does Satan come into all of this? Satanists believe Satan (and other gods) is not so much an entity as a force of nature. These gods are not all concerned with the life of mortals. Satan is a very powerful word that serves as an isolation between Satanists and society. It is this separation that a true Satanist appreciates and holds dear. the separation of a society where the strong and willing work for what they need and want but are forced to support the weak through welfare and charity. Satanists' know their opinions may not be politically correct, but they still obey the laws governing man on this planet and they expect the same protection under the laws as other minorities, races and religions. There are several divisions of the believe systems of various "Satanic" groups. Satanism has changed so much from it's original form. For instance a group that are sometimes referred to as The Dabblers adopt Satanic beliefs for a brief period of time, usually for entertainment rather than serious purposes. Many modern youths fall into this category. A Promethian Gnostic believe that the creator of the world (Jehovah) is the evil deity. They look at Satan as the "bringer of life"; a beneficent god. Then there is the Dark Gnostic who worships the dark force of nature. These type of groups follow a Capricious god. A Secondary Satanist would not consider themselves as being "Satanic" and actually should not be defined as Satanists. Hellfire Clubs were a phenomenon of the 18th century. The first of those was founded in the early 1700's. Members of a Hellfire Club were dedicated to political intrigue and some occasional occult activities. Many would be suprised to know that Benjamin Franklin was a very active member of this club. Those are just a few examples of different Satanic groups. There is one thing that all groups do agree on and that is the Satanic Bible. The Satanic Bible is a describing book by Anton LaVey, founder of the church

of Satan. I hope your views of Satanism have been verified. In the end you are free to believe what you want and understand. I would like to state that this paper is not written on my personal views, opinions, or religion

Reading Can Change Your Life ... Upon completion of the second grade, I was sent home with a note to my mother informing her that I would have to attend summer school to improve my reading skills. I did not want to go because Mrs. Cousins was a tough, demanding teacher and I was supposed to be on vacation. But my mother made me go and so I did. By summer's end a minor miracle had occurred. Mrs. Cousins had taught me phonics. For the first time in my life it was possible to figure out how to read and pronounce words by myself and reading wasn't something scary that made me feel stupid. The following summer I began reading Robinson Crusoe. I was a painfully slow reader but determined to read my first book cover to cover. It took several hours a day, every day, all summer to complete that book but I achieved my goal. I began checking books out of the library, usually five or six at a time, never finishing more than one and always returning them late. But I read and read and read. At thirteen I started wearing glasses to correct near-sightedness and astigmatism. Still an extremely slow reader, I enrolled myself in an adult, night class on speedreading. In six weeks I went from reading 50 to 250 words per minute. About that time, our local newspaper ran a series of articles on Amelia Earhart and I read every one of them and so discovered my first hero. Reading opened my eyes to the world of adventure. After college I began a career as a respiratory therapist. Inspired by other people's stories I read in books, I began having my own real-life adventures - hiking, sailing, and dog mushing. At forty-four, after reading Across Arctic America, I decided it was time to have my own really big adventure by retracing the journey described in that book. At forty-six, I did it! My dogs and I traveled 2,500 miles alone across the arctic. Now I earn my living speaking and writing. Learning to read changed my life and has given me years of education, entertainment, and adventure. Still a slow reader, I sometimes read kids' books about adventures and biographies just for the pleasure of reading an entire book quickly and easily. Thanks to Mrs. Cousins, a pair of glasses and a speed-reading course, I can read well. If you or someone you know has difficulty reading, seek help, find out what's wrong and try to fix the problem. Reading can change your life, too. Pam Flowers Talkeetna, AK

How to read an essay Note: this excellent process can be applied to books, chapters in books, articles, and all manner of reading. What is the title? What does it tell you about what the essay is about? What do you already know about the subject? What do you expect the essay to say about it--especially given when it was written and who the author was (see next questions)? When was the essay written? Do you know anything about the state of the historical literature on the subject at that time? If so, what do you expect the essay to say? Who wrote it? What do you expect him or her to say? What are the author's credentials, or affiliations? What are his/her prejudices? Are you familiar with the authors' other work related to the subject? Read the essay, marking the information that is crucial to you. When the text gives you crucial information, mark and note it: What exactly is the subject? How does it correspond to the title? What are the main points--the theses? What is the evidence that the author gives to sustain the thesis or theses? What is the factual information that you want to retain? Is there a good description of something you knew, or did not know, that you want to remember its location? If so, mark it. If for research, make out a research note on it. Does the author cite some important source that you want to retain for future reference? If so, mark it. If for research, make out a bibliographic note either now or on reviewing the article for such citations. Once you have finished the article, reflect on: What have you learned? How does it relate to what you already know?

Did you find the argument convincing on its own terms? Given what you know about the subject, do you think the main point(s) might be correct even if the argument was not convincing? Can you think of information that makes you doubt the main point(s), even if the essay argued it well? How does the essay relate to other things you have read--that is, how does it fit in the historical literature?

Summary form for an essay Summarize your reading (or make out your own form to suit your needs!)

date: TITLE OF BOOK, ESSAY OR ARTICLE: AUTHOR:

PUBLICATION INFORMATION:

SUBJECT:

MAIN POINT(S) (I.E., THESIS OR THESES): ELABORATION: HOW ARE THE THESES TESTED, WHAT SORTS OF METHODS AND SOURCES: HISTORIOGRAPHICAL CONTEXT AND RECEPTION/PLACE IN THE LITERATURE:

HOW PERSUASIVE AND OTHER COMMENTS: