Path: shell.portal.com!shell.portal.com!not-for-mail From: tyagi@houseofkaos.abyss.com (mordred) Newsgroups: alt.satanism,alt.magick.tyagi,alt.fan.kali.astarte.inanna,alt.pagan Subject: Re: Animal Sacrifice Date: 31 Mar 1995 09:37:30 -0800 Organization: Portal Communications (shell) Lines: 150 Sender: tyagi@shell.portal.com Message-ID: <3lhekq$7ku@jobe.shell.portal.com> References: <3jukv8$q6n@jobe.shell.portal.com> <1995Mar18.170510.5737@dxcern.cern.ch> Reply-To: tyagi@houseofkaos.abyss.com (mordred) NNTP-Posting-Host: jobe.shell.portal.com Xref: shell.portal.com alt.satanism:16702 alt.magick.tyagi:2691 alt.fan.kali.astarte.inanna:261 alt.pagan:96959 [Sorry if duplication. - tn] ~From: tyagi/TOKUS To: Private Email ~Subject: Re: Embarrassing Satanism ~Date: Tue, 7 Mar 1995 10:50:07 -0800 (PST) Kali Yuga 49950307 (excerpts) [re: animal sacrifice] |>tyagi/TOKUS |>...KILLING IS NOT SACRIFICE. ...animal sacrifice ought be supported by |>Satanists, absolutely. If you've ever eaten animal flesh, you've been practically supportive of animal killing.... ...You could support animal KILLING-FOR-FOOD-BY-BUTCHERS rather than animal sacrifice (i.e. ritual and careful murder rather than feelingless and secular slaughter). In this you could (as most Americans and CoSatanists do) condemn murdering animals in ritual while supporting it by the establishment butchery. ...Consider the possibility of Satanists who actively work with the SPCA in the 'destruction' (as the SPCA calls it) of unwanted, domesticated animals (bred by the score among 'Christian' households). Instead of being kept in a cold cage for months with several other animals she is given a nice home and care and pampered for several months to a year prior to Celebration Day. On that day she is treated as a god, brought before the altar and released from the sufferings of her existence in squalor and destitution with a quick and practiced blade. The people who have cared for her do the sacrifice. They cry as the life drains from her body. Consider Satanists who actively work *as* butchers, accepting only cared-for and loved animals as sacrifices (none of this mass-marketed meat syndrome), seeing carefully to the quick and painless (even *fearless* ebbing of life from her charge. Caring for the animals which she sacrifices, the Satanist is by far superior to the typical butcher. See my point? Consider the *magical* implications of this. Many say that the 'meat' we eat is not only shot full of hormones and reddeners to give it consumer appeal, but that it is also full of *fear* and *suffering*. Contact PETA and others to find out the conditions that most animals must endure during their sometimes horrible lives. I think y'all are reacting to your conditioning rather than from having considered this issue very carefully. [re: 'nobody would approve of a Richard Ramirez'] False. I would not condescend to judging whether his actions were 'right or wrong'. I.e. it would seem arrogant for me to begin 'approving' anyone's actions. This is much different than asking me if I would *oppose* them! Of course I would, and perhaps this is your point. [re: we'd call Ramirez a 'nut'] I will not do this, largely because once I begin by calling him a 'nut' I know that in the future it will be used against those who are like me. It doesn't matter if the label is 'nut' or 'Satanist'. The point is that it goes beyond simple pragmatic description (such as 'heterosexual') and enters into ridiculous judgementalism. If you merely mean 'not cohering to the cultural norm of behaviors', then I'd agree but not agree that this ought to require retribution. Some behaviors society needs to protect itself against. Some not. That is as far as I can go with the matter. [re: establishing 'ethical standards'] ...Most of us live conventional lives preprogrammed from birth to death by mass-media and cultural convention. We dream up big ideas about 'moral and ethical standards' when in fact there are no such things. We rationalize and justify our behaviors after the fact of our desire and doing. This is why some behaviors are illegal and yet consistently done anyway (speeding on the freeway, for example, or consumption of psychoactives).... The weak shall need braces to stand. The immature shall need laws and rules to obey. 'The slaves shall serve.'.... Count me out. Descriptions of standards of behavior have always been repulsive to me. See _Tao Te Ching_. When Tao is lost, Love is born. When Love is lost, Respectability is born. When Respectability is lost, laws are created. When laws are lost, woe is the meat and bread of the Age. [re: rebellion, youth, and Satanism] ...Separating oneself from the younger generations is not the same as learning from them, harnessing them if possible. Radical segregation is only a means to preserve comfort. I am not condemning comfort, just pointing out that you are only supporting the notion that ToS and CoS are doing precisely the opposite of what I'm arguing is valuable. ...as far as I can see, rebellion and individualism often coincide (not always, but often). When I feel oppressed, when I wish to be my own person and feel pressure telling me that I cannot, my first natural instinct is to rebel. [re: 'considering their anger' and 'educating' the young] ...'Consideration' and 'education' are top-down activities (or can easily become this). I would rather befriend them, exchange information and feelings, SHARE. This is much different than trying to force things. If they take to the more sophisticated (and often domesticated) ways of being, fine. If not, fine. Perhaps they can show me something of their antagonistic, 'sociopathic' manner. Perhaps I will need to protect myself from them. Whatever. [re: avoiding the 'heh-heh-heh-Satanism-is-COOL' style of Satanists] Why? What is it about the 'other sorts' which you find distressing? Is it that they don't have intellectual aspects which interest you? Is it possible that there is something about them which reflects something in yourself that is difficult to resolve? I don't know you offline, so I can't tell these things, but whenever I have the 'avoid it' reaction (and I do get and act on these) I find that it says more about me than about that away from which I move. This is much more interesting to me. Why would you characterize these folx as "thoroughly repulsive, idiotic-acting jerks"? Doesn't it make sense to you to follow your hormones and, given what you may (or may not) know about magick, Satanism, etc., attempt to procure some hot flesh of desired type? What, precisely, did you find so repulsive about these people? [re: 'avoiding the anti-Satanist hysteria by remaining underground'] Eventually that ground may get dug up. Letting others fight our battles for us is precisely the argument used by ToS to condemn the CoS's reactions to the recent Aquino Childcare issue. I find a lot of substance behind Dr. Aquino's contention that the CoS left the ToS holding the public bag. Mr. LaVey's books aside, I'm unsure that they have done anything at all since the SRAbuse hysteria to dissuade these ideas. Then again, I'm unsure that they are necessary. Perhaps you are correct. Perhaps the law enforce- ment agencies will continue to notice when they are duped by charlatans and false authorities. NocTifer (tyagi@houseofkaos.abyss.com)