Metal Reviews

Nothing to do with it, I don't think so. Someone else brought up religions that weren't morally outrageous. I added to that justly because it is true.

Neitchze was not the first nor last heretic and I doubt Anton LaVey ever read an Ayn Rand novel or her philosophy, especially since he started his organization well before her media noteriety.

He has gone very in depth as to his motivations (I doubt it was money, he never had any and always had employment until he started getting royalties as an author, he was a professional musician)

By the way, what books of his have you read that you can claim it is a ripoff of anyone's work? I doubt any because I have read all of his works and they have little to do with neitchze or rand.

People want opinions, unless they disagree with them.

Excellent points. Most Muslims are peaceful and are not interested in conflict or even enlightning others that are not of thier creed. That doesn't mean I don't despise thier religion as a whole. Christians however insist you must be like themselves and have effectively changed political policies because they believe that someone's religion should also have very deep political motivations, which, they also think everyone should be subscribing to as well.

So you aren't denying Lavey stole from Nietzsche or are you just saying they are in the same vein? Ayn Rand was popular in the 40s and LaVey started his shit in the 60s; I doubt he would claim he read it, if he did.

I'll admit to not reading any whole book of his, but I have read countless pages off of the church's site and summaries of his ideas. I try not to spend $20 on books that I already have under the name of The Antichrist by Nietzsche. So you've read all of LaVey's ,have you ever read a single Nietzsche or Rand because if so it would be hard not to see the blatant call for individualism and giving into passions, as Nietzsche calls them.

Please read Section 2. (It's short. Don't worry.)
http://www.handprint.com/SC/NIE/antich.html#sect2

As for the whole opinions, I love different opinions; I just can't stand idiotic ones. I might as well stop now because I doubt you will come to understand my opinion.

I would love to agree with this and I may, and probably are, being brainwashed into thinking that.

In my defense though, I believe that Islam calls for the conquest of all non-believers (not jihad though). Not forced conversions, just conquering and unless I'm wrong, that ideology will continue to plague any political and social interaction that occurs between the two cultures.

Christianity calls for the conversion of non-believers too, I think you just need to replace that with acceptance of others' beliefs

It's quite silly to get punished for naming your teddy bear 'Mohammed'. But she should have known better that the Muslims won't tolerate any of these sort of mockery. It's pretty ridiculous banning and disallowing any form of depiction of their God, prophets, etc, but hey, you're in their world, go by the rules. Play it safe.

Haha, we're doing a satire issue for our paper, and I'm basing my article on this story. I'll post it when it's published.

That does depend slightly on which denomination of Christianity you're talking about, though. Evangelicals, in particular, are all about "Spreading The Good News", "never associating with non-Christians", and "everybody must think like I do otherwise they're going to Hell." Baptists and, of course, fundamentalists often have similar ideologies. Coincidentally, it's been statistically shown that Evangelicals, Fundamentalists, and Baptists are often the least educated of the Christian denominations. Other denominations, such as Catholicism, are considerably less fascist and less afraid to question certain points in the Bible (although Catholics do tend to believe that Catholicism is the "one true religion", which I'm not so sure I completely agree with).

Not only does Islam seem to call for such a thing, it's also forbidden to even do so much as READ any religious text that are not pro-Islam. Otherwise, you'll be punished somehow by Allah.

To clarify, Islam doesn't force people to convert when they conquer them. Example: The Jews in Spain had it extremely well when the Moors were in control.

The fear in Islam from naming teddy bears Mohammad, puts Mohammad on a pedestal and Mohammad is nothing more than Moses and they don't want people to worship him or any depiction of him.

In Spain then, perhaps. Elsewhere things were as shitty under Islamic rule as under Christian. Don't make Islam out to be better than Christianity - it's not.

now we have the whole "i'm too complex to be understood" bit.

Yes, Ive read neitchze and rand and Satanism has nothing to do with either one, namely, Satan, Rituals, Goals, A respected organisation, Influence, Respect, Order, Dogma, Fun & entertainment value. One must really really read all the books to get it, many that have read all the books, claim to be satanists still don't get, nor will because they lack ,the ability to put certain facts together that encompass a whole idea when they are separated.

But just as in Christianity there is a vast range of levels of literalness (is this a word) with which you can interpret the bible, so there is in Islam. Of course, there are very few influential Christians with the power to affect politics that still subscribe to the most literal readings, but in the Muslim world this is not the case. I suspect that the problems Islam has today are a result of the strength that these leaders have been allowed to accumulate, and the influence they have in the Middle East. The leaders of Saudi Arabia and to a lesser extent Iran can be blamed for an awful lot of the awful things that are done in the name of Islam, in my opinion.

In the first case, well that is what you get when you have a royal line of nuts that can do what they want without being challenged because of their oil, and the fact that they're willing to play nicely with the West. In the latter case it's probably more complicated... Islam as a political movement (ie Islamism) gained its strength in part because secular ideologies such as nationalism, socialism etc failed to deal with the problems faced by the people of the Middle East. Hence them turning to the Ayatollahs after the revolution: secular leaders had failed to stop the West and the USSR meddling with them so damagingly, so they turned to something completely off the wall. In Palestine the same principle exists, or it seems to me that it does. People turned to Hamas because Fatah, a secular group, was so corrupt and ineffectual.

No...Coptic Christians in Egypt had it pretty well off too. Spain as a whole was a center of academia. Arabs had to actually treat their wifes with some respect, a lot more than before Islam. Islam actually kept Roman traditions like sewers, aqueducts and bathing and they kept alive Aristotle's and many other Greek philosophers' works. Islam may suck now but back in the Middle Ages it was 10x better than the Catholic Church and ransacked villages that Europe was. Middles Age Catholicism loses to Middle Age early Islam.

If you can't understand what I just said, how the hell I'm supposed to believe you when you say you understand LaVey like so few can? I just told you Nietzsche's The Anti-Christ is a precursor, if not the source, of LaVey's ideas.

Middle age Islam was all about gaining knowledge and spreading their faith. The Muslims lived in harmony among other races because it was it was a form of symbiosis. They learned new sciences from the other races and shared theirs as well. Remember, the Muslims didn't execute anyone who proposed theories that deviated from the Quran, unlike the Christians. They were a very knowledge hungry race. Middle age Muslim kingdoms in the middle east were very tolerant. The Muslims shared their countries with both the Jews and Christians.

But of course, as time passed by, the fanatics grew larger. It's all about the wrong preaching they've had. I'm sure geniuses like Ibn Sina and friends would be very disappointed looking at the present state of their people.

yeah... Islam was kinda progressive compared to other religions back in the medieval. The west actually have a lot to thank them for, without them we wouldn't be where we are today, cuz as you say they were quite hungry for knowledge. So saying that the middle east lives in the dark age, is not quite the right term to use.

Some ppl, especielly in my country, claims that women who wear scarfs, not a burka, are medieval too, which is quite funny, cuz women wore scarfs around the head too back in the 60's, at least some did, before the sexual revolution and shit. That said, I don't appreciate the look of women with scarfs, but I don't think I should dictate what other ppl wear either, unless we talking about burkas covering the women from top to toe - In my country, that is, I don't care what ppl wear in the middle east.

And the Islamic horde that wanted to conquer Europe was even crueler than the Crusaders when the siege of a city didn't go as planned. Please my friend, almost every tribe or people, or religion was equally worse if they had the same amount of power.

I don't know, I fit in nicely with other Satanists when I converse with Them, especially thier upper ranks.

Neitchze is not the only person who had the same ideas. Aristotle, Ben Franklin, et al. had some truley Satanic ideas working, but I guess since they don't fit into the mindset of people that associate anti-christianity with neitchze, all thier ideas and work can be convienently forgotten.

Anton wasn't the first, nor last, neither was neitchze, so why is the latter credited in such a way to discredit everyone else? Hypocrisy!

I'm not getting into a religion debate, because I don't waste my time arguing about something that doesn't exist.

I read the paper about this story though, and it amazes me how often angry mobs in such countries take to the streets to burn something. They're obviously bored and need some entertainment.

We all have old Playstation 1s that we don't use anymore. Why don't we start a worldwide collection of PS1 & games and parachute them into these countries, give them something to do on their days off?

Works for Western civilisation.

I'm not going to argue with you about any of this pseudo-intellectual bollocks, from whoever the hell 'Neitchze' was to the correct spelling of 'their'. I just want to at the thought of upper ranks of Satanists sitting about and VERY SERIOUSLY discussing topics like this.

Which country do you hail from, btw, I'm having a bet with myself.