Awesome story, man. That's great that people helped you out like that. There are a lot of shitbags and scum out there, but there are some really solid, quality people as well, who make it all worth while.

I am very much alike the thread starter as well. I just can't assert myself into the whole magical portion and/or ritual portion of Satanism. I'd need empirical evidence that it is actually beneficial to me or results in something I'd determine worthy for further use.

And I also tend to not be as harsh (or as how I perceive TSB to have put it) to those less responsible. I've not ever given a homeless person money, but I haven't necassarily shunned them or been utterly rude to them. I'm just apathetic to their situation.

Overall I agree with most of the tenants of Satanism, as I see it much more as an ideal than a religion.

Dialogue can resume now if you so wish.

(1) Real science does not rule out what we call Greater Magic in Satanism while scientism does.

Posturing bigots who claim to be able to "rule out" the effects of magic are thereby also claiming to be omniscient - a quality of the Judeo-Islamic-Christian God.

These are the true know-it-alls who don't.

Those who do not aspire to such heights of self-deluded hubris and take the name "Satanist" are willing to test and use tools that do work and do not care if ten thousand priests in white coats proclaim what "cannot" be.

What is, is.

Those of us who have discovered, as did Anton LaVey, that magic works will not try to convince others through argument or debate.

We are engineers of the real.

We are not evangelists for magic.

Usually we are very quiet about it.

It is a powerful tool and a secret weapon.

If you do not wish to avail yourself of tools that can go beyond what the current day technology offers, that is your choice.

The brainwashing of the masses to subservience works well in those who will not (as Aristotle suggested) look into the horse's mouth to count the number of teeth.

At this outer (public) level we do not discuss the details of what some forty years of magical experimentation has produced in terms of effective tools.

I will only simply state that like Anton LaVey, I know that magic works and will continue to use it because it does.

Those who do not wish to do not trouble me.

Neither do I bother to attempt to waken them from their deep sleep.

(2) "Responsibility to the responsible."

The bum who does not express gratitude for charity was molded to be that way by his "environment" as much as everything else that has "victimized" him?

That is merely an extension of the argument that charity should be offered to the chronically incompetent.

Another view is that each individual has free will and chooses how they will respond to anything that happens - internally and externally - whether due to genetics, politics or anything else.

We define as heroic those who courageously follow their inner will despite the "odds". So too does Satanism hold in contempt the man or woman who does the opposite and merely collapses and whines.

Anyone can have a run of "bad luck".

How they respond to it is what matters.

There is either a "ghost in the machine" who is worthy of judgment for their actions and choices, or all of humanity are merely mindless lumps of clay molded by the random machinations of a mechanical universe.

Satanism goes for number one as I see it.

This is a brutal and honest view of life.

It is not without heart. It has the greatest compassion for the heroic but also the greatest rejection of the vile.

If this appeals to you then you are of us.

If not then the world offers six billion variations on altruistic fairy tale claptrap to which you are welcome.

The choice is yours.

That is how we see it.

It IS your CHOICE.

Correct, Linguascelesta did offer value for value:

Quote:

---

I charmed My hosts and they felt their lives enriched to have met such a remarkable individual, someone who had all these physical discomforts and yet was cheery and pleasant and asked for nothing.

---

But who initiated this exchange? Unless there's more to Linguascelesta's story, it seems these strangers offered him help without anything offered to them up front. And this is the kind of thing I like to see in humanity.

He did ... by his behavior - whether or not this was done first verbally or not.

I have met him and already know this to be true.

I am a high proponent of Dale Carnegie.

However, how the human being responds to my efforts will always and forever be judged by me.

If his actions are vile, I condemn him and withdraw any effort to aid him.

If his efforts are positive, I respond in kind.

"Responsiblity to the responsible."

Not hoping that each person will always behave in a kind and intelligent way but responding to what is - this is what these words mean to me.

Observing normal automobile driving behaviors on the highways is more than enough to verify the overall courtesy, intelligence and worth of the average human being.

I'm very analytic myself and do not subscribe to magic. I vent my frustrations through visualizations much as you do. I did spend a considerable time as a Buddhist, so meditations and visualizations come fairly easily to me. I have a very narrow definition of what is and isn't science, and to me magic does not fall within the realm of science since it cannot be empirically tested and verified through the scientific method. Actually... It can, but I've yet to find a magister/magistra who would submit to such a thing. Prayer has been subjected to scientific investigation and has been found to be useless (big surprise.) I do believe in paranormal activity that is outside our current understanding of science, but until someone is able to propose a quantifiable experiment and find willing participants then the question of magic will remain one of faith for the individual practitioner.
I've also been a very compassionate person my whole life, so I can relate there as well. My experience is that those who have nothing, earned nothing. If I gave money to every outstretched hand, I'd be broke in no time. Bums on the street, telemarkets for charities, collection plates in churches, infomercials on TV... the list goes on and on. I simply reply to bums that I don't carry cash on me (which is true enough.) There are a few handicapped people who can't help being what they are, but many people choose this lifestyle willingly and knowingly. I've found, time after time, that most of the helpless have no gratitude for any sort of assistance. Finding no tangible benefits in helping random people, I now limit myself to assisting those who may prove useful in the future and who I know will feel a debt of gratitude for what I've done for them.
I believe that a Satanist is not a follower of LaVey, but a kindred spirit. We don't try to be like LaVey. LaVey just published a book which expressed what we've always known to be true. The big issue when it comes to being a Satanist or not is, "Are you having fun?" Really that's the whole point. I personally feel a kind of excitement wearing a pentagram under my shirt around a group of Christians. I get a kick out of the whole secrety cloak and dagger thing. Just a personal fetish of mine. It's my opinion that one should accept themselves as a Satanist only if doing so enriches their lives and makes the whole womb to grave experience more enjoyable.

I wish that I could have jumped in sooner. I always seem to come to late!

Quote:

---

Unless there's more to Linguascelesta's story, it seems these strangers offered him help without anything offered to them up front. And this is the kind of thing I like to see in humanity.

---

I find this last statement somewhat disturbing. It begs the question of why. Why is this the "kind of thing" you want to see in humanity? Most of the time when people say something to this effect it is because they are either deluded about the nature of humanity or because they are parasites. I am willing to give you the benefit of the doubt until you explain yourself.

I think this post of Magister Nemo's is just about the crux of the matter. Little more needs to be said and it elucidates perfectly who and what we would see as worthy of compassion or not.

Quite frankly, having compassion for those who show themselves to be wastrels serves absolutely no purpose anyway. And I cannot accept the argument that it simply makes one feel good. It makes me feel a lot better to show compassion to those who deserve it.

It is indeed not without heart:

A while ago I heard a story about a former world champion boxer who was now in retirement and enjoying his millions. He is walking in London and on a whim stops to offer a beggar a little money. Then he looks at the beggar and says "don't I know you?"

Turns out they used to go to school together. The beggar had been a highly ranked naval officer who had experienced a run of bad luck. His life had fallen apart - and he had let it.

To cut a long story short the boxer kitted him out in some new clothes and put him up in a good hotel and said this was "until he got himself back together."

The beggar got himself a job and in time payed the boxer back every penny. They remained good friends.

Now that is "kind of thing I like to see in humanity."

You might say, who initiated this exchange?

Well, perhaps the beggar had employed a spot of magic.

We all have a bit of good luck every so often. What counts is what we do with that luck. It's what we do with the magic.

Charles Bukowski said it best - "what matters most is how well you walk through the fire."

See UVRAY's post above mine for an explanation of what I meant by "what I like to see in humanity." He illustrated my point perfectly. It is this reciprocal, even exchange (give and take) that I like to see in humanity, *NOT* the privileged filling the pockets of leeches. I think you must've misunderstood me, Maya. I'm for people helping people, not people helping parasites. And I'll pretend you never implied I was one.