Question from Janiece:
I read the previous question from the Australian guy regarding the Illuminati. My issue is this… Several people who I respect and believe say Hollywood is run by Satanist paedophiles and homosexuals. They talk of and point out things that seem to validate much of this. Things that were done to or witnessed by them personally. I do not believe for one minute that the Hollywood Insiders – paedophiles or not – actually worship Satan but wonder if he is used to make claims regarding the crimes of Hollywood less credible. I am really struggling with all the “devil worship” behind all the secret societies that our Presidents and many other leaders all seem associated to. Since devil worship doesn’t seem to be the real motive behind these groups what is the purpose of using the rituals that can be clearly associated to Satanists?
Answer by SmartLX:
There are certainly plenty of homosexuals in Hollywood. There are also many suspected paedophiles in the movie industry, and confirmed or confessed paedophiles in some cases. (Roman Polanski and the father from 7th Heaven come to mind.) The difference is that one implies sexual behaviour between consenting adults and the other implies rape, at least statutory. I have no problem with homosexuals running Hollywood any more than I would have a problem with a homosexual head of state, provided that this one aspect of their identity does not drive their every decision. As for paedophiles, they should be either in prison or in therapy and have no business running an industry at the same time as either.
Aside from those relatively few individuals committing legally defined sex crimes, as happens in all industries to some degree, what exactly are the crimes of Hollywood? You’re convinced that these shadowy cabals are running the place, but what dastardly deeds are they using that power to actually do? How are you threatened, and why are you so concerned? Comment with some material and let us down the rabbit hole. The simple fact that you’re convinced isn’t enough to convince most of us, I reckon. Besides, if you don’t actually think anyone involved is a genuine Satanist, the whole subject has little to do with religion or with this site.
Satan Does Hollywood
Question from Janiece:
7 thoughts on “Satan Does Hollywood”
Instead of asking someone here to disprove the claims of the people you respect and believe, why not ask the people you respect and believe to provide you with evidence to prove their claims? After all, they are the ones saying it is true. Ask them for details, for statistics, for something that can be empirically shown. When they fail to provide it (and they will, because if such data existed it would have been all over the news), then ask yourself why you respect and believe them…
Good point Tim.
“The difference is that one implies sexual behaviour between consenting adults and the other implies rape, at least statutory.”
You affirm the idea of ‘consent’, which relies on free will being a part of reality (if that is not the case, then how is it possible to give consent without free will?). Do you believe that there is such a thing as ‘free will’, and if so, how does that square with atheistic materialism (which implies the sole operation of entirely impersonal and therefore deterministic forces)?
“As for paedophiles, they should be either in prison or in therapy and have no business running an industry at the same time as either.”
Like you, I utterly condemn paedophilia, but does this condemnation of this immoral behaviour not imply a belief that there is such a thing as objective valid morality? How does this agree with atheistic materialism? If, as atheists generally state, morality is entirely subjective, then on what basis are paedophiles judged to be ‘wrong’? They could argue that they are just bundles of molecules operating in a certain way within a completely amoral universe, and that those who condemn them have no moral basis for doing so, because their moral indignation is just matter reacting in a different way.
It seems to me that atheists routinely make statements about reality, that do not fit with their worldview. I regard this as rather strong evidence that atheism is, in fact, not true.
Hi Allistair. You’d have been better off looking up one of my multiple pieces on free will or morality, but I’ll cover both briefly here.
Consent merely relies on the concept of will, the idea that there are things that we want and don’t want and we act and speak accordingly. These desires are not under our control and therefore we are driven by them instead, so I don’t consider our will to be ‘free’, but it’s still there and a child’s will is violated by the imposition of an act it is too young to fully understand or physically cope with, such as sexual intercourse. Gay adults on the other hand know exactly what they’re getting into, take measures to be ready (like using tons of lubricant), and enjoy it immensely. In short, they have sex WILLingly.
As for objective morality, it need only be based on an object, or objective. To take for example the utilitarian approach of aiming for increased overall human happiness and minimisation of suffering, paedophilia is demonstrably counter to both, and we do the people of the world a service by preventing paedophiles from inflicting themselves on the innocent whenever possible. We ARE bundles of molecules, but as such we care a great deal about similar bundles of molecules, and we work for a better existence for all such bundles.
A popular alternative is to base an absolute morality on an absolute being who might not exist, concentrating all the uncertainty at one point to make it easier to ignore.
Allistair writes: [ If, as atheists generally state, morality is entirely subjective, then on what basis are paedophiles judged to be ‘wrong’?]
They aren’t always judged wrong. In some Middle East areas it is still permitted to take child brides for example.
That is because, as has been mentioned in previous discussions, morality IS subjective. Morality is a human construct, a concept to group certain topics and objects together under a common roof. Morality it defined by the culture or society that is doing the defining. What is considered wrong in England is not necessarily wrong in Indonesia or the Brazilian rain forest. To claim there is an absolute morality is ludicrous, especially given the moral contradictions in the very text (the Bible) that is supposed to tell us what those morals are supposed to be.
[Do you believe that there is such a thing as ‘free will’, and if so, how does that square with atheistic materialism (which implies the sole operation of entirely impersonal and therefore deterministic forces)?]
You certainly can’t believe in free will. You believe there is an all powerful and knowing god. Under that condition there is no possible way you can have free will. Everything you will do is already known, because your god is all knowing, which means that you are already destined to do everything that you will do. Someone who will commit a murder next week doesn’t know it, but god already does, because god knows all. Therefore the murderer is going to do it, they don’t have a choice. If they were going to change their mind that would already be known too, and therefore its already known that they AREN’T a murderer.
So each one of us in going to heaven or hell as is our destiny, no matter what…
To remain behind the scenes, and still influencing society, is the goal of any real anarchist. Satan doesn’t want the world to know that God exists so he is content to hide the fact that he is the real cause of calamities and disasters because if people knew that it is because of satan, then people would begin to realize that if there is a devil, then why could there not be a God. So, he works through individuals who have little to know self control or self discipline or whose souls are so depraved, that they will allow him to guide them into doing and permitting any kind of filthy act that demoralizes and compromises society. People have known since advertising was being used that it could influence the masses. Before Hollywood was used to uplift society. Bur little by little those who want to use advertising for their own good, have taken control of the media and wither they want to on purpose or not knowing it satan is using Hollywood to flush the morals of society, down the toilet. And ” all it takes for evil to win is for good to remain silent”
Convenient, isn’t it, that the way Satan works is consistent with the total absence of evidence for intervention by Satan? I’ve heard similar rationalisations for the absence of substantive evidence for God.
Comments are closed.