Oh my gods, where can I get started about satanism. I write it lower-case because it does not deserve any respect, even conceptually.

I really wish I could cite my source on this one, but I read that satanism was originally formed by two Catholic priests. "satanism" was being held as a bugbear by the Church, warning people away from certain activities, holding them in check like a parent does to a small child with stories of monsters and supernatural punishments for misbehavior. Yeah, nothing changes. But these two priests were talking and realized that neither of them had actually ever met a satanist or seen any kind of actual satanic activity. So they went down into the church library where they were stationed and read as much as they could about it and actually formed the "religion", such as it is. You'll note that much of satanism is only a mirror opposite of the Church's rituals, defining itself by closely imitating its rituals but employing the conceptual opposite of everything used. If the church uses holy water, then the satanic church uses unholy water; if priests are celibate, then satanic priests must have sex with all their clergy. It goes on and on - satanists are essentially anti-conformists, defining themselves paradoxically by mimicking that which they claim to hate. That's the first strike.

Many people hold a pretty convoluted idea of what Satan is supposed to be in the first place. Originally Satan, coming from Shaitan, whose name means "the Adversary" or "the Accuser", was a devil's advocate for God, before there was a devil. God would make a decision and mull it over with his advisors, and Satan would try to imagine a worst-case scenario as a result of the plan. That was his function. Then Milton wrote that whole 'Paradise Lost' and today people will refer to it as if they were quoting Biblical text. Have you noticed this? They'll go on and on about the war between the angels and Satan being thrown down from Heaven, but try to find where in the Bible it says all this; the only reference I can find at all is Luke 10:18. (While you're looking, try to find anywhere in the Bible it says angels have wings. It doesn't. This is yet another "everybody knows" misconception propagated by ignorant mainstream culture.) Now, when the Judeo/Christian sword swung across continents and slaughtered new cultures and religions with callous disregard, it employed the trick of the age-old maxim, "The gods of the old religion are the devils of the new." Likely the pagan figure Pan had the devil mantle placed forcibly upon his shoulders, to fabricate an enemy for the Church to prosecute, and the pagans who acknowledged him were likewise crushed. Most intelligent and well-read people are quite aware that many Christian holidays come from assimilating pagan holidays, most notably Christmas, Easter, and Hallowe'en. So between swallowing pop culture and succumbing to the propaganda of the Church, I guess most people can't be blamed for not knowing who Satan is. Regardless, go ahead and smack anyone who makes reference to "Lucifer" interchangeably with Satan. Again, nowhere in the Bible does it say that Lucifer is Satan - people get confused because Isaiah 14:12 references Lucifer falling from the heavens, but that chapter is an analogy for the king of Babylon (as clearly delineated in Isaiah 14:4). Again, ignorance reigns for anyone who considers the light-bringer (Lucifer: luci- or lux-, "light" + -pher or -phoros, "to carry"; see also: Christopher, "bearer of Christ") to be the Adversary. If anything, Lucifer more closely resembles Prometheus, by etymology... is this another bedtime story cooked up by the Church to warn their sheep against anyone who might interfere with intelligence and illumination? Anyway, Lucifer/Satan = strike two.

The third strike, however, is an entirely personal reason. I adhere most closely (out of the orthodoxies) to the philosophy of Zen, as it represents living in harmony with nature, responsibility for one's actions, and consideration for others. While I don't perfectly embody these doctrines I may yet stand against anything that directly opposes them, and modern satanism would be this. Of course, satanism is as guilty as the Church of promoting materialism (Stained glass? Gold leaf? All those statues and sumptuous fabrics? What need have spiritual beings for these mundane trappings?), it's just that the Church's method is more grandiose at achieving these ends, where satanism is low and simplistic. Their belief is to use others for what they can do for you, other people are merely defined by your own needs and wants, and when your usefulness is outlived, so much for you. Satanists think they're very clever for deconstructing social relationships like this, each one believing him/herself to be above mortal and communal law. The short-sightedness of material gain and exploiting others in your environment is astounding to me. The concept of living for oneself at the expense of others is foreign to me; I believe it is in our personal best interests to compromise with the community and contribute to the well-being of others. I would do what I can for anyone around me, and have, but not with the expectation of remuneration or compensation. I see a need and I work to fulfill it, I'm a tool of the universe, part of an action completing itself. This is what makes me an exceptional worker in the office: when something needs to be done, I do it. I don't complain about how much more work I have to do; I don't whine about how I'm not going to get anything for my labor or time. I simply do what needs to be done, and then it's done and I go back to my tasks. I have always done this, ever since my military service, which is where I picked this mindset up; Zen later reaffirmed it in my mind. Mind you, I have a hard time doing this for myself, like doing the dishes when they need it, or folding my clothes when they lie around, but I have no hesitation in assisting others when the need arises. This isn't about me, there is no "me", there is only a need and a means to fulfill it. Satanists don't think like this: not only are they completely "me"-oriented, but they have the most fucked up scale of priorities to be fulfilled. Everything is material, everything they desire is temporary and myopic. This is a grand exercise in futility that I cannot wrap my mind around, so that's the third strike with me.

With other religions, I may not necessarily adhere to their tenets but I can acknowledge there is some wisdom to be had in there somewhere. Most religions preach a value for "sanctity of life". Many try to encourage communal benefit. Some emphasize abandonment of material desires, either as a means to immortality or simply a cessation of pain. What is there in satanism? Nothing. Satanism only serves as a bad foil, to show us how not to live, what not to be like. There is no reward is satanism, it is the embodiment of ignorance, its definition is in negatives. This is just too pathetic.