Heads up, to the clergy, this post is meant to raise awareness to educate themselves in the truth rather than constantly relying on someone else. To motivate and inspire to think for one's self. Which unfortunately I don't see that happening a lot.

For anyone in the clergy. I completely understand why they would hate being put on a pedestal and do not really get involved deeply in topics. Unfortunately with a lot of people unable to think for themselves in these forums I have witnessed a lot of people here who will agree with anything the clergy said rather than researching for themselves and this leads to knowing that these types of people are easily controlled and can't think for themselves, it is a sad state for sure.

Another common thing I have noticed that a lot of people will side with clergy or anyone with a title of power instead of intellectually debating both sides of a topic or perhaps there is a third side? And then they claim to know the "truth". They will probably have a response "I am thinking for myself, what hp said just makes sense" rather than doing more actual research then come back to decide for yourself. You have a choice to do as you wish. I think debating is healthy, there is no need to resort to anything disrespectful in debates and name calling which is immature in my opinion.

It's not just in the clergy either, its something that I experience in the work place with certain co-workers who are ass kissing the managers. I think it's called brown-nosing and it is a manipulative tactic to claw one's way up the ladder instead of honest hard work and success because of it.

Debating in my opinion with ANYONE is healthy and help to develop certainty of their understanding, a decisive awareness that is.

Personally for me, it has helped me with critical thinking skills, help me with speech (I have had tendency to stutter sometimes because I am hard-of-hearing/almost deaf, I wear hearing aids).

It also can help with confidence too when you come to a understanding of what you know. Also to develop more confidence to stand up for truth if the discussion promotes falsehoods or inaccuracies. And if there is any respect you can do it with gentleness, learning to control your anger and develop your identity even more, or at least strengthen your beliefs. Finally can help identifying holes in their theories and concocting more balanced arguments.

Unfortunately it doesn't always happen that way, sometimes it goes beyond to name calling, that if anyone questions another they get called a kike or "am I a jew?" response. Which says a lot about their programming and how much development they have to do. Sometimes though debates can cause both parties to believe they are right and the other is wrong. I personally believe that is not how it should work I think it should work to personally help you GROW and develop the benefits of a debate can do, that would be the aim of it rather than trying to beat someone with logic.

If Satanism is about free thought, then you definitely have a lot to do to sit down with your thoughts and observe them. Then make a decision whether to act on them or believe them.

Most of the people who cant think for themselves had an emotionally negligent or absent father or a single or present mother who instead of teaching them 'how to think' taught them 'what to think', which caused this situation you see now. Grown adults having the maturity of little kids looking at mommy or daddy to tell them what to think and do.

Jack said:

Most of the people who cant think for themselves had an emotionally negligent or absent father or a single or present mother who instead of teaching them 'how to think' taught them 'what to think', which caused this situation you see now. Grown adults having the maturity of little kids looking at mommy or daddy to tell them what to think and do.

Click to expand...

Eau contraire, in those cases the child relies on friends as father figures, or older people like uncles and close people of authority like teachers. This will most likely be a mixture of different of these groups of people and so this will lead one to have varied opinions and values- even flip flopping between different ones taught at different times. A lot of these people can fall into crime and make up the majority of the prison population.

For an absent mother there's a case where I knew a guy born under a new Moon who lacked a lot of watery emotion (+had strong fire emphasis) who was unruly in school and a non-conformist. His mother had died at an early age. Because of the hectic situations he was raised in he dissociated from society at large and got into a lot of philosophy mainly after school although he still suffered issues with drug addiction and has a lot of mental problems because of it. Not having a mother is far worse on the mind than not having a father.

I don't think either of them point to likelihood in not being able to think for oneself. I think if your surrounded by people as in a town or whatever whom make you think that way early on then you will. Two parents are better but if they are parents who are teaching you 'what to think' then that is the root cause of the problem. That in of itself. However if you have a single parent and different figures in your life are showing you 'how to think' that's positive then, and also implies in itself a varied thought process because it takes from lots of different sources.

"Thinking differently" isn't always too good so we should make sure fathers and mothers dont leave their children and create the antisocial criminal who 'thinks differently', but thinking what everyone else does on certain topics (as in being traditional and 'normal') is also a good thing which is more in place with two parents. Pressure on the child in different areas, I think is the core or among the core factors and the situation of the parents is a wild variable which can go either way- I disagree with you saying that it's a certain thing and that 'most of' those cases are like it, I think that's false.

13th_Wolf said:

Jack said:

Most of the people who cant think for themselves had an emotionally negligent or absent father or a single or present mother who instead of teaching them 'how to think' taught them 'what to think', which caused this situation you see now. Grown adults having the maturity of little kids looking at mommy or daddy to tell them what to think and do.

Click to expand...

Eau contraire, in those cases the child relies on friends as father figures, or older people like uncles and close people of authority like teachers. This will most likely be a mixture of different of these groups of people and so this will lead one to have varied opinions and values- even flip flopping between different ones taught at different times. A lot of these people can fall into crime and make up the majority of the prison population.

For an absent mother there's a case where I knew a guy born under a new Moon who lacked a lot of watery emotion (+had strong fire emphasis) who was unruly in school and a non-conformist. His mother had died at an early age. Because of the hectic situations he was raised in he dissociated from society at large and got into a lot of philosophy mainly after school although he still suffered issues with drug addiction and has a lot of mental problems because of it. Not having a mother is far worse on the mind than not having a father.

I don't think either of them point to likelihood in not being able to think for oneself. I think if your surrounded by people as in a town or whatever whom make you think that way early on then you will. Two parents are better but if they are parents who are teaching you 'what to think' then that is the root cause of the problem. That in of itself. However if you have a single parent and different figures in your life are showing you 'how to think' that's positive then, and also implies in itself a varied thought process because it takes from lots of different sources.

"Thinking differently" isn't always too good so we should make sure fathers and mothers dont leave their children and create the antisocial criminal who 'thinks differently', but thinking what everyone else does on certain topics (as in being traditional and 'normal') is also a good thing which is more in place with two parents. Pressure on the child in different areas, I think is the core or among the core factors and the situation of the parents is a wild variable which can go either way- I disagree with you saying that it's a certain thing and that 'most of' those cases are like it, I think that's false.

Click to expand...

I know because it has been my case. If you're emotionally not fulfilled or or emotionally dependent your going to search for emotional fulfillment outside of you externally in women or in groups (like you said in gangs.) If you have a healthy relationship with both parents you grow up to be emotionally independent and not get into damaging relationships. You also have less need for approval seeking behaviors.

Here's a book I want you to read on this subject,
http://libgen.rs/book/index.php?md5=05CA5B6CF10F3883F041458F448904AB