Does lyrical content worry you?

 

 

 But while it might make someone obnoxious, it doesn't necessarily imply that they're arrogant.

 

 

 

 

The T wrote: Why? I understand the need for peaceful co-existence of people. But I think singing about opposite things doesn't mean being offensive. Especially considering that those who may be offended DO NOT HAVE TO PURCHASE THE MUSIC. It's music. Those who like it will buy it, thopse who don't like it won't. And those who buy it only to protest against it are the ones who are trying to censor free speech.   Singing the opposite thing is not wrong, it's free expression (Even when I'm against any form of evangelistic attempts in popular music), but saying for example Budahh is a  is offensive, and that's what some bands do making mockery of our beliefs. Again, I side here with the opinion that speech must be free and that you're entitled NOT to buy this kind of thing.  If you're a budhist and you buy something that says "Budah is a  then the shame lies in you for being masochist    No. I on the other hand think both the christian artists and the opposite side have the same right to record whatever they want. For centuries Christianity has had the exclusive right to promote THEIR world view. It's time to allow others to do it, no matter how insane that world-view may be. Other's people right can only be affected by ACTION, not by THOUGHT. At least in my book.   Free thought is one thing, but freedom to attack is not, you can ebven be sued for diffamation if something is a lie. Freedom to attack is not... You say someone can be sued for diffamation... Who will sue? Christ? Budah? Satan? They're either dead or just imaginary.    Why? Again, I personally think Christ was NOT the son of god and at the same time I think he WAS probably the greatest human being there has ever been. Many artists don't agree with you or with me. But he was just ANOTHER person. He can be addressed. Of course, when you insult him you may be indirectly insulting the beliefs of millions... but read carefully... BELIEFS... Just BELIEFS... I think religious beliefs shouldn't be so highly regarded, that's where you and I will disagree Ivan.   FOR YOU....But for some people religious beliefs aere the center of their lifes, and they deserve the same respect, it's funny, if you make a song saying something about homosexuals, probably you would be harrassed by everybody, and I'll be one of them, because even when I'm not a homosexual or accept this behaviour totally, I believe they deserve all repect from us...But if you attack Christ who is for many of us the son of God, Hey nobody gives a damn.. No... for ages, people have been obligated to pay utmost respect to Christianity mostly. Now the arrival of freedom of speech makes it the right of people to say what they please, as long as ACTIONS don't hurt other people. I insist, if you don't like hearing negative words about your faith, DON'T BUY.     COUNTERCULTURE IVAN. I know you know this. Reaction. Even shock in some cases. It represents the OPPOSITE of what's "good".  This is also a SOCIAL issue. TRANSGRESSION. And, for some, (la Vey satanists) it doesn't represent evil but a complete freedom of the self... Of course that can be interpreted as evil as it's individualism at its purest but that's a point of view. What's evil for you may be good fr me and viceversa. There are some standards which all of us have to follow, those are LAWS created for a harmonic co-existence. Usually, if yu read, La Vey Satanists (which I don't agree with in LOTS of things) have an strict observance of the law as one of their ideals. And many satanic artists follow this train of thought. Others didn't, they burned churches and even killed people... They're in jail. The system worked. The LAW system worked. It was not their lyrics but their ACTIONS.   Oh please, satanism sells, it's all business in most of the cases. That is correct but not so much in the extreme metal world. I reccomend "Extreme Metal, music and culture on the edge" by Keith Hann-Harris, a sociological approach to the subject NOT by a fan but by a PHD researcher. I reccomend other literature in the subject. I know you are not interested on this Ivan but then it's normal you don't know some facts. It's business in many cases, but not in all. (yes, that may be disturbing but that's how it is).   No. Kids AREN't the target audience, unless in "kids" you include post-teenagers (15 and up) and young adults... You think they don't believe the crap they say? Obviously, we're not talking about the same people here. Anyway, it's the PARENTS fault if the "kids" are too-free to enjoy whatever is thrown at them.   If parents control their kids, they are accused of being over protective, if they are left alone, they are guilty of everything, it's a paradox, parents are in a no win position. That's correct. That's why parenthood is very difficult. But many people do their best. How come I, who like extreme metal and some "satanist" groups, haven't killed nobody and I actually have never even gotten into a fistfight with nobody? How come most people who listen to some of this music use it mostly in cathartic ways? Not everybody turns into an agressor. (i digress, I know...)   Kids go to school where this albums are played, in the street with their friends, parents can't control kids 24/7   BTW: 15 to 19 are teenagers also, and please, a lot of pre-15 kids also buy that music. You're right. And that's not so good because THOSE people can be influenced. But again, it's not the band's fault.   .Oh I'm more than ready for that too.   So you are ready to criticize evangelism but not satanism in music?     Isn't that to be partial?   Isn't it more honest to be against both?   That's correct. But in this case I have to play a (quite literal) Devil's Advocate. I think both have the right to express their beliefs. For centuries, Christianity had that exclusive rights. Nowadays even ridiculous religions are emerging free of chains. And the dark side has a right to be expressed, too.     Iván  Teo

 

There aren't any bands out there who would dare to insult Allah or Mohammed because of the repercussions! - why insult Christianity through music then?? Because it's allowed??

Certain sectors of the Muslim community do respond with violence to perceived offenses against their religion: a reaction that doesn't appear to be predominant (presently, at least) in Christendom.  Perhaps this isn't so much due to Judeo-Christian ethics but rather the Western value of free expression.

 

Why is it that lyrics can't be about trees, mountains, nature, love, in fact whatever subject except those that would or could offend??

Risking presumption, I must say it seems that it's not a matter of lyrics which offend the beliefs of others but rather your beliefs.  (As an aside, not a few "satanic" black metal bands do, in fact, write about nature, etc.)

Don't Bands realise that by alienating a group of people they cut out a significant market???

Irrelevant, quite frankly, especially in view of the fact that this is a prog forum.

Many Satanic Bands will tell you - and it's been quoted many times that their audience is their Church and the Service is the music!!!! Read the many many quotes to that end!!! - they can be found on the Net quite easily.

To be honest, I don't believe it; at the very least, you'll have to provide references for me.  But let's suppose that what you claim is true, i.e. the intended audience of "many Satanic bands" is "their Church and the Service is the music."  Since you're not ostensibly a member of their Church (nor are those who would likely be offended), why should you be concerned?

Documentation?  Hypnosis is unreliable, unrepeatable and cannot be used on everyone - and from what I've read even the most susceptible subjects do not have 100% recall.