It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
originally posted by: beezzer
a reply to: blupblup
I see what you mean!
I'm not attacking other Christians who don't like it and think it unconstitutional.
And I'm not supporting it.
All I stated was that it was constitutional.
So in order to be "correct" I have to support and/or attack others that don't support.
No.
originally posted by: beezzer
On a personal level, I have severe issues with this. Messing with Satan, demons, devils, all that is generally associated with evil and (in my opinion) not a good thing.
The Constitution allows this though.
If a religious ritual brings about Satan and hell on Earth and the destruction of mankind, then that is the ultimate edge to the double edged sword of freedom.
originally posted by: 3n19m470
a reply to: CloudsTasteMetallic
Yeah but this nation was founded on Christianity to a good extent. Look at the references to God, In God we trust, etc. And while laws concerning religion have changed, a statue of the 10 commandments has a historical reference to this country. And unless it's openly stated or historical documentation found, Satanism does not hold that same claim. We've had Christian related monuments here for a long time. It has historical value.
The Supreme Court has interpreted religion to mean a sincere and meaningful belief that occupies in the life of its possessor a place parallel to the place held by God in the lives of other persons. The religion or religious concept need not include belief in the existence of God or a supreme being to be within the scope of the First Amendment.
As the case of United States v. Ballard, 322 U.S. 78, 64 S. Ct. 882, 88 L. Ed. 1148 (1944), demonstrates, the Supreme Court must look to the sincerity of a person's beliefs to help decide if those beliefs constitute a religion that deserves constitutional protection.
It is only the view of christians that satanism is practiced primarily to mock/belittle christianity. No one else's.
So does satanism, when practiced primarily to make a statement/mock/belittle Christianity and to make a political statement, even qualify as a religion?
originally posted by: spite
I want to add that from what I can see in this thread, a majority of the people who oppose don't understand what it is the church goers are doing in a church like that. That's why you go, to learn. I go to Christian churches* with my friends but it doesn't make me a Christian.
It is only the view of christians that satanism is practiced primarily to mock/belittle christianity. No one else's.
The Satanic Temple was actually conceived of independent from me by a friend and one of his colleagues. They envisioned it more as a “poison pill” in the Church/State debate. The idea was that Satanists, asserting their rights and privileges where religious agendas have been successful in imposing themselves upon public affairs, could serve as a poignant reminder that such privileges are for everybody, and can be used to serve an agenda beyond the current narrow understanding of what “the” religious agenda is. So at the inception, the political message was primary, though it was understood that there are, in fact, self-identified Satanists who live productive lives within the boundaries of the law, and that they do deserve just as much consideration as any other religious group
We’ve moved well beyond being a simple political ploy
It is only the view of christians that satanism is practiced primarily to mock/belittle christianity. No one else's.
As much as christians want to try and make it about them (as per usual), its not.
originally posted by: ArchAngel_X
I personally think it's a great idea that this mass is taking place, although I do view it more as an entertainment spectacle than anything 'religious' given that they're selling tickets for the event. If any other denomination can gather and congregate, why not Satanists, too? Freedom and tolerance is a two-way street for it to actually mean what they are.
I'm also surprised that no one else here has mentioned that the majority of Satanist religions do not actually worship Satan or demons, but people commonly make that assumption due to the name and associated imagery burned into our collective social consciousness.
If they weren't considered a "religion" legally, they could still hold their event.