Perverts, aka Satanists, want to be considered a valid religion. DeSantis says No

Satanism is certainly a religion, but whether it is protected is undediced. That is up in air, and the fact is that your opinion only for you.

In fact, "According to a source1, there is very little case law on the specific issue of whether Satanism is a protected religion, and what we do have is a bit jumbled. An illustrative case from the mid-1990s from the federal court in the Northern District of Ohio, while not binding precedent, is an excellent summary of how confused American constitutional law has become regarding religion. In Carpenter v. Wilkinson, the court deals with a lawsuit by a prisoner who was denied access to a Satanic Bible while incarcerated. While the court ends up deciding the case on other grounds, it goes into great detail about the contours of religious liberty. The court’s analysis begins by admitting that “Deciding what is ‘religious’ or what constitutes a ‘religion’ is a very delicate undertaking, especially where the claimed ‘religious’ beliefs fall outside what is commonly thought of as mainstream religion.” At the same time, the court knows that there cannot be a “blanket privilege” to create any set of beliefs justifying one to conduct himself however he pleases, and call it a protected religion. Thus the court is stuck between religious relativism and the anarchy that would result if it actually allowed that relativism to play out.

Another source2 states that the First Amendment states that “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.” The argument was simply that, at the time the First Amendment was ratified, the definition of the word “religion” clearly did not include Satanism.

In conclusion, the issue of whether Satanism is a protected religion under the Constitution is a complex one, and there is no clear answer."
By definition a religion is the belief in and worship of a God or Gods. Since Satanism is the worship of self it is by definition NOT a religion.
 

Again, I have not finished this, but will soon. I thought others here would be interested.

Yeh, those wacky religions... All of them should be equally respected along with the ones that respect human life!

FREEDOM!

We have to accept every damn perverse thing one can think to do, including worshipping Satan! Where's that in the US Constitution?

Our nation was founded on CHRISTIAN (Judeo-Christian) principles.

I say to the Satanists: Go somewhere else... although I really want them to just go... uh... where they ultimately belong


from the site:

"Satan has no place in our society [LOL] and should not be recognized as a ‘religion’ by the federal government," DeSantis tweeted. "I'll chip in to contribute to this veteran's legal defense fund."

Me

Good for him! It's about time politicians stood up to this insanity!

well, actually, it is past time... :(

why do so many of you people hate the freedom of religion?
 
Ooh now who's pissed?

Leave children alone, you're told that and go ballistic? That's telling.

What's wrong with everyone just leaving children alone, they don't belong to any of you, they're not yours to form, mold, use or anything else. They don't belong to society and they don't need your village
SIL:

Here to remind everyone that every thread is about her irrational fear of imaginary pedophiles EVERYWHERE.

But yeah, Satanists are cool. :)
 
The Constitution gives you freedom of religion, or freedom from religion.

It does not give the state freedom to preach anti-religious (irreligous propaganda,) or anti-human propaganda to children.

View attachment 874192

Just as antisemitism and other forms of bigotry need to be discouraged, given our civil rights, civil liberties, and basic form of government depend on recognizing a creator that endows our rights? This groups deserves no protection, they are a threat to our very form of government.

Our liberty is god given, it flows from natural law. . . NOT THE STATE. The founders could not be more clear on this, and the folks that founded this cult, could not be more clear, that they don't agree with this. . . thus they set themselves up as enemies of the state.


These folks are just a bunch of pinko authoritarians. If they do not stop their subversive activities? I say, throw them in GITMO.


:auiqs.jpg:
Do you think it’s a good idea for the government to pick and choose which religions are “worthy“ of protection? It’s kind of like free speech … I may not like the message but I’ll fight like hell for your right to express it. As long as a person’s faith does not impinge on the rights of others, they can worship pimentos for all I care.

:p

1702847898942.jpeg
 
By definition a religion is the belief in and worship of a God or Gods. Since Satanism is the worship of self it is by definition NOT a religion.

Not strictly God or Gods.

Merriam-Webster gives this definition:
"religion

noun

re·li·gion ri-ˈli-jən

Synonyms of religion
1: a personal set or institutionalized system of religious attitudes, beliefs, and practices

2 a (1): the service and worship of God or the supernatural
(2): commitment or devotion to religious faith or observance
b: the state of a religious
a nun in her 20th year of religion

3: a cause, principle, or system of beliefs held to with ardor and faith

4 archaic : scrupulous conformity : CONSCIENTIOUSNESS
 
Do you think it’s a good idea for the government to pick and choose which religions are “worthy“ of protection?
It isn't up to government to "pick and choose," when rights are natural rights!

The government doesn't have that option. .. . .

This cult? Does not believe in natural rights. . . they admit this, thus? They get no protection.

You have a fundamental misunderstanding of the Constitution of the United States of America.

If you want to live life under say, the British constitutional monarchy, or any other nation which practices Napoleonic codes? Sure. But this cult that is under discussion, from what I have researched? Does not believe in Natural law. If they don't believe in it, they don't get it. Simple.


IMO? It does not even deserve tax exempt status, as its only purpose is to mock spirituality and subvert the nation.

What Are Natural Rights?​


"Natural rights are rights granted to all people by nature or God that cannot be denied or restricted by any government or individual. Natural rights are often said to be granted to people by “natural law.”

<snip>

". . . Some of Jefferson’s fellow enslaver separatists justified the obvious contradiction by explaining that only “civilized” people had natural rights, thus excluding enslaved people from eligibility.

As for Jefferson, history shows that he had long believed the slave trade was morally wrong and attempted to denounce it in the Declaration of Independence.

“He (King George) has waged cruel war against human nature itself, violating its most sacred rights of life and liberty in the persons of a distant people who never offended him, captivating & carrying them into slavery in another hemisphere or to incur miserable death in their transportation thither,” he wrote in a draft of the document.

However, Jefferson’s anti-enslavement statement was removed from the final draft of the Declaration of Independence. Jefferson later blamed the removal of his statement on influential delegates who represented merchants who were at the time dependent on the Transatlantic slave trade for their livelihoods. Other delegates may have feared the possible loss of their financial support for the expected Revolutionary War. . . "


<snip>

First Amendment and Natural Rights​


". . . While it was third on the list of original proposals in the Bill of Rights that Congress submitted to the states for approval, the First Amendment was the first amendment to deal with natural individual rights. Almost without exception, the rights in the First Amendment are thought to be natural rights because they deal with matters of conscience, thought, and expression.

The two clauses on religion—“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof,” are designed to allow individuals to follow their conscience in matters of faith and worship.

Clauses relating to speech, press, peaceable assembly, and petition are designed to promote discussion and debate concerning the kind of governmental policies that suit a representative form of government, and arguably to promote the development of the individual’s personality.. . . "


Now. . I have studied comparative religion, and philosophy. Without natural law, ethics and ANY & ALL civic and all morality becomes subjective. Hell, look at post-modern philosophy and any school of critical theory? It justifies the subversion of any societal norm you wish to lay claim to.

At that point? You can justify anything you wish. Might makes right. And this was already debunked in Plato's Republic, BUT ONLY, if there was, "THE GOOD, i.e. a creator;" which our nation is based on. . .

. . . but without such? Slavery? Sure. Totalitarianism? Why not. Pedophilia? If it benefits those who are in power?? . . . you bet. ANYTHING GOES! Why? Because there is no justification not to allow anything, other than do unto others, etc. . . . but again, that's flimsy Humanistic sophomoric garbage? Go back and read your Republic. :rolleyes:

And as we saw with both the publishing of our nation's two most popular books, Tom Pain's Common Sense, and Harriet Beecher Stowe's, Uncle Tom's Cabin, both? They BOTH rely on Natural Rights and a creator. It is essential to the understanding of our nation!

This cult? Is anti-American, they are not a religion, and they are working to destroy the nation. . so I ask, why should we, as a nation, protect entity that is trying to destroy and enslave us?

:dunno:
 
By definition a religion is the belief in and worship of a God or Gods. Since Satanism is the worship of self it is by definition NOT a religion.
So, any denier that claims that people who believe the science of climate change can never be called a religious belief.

Got it
 

Forum List

Back
Top