Satanists denied opening prayer for the third time in Boston.

[74x12]

The fact is these city halls hold prayer because it pleases the majority of the citizens of that city. If there were ever a majority of atheists in a given city then they could stop the prayer and probably would waste no time in doing so.

TST is militant antichristian, theism in general and trying to get rid of belief in God everywhere they can with any tactics. They think they're doing good by annoying average people (probably not even very religious people) who just want to have a prayer before council meetings that no one forces you to partake of; if you choose to just sit there ... that's your call.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

The fact is these city halls hold prayer because it pleases the majority of the citizens of that city.

That's not a good enough reason.

TST is militant antichristian, theism in general and trying to get rid of belief in God everywhere they can with any tactics

What if I said Christians are militant zealots who are trying to get rid of reason and logic as well as equal, unalienable rights everywhere they can?

 

[Subduction Zone]

The fact is these city halls hold prayer because it pleases the majority of the citizens of that city. If there were ever a majority of atheists in a given city then they could stop the prayer and probably would waste no time in doing so.

TST is militant antichristian, theism in general and trying to get rid of belief in God everywhere they can with any tactics. They think they're doing good by annoying average people (probably not even very religious people) who just want to have a prayer before council meetings that no one forces you to partake of; if you choose to just sit there ... that's your call.

So a militant atheist is one that does not allow others to do acts banned by the Constitution? That is quite a weird definition.

 

[74x12]

That's not a good enough reason.

Seems pretty democratic to me. Why not?

What if I said Christians are militant zealots who are trying to get rid of reason and logic as well as equal, unalienable rights everywhere they can?

That might be valid if you said it about a specific Christian organization that is known to be trying to do those things.

The fact is that TST has put themselves out there in the public sphere. They're making themselves political and they're pretty open about that. I think they should expect people to disagree with them and even criticize them. They might even welcome criticism considering their over the top publicity stunts. They certainly dish plenty of criticism out themselves.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Seems pretty democratic to me. Why not?

Because we are not a democracy, we are a democratically elected republic, and here is the important part: minority rights. Just because the majority votes to take away the rights of the minority does not mean that they can do so.

That might be valid if you said it about a specific Christian organization that is known to be trying to do those things.

The fact is that TST has put themselves out there in the public sphere. They're making themselves political and they're pretty open about that. I think they should expect people to disagree with them and even criticize them. They might even welcome criticism considering their over the top publicity stunts. They certainly dish plenty of criticism out themselves.

No, one cannot show prejudice against any group. Again, majority rules with minority rights.

 

[74x12]

So a militant atheist is one that does not allow others to do acts banned by the Constitution? That is quite a weird definition.

Separation of church and state was a concept invented before the rise of atheism in the USA. The idea of separation of church and state comes from mostly church goers themselves fearing that one or other religion would take over power in the government and stop them worshiping God as they see fit for themselves.

So really atheists have had to warp the idea of separation of church and state to mean that all government should be 100% atheistic. But in my opinion that opens a new imbalance in the system. That is atheism now has too much power which we see today. Especially when they want to erase culture, art and tradition just because it's "religious". When it's usually something really general and like a monument to 10 commandments or whatever. It's like atheists want to erase Western culture and start over. I don't like that and I don't think that's what is meant by "separation of church and state".

Token acknowledgment of theism in government is not really a violation of separation of church and state. Because it doesn't favor any specific church/religion. For example the motto "In God we trust" is not really violating this. All it does favor is theism over atheism ... but that's not really a religion.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Separation of church and state was a concept invented before the rise of atheism in the USA. The idea of separation of church and state comes from mostly church goers themselves fearing that one or other religion would take over power in the government and stop them worshiping God as they see fit for themselves.

So really atheists have had to warp the idea of separation of church and state to mean that all government should be 100% atheistic. But in my opinion that opens a new imbalance in the system. That is atheism now has too much power which we see today. Especially when they want to erase culture, art and tradition just because it's "religious". When it's usually something really general and like a monument to 10 commandments or whatever. It's like atheists want to erase Western culture and start over. I don't like that and I don't think that's what is meant by "separation of church and state".

Token acknowledgment of theism in government is not really a violation of separation of church and state. Because it doesn't favor any specific church/religion. For example the motto "In God we trust" is not really violating this. All it does favor is theism over atheism ... but that's not really a religion.

Separation of church and state allows people to worship as they wish, in private or in their own churches. It does not give the religious the right to take over public spaces. There is no warping involved. This is so clearly a violation of that that it beggars belief that you cannot understand what Boston is doing wrong and why they will lose their lawsuit. In fact there probably will not be one. their lawyers are going to take them aside and say:

:"Dudes!! You are going to lose and have to pay out a huge settlement. Now pay me $200,000 and thank me for saving you millions."

 

[Shadow Wolf]

Seems pretty democratic to me. Why not?

Because that's not how America works. A large majority isn't supposed to be able to walk all over a minority.
It's all broken down and divided and equal.

That might be valid if you said it about a specific Christian organization that is known to be trying to do those things.

I claim it is the entire religion as a whole.

So really atheists have had to warp the idea of separation of church and state to mean that all government should be 100% atheistic. But in my opinion that opens a new imbalance in the system. That is atheism now has too much power which we see today. Especially when they want to erase culture, art and tradition just because it's "religious". When it's usually something really general and like a monument to 10 commandments or whatever. It's like atheists want to erase Western culture and start over. I don't like that and I don't think that's what is meant by "separation of church and state".

Erase culture, art, and tradition?
Pointing out shortcomings in the separation of church and state does none of these. But you Christians don't have a good track record with portraying things accurately or honestly in this thread.
And the 10 Commandments are not general. They are specific to a certain people and a certain god. It is also fundamentally incompatible with American values, rights, and laws.

Because it doesn't favor any specific church/religion. For example the motto "In God we trust" is not really violating this. All it does favor is theism over atheism ... but that's not really a religion.

In god we trust and "under god" are not even original things. They were both added to be divisive and highlight differences.

 

[night912]

Separation of church and state was a concept invented before the rise of atheism in the USA. The idea of separation of church and state comes from mostly church goers themselves fearing that one or other religion would take over power in the government and stop them worshiping God as they see fit for themselves.

Yes, it was a concept before the rise of atheism in the USA, that's why it has nothing to do with atheism. The concept was the foundation of the USA government because this country was created as a secular nation.

So really atheists have had to warp the idea of separation of church and state to mean that all government should be 100% atheistic. But in my opinion that opens a new imbalance in the system. That is atheism now has too much power which we see today. Especially when they want to erase culture, art and tradition just because it's "religious". When it's usually something really general and like a monument to 10 commandments or whatever. It's like atheists want to erase Western culture and start over. I don't like that and I don't think that's what is meant by "separation of church and state".

No, actually it's only the religious people(mostly Christians) who wants special treatment for their religion, thy have warped the idea. Those who advocate for separation of church today are religious(Christians included) non-religious people, theists(Christians included) and atheists alike. They're the ones who want equality for all religions and non interference of the government on private religion affairs. So unless you're saying that some Christians and other religious people want the government to be 100% atheistic, you're wrong and just spreading false information. Again, separation of church and state has nothing to do with atheism.

Token acknowledgment of theism in government is not really a violation of separation of church and state. Because it doesn't favor any specific church/religion. For example the motto "In God we trust" is not really violating this. All it does favor is theism over atheism ... but that's not really a religion.

But a monument of the 10 commandments is religious, that's why it doesn't belong in the government. It violates separation of church and state. Glad that you cleared that up.

Americans United for Separation of Church and State
Americans United for Separation of Church and State - Wikipedia

 

[74x12]

No, actually it's only the religious people(mostly Christians) who wants special treatment for their religion, thy have warped the idea. Those who advocate for separation of church today are religious(Christians included) non-religious people, theists(Christians included) and atheists alike. They're the ones who want equality for all religions and non interference of the government on private religion affairs. So unless you're saying that some Christians and other religious people want the government to be 100% atheistic, you're wrong and just spreading false information. Again, separation of church and state has nothing to do with atheism.

Keep telling yourself that.

 

[74x12]

Erase culture, art, and tradition?
Pointing out shortcomings in the separation of church and state does none of these. But you Christians don't have a good track record with portraying things accurately or honestly in this thread.
And the 10 Commandments are not general. They are specific to a certain people and a certain god. It is also fundamentally incompatible with American values, rights, and laws.

So how is art incompatible?

Next you'll claim they should erase all the artwork of Greek Zeus and what not from public buildings ... It is a religion after all.

 

[74x12]

I claim it is the entire religion as a whole.

Yet you act offended that I call out TST because of their political activism ... okeydokey.

 

[74x12]

they will lose their lawsuit. In fact there probably will not be one. their lawyers are going to take them aside and say:

:"Dudes!! You are going to lose and have to pay out a huge settlement. Now pay me $200,000 and thank me for saving you millions."

You might be correct the way things go these days but that doesn't mean it's right.

 

[danieldemol]

Keep telling yourself that.

I'm a monotheist and I'm opposed to prayer in government offices because in practice regardless of intent such things pose a theocratic influence on politics in my opinion.

So you can keep telling yourself this is all about state enforced atheism if you want to, but I think you are just pretending in the face of contrary evidence to do so.

 

[danieldemol]

So how is art incompatible?

Next you'll claim they should erase all the artwork of Greek Zeus and what not from public buildings ... It is a religion after all.

The ten commandments belongs in a museum alongside statues of Zues in my opinion.

 

[Subduction Zone]

You might be correct the way things go these days but that doesn't mean it's right.

I would say that it is clearly right. Do you agree with other sects of Christianity? You would probably not waa Catholic to tell you how to pray. You are trying to tell others how they can pray. If you value freedom to follow your own religion you have to support the rights of others.

 

[Messianic Israelite]

And here we have another judging Satanism while simultaneously making it extremely obvious they don't know anything about Satanism.

Hi Shadow Wolf. Good afternoon. If I've said something wrong, please do correct me. The Britannica Encyclopedia says: Satanism, any of various religious or countercultural practices and movements centred on the figure of Satan, the Devil, regarded in Christianity and Judaism as the embodiment of absolute evil. Historical Satanism, also called devil worship, consists of belief in and worship of the Judeo-Christian Devil and the explicit rejection of his antithesis, God, and (in Christianity) God’s Incarnation, Jesus Christ.

As far as I'm concerned, it's despicable that anyone would even consider worshipping a being that is a despicable murderer, liar, that has caused many and still causes many to lose their salvation and tried to cause our Savior and Messiah to sin and lose His as well as all our salvation.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

I ridicule the TST and other similar groups because their whole purpose in life is to oppose Christianity. I don't really think they have a broader purpose.

There are worse purposes, frankly. There are a lot of things in Christianity that need opposing.

I kinda like them as the "poison pill" to fight anti-secularism: "oh - you want official prayers at Council meetings/religious literature handed out to kids in public schools/paid chaplains in prisons/whatever? Then you're going to have to put up with us and all the things you hate about us until you do the right thing and stop abusing your religious privilege."

 

[VoidCat]

Hi Shadow Wolf. Good afternoon. If I've said something wrong, please do correct me. The Britannica Encyclopedia says: Satanism, any of various religious or countercultural practices and movements centred on the figure of Satan, the Devil, regarded in Christianity and Judaism as the embodiment of absolute evil. Historical Satanism, also called devil worship, consists of belief in and worship of the Judeo-Christian Devil and the explicit rejection of his antithesis, God, and (in Christianity) God’s Incarnation, Jesus Christ.

As far as I'm concerned, it's despicable that anyone would even consider worshipping a being that is a despicable murderer, liar, that has caused many and still causes many to lose their salvation and tried to cause our Savior and Messiah to sin and lose His as well as all our salvation.

I am not shadow wolf but from my understanding Satanists have a very different view of Satan and of God( most dont believe in either but some do believe in one or both and if they do tend to interpet Satan differently...if they don't Satan is just an archetype)...If I am wrong on any of this someone like Shadow Wolf please correct me..Ive only just started researching... Some see the God of the Bible as a terrible deity who tries to control man and surpresses individuality, knowledge, freedom...Satan is a good guy for opposing him and allowing men to embrace their true selves...to help them question the current system and to not follow the rules blindly but question them. As a result Satan is a symbol of someone who embraces the self over authority(which in my opinion isn't a bad thing) and is a seeker of truth, individuality and freedom.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Well should we allow militant atheists to pray to spaghetti monster at city hall?

Ideally, there should be no official prayers at all, and every member should be privately pray - or not - as they personally feel obligated to do.

Putting a big Christian stamp on a secular government institution sends the message to every non-Christian who might come before it that the institution does not represent them, and that they should expect to be treated unfavourably compared to Christians.

Someone wearing a colander on their head at a Council meeting is silly, but it's not offensive and anti-democratic the way that allowing only the prayers of one religion would be.