Satanic Temple moving into Florida School Sytems?

[Balthazzar]

"Since the recent House Bill 931 or Senate Bill 7044 was passed in Florida, religious groups have been clamoring to enter into schools, including the Satanic Temple. The bill was passed to allow more religious expressions in Florida public schools. But what does this mean for students and the community?" Read More

It's obviously politically motivated, and about having no religion taught in our nation's schools, but what if and why not? The play is undeniable. The shock value I'm sure expected, and the suggested after school Satanist club is something I'll never forget. Apparently, a bill passed that will allow more religious expression in Florida's public schools. Counting on Satanists showing up to join the expression effort in support of the new passing of bill 7044-931 may have not been expected. This is gold ... Seriously, if this is true, It's gold.

What if and why not?

 

[PoetPhilosopher]

It's simple, really - with religious freedom comes all kinds of religions and beliefs being expressed, some of which will rub some people the wrong way - including the ones who originally advocated for religious freedom.

 

[PoetPhilosopher]

So what I'm saying is, wanting broad religious expression, but not accounting for, for example, some obscure religion which tries to summon demons (or some such) or says down is up or worships eggs and toast - seems to have been an oversight.

 

[Balthazzar]

It's simple, really - with religious freedom comes all kinds of religions and beliefs being expressed, some of which will rub some people the wrong way - including the ones who originally advocated for religious freedom.

That's why this is gold ... For years on end the mantra "Put God back in our schools" was chanted among religiously motivated people like myself. The 1st amendment secures freedom of religion and separation of church and state, it does not allow for religious biases, particularly as they might pertain to our laws. This move by the Satanist Temple is both genius and problematic and one "hell" of a political move to keep religion out of our schools or to put to test the 1st of our bill of rights, which is quite literally this nation's first line of defense. This could prove, if efforts are made to amend the 1st, to be very very dangerous waters.

 

[Pogo]

That's why this is gold ... For years on end the mantra "Put God back in our schools" was chanted among religiously motivated people like myself. The 1st amendment secures freedom of religion and separation of church and state, it does not allow for religious biases, particularly as they might pertain to our laws. This move by the Satanist Temple is both genius and problematic and one "hell" of a political move to keep religion out of our schools or to put to test the 1st of our bill of rights, which is quite literally this nation's first line of defense. This could prove, if efforts are made to amend the 1st, to be very very dangerous waters.

Somehow even with all the god boting lately, I doubt that you will get 2/3 of both houses and 3/4 of the states to agree on this or anything else.

 

[Balthazzar]

Somehow even with all the god boting lately, I doubt that you will get 2/3 of both houses and 3/4 of the states to agree on this or anything else.

Florida schools already allow for religious expression. The Satanist Temple have already been classified as a legitimate religion complete with tax exempt status. Discussion is allowed on forums apparently, and there are no religious restrictions on after school activities, such as the proposed "After school Satanist Club". The only thing left is to allow inclusion without fear for safety, or to make excuses as why not to include them in the effort to increase religious expression and discussion as an academic in Florida school systems. Big move by all parties involved, respectfully. Whether the after school club is pursued or not is yet to be seen, but man ... what a wake up.

 

[Pogo]

Florida schools already allow for religious expression. The Satanist Temple have already been classified as a legitimate religion complete with tax exempt status. Discussion is allowed on forums apparently, and there are no religious restrictions on after school activities, such as the proposed "After school Satanist Club". The only thing left is to allow inclusion without fear for safety, or to make excuses as why not to include them in the effort to increase religious expression and discussion as an academic in Florida school systems. Big move by all parties involved, respectfully. Whether the after school club is pursued or not is yet to be seen, but man ... what a wake up.

After school programs of all sorts have been legal for years so long as the school and it's employees are not sponsoring them. The first amendment is what guarantees their right to exist. If Florida allows any religion to have a club, they must allow all of them. It is just another example of right wing christians not understanding the system of government.

 

[Balthazzar]

After school programs of all sorts have been legal for years so long as the school and it's employees are not sponsoring them. The first amendment is what guarantees their right to exist. If Florida allows any religion to have a club, they must allow all of them. It is just another example of right wing christians not understanding the system of government.

The example being? The article, if you read it, spoke of a Satanist Temple chaplain joining the efforts of the proposed initiative. The bill, if I'm not mistaken, is due to be voted on July 1st of this year, which would allow for their involvement. I myself understand the necessity of separation of church and state, but ... the idea of this type of inclusion intrigues me. Will Americans ever be open enough to truly discuss religion openly and inclusively? The 1st of our rights, specifically about laws being made or policies that show bias would still stand, but at state levels, our schools could possibly open up religious discussions for academic purposes. I think it could be beneficial as an academic, but not so much as a way to draw students in as proselytes. Knowing, or rather understanding your neighbor whether foreign or domestic, could prove beneficial, yet no less detrimental, depending on maturity of students and the representatives of the religions involved.

 

[The Hammer]

Somehow even with all the god boting lately, I doubt that you will get 2/3 of both houses and 3/4 of the states to agree on this or anything else.

Yeah this sort of blustering is nothing new.

 

[Balthazzar]

Yeah this sort of blustering is nothing new.

It's new for me ... and I'm unsure the implication here. Blustering from Satanists or who, specifically? No religion in schools or religion in schools and inclusive for the academic value is on the docket. If we negate the value of religious thought, then we likewise abandon a very large demographic in the states and also internationally. If we negate specific religions, then we abandon that specific demographic. The hostilities evident, and very likely due to lack of understanding, which is a result of not being open enough to understand where people are coming from. Voices and no voices, the heard and un-acknowledged, and with this nation's diversity, the hostilities will likely continue until we truly open ourselves up to discussions. I'm ok not allowing religious discussions in our schools, but this won't lend much to social equality and acceptance as beneficial and productive American citizens.

 

[The Hammer]

Blustering from Satanists or who, specifically

Yes, TST regularly engages in this sort of demonstrative behavior..

The Alchemy Of Activism: The Satanic Temple

One might see Satanism as a form of Gnosticism: a view of scriptures and myths, usually in favor of man, sex, and knowledge, over an unjust god.

www.patheos.com

 

[Balthazzar]

Yes, TST regularly engages in this sort of demonstrative behavior..

The Alchemy Of Activism: The Satanic Temple

One might see Satanism as a form of Gnosticism: a view of scriptures and myths, usually in favor of man, sex, and knowledge, over an unjust god.

www.patheos.com

It was a great one and I doubt the bill will truly be passed and allow the proposed to play out. I've changed my position, actually.
Not so much due to disagreeing with religious discussions in public schools, but due to the necessity of separation of church and state. Public federally funded educational institutions should remain secular and focused on academics. Sociology is better reserved for higher education, and various religions should be covered per social demographic. I enjoy theology. It's a very dynamic part of world politics.

 

[LuisDantas]

To me this seems gold. It is the perfect opportunity to evidence as well as question the relative merits of various forms of religion and of concept of god "in a vaccuum".

 

[Balthazzar]

To me this seems gold. It is the perfect opportunity to evidence as well as question the relative merits of various forms of religion and of concept of god "in a vaccuum".

For me it brought to mind the nature of the argument and the associated additions to the idea that its ok for religion to be encouraged in our educational institutions. The gold was realizing the political nature and effectiveness of the move, not to mention the potential reactionary elements attached.

 

[crossfire]

It was a great one and I doubt the bill will truly be passed and allow the proposed to play out. I've changed my position, actually.
Not so much due to disagreeing with religious discussions in public schools, but due to the necessity of separation of church and state. Public federally funded educational institutions should remain secular and focused on academics. Sociology is better reserved for higher education, and various religions should be covered per social demographic. I enjoy theology. It's a very dynamic part of world politics.

We were started on sociology in the third grade, and social studies quickly became one of my favorite subjects. Why keep children ignorant and allow the negative side effects associated with ignorance develop and become engrained into adulthood?

 

[Balthazzar]

We were started on sociology in the third grade, and social studies quickly became one of my favorite subjects. Why keep children ignorant and allow the negative side effects associated with ignorance develop and become engrained into adulthood?

Religious aspects of sociology, specifically. Would you be one who supports deeper religious sociological study in the k-12 arena? What's been brought to my attention in recent years is the possible risks associated with openly expressive religious views and dialogue in our day to days. On one hand, I thought allowing for the discussions might be beneficial due to the possible understanding between parties, but then I look at history, current events, and the nature of conviction and think to myself "I'm an idiot." What evidence is there to support the notion that open religious discussion will be helpful to this end? This nation's government is expected to base its policies on principles that seem most likely to effect our Safety and Happiness, per the Declaration of Independence. I haven't found open and direct religious discussions to offer much of either, but then the hostile nature between religions isn't just going away without some type of common denominator able to help establish and maintain peaceful relations. What does this leave, but some type of ongoing dialogue in effort to understand and accept present world diversity. Either this or possibly remain hostile and intolerant of various religious practices and associated traditions.

 

[LuisDantas]

Open religious discussion is a good thing IMO. As long as it is not presented as something more widely applicable than what it is.

Covert religious discussion isn't an improvement.

I for one greatly encourage presentation of religious diversity and discussion of the sociological aspects of religion in K-12. It is a real concern IMO and I feel a bit distressed that it hasn't happened and is not very likely to ever happen here in Brazil. We are doing ourselves no favors there.

In all honesty, it is more than a bit abusive to raise children unaware and unprepared to deal with the diversity of religious and pseudo-religious groups, their reasons for being, the well known upsides and drawbacks of each, and the most common criticisms and the defenses to same proposed. They will be affected by that aspect of reality from a very early age and ignorance will not help them.

 

[Balthazzar]

Open religious discussion is a good thing IMO. As long as it is not presented as something more widely applicable than what it is.

Covert religious discussion isn't an improvement.

I for one greatly encourage presentation of religious diversity and discussion of the sociological aspects of religion in K-12. It is a real concern IMO and I feel a bit distressed that it hasn't happened and is not very likely to ever happen here in Brazil. We are doing ourselves no favors there.

I have a Bahai friend who lives in Brazil, and he would very likely agree with your position.

 

[LuisDantas]

I have a Bahai friend who lives in Brazil, and he would very likely agree with your position.

I added a bit to my previous post in the meantime.

Brazil is currently being pressured by its right wing politicians into becoming more of a theocracy. Openly. It sometimes reminds me of the wackier wing of the Republican Party, with its Marjories Taylor Greenes, Sarah Palins and Michelle Bachmanns. One of our so-called Senators who carries her Christian credentials on the shoulder at all times recently redoubled on her libelous efforts at "denouncing" apparently fictional grievous child exploitation for political projection.

These are people shamelessly using presumably religious beliefs for personal and political gain, with no ethical responsibility whatsoever.

And they have been having incredible success at that.

 

[crossfire]

Religious aspects of sociology, specifically. Would you be one who supports deeper religious sociological study in the k-12 arena?

Absolutely. I would focus more on the cultural aspects than theology in the primary grades though.

What's been brought to my attention in recent years is the possible risks associated with openly expressive religious views and dialogue in our day to days. On one hand, I thought allowing for the discussions might be beneficial due to the possible understanding between parties, but then I look at history, current events, and the nature of conviction and think to myself "I'm an idiot." What evidence is there to support the notion that open religious discussion will be helpful to this end? This nation's government is expected to base its policies on principles that seem most likely to effect our Safety and Happiness, per the Declaration of Independence. I haven't found open and direct religious discussions to offer much of either, but then the hostile nature between religions isn't just going away without some type of common denominator able to help establish and maintain peaceful relations. What does this leave, but some type of ongoing dialogue in effort to understand and accept present world diversity. Either this or possibly remain hostile and intolerant of various religious practices and associated traditions.

Do you want the children to be equipped to build a better future? Who doesn't want that?