Skip to comments.Satanic Temple launches campaign to 'protect' children and permit them to pray to Satan
Posted on 04/13/2014 3:25:06 PM PDT by NYer
Satanists want in on the right to pray in school - as long as they can pray to the devil.
The Satanic Temple states that they are fighting for the rights of public school students to learn in a cruelty-free classroom.
In a press release, the NYC organisation declares May 15 as "Protect Children Day," and describes a goal of ending physical and mental abuse in public schools.
After students register on Satanic Temple's ProtectChildrenProject.com, "the Temple will then notify their respective school boards that their deeply held beliefs oppose physical and psychological abuses, including the use of corporal punishment, physical restraints, and isolation rooms as forms of punishment," a press release states.
The Protect Children Project's website encourages children to submit their name, email address, and the name of their school in order to receive help from the Temple. The organization maintains that submission does not make one a Temple member, and is open to all denominations.
"One of the fundamental tenets of The Satanic Temple is personal sovereignty and the inviolability of one's body and mind," Temple spokesperson Lucien Greaves said. "Hitting a child or placing them in solitary confinement goes entirely against our beliefs."
According to an Education Week article, there are no federal laws regarding corporal punishment, and the practice is legal in 19 states. The article and The Satanic Temple's press release both cite a U.S. Department of Education statistic stating that in one year, over 200,000 students were physically punished in school.
ProtectChildrenProject.com provides fact sheets on physical and psychological abuse in schools, an FAQ for students, and a Satanic activity book.
"We want children to know that they are permitted to pray to Satan in school and that they can even share their religious beliefs with others in accordance with certain guidelines," Greaves said.
Liberals and Satanists use the same tactics. No difference. Speaks for itself.
That’s the kicker - if we let one religion do it, we have to let them ALL do it, or it appears that we’re favoring this religion over that one. If I have a choice between ALL or NONE, I choose NONE, because I don’t want to see Muslims praying to Mecca in schools, or worshiping Satan.
Everybodys into the act, blacks latinos, mexicans, muslims, terrorists,gays lesbians, athiests, anarchists, all want ther rights protected under the constitution while the government takes away yours, funny
No we don't - that's a surrender to "tolerance at all costs".
Our nation was founded on Judeo-Christian values - they can either accept that or move somewhere else.
Like the homosexuals, they are free to do whatever they want out of the public eye - but our societal norm is heterosexual and Judeo-Christian. Deal with it.
Commiesaaaar De Blasio is their high preeeest?
Same here if those all the only choices. Any kind of human behavior could by that logic, be called ‘part of a religion’. Eventually, we’ll get this word game of semantics ironed out. Meanwhile No no and NO! The way some colleges protect and promote non-school activites like ‘Sex Week’, we are not that far from some goofball professor from making Pornography into some form of ‘worship’, worthy of school funding. That kind of perversion, they would absolutley love.
So now you know whose side government is on.
We KNOW the end game of Jesus ... HE wants us to live in Heaven with HIM forever
What does Satan want ?
It is stupid to consider anything a religion unless it is explained as such
I want to pray eleventeen times a day to my Lord of The Steak and MY way of honoring my god is to partake of him eleventeen times a day.
You know, throw your children into the fires of Moloch, you know for their own good....
Wait we already are doing that...
Jesus, have mercy on us all.
Not so! All the First Amendment did was take the question of religion out of the federal jurisdiction, preventing Congress from interfering with state laws regarding the establishment of religion. The so-called Wall of Separation is a lie.
Our nation was founded on Judeo-Christian values - they can either accept that or move somewhere else. Like the homosexuals, they are free to do whatever they want out of the public eye - but our societal norm is heterosexual and Judeo-Christian. Deal with it.And what about the Establishment Clause in the 1st Amendment? Does that mean it's open season on the Hindus, Buddhists, and Muslims? Tell me it's so and I'll lobby to get a law passed banning all non-Christian religions from being allowed to exist in Georgia.
All the First Amendment did was take the question of religion out of the federal jurisdiction, preventing Congress from interfering with state laws regarding the establishment of religion.You're forgetting the 14th Amendment. SCOTUS has ruled several times over that the First Amendment establishment clause was fully applicable to the state governments and local governments. See Everson v. Board of Education and Board of Education of Kiryas Joel Village School District v. Grumet.
“Thats the kicker - if we let one religion do it, we have to let them ALL do it”
Someone needs to inform 70% of the world’s countries of this startling revelation!
Someone needs to inform 70% of the worlds countries of this startling revelation!Only applies in this country under the 1st and 14th Amendment. I do not speak for other countries; they have their own laws.
The SCOTUS also ruled you can cut up a baby. Think for yourself. In matters of states rights vs. federal edict, it’s always good practice to ask “would the states have signed it if they knew it would be interpreted that way”.
The SCOTUS also ruled you can cut up a baby. Think for yourself. In matters of states rights vs. federal edict, its always good practice to ask would the states have signed it if they knew it would be interpreted that way.Yeah, I go with what exists, not with alternate history scenarios. I save the alternate history for my reading time.
Then you have to think of what’s possible, and what our designed on the country are. Here is a situation in which the Establishment Clause is being clearly abused by very sick, mentally ill people.
If the situation at the Bundy ranch shows anything its that court decisions and the tyranny of leftist bureaucrats are not unbeatable. He who dares wins.
You know, sometimes I read stuff, here and elsewhere, about how this country is going to the devil, evil is taking over, etc. etc. And oftentimes I dismiss that as hyperbole.
Then there’s a story like this!
But of course, if religion were not already being treated as a joke, something like this would never happen.
I hope they ask the Muslim parents for their input.
Boy, won't they be surprised - on the other side.
Is this a joke? Satan hates children. I think this group is having fun with the media.
The liberals already have that base covered. Except they don't call the devil by his real name Satan.
Might as well call it a mosque....
As a Christian, I worship a God that supports free will. Your choice is against free will. In the final days "Every knee shall bow". Let everyone pray according to their own beliefs and let God sort it out later.
You’re right, of course, but a great many here will cry that you’re wrong.
Let everyone pray according to their own beliefs and let God sort it out later.You really want them bowing to Mecca at your kid's school?
Youre right, of course, but a great many here will cry that youre wrong.I've been seeing that lately.
That's actually not very precise. We have to let them participate based on their representation in the population. If they are .0001% of the population, then they would have their name drawn to pray .0001% of the prayers.
The US military has used this proportionate system for years in determining representation of chaplains from the different denominations and religions.
Yeah, pretty darned lately, considering you're abour four weeks old.
Why should I care?
There is no official state religious denomination like The Church of England, and Congress cannot creat one.
Does not mean we were not originally envisioned as having a Judeo-Chrsitian culture, but it does mean we don't discriminate AGAINST any religion.
They are not mutually exclusive.
Public schools were given to Satan a long time ago. They are just more open about it now.
Satan is not God, and even Satanists will admit that. Therefore Satanism is not a religion and receives no 1A protection.
Islam denies free association without punishment for non- believers. Therefore Islam is not a religion and should be denied 1A protection.
I think people simply have to get over their constitutional phobias about this. There is nothing wrong with favoring Christianity over satanism, islam, or atheism. In fact, it is the right thing to do.
If I have a choice between ALL or NONE, I choose NONE, because I dont want to see Muslims praying to Mecca in schools, or worshiping Satan.
If you choose "none", YOU will be left with "none" while muslims, satanists and atheists will be running the country. Want america to be ground down under the heels of islam and atheism? Choose "none".
Okay if I opened the dictionary and looked up oxymoron I am almost positive that the words “satan” and “protect children” would be in the same sentence!!
The First Amendment actually reads:
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereofThe First Amendment is the only one which clearly limits its reach to Congress. In Everson v. Board of Education the Supreme Court actually referred back to Muddock v. Commonwealth of Pennsylvania in its claim that the First Amendment was made applicable to the states by the Fourteenth. The reasoning of the Court in Muddock is specious. No attempt was made to show how "Congress" somehow mutated into "states". It just makes a broad statement:
The First Amendment, which the Fourteenth makes applicable to the states, declares that 'Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press ....'The reasoning of the Court however can be found in how it addresses the question of taxation in regard to religious freedom:
It may be said, however, that ours is a too narrow, technical and legalistic approach to the problem of state taxation of the activities of church and press; that we should look not to the expressed or historical meaning of the First Amendment but to the broad principles of free speech and free exercise of religion which pervade our national way of life. It may be that the Fourteenth Amendment guarantees these principles rather than the more definite concept expressed in the First Amendment. This would mean that as a Court, we should determine what sort of liberty it is that the due process clause of [319 U.S. 105, 129] the Fourteenth Amendment guarantees against state restrictions on speech and church.This search for broad meaning rather than what the Constitution actually says is gate through which the Philosopher-Kings of the Court have marched in order to impose what they think is good government and turned what was suppose to be a limited federal government to the all-powerful monster we have today. Stare decisis be damned. It is time that these bogus rulings of the Court be challenged and overturned.
Religion is the key word which I never have liked, my faith is in God via his son Jesus Christ, for some reason most likely planed it has become known as religion.
Maybe the things like this that are taking place will expose religion for what it really means and the true believers will come out of it.
There is nothing wrong with favoring Christianity over satanism, islam, or atheism. In fact, it is the right thing to do.If you can do it without falling afoul of the Establishment Clause, more power to you. How do you plan to avoid it?
Maybe the things like this that are taking place will expose religion for what it really means and the true believers will come out of it.That would be my hope!
In Everson v. Board of Education the Supreme Court actually referred back to Muddock v. Commonwealth of Pennsylvania in its claim that the First Amendment was made applicable to the states by the Fourteenth. The reasoning of the Court in Muddock is specious.The problem is that it doesn't matter if it's specious or not. If it's the accepted legal holding by the Supreme Court, then that's all she wrote until a) it's overturned or b) Marbury vs. Madison goes out the window. While I would hope for B, I know it's not going to happen, so we have to operate by what is rather than what we wish it were.
Stare decisis be damned. It is time that these bogus rulings of the Court be challenged and overturned.I don't disagree that they need to be challenged and overturned. But we have to use persuasive legal arguments if we want that done.
Because you are a Godly person?
Yeah, pretty darned lately, considering you're abour four weeks old.Past 3 days I've seen it, as a matter of fact.
[GAFreedom] If you can do it without falling afoul of the Establishment Clause, more power to you. How do you plan to avoid it?
I don't think the Establishment clause or any other clause in any document prohibits me from favoring Christianity over, say, islam. Christianity is good, islam is evil, and it would help if people realized there are no constitutional gnomes living in their heads that prevent them from favoring good over evil.
and yes I just had to!
Rofl! Thank you!