Posted on 04/26/2024 2:04:38 PM PDT by Twotone
The Sunshine State is now welcoming chaplains into public schools, but Satanists need not apply.
On Thursday, Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis, a Republican, signed a bill into law allowing chaplains to volunteer to offer counseling at public and charter schools. However, the Catholic governor warned that Satanists would not be accepted into the program, as some Christian and conservative groups had feared.
“Now some have said if you do a school chaplain program that somehow you’re going to have Satanists running around in all our schools,” DeSantis said in a press conference. “We’re not playing those games in Florida. That is not a religion. That is not qualifying to be able to participate in this. We’re going to be using common sense when it comes to this, so you don’t have to worry about that.”
The Florida Senate version of the bill was approved in February and the House version was approved early last month. The legislation’s text states, “Each school district or charter school may adopt a policy to authorize volunteer school chaplains to provide supports, services, and programs to students as assigned by the district school board or charter school governing board.”
The new law requires volunteer chaplains to pass a background check and would require school administrators to publicize each volunteer chaplain’s religious affiliation and obtain parental consent before a student begins counseling.
“Any opportunity that exists for ministers or chaplains in the public sector must not discriminate based on religious affiliation,” said The Satanic Temple’s “Director of Ministry” Penemue Grigori in February. “Our ministers look forward to participating in opportunities to do good in the community, including the opportunities created by this bill, right alongside the clergy of other religions.”
Ryan Jayne of the Freedom From Religion Foundation’s Action Fund added, “I think there is a 100% chance you see satanic chaplains, and also of course other religious minorities that the majority-Christian population might not be a fan of. The Satanic Temple is a church, whether people like it or not.”
“It is wonderful to have such a strong statement denying the legitimacy of Satanism as a religion or church from Governor DeSantis. But I worry that appeals to common sense will not hold in the most ideological school systems, even in Florida,” Meg Kilgannon, Family Research Council’s senior fellow for education studies, commented to The Washington Stand. “Regardless, this is an important step in acknowledging the role that faith plays in our lives and how important it is that the big questions students have about morality, life and death, and God’s plan for their lives are best answered by a parent or priest, pastor, or chaplain.”
DeSantis has criticized Satanism in the past, arguing that it is not a religion. In December, after military veteran and outspoken Christian Michael Cassidy toppled and beheaded a Baphomet idol erected in the Iowa State Capitol Building by The Satanic Temple, the Florida governor declared, “Satan has no place in our society and should not be recognized as a ‘religion’ by the federal government. … Good prevails over evil—that’s the American spirit.”
On its website, The Satanic Temple responds to the question “Do you worship Satan?” The organization states, “No, nor do we believe in the existence of Satan or the supernatural.” The Satanic Temple adds, “Satan is a symbol of the Eternal Rebel in opposition to arbitrary authority, forever defending personal sovereignty even in the face of insurmountable odds. … Our metaphoric representation is the literary Satan best exemplified by Milton and the Romantic Satanists from Blake to Shelley to Anatole France.”
Now that it has been signed by DeSantis, Florida’s new law goes into effect on July 1.
And just what kind of argument is that against the premise that the Constitution is based upon belief in God? Just where do you think that the principles it expresses came from? Atheism? What kind of Justice and the Blessings of Liberty? Did the Founders operate out of a vacuum? How many were atheists, versus men who supported basic Biblical values and its principle of separation of powers on the federal level?
What states did they censure for affirming God?
Many of whom expressly affirmed the Bible, even if not all were Christians.
See HISTORICAL QUOTES IN CONTRAST
"Religion" to the Founders was not a "resolutely non-theistic" fraternal organization (the Satanic Temple, basically a preforming arts and political org.), "which does not even endorse supernatural (or 'supernormal') explanations...".
Yet since the IRS granted religious tax-exempt status to them, then not only must every US state gov. allow them religious rights and protections, but it opens the door for all sorts of secular org. claiming religious. Which means that neither the IRS or SCOTUS ruled consistent with what the Founders had in mind a religion.
It is a secular document. It is not a Christian document.
Yes, indeed. If not platinum.
There is this however.....
Declaration of Independence
https://www.archives.gov/founding-docs/declaration-transcript
Which I know you are going to argue is not the Constitution but the Constitution was set up to establish the government that was formed from this document.
The kind of atheistic worldview that is espoused today that uses that kind of argument to divorce it from it’s beginning did not exist in the days our government was established.
And still……not the constitution. Not the law of the land. Government determining which ‘religion’ is valid or official is expressly forbidden in the constitution. No matter how loud one is on the subject.
Agreed!
And so a secular document and a secular government does not make and uphold laws that are based upon beliefs, which often vary btwn cultures? Today the left believes gender is fluid. In Communism guilt can be dismissed as simply an emotion if needed.
What influences were behind the meaning of life, liberty and pursuit of happiness. Of liberty with limits? In some cultures, treachery is a virtue, or honor killing, or suicide.
Just what was the most singular esteemed influential historical source of the Founders overall, as well as that of many other sources?
Where did American laws flow from, and where in turn did those flow from?
The point is that there is no strict separation of belief and state, and the latter requires obedience to actions based upon beliefs, including what rights one should have an d when they should have them. Are the unborn a protected class, and should homosexuals be so based upon how they feel and act?
Based upon the influences behind the Founder's judgment, would they think a resolutely non-theistic, secular org. be a religion? Would they affirm the beliefs-based wokeism of today?
Wow. Get some rest.
I was angry with DeSantis during the primaries, BUT, RON IS STILL A GOOD AMERICAN AND I LOVE HIS DEVOTION TO HIS CONSTITUENTS.
Eventually, I will support him when President Trump has done ALL HE CAN DO TO MAKE MAGA WORK.
The Constitution is to regulate us, not God.
The Declaration of Independence preceded the Constitution, and He most certainly is acknowledged, four times:
Creator
Nature’s God
Supreme Judge
divine Providence
I did, thank God, but a forum is a place of exchange of ideas, and in which there is often an ideology behind even certain statements in issues as this, and which invites investigation and debate. This thread is about the basis for the Satanic Temple being classed as a religion, and a statement that only seems to be akin to the ACLU provokes challenging. At least you could explain your position.
Is the brain mentioned in the Constitution?
No, but the concept of the brain is presumed throughout. The Constitution is thus founded on the concept of the brain.
And the Constitution is founded even more directly on the concept of God, via the principle of rights.
That’s true except in the case of those who worship the devil.
Funny, my Constitution doesn’t include any explicit statements about satanism.
However, its entire body is founded on the idea of opposing satanism.
Your brain analogy is silly and will be ignored.
The influences on the bill of rights were from many different places, both secular and religious. The concept of human rights and rule of law goes back thousands of years and hundreds of years before Paul wrote his version.
The US didn’t perfect human rights in their founding documents either, as it made allowances for slavery is one example.
The constitution explicitly states there is no national religion. The type of Christianity practiced by most people who claim the constitution is their work didn’t even exist then.
It is not yours or your version of Christianity to claim. It gives you the freedom to worship as you choose, but no special right to enforce it on others or claim ownership.
“Devil Worship” and “Church of/LaVeyan Satanistm” are 2 different things.
I was trying to help you understand that some concepts are so properly basic that they can’t be removed from the matter at hand.
The concept of God in our Constitution is such a properly basic concept. Another is logic itself. I’m fairly confident you wouldn’t try to say logic doesn’t belong in the Constitution.
God is more fundamental than logic, because logic comes from God.
One of the first sacraments satanism is the act of lying. This causes the devil and his followers to pretend to be something other than what they are.
An example of this deceptiveness is when any given “church of satan” pretends to be “not devil worship.”
But when lying is your first principle, the price you eventually pay is your credibility.
When you believe god created everything of course you would have that view, unless the topic dispenses you, then blame satan.
That is not a rational argument and does not belong in American policy decisions.
Your religious beliefs do not make you special.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.