Religious people are not all fanatics, or all opposed to the self actualization of others, so adopting symbology that they would find abhorrent does not win favors or friends. In fact, religious zealots get some sort of existential validation by the existence of Church of Satan etc. I think choosing a symbol associated with destructive ideas is not good marketing if you’re aiming for people who aren’t angsty about religion, or biased against people of faith. I don’t think it’s necessarily bad to let people be themselves, including have faith. The problem is that we’ve forgotten that separation of faith and state is needed for civil discourse and social harmony.
You’re conflating the Church of Satan with The Satanic Temple. Two different things. The latter does not believe in the supernatural.
The problem is that we’ve forgotten that separation of faith and state is needed for civil discourse and social harmony.
This is exactly the main point of TST. To fix this problem.
I don’t consider myself a member, despite agreeing with all of their 7 tenets (I challenge you to read them and tell me which you find objectionable), because I’m personally not a fan of all of the baggage associated with “Satan” and Abrahamic religion in general. I don’t need all of that just to be a secular humanist or whatever.
That said, I’m glad they exist and I support all of their efforts to try to stop Christian nationalism from taking hold of our country.
Man, you are reeaally over upset by this. Unless you are a hypocrite calling yourself a Christian, they are not calling you out. They are not angsty; they are political progressives fighting against hypocrisy and the force of religion in the public sphere (which is to say, government and schools).
If you truly believe that the problem is we have forgotten the separation between faith and state, you would probably be supportive of them.
Religious people are not all fanatics, or all opposed to the self actualization of others, so adopting symbology that they would find abhorrent does not win favors or friends. In fact, religious zealots get some sort of existential validation by the existence of Church of Satan etc. I think choosing a symbol associated with destructive ideas is not good marketing if you’re aiming for people who aren’t angsty about religion, or biased against people of faith. I don’t think it’s necessarily bad to let people be themselves, including have faith. The problem is that we’ve forgotten that separation of faith and state is needed for civil discourse and social harmony.
You’re conflating the Church of Satan with The Satanic Temple. Two different things. The latter does not believe in the supernatural.
This is exactly the main point of TST. To fix this problem.
I don’t consider myself a member, despite agreeing with all of their 7 tenets (I challenge you to read them and tell me which you find objectionable), because I’m personally not a fan of all of the baggage associated with “Satan” and Abrahamic religion in general. I don’t need all of that just to be a secular humanist or whatever.
That said, I’m glad they exist and I support all of their efforts to try to stop Christian nationalism from taking hold of our country.
Man, you are reeaally over upset by this. Unless you are a hypocrite calling yourself a Christian, they are not calling you out. They are not angsty; they are political progressives fighting against hypocrisy and the force of religion in the public sphere (which is to say, government and schools).
If you truly believe that the problem is we have forgotten the separation between faith and state, you would probably be supportive of them.