Satanist Leads Invocation at Alaskan Assembly Meeting

http://www.mrctv.org/blog/satanist-leads-invocation-alaska-assembly-meeting

I require your thoughts on this, dear Jedi. What say you?

I feel that the invocation itself is lovely.

I think that Satanism needs more exposure. Like with Jediism, most people have misconceptions, born of ignorance, about what Satanism is.

They're not eating children or setting churches ablaze, so who cares what they believe?

I say, "Satanists, invoke on!"

I say they are free to do as they please in expressing themselves according to their beliefs. When people speak of Lucifer, to me it just means intellect, nothing wrong with it as long as you don't end up like every other religion clinging to concretized images and idols to only separate yourself from everyone else leading to conflict.

i havent read the article yet but my first reaction is that i think its great

imo our cultural standards of inclusion and cooperation should be behavior oriented more than belief or culture or demographic oriented
if people behave in a way that promotes the public good then they are good

anything that helps move us in that direction is a good thing

im glad to know this happened

Sure, why not. Religious freedom is essential for a healthy society. Yet I personally believe that religion is a private matter and I've never been a fan of publicly displaying one's religious beliefs, as doing so is bound to insult those who don't share these beliefs and will likely cause reactions, which, in turn will also cause reactions etc., perpetuating the constant struggle of religious faiths in society that has been going on for millennia, that has cost countless lives and has ruined even more.

With full agreement of all that's been posted so far.

I am a tad sad that this is news , what next , Jediist opens Kindergarten?, Pastafarian opens Healthcare center ? Islamists saves pig from drowning? :silly: We are still so far of from really accepting each other are not we ?

That people ignored the invocation, or walked out, is evidence that there is a very long way to go until everyone's beliefs are respected. The Satanic Temple does a generally good job of highlighting in America where this inequality exists.

Edan wrote: That people ignored the invocation, or walked out, is evidence that there is a very long way to go until everyone's beliefs are respected. The Satanic Temple does a generally good job of highlighting in America where this inequality exists.

Its a clear sign that they did not care about the invocation , but care more about the one who does it , in my opinion this is ignorance at its worse , i see this a lot , everywhere , where the words dont matter , but the one who utters them , its a nasty glitch in our ability to communicate. And it also leads to certain religions claiming to be more "just" or "important" only because they have more followers or governments indorsing them. Like i said , its sad that we cannot listen to people for what they are saying but judge them on what they believe.

Since nobody has mentioned it, The Satanic Temple's position is that invocations shouldn't be a part of government proceedings. Religion is a private matter and has no place in government. The reason TST does this is to make a point that if you're going to allow Christians to hold a prayer, blessing, or what-have-you at a government function then you have to give equal opportunity to all other religions to do the same. TST anticipates that there will be backlash and so long as religious plurality is truly enforced then nothing is amiss (though not ideal), but often what happens is the local government tries to find ways to keep TST from being a part of their local government's religious ceremonies.

That said, I'm pleasantly surprised this happened. My impression of Alaska is as a puritanical conservative state of gun toting snow eaters.

Jamie Stick wrote: Since nobody has mentioned it, The Satanic Temple's position is that invocations shouldn't be a part of government proceedings. Religion is a private matter and has no place in government. The reason TST does this is to make a point that if you're going to allow Christians to hold a prayer, blessing, or what-have-you at a government function then you have to give equal opportunity to all other religions to do the same. TST anticipates that there will be backlash and so long as religious plurality is truly enforced then nothing is amiss (though not ideal), but often what happens is the local government tries to find ways to keep TST from being a part of their local government's religious ceremonies.

That said, I'm pleasantly surprised this happened. My impression of Alaska is as a puritanical conservative state of gun toting snow eaters.

Why would anyone mention that? I for one am not interested in any religious agenda as such , although i can find myself in their stance of keeping government and religion apart. As for your last remark , it clearly illustrates the ignorance as i stated in my former comment. I for one am not pleasantly surprised , as i also earlier stated , what next ? Atheists support football club ?

I'm sensing indignation, but I'm not sure why. My comment was meant to clarify why the TST is doing this as it is important to TST that the issue of separation of Church and State become policy rather than simply trying to cause a scene or stir up trouble. Furthermore, it's important because TST isn't a church of conventional Satanists. TST is a non-theistic religious organization; they don't worship Satan, nor do they believe in deity or Satan-like entity, but rather use the image of Satan as a symbol for rebellion against tyranny (and injustice).

Jamie Stick wrote: I'm sensing indignation, but I'm not sure why. My comment was meant to clarify why the TST is doing this as it is important to TST that the issue of separation of Church and State become policy rather than simply trying to cause a scene or stir up trouble. Furthermore, it's important because TST isn't a church of conventional Satanists. TST is a non-theistic religious organization; they don't worship Satan, nor do they believe in deity or Satan-like entity, but rather use the image of Satan as a symbol for rebellion against tyranny (and injustice).

Hmm that was not my intention really sorry if i came of a bit blunt , i was just surprised you would say such a thing about a whole state and in the same post showd gladness of being accepted :huh:

Ah, yeah, so you were reacting to my generalization of Alaska... Okay, fair enough. I don't know if you saw all the press around Sarah Palin when she was on the ballot with Senator McCain who was running for president, but basically she embodies a lot of things that I think of as regressive and gave me a really bad impression of Alaska. To me, Alaska is like a cousin to Minnesota (where I was born).

Jamie Stick wrote: Ah, yeah, so you were reacting to my generalization of Alaska... Okay, fair enough. I don't know if you saw all the press around Sarah Palin when she was on the ballot with Senator McCain who was running for president, but basically she embodies a lot of things that I think of as regressive and gave me a really bad impression of Alaska. To me, Alaska is like a cousin to Minnesota (where I was born).

Yeah i was really trying to forget that hahah thanks for reminding me loll i need so much rum to get over that much stupidity hehe

This may be a little off-topic, but what is the difference here between this and when the tabloids spray us images and codswabble about when celebrities get married or divorced ? Or, hyper-mediatised court cases like OJ Simpson a few years back ?

The same invocation could have been delivered by an Enlightenment scholar - probably substituting "eating from the tree of Knowledge" by "Reason," but not necessarily - and no one would be raising a fuss. Incidentally, "Luciferian impulse" would be lexically synonymous with 'the Enlightenment movement' (not at all a recent development).

No, this seems like another go at getting people to take sides based on stuff they don't know anything about other than their conditioned belief systems (i.e. 'Satanists are witches who eat babies and have orgies'). I've known some of those people, and as it turns out, most of the authentic ones had gone just far enough up the Nihilism path to get to some pretty sound ethics. In other words, they were pretty genuinely kind ...

As it turns out, I find the zealots of the traditional religions (followed closely by the materialist atheists with a cause) a whole hell of a lot scarier than the Satanists.

As Alan Watts points out, in the Christian tradition, Jesus sits at the right hand of God. but who sits at His left ? Ah ! For all the pride we take in our God-given Reason, we seem to forget that Reason is the Serpent itself. 'To know that one knows' (forgetting in the process that one indeed does not) is the kindling for such flammable conflicts as this one -- and all the others where "this isn't appropriate" gets used as an umbrella against the good sense of the out-group.

This sort of diatribe has been going on ever since Charlemagne's "conversions" in the 9^th Century ... it leads to ethnic cleansing and ideologically expired violence and some otherwise unsavoury table manners. :whistle:

Alexandre Orion wrote: This may be a little off-topic, but what is the difference here between this and when the tabloids spray us images and codswabble about when celebrities get married or divorced ? Or, hyper-mediatised court cases like OJ Simpson a few years back ?

The same invocation could have been delivered by an Enlightenment scholar - probably substituting "eating from the tree of Knowledge" by "Reason," but not necessarily - and no one would be raising a fuss. Incidentally, "Luciferian impulse" would be lexically synonymous with 'the Enlightenment movement' (not at all a recent development).

No, this seems like another go at getting people to take sides based on stuff they don't know anything about other than their conditioned belief systems (i.e. 'Satanists are witches who eat babies and have orgies'). I've known some of those people, and as it turns out, most of the authentic ones had gone just far enough up the Nihilism path to get to some pretty sound ethics. In other words, they were pretty genuinely kind ...

As it turns out, I find the zealots of the traditional religions (followed closely by the materialist atheists with a cause) a whole hell of a lot scarier than the Satanists.

As Alan Watts points out, in the Christian tradition, Jesus sits at the right hand of God. but who sits at His left ? Ah ! For all the pride we take in our God-given Reason, we seem to forget that Reason is the Serpent itself. 'To know that one knows' (forgetting in the process that one indeed does not) is the kindling for such flammable conflicts as this one -- and all the others where "this isn't appropriate" gets used as an umbrella against the good sense of the out-group.

This sort of diatribe has been going on ever since Charlemagne's "conversions" in the 9^th Century ... it leads to ethnic cleansing and ideologically expired violence and some otherwise unsavoury table manners. :whistle:

Yeah that was what i was trying to say in my first response , thanks for translating :lol: My point being...why is this News ....?( The OP i mean)

As a sensationalist news item, this does seem pretty vulgar. As a philosophic consideration, this becomes much more interesting :

Most of the time, when we talk about the separation of Church and State, we are still thinking of "a particular" church in any given political organisation. We are not talking about "religion" as such. Now, for as much banging on as I do about it, most people are going to continue to understand the word "religion" as "a particular" religion - a set of doctrinal imperatives, interpreted in particular ways by particular (groups of) people. That is not what "religion" is ...

Religion - religare, ("to re-bind," "to re-fasten," "to link back") is the re-connexion that we always talk about in relation to the Force, the Universe, God (sens large) or whatever one sees re-connexion to the transcendent as being. It is our instinctive quest for an Absolute, our elusive desire for that non-duality, that connexion with all that the human consciousness perceives as "not-I" (including other people). It is the seat of our emotions and thus our imagination necessary for the perspectival gymnastics that permit empathy and result in compassion.

Religion is not the priesthood or the authoritarian hierarchy or the doctrine ... That is, in effect, merely the gaudy, and often deceptive, packaging that tempts people into "buying" (believing) the product. Religion, that which the human being is by evolutionary bias predisposed to, needs no Church to be kept separate from a State.

The typical way of asking "what religion are you a part of ?" is on the same statistical level as asking "what political party do you belong to ?" The typical, census bureau-type responses are a demographic index sorting how people see themselves as partisans of one group or another. It is certainly not inviting them to feel out what they actually believe. It is thus not indicative of what religious beliefs actually are.

On the other hand, we need to pose the more interesting question now : ought "religion" (given the description above) be kept separate from a political organisation (a State) ? Ought we organise government based on the un-feeling, un-sympathetic mathematical (im)precision of an All-Powerful Bureaucracy ? Are human beings reducible to demographic functions and quanta ? :huh:

There is some really interesting work being done in this field right now. I'd suggest perusing Martha Nussbaum's works ... but that is, of course, only because she's hot !

Religion - religare, ("to re-bind," "to re-fasten," "to link back") is the re-connexion that we always talk about in relation to the Force, the Universe, God (sens large) or whatever one sees re-connexion to the transcendent as being. It is our instinctive quest for an Absolute, our elusive desire for that non-duality, that connexion with all that the human consciousness perceives as "not-I" (including other people). It is the seat of our emotions and thus our imagination necessary for the perspectival gymnastics that permit empathy and result in compassion.

This is the part that i really agree with , religion has lost its initial meaning and is transformed into a golem of rules and doctrines , one that we cannot seem to escape from , by acknowleging the differences but stressing the connection we might overcome this , meaning that here at the Temple , we stress the connection more than the differences , thats why i dislike posts like the OP , its like a pledge for some kind of awereness that we should have conserning a religion that is set aside as odd , it may be , but for me every religion is very personal , and i dont do Catholic or Jewish awarement posts , as a Jew i know what its like to be disliked and misunderstood , hell look at the Olympics , suppose to be a game to bring together and yet , people refuse to shake a Kurdish Jews hand ,...i still believe we have a very long way to go in accepting eachother ...Satanists believe something , thats fine , some believe nothing , thats fine, some believe not in the Force but in Spaggetisaus keeping the Universe together , one being a bit tastier than the other , both fine ...

Yeah that was what i was trying to say in my first response , thanks for translating :lol: My point being...why is this News ....?( The OP i mean)

I'd say that the comment I made in my previous post works here too... that fact that it is news

is evidence that there is a very long way to go until everyone's beliefs are respected.

The Satanic Temple's actions force people who believe only they should get a certain thing (but not let everyone else have it too), through their actions, into an uncomfortable position. They don't want to ban prayers or invocations, but they don't like having Satanic invocation there either. They should feel uncomfortable, only because it shouldn't be an issue. They shouldn't feel uncomfortable about a Satanic invocation, any more than a christian prayer, or a muslim one, but they are... so they should feel uncomfortable about that... in my opinion... if it makes sense.