Satanic Temple to deliver invocation at Scottsdale City Council meeting (to rent, to buy)

[DetroitN8V]

Originally Posted by BIG CATS

I didnt condemn anyone, did I? In fact I actually said I believe the Satanists have the right to do their invocation, even if Im against it. Dont be so quick to jump down others' throats. I know it might be hard for you to go 5 minutes throughout your day w/o telling everyone your beliefs, so I understand your angst.

And if you want to "rise up and take a stand", bring the fight, we're game.

Dude, come on. You threatened hell, damnation and desolation claiming that Scottsdale would soon resemble Detroit because of this decision. Sure, it was probably tongue-in-cheek, but it was still clearly condemnation. I don't think any reasonable people are giving this scare tactic a second thought, but these fire and brimstone tactics of some outspoken Christians are downright ridiculous.

[azriverfan.]

Originally Posted by DetroitN8V

Dude, come on. You threatened hell, damnation and desolation claiming that Scottsdale would soon resemble Detroit because of this decision. Sure, it was probably tongue-in-cheek, but it was still clearly condemnation. I don't think any reasonable people are giving this scare tactic a second thought, but these fire and brimstone tactics of some outspoken Christians are downright ridiculous.

Good, I hope they move. If these types of actions concern them, they are more than welcome to move to a more conservative state like Oklahoma. There are plenty of like-minded folks there.

[Arizona Mike]

Originally Posted by JGMotorsport64

I think you're getting too hung up on the name Satanist. And you're right Greece wasn't required to allow such a group to provide an invocation, however, the city of Phoenix is behaving discriminatorily against a religion. As for hate speech in dicta that was specifically addressed in what I quoted above, offensive language is protected and you aren't coerced to listen to it.

Phoenix's proper route, following this decision, would have been to require that the religion providing invocation to be within the municipality. Of course that would open the door to a similar incident of a local Satanist chapter. But that would then be a protectable invocation putting the city in the wrong.

My point wasn't about facts, it was the holding. They specified that Greece wasn't violating the Free Establishment Clause in light of the non discriminatory behavior. Phoenix is discriminating. Phoenix is censuring citizens who don't conform, precisely against one of Greeces reasons for not violating the First Amendment. Phoenix is limiting who can provide the invocation, unlike Greece. Phoenix is censuring a willing minister, unlike Greece.

Scottsdale is not.

Again, if Terry Jones would not be permitted to offer a prayers in front of the council (for what SCOTUS, and most sane Phoenicians and Scottsdalians, would probably be considered common-sensical reasons) neither should Satanists.

Hate-speech is still permitted in other venues. They would be free to make their proclamations outside in the hallway, outside in the free air, or in any number of other places. The denial of the space and time of the council chambers would not place an undue burden on their free exercise of "religious" belief.

[Banjo71]

Originally Posted by sandy6879

It's time that this practice ended. One can pray all they want in their home or place of worship. It has no place in the government.

This makes my point. The end game isn't inclusion, it's destruction. Freedom for all means freedom for none.

[DetroitN8V]

Originally Posted by Banjo71

This makes my point. The end game isn't inclusion, it's destruction. Freedom for all means freedom for none.

In Phoenix, yes. They were so scared of another viewpoint that they 'destroyed' the tradition. Scottsdale is not destroying anything. They are exemplifying your "freedom for all" point.

[phetaroi]

Originally Posted by Arizona Mike

Pretty sure no one has made the claim that a simple prayer before a meeting will make everything perfect.

But as you recognize, the U.S. Congress actually employs a religious leader as the Chaplain of Congress, and pays him with public funds, just as the Armed Forces employs religious leaders as chaplains and pays them a wage and allows them to put themselves in harm's way while providing religious services to government employees.

SCOTUS, who gets the last say in this matter, says this is all constitutional. In Town of Greece v. Galloway, they narrowed that to say that there is nothing wrong with prayer before a public meeting as long as they weren't restricted to all Christian or Judaeo-Christian prayers (which, the Phoenix City Council has not, historically - I have been present at a meeting where a Native American prayer was made.)

The issue of devil-worship was even brought up, as a ludicrous example of where a policy could lead, incidentally in Town of Greece. Douglas Laycock, who represented the two women who challenged the prayers in New York as a violation of the First Amendment’s ban on government establishment of religion as excessively sectarian, was asked by Justice Alito Jr. for an example of a prayer that would be acceptable to people of all faiths.

Mr. Laycock said “prayers to the Almighty” and “prayers to the Creator” would be all right.

“What about devil worshipers?” Justice Scalia asked.

Mr. Laycock said that “if devil worshipers believe the devil is the almighty, they might be O.K.”

(Interesting response, in that the Satanists in this case have admitted they do not.)

Ultimately, by a 5-4 vote, the Court ruled that the town's practice did not violate the Establishment Clause. The majority opinion authored by Justice Kennedy stated: "The town of Greece does not violate the First Amendment by opening its meetings with prayer that comports with our tradition and does not coerce participation by nonadherents."

So there you go. It's hard to argue that an invocation to a Satan, in whom the invokers have stated they do not believe, could be considered part of our tradition.

The court concluded that the town's practice of opening its town board meetings with a prayer offered by members of the clergy does not violate the Establishment Clause when the practice is consistent with the tradition long followed by Congress and state legislatures, the town does not discriminate against minority faiths in determining who may offer a prayer, and the prayer does not coerce participation with non-adherents.

I'm all for encouraging prayers by members of minority faiths, within the realm of decency and common sense. A hate-group such as the Satanists, who are conducting a publicity stunt as atheists to try to force religious expression out of the public square, do not fall under that category, in my opinion, anymore than the Westboro Baptist Church or the Branch Davidians do.

As the sole expressed reason for conducting this atheist exercise is to try to end religious prayer at government meetings, I would suggest that the best way to oppose this, if the city council's legal representatives are too weak-willed to resist it in court, is to allow them to make their prayer, let members who oppose it walk out, and have done with it. They will then have satisfied the legal need to allow them to speak, and can continue to allow real faiths to offer prayers. There will then be no need to allow them to speak again, given the tiny numbers of Satanists in our community.

Make everything perfect? It doesn't do a whit of good. Forget about useless traditions and get down to business.

The government shouldn't be paying for religious services. Period. Religion is osmething within a person, not something placed on them by the government.

My god (small "g")...a conservative praising the Supreme Court.

"the realm of decency and common sense"...of course, based on your standards.

"real faiths"...again, based on your standards.

[phetaroi]

Originally Posted by sargeant79

They should recite this simple, non-offensive prayer asking for God's guidance on their own time. If they choose to lead a group in said prayer as part of a government proceeding, then yes...they are forcing their belief system on me. Do I care personally? Not really. But were I a devout Hebrew, Muslim, Buddhist, or Satanist, I might have an issue with it, especially if I wasn't afforded the same opportunity to lead the group in my religion's prayer.

The best solution would be to keep a group prayer completely separate from government activity. If that's not okay with some folks, then I see nothing wrong with a good old non-denominational moment of silence. Anything more than that means you have to allow all to be represented...even the Satanists.



I don't think anyone is getting discombobulated except a handful of hardcore Christians who are objecting to the Satanists leading the prayer. Seems to me that most others are either snickering quietly to themselves or simply rolling their eyes and moving on.

I think they ought to do what had to be allowed at our school. Each morning, students and adults of any faith could, if they wished, gather at the flagpole before homeroom. After all the fuss, it got about 8 stragglers out of a faculty, staff, and student body that numbered nearly 1,000...and after all the fuss was over pretty much disappeared within a few weeks.

[phetaroi]

Originally Posted by Arizona Mike

So get out the vote and organize your side. As the French saying goes, he who does not show up for a vote is automatically wrong. Don't blame the other side because they are more passionate and organized than you are. That's not a "disproportionate influence," it just means your side is more lazy.

Or, move to a place where your end of the political spectrum is more active.

Because, of course, majority rules.

[observer53]

Originally Posted by DetroitN8V

I didn't say anything about my beliefs. They're simply not relevant.

Back to the topic, will Scottsdale succumb to the same pressures Phoenix did and remove their invocation altogether?

You put your distaste for organized religion out there all over this forum, both in threads where relgion is part of or all of the topic and those where it's not. If that's your belief, it's got some relevance here. Where someone is "coming from" in expressing their opinions is not irrelevant.

[DetroitN8V]

Originally Posted by observer53

You put your distaste for organized religion out there all over this forum, both in threads where relgion is part of or all of the topic and those where it's not. If that's your belief, it's got some relevance here. Where someone is "coming from" in expressing their opinions is not irrelevant.

I know you love to drag my personal viewpoints into any thread you can, however, this thread is to discuss the topic at hand - not DetroitN8V's personal views and beliefs. Please stay on topic.