122

Satanists in Florida offer to fill school counselor roles after DeSantis law (thehill.com)

submitted 1 month ago by Emperor@feddit.uk to c/andfinally@feddit.uk

40 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Florida Satanists are volunteering to fill school counselor roles after Gov. Ron DeSantis (R) signed a law allowing religious chaplains into public schools amid staffing shortages.

“Nothing in the text of the bill serves to exclude us, and no credible interpretation of the First Amendment could. Should a school district now choose to have chaplains, they should expect Satanists to participate as well,” Lucien Greaves, cofounder and spokesperson for The Satanic Temple, said in a statement to The Hill on Monday.

Back when DeSantis signed the bill in April, he described Satanism as “not a religion” and said its members would not be allowed to participate in the program.

...

The Florida move allowing chaplains to serve as public school counselors comes as more states are aiming to inject Christianity into public school environments, including by mandating that the Bible or Ten Commandments be taught in classrooms.

The Satanic Temple has increasingly leaned into the fight over freedom of religion in public schools, including through the establishment of After School Satan clubs.

The temple, founded in 2014, says its mission is to “encourage benevolence and empathy, [and] reject tyrannical authority.”

top 40 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

[-] JoMiran@lemmy.ml 28 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

They are not Satanists. Chaplains of the Satanic Temple are atheists. Members of the Church of Satan are Satanists.

THE SEVEN FUNDAMENTAL TENETS OF THE SATANIC TEMPLE

One should strive to act with compassion and empathy toward all creatures in accordance with reason.

The struggle for justice is an ongoing and necessary pursuit that should prevail over laws and institutions.

III

One’s body is inviolable, subject to one’s own will alone.

The freedoms of others should be respected, including the freedom to offend. To willfully and unjustly encroach upon the freedoms of another is to forgo one's own.

Beliefs should conform to one's best scientific understanding of the world. One should take care never to distort scientific facts to fit one's beliefs.

People are fallible. If one makes a mistake, one should do one's best to rectify it and resolve any harm that might have been caused.

VII

Every tenet is a guiding principle designed to inspire nobility in action and thought. The spirit of compassion, wisdom, and justice should always prevail over the written or spoken word.

[-] phoenixz@lemmy.ca 1 points 1 month ago

Yeah those tenets are evil writings from satan, you must ask god for forgiveness!

/S, of course

[-] Emperor@feddit.uk 28 points 1 month ago

They're doing the Lord's work.

[-] HumanPenguin@feddit.uk 21 points 1 month ago

As an atheist. Honestly any rational view of the role satan played in the story.

Actually questioning an authoritarian leader. And punished for doing so. Blamed by that leader and all future followers as the director of evil. Because he is put in charge of all people who question the word of that autocratic leader.

Yeah doing the Lords work because the Lord is to narcissistic to do the job. Hmm makes the Christian right voting trump a little more understandable.

[+] Flax_vert@feddit.uk -6 points 1 month ago

Mfw "do not kill people" and "do not rape children" is "authoritarian". If God was really a tyrant, He'd just vanquish all of us immediately instead of giving us free will, then dying for us to pay the price for our sins.

[-] HumanPenguin@feddit.uk 12 points 1 month ago

Do not invent my arguments to satisfy your own stupidity. The story in no way indicates Satan objected to the rules. If fact, he objected to the very thing you are giving god credit for.

God punished Satan for questioning him. Not for killing or rape. Just for asking why humans were given free will, but angels were not. As much as you like to read the story in a way that makes you feel better. You are talking from the wrong orifice. The story of Satan is in no way accused of breaking the commandments. Only asking why humans are given so much freedom and his own kind not.

[-] Flax_vert@feddit.uk -5 points 1 month ago

You're saying that Satan was actually punished for questioning God, but this is the same argument as "The American civil war was about State's rights" a State's right to what? Questioning God on what? People nowadays for some reason have this cute or cool fluffy idea of Satan - you're forgetting though that Satan is very much the personification and embodiment of all evil and suffering. Every atrocity and every suffering is the fault of Satan.

[-] webadict@lemmy.world 2 points 1 month ago

Every atrocity and every suffering is the fault of Satan.

If Satan is the cause of all suffering and atrocities, then God either cannot stop them and/or refuses to stop them, but if we assume the former, Satan is more powerful than an omnipotent and omniscient being, and if we assume the latter, God is also responsible in part for some of that suffering by refusing to stop them. I don't think either of those are correct.

[-] Flax_vert@feddit.uk 1 points 1 month ago

That would result in taking free will away from us. And suffering does end in heaven, where this life is merely just a blip

[-] webadict@lemmy.world 2 points 1 month ago

That is God refusing, by choosing to let free will dictate actions. God acting as a bystander while those that didn't take any actions towards Evil suffer punishes those who chose to be Good because of God's actions (or lack thereof.) Pretending that this aligns with free will is inconsequential.

Does God have the ability and power to make it so people have free will AND there is no Evil: Yes or no?

[-] Flax_vert@feddit.uk 1 points 1 month ago

Nobody chooses to be good. Apart from Jesus Christ who yes, was punished because of our sin and us executing someone who was very much innocent

[-] webadict@lemmy.world 2 points 1 month ago

Does God have the ability and power to make it so people have free will AND there is no Evil: Yes or no?

[-] Flax_vert@feddit.uk 1 points 1 month ago

That's a contradiction. Free will without evil isn't free will, and you've basically just asked a question which is the omnipotence paradox. It's like asking if God can make a square circle or a boulder so heavy that He cannot lift it. Which are both things that cannot exist, like free will without evil.

[-] webadict@lemmy.world 3 points 1 month ago

It's only a contradiction from a flawed human logical perspective. We, as imperfect beings, cannot see a world that is capable of free will that is also free of Evil. But God is capable of all things, including creating such a world where that is possible.

God is capable of a world existing without Satan and having free will, for example. Satan's existence is reliant on God's will, and should God will it, Satan would not exist, and to ascribe all Evil purely to Satan is to blame God for Evil. It is, frankly, an incorrect assertion. Satan could be a manifestation of Evil, I could understand that, but Satan is not the CAUSE or even perpetuator of Evil. Evil would have to be a fundamental force created by God in that example, in order to allow free will.

[-] HumanPenguin@feddit.uk 1 points 1 month ago

It's not the same argument at all.

Mainly because we are talking about old white men in 400 ad gathering fables from local tribes. IE a library of stories and fiction.

Nothing in those fables talks about any action committed by Satan matching such crimes.

People claiming the cause of the civil war are ignoring events. Actual slavery rape murder and abuse, (although not crimes at the time in the states involved). Not to mention the north actually allowing and working to protect the south's right to keep slaves. Such event just did not exist in the fables.

The only time the devil is actually accused of anything is after he is giving knowledge to mankind. At no point is he ever said to have murdered or raped anyone.

[-] Flax_vert@feddit.uk -2 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

I don't know what library you're talking about because it doesn't match the description of the Bible.

In the book of Job, you see Satan casting down evil on Job and cursing him. Genesis shows Satan misleading Adam and Eve in the Garden of Eden. Revelation shows Satan as the ultimate source of evil. Isaiah talks about how far Satan has fallen. Jesus - who is God Himself - talks about Satan being a father of lies and Satan even tempts Jesus in the wilderness. Yes, humans do also carry a fault of following Satan and his demons in the rebellion against God, but your idea of rebelling against God is seen as "hip" and "cool", but rebelling against God is the bringer of genocide, wars, greed, famine and destruction. And then when God was incarnate on this earth as a Man, He preached love, kindness, morality and condemned evil. Yet we nailed Him to a cross, killing Him in one of the most horrific and humiliating ways possible. Yet on that cross He bore the punishment for our sins and offers us forgiveness. Not through our own doing or good works, but through His doing. He lived the life we should have lived and died the death that we deserved. That's who God truly is.

[-] HumanPenguin@feddit.uk 1 points 1 month ago

I don’t know what library you’re talking about because it doesn’t match the description of the Bible.

The word bible translates to library.

Honestly its time you actually did a little reseach on the history of your religion.

[-] Flax_vert@feddit.uk -3 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

I have. And the Bible canon was decided upon long before 400ad. And it wasn't old "fables" either. They were rather contemporary accounts of Jesus as well as letters between His followers.

I was baptised less than a year ago. My decision to be a Christian is to do with research that I have already done. Atheist arguments are generally based on alternative theories and argument from silence. Reminds me of the classic argument "The Bible is wrong as there is no evidence of Pontius Pilate existing" until they found a first century tablet with his name on it. Or the "Christianity is wrong as Science says the universe always existed" until they discovered that there actually was a beginning.

[-] HumanPenguin@feddit.uk 2 points 1 month ago

Wow, so logical. Accept, this is a discussion of the Old Testament.

You are showing a fucking desperate effort to ignore the facts.

[-] Flax_vert@feddit.uk 1 points 1 month ago

I didn't know this was about the Old Testament as it's common knowledge that the Old Testament was already compiled by the time Jesus came, so I assumed you were referring to the New Testament 🤦

[-] HumanPenguin@feddit.uk 3 points 1 month ago

The Old Testament was a collection of stories, not an actual book. Hence, the word bible. And not compiled as we know it until 400ad by St. Jerome. This was when the 66 books were agreed on and formed into a single accepted source. Also, when a huge number of stories were excluded as they were opposed to the political ideas of the church leaders at the time.

And given we are talking about the fall of Satan. It is pretty obvious that I am refusing to mythical events and stories passed down long before the bibble was a concept.

Assuming fundamental xtian belief, just over 6k years. (ignoring clear evidence that Homo sapiens existed nearly 300k years ago and Homo erectus ancestors about 2m years ago. Sorta throws the whole biblical story of Eden as nothing more then fairy tales.

But those tails def only paint the story of Satan as encouraging mankind to learn

And god as an authoritarian that did not want his children/humanity t) to learn to question him. Yeah, at no point is Satan actually accused of creating or being evil. Just giving humans the ability to actually question and learn independent of god.

IE, to question someone who at the very least is very narcissistic. And in the most logical interpretation. Trying to force sentient beings into a slavery of ignorance. .

[-] Flax_vert@feddit.uk 1 points 1 month ago

Source on the St Jerome thing? St Jerome translated the Bible into Latin. And I don't know how to help you since you clearly don't know the difference between translating and writing an entirely new book.

No idea what you are on about the 6k year thing and homosapiens. The Bible doesn't talk about when homosapiens came about, just that God created them.

Again, questioning God on what issue exactly? What good has ever come out of questioning God? You're trying to both have your cake and eat it here. God allows us to question Him, but obviously we will get the deserved consequence for when we do. Of course God didn't want us to question Him, because nothing good has ever come out of questioning God. And we do have the ability to learn as well. God gave us it. That's why so many scientists throughout history were Christians and theologians as well. We wanted to see how God's creation works.

Again, once again, you want to have free will but also don't want evil to exist. Free will without the ability to rebel against God isn't free will.

[-] HumanPenguin@feddit.uk 1 points 1 month ago

Again, once again, you want to have free will but also don’t want evil to exist. Free will without the ability to rebel against God isn’t free will.

Not believing in god or Satan in no way means I don't believe in evil. That is a rather nieve Christian idea. And a very fucked up idea of what free will is.

You seem to believe in some odd version of free will, where you have freedom of action. But get to blame someone/something else for your actions. When you do something evil. You did it, you were not tempted or deceived into it by some 3rd party fairy tail.

The statement you make here is fucking terrifying to atheists. Because you seem to think free will has no actual responsibility for your own actions. But instead blame Satan.

And a library of collected stories is not a book. The forming of 66 books into the bible was the actual action of St Jerome.

[-] Flax_vert@feddit.uk 0 points 1 month ago

So you don't believe in evil... So eugenics and genocide is alright then? So is anarcho capitalism? These are all part of survival of the fittest which is the atheist system for how the world is run, so therefore they shouldn't be evil in atheist's eyes.

Of course we don't get to blame someone else for our actions. We choose to participate in the rebellion started by Satan. The original point was that Satan isn't some brave revolutionary standing up to a dictator- Satan is the root of all evil, who started the rebellion against God that we choose to participate in. We do have responsibility for our actions- as God judges us instead of the atheist version where "it doesn't matter what you do, just enjoy life as it doesn't matter anyway"

The canon is formed by the books Jesus mentioned and referenced from and would have used, and the letters and writings of the apostles- People who were around at the time of Jesus. Some of them met Him personally.

[-] HumanPenguin@feddit.uk 2 points 1 month ago

Stop inventing fucking insane ideas in my name. It's a fucking childish way to make an invalid and childish point.

I do not believe in mythical fairy tail beings. Evil is an action of free thought and people. Not some stupid influence that allows you to feel better for your own shitty actions.

If you do shitty things like eugenics, genocide, murder or rape. The subjects you raise to try and create an emotional link. You are a shitty, evil arsehole. Not some imaginary 3rd party you invent to give yourself an excuse.

Its this insulting and self excusing bullshit that makes so many athists consider Christianity and Christians fucking evil.

[-] Flax_vert@feddit.uk 1 points 1 month ago

The original discussion wasn't about accountability - the original discussion was you were trying to claim Satan was some form of cool rebel, essentially Hazbin Hotel level theology. And I pointed out that rebelling against God isn't a good thing. Trying to justify your wrong by blaming satan doesn't justify it- because we choose to follow Satan in rebelling against God. Sin is NEVER justified. It's what nailed Jesus to the cross.

Its this insulting and self excusing bullshit that makes so many athists consider Christianity and Christians fucking evil.

And I'd say those atheists are bigoted.

[-] HumanPenguin@feddit.uk 1 points 1 month ago

The original discussion wasn’t about accountabilit

As a xtian raised with the idea of Satan. I spose it is understandable why you may feel others think that way. But you are incorrect. To an atheist and in fact all non-Abrahamic religions

Yes it was. To non xtians (etc) The whole story of Satan is about accountability. To such an obvious extent, it seems odd to have to explain it to you.

The whole xtian idea of Satan informing mankind of the knowledge of good and evil is a story about mankind not being accountable for sin. But instead, failing to resist the temptation of a 3rd party, the devil. To anyone not raised on your ideal of satan. It is an attempt to reject the Idea you have evil thoughts and ideas. But instead the suggestion you just lack the faith to resist evil injected into your mind by a 3rd party. So yes, I raised accountability. This is why the whole idea of rebelling against God being a bad thing. Seems to be more refusal of accountability.

I know it is hard. But for one minute, remember you are actually an atheist. You will consider this a stupid argument. But that is the bias of religion. But you consider faith in Oden, Thor, Zeus, Poseidon and the list can go on for 1000s. All to be stupid. I just add one more.

Try to see the story of Satan as for example the story of Oden hanging from the tree giving knowledge of runic writing to mankind. And it becomes clear why I see your story as describing an authoritarian god. How else do you describe a god who refuses to let his children gain knowledge. Basically a refusal to let children grow.

Yes, to the rest of us it is about accountability. To us its not is evil acceptable or not. Of course, it is not. But then, nor is refusing to accept the ideas are your own. And as such, if you have them. You have to be responsible for not acting on them.

As for being bigoted. The amount of times I have had American xtians when I lived there. Question why I don't do evil things because I am an atheist. A concept I have never heard from a European xtian in my whole life.

Yeah the whole idea these people only refuse to harm folks because they think god will punish them. Is fucking scary.

I don't harm others because they are people with feelings. The whole idea that some people cannot comprehend that without the thought of a heaven or hell. These people are not good.

[-] Flax_vert@feddit.uk 1 points 1 month ago

If we aren't accountable for our sin, then Jesus would have never had to die for us. God could have just had Satan pay the price instead.

I have thought about the odin argument, but I find all other religions and belief systems less compelling than Christianity, which is why I chose to become a Christian.

Runic writing is not the ability to intentionally commit evil. So that story falls apart. And if God refuses us to gain knowledge, He would have never given us the choice on whether or not to commit evil.

We don't harm people because we have a moral compass. For example, the Nazis had to desensitise people to violence in order to have them commit atrocities. So we all have fundamental morality. I believe that everyone has one because that is our knowledge of good and evil. Because God exists, right and wrong exist, and we know the difference. So it doesn't matter what religion (or lack of) you follow, that knowledge is there. In the same way, people who deny climate change are still affected by it- because believing in something or not believing doesn't make it more or less real. So believing in God or not doesn't make God, and the difference of good and evil any less real. So it makes perfect sense why plenty of Atheists are good, moral people.

As for heaven and hell, good works doesn't get you into heaven. There are people who are far better people than me who are in hell, because they trusted in their works. Accepting God's perfect sacrifice does.

[-] HumanPenguin@feddit.uk 1 points 1 month ago

Your first sentence is a common issue xtians face. You are making an argument to an atheist using your stories as evidence. To my it's like saying faster than light travel exists because captain Picard did it.

It in no way suggests to anyone but xtians that you are accountable for your sins. And worse, suggests you think someone else was punished rather than you. And when you add the whole concept of original sin. Very much indicates sin is not actually something you consider to be purely related to your own personal action. So sorta impossible to convince non xtians that your understanding of accountability is well-formed.

As for your last sentence. It is rather odd you can honestly sprout crap like that after your first comment was having a go at me for calling god authoritarian.

You believe he makes people suffer for eternity for failing to love him. We consider human insane and criminal for that behaviour.

[-] Flax_vert@feddit.uk 1 points 1 month ago

Didn't know you were asking for evidence 😂 In this circumstance we are talking about the same story and same character - Satan. The difference that I believe he is real and you don't here is irrelevant.

If people don't want to be with God, God respects their choice.

[-] HumanPenguin@feddit.uk 1 points 1 month ago

If people don’t want to be with God, God respects their choice.

You may genuinely believe that. But it is in no way what your religion teaches. The whole history of your religions desire to spread. Is based on saving non Christian souls from suffering.

And even a cursory look at the history of Christianity. Shows a great deal of earthly suffering caused by that unprofitable and frankly rather daft idea.

I'll give you a break. Few religions do not have this inbuilt punish,ent for unbelievers. Its sorta the point of religion to grow and form a powerful force. Yeah you may find that idea insulting. But it is simply the truth of history. Religions are lead by humans who have human goals.

The only religion that is actually openly opposed to it is Wiccan. And honestly that is a religion created in the 1940 by people looking at the mess other created. So hardly less about human goals. Just nicer humans.

[-] lorgo_numputz@beehaw.org 0 points 1 month ago

Someone might want to inform King James, who published his version in 1611.

Your lack of knowledge is showing in public. You might want to correct that.

[-] Flax_vert@feddit.uk 1 points 1 month ago

I think you just showed your lack of knowledge? The King James translation of the Bible is literally just a translation of the original Greek and Hebrew. That's like claiming that Egyptian hieroglyphics were written in the past 100 years because that was when we were able to translate some of them into English 🤦

[-] lorgo_numputz@beehaw.org 1 points 1 month ago

It was literally altered to enhance the claim of the divine right of kings, among other changes.

"A popular Puritan bible had downplayed the divine right of kings — greatly offending James — and James manipulated different Christian sects until they agreed to produce a different translation."

https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/origins-of-the-king-james-bible-180956949/

This is your religion, I shouldn't have to be telling you this. It's even been altered numerous times since KJV. It is not a literal translation and numerous books were left out because... they didn't like what was said.

Don't get me wrong; Christianity has many laidable tenets - "Don't murder", "Don't steal", etc. - basic rules for having a maintainable civilization, same as other major religions.

But don't pretend it is some static thing. It has been and is manipulated for polical purposes and is used to justify horrific treatment of others (same as other religions).

You might want to look more closely, but beware - studying religion too carefully is often the birth event of athiests.

[-] Flax_vert@feddit.uk 1 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

So is David Cross proposing that the original texts were translated into the Vulgate, then Geneva Bible to KJV, then KJV was translated into the NASB which was then translated into the NIV and then ESV... Or something?

The Bible we have today, let's say the ESV, is translated from the original texts. Meaning any changes made by popes or King James or whatever are gone (you actually can see this as some parts are in the KJV, like the note in 1 John 5:7-8 which was not part of the original text, or the Lord's Prayer doxology in Matthew 6:13) and they are translated from the earliest texts. They don't lie to you either about the parts we cannot be completely sure of such as John 8:1-11 or the ending to Mark's Gospel. So what David Cross is actually saying here is irrelevant - if I were to take a text and badly translated it, then someone comes along and fixes my translation by correctly retranslating from the original text, their translation wouldn't be bad simply because mine exists - which is what you would be arguing for with your logic.

Also if we left out books because we didn't like what they said, we would have left out the Sermon on the Mount and the parts telling you not to have multiple wives.

[-] lorgo_numputz@beehaw.org 1 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

My last response was unacceptably juvenile so I've retracted it - with my apologies.

I'll stick to the actually important part.

We may differ on matters ecclesiastical but this is all I really care about: If you are a Christian are you the type that actually follows the word of Jesus?

Not churchgoing, I don't care about that. Instead, being someone who forgives others, is charitable and helps those in need, as commanded by Jesus?

If so then you and I have no problems. I like you already - which means it makes even less sense to make enemies with you over the internet.

Enjoy your Friday.

[-] Flax_vert@feddit.uk 1 points 1 month ago

Just can claim things are wrong about anything, doesn't make them true.

[-] invertedspear@lemm.ee 4 points 1 month ago

They can volunteer for it all they want, but no school is going to actually let them fill the role. No school administrator is prepared to deal with the fallout that would come from it. Huge props to any principal that attempts it though.

[-] phoenixz@lemmy.ca 4 points 1 month ago

When are we going to ban religion, spirituality, and other superstitious crap?

Seriously, EVERY time any of that comes in the news, its always about abuse, coercion, and violence.

Sorry, NOTHING good comes from believing in things like you're a 5 year old. If you're one of those sweet old grandma's that uses their religion to do good in the world, then congratulations, you are being abused by your church.

You can do good without a church. If you want to help people, start a foundation, attract volunteers, and do good. You don't need stone age superstitions to be able to do any of that.

Grow up, because you're ruining this world

[-] phoenixz@lemmy.ca 2 points 1 month ago

Man these people really watched the Handmaid's tale and thought it was a documentary / instruction video

this post was submitted on 09 Jul 2024

122 points (99.2% liked)

And Finally...

867 readers

114 users here now

A place for odd or quirky world news stories.

Elsewhere in the Fediverse:

Rules:

Be excellent to each other
The Internet will resurface old "And finally..." material. Just mark it [VINTAGE]

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

Emperor@feddit.uk