Muslims For Satan

[4588686]

Following Catholic uproar, a proposed Satanic mass at Harvard has been canceled. The mass was going to be put on by the Satanic Temple, the group who also has plans to plant a Baphomet figure on the front lawn of the Oklahoma Statehouse. Despite the fact that the Harvard Extension School Cultural Studies Club dropped its sponsorship, the group still managed to have an unsanctioned "black mass" at Harvard Square's Hong Kong restaurant and lounge. What bothers me the most about the official quashing of the Satanic Temple's mass by Harvard is that it is being hailed as a victory for religious tolerance—it's not. Instead, it's a case of a small group getting bullied into submission because it offended a big religion. 

 

...

 

Times have changed, so I’d like to tell Dr. Clooney how the American religious landscape looks in 2014. Dr. Clooney, I am a Muslim. As a Muslim in the cliché context of “post-9/11 America,” I encounter anti-Muslim discourses that use the same arguments that you have employed against Satanists. In more than one American city, Islamophobes have opposed the establishment of mosques by claiming that Muslims are intolerant and incapable of coexisting with other communities, or even that Islam is not a “real” religion and therefore cannot be entitled to the same defense of its freedoms. In the case of the so-called “Ground Zero Mosque,” people argued against the presence of a Muslim community simply on the basis that it would hurt their feelings. 

As a Muslim, I have to support the Satanists. Public revulsion of Muslims in this country is so popular that I have no choice but to stand with religions that are marked as ugly, offensive, and intolerant. Rather than join the anti-Satanist outrage and try to convince Christians that Muslims deserve to be included as “children of Abraham” or whatever, I would suggest that Muslims take a radical stand on behalf of the religious freedoms that we claim for ourselves. The people who wish to insult Muslims are not members of ridiculed fringe groups. They are not just isolated Qur’an-burning pastors, but extraordinarily well-funded and networked activists. Islamophobia is so mainstream that as Muslims, we must support freedom for all marginalized religions, because too many people have marginalized us.

....

 

What Clooney and Faust miss is that some of us find claims of Jesus Christ as the only means of salvation from eternal torture to be incredibly offensive. Any tradition whose advocates promise to be exclusive possessors of the capital-T “Truth” is going to bother someone. Should all religious discourse that claims supreme truth-making power over other religions disappear from the public? I get that Harvard Divinity School’s preferred religiosity tends to go soft in this regard: At Div School, folks don’t go much for the hellfire talk or claims of superiority. Maybe there’s a Div School version of Satanism that Clooney could go for. Or not, but who cares—Clooney’s personal taste does not provide the measurement of Satanism’s legitimacy. 

 

...

 

Read the full article here

 

http://www.vice.com/read/muslims-for-satan

Edited May 14, 2014 by Hasan

[Winchester]

I find myself taking Satanism as seriously as I might a GWAR concert.

 

By which I mean, not at all.

[4588686]

I find myself taking Satanism as seriously as I might a GWAR concert.

By which I mean, not at all.

That's cool, brah

[Winchester]

Other than that, the article makes good points. I like the part that implies that maybe none of this stuff is the purview of state power.

[Seven77]

i wonder how the author would feel about a "religious" ceremony that involves desecrating the the Quran.

[KnightofChrist]

i wonder how the author would feel about a "religious" ceremony that involves desecrating the the Quran.

 

Or a mock version of a Satanic mockery of the Salat. 

[4588686]

i wonder how the author would feel about a "religious" ceremony that involves desecrating the the Quran.

 

 

I think that would depend on who was doing the desecrating and where.  I think he would find a Christian group doing it in the US the be vulgar while Saudi Christians performing the same act in Saudi Arabia would likely be something he'd be a lot more sympathetic too.  

 

However, his point is not about feelings.  As he explicitly says.  A marginalized group's ability to express itself peacefully should not be contingent on how you or he feels about that group or their expression.  

[Anastasia13]

I think that would depend on who was doing the desecrating and where.  I think he would find a Christian group doing it in the US the be vulgar while Saudi Christians performing the same act in Saudi Arabia would likely be something he'd be a lot more sympathetic too.  

 

However, his point is not about feelings.  As he explicitly says.  A marginalized group's ability to express itself peacefully should not be contingent on how you or he feels about that group or their expression.  

Can we test that before going to Saudi Arabia?

[Anastasia13]

Other than that, the article makes good points. I like the part that implies that maybe none of this stuff is the purview of state power.

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion or prohibiting the free practice thereof.

 

...We leave that to case law.

Edited May 14, 2014 by Light and Truth

[ardillacid]

I find myself taking Satanism as seriously as I might a GWAR concert.

 

By which I mean, not at all.

 

Is this some old person reference? 

[Winchester]

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion or prohibiting the free practice thereof.

 

...We They leave that to case law.

It's they. We are not the government. We were never the government. We never will be the government.  That was always a lie. 

[Anastasia13]

It's they. We are not the government. We were never the government. We never will be the government.  That was always a lie. 

 

Or a death sentence.

[Seven77]

I think that would depend on who was doing the desecrating and where.  I think he would find a Christian group doing it in the US the be vulgar while Saudi Christians performing the same act in Saudi Arabia would likely be something he'd be a lot more sympathetic too.  

 

However, his point is not about feelings.  As he explicitly says.  A marginalized group's ability to express itself peacefully should not be contingent on how you or he feels about that group or their expression.  

 

Is it (desecration of the Quran) in-and-of itself offensive to Muslims or not? 

[4588686]

Is it (desecration of the Quran) in-and-of itself offensive to Muslims or not?

Since there are over a billion Muslims I don't think anybody can say what every single individual Muslim considers. I think it's safe to say traditionally and contemporarily most believing Muslims would find such an act offensive.

[PhuturePriest]

Since there are over a billion Muslims I don't think anybody can say what every single individual Muslim considers. I think it's safe to say traditionally and contemporarily most believing Muslims would find such an act offensive.

 

What if part of the Miles-Is-Awesome Religion (founded by Your Humbleness, Miles the Great) was burning mass quantities of Qur'ans? Should it be stopped if I wanted to do a ritual in His Greatness' honor on Harvard if Muslims found it deeply offensive?

 

This is why I don't like American politics.