That is by design.

Equating it with bullying is just silly...

But hate-baiting should be taken seriously, and called out whenever it raises it's divisive little head.

what are you calling "hate-baiting"?

Thanks!

'The Satanic Temple' (while not actually believing in an entity called Satan) and who create a children's program which could be called the 'ASS Club' - are trying to be provocative. If this is true, then what are they trying to provoke? Happy, good-will thoughts? No.

If they had wanted to make a point about religious liberty and equal protection under the law, they could have easily done that. Instead at every opportunity they have sought to incite & divide. They rightly condemn the abominable Westboro Baptist "church", but how is being an "equal opposite" any better?

Have you really never heard of satire before?

The point is that folks who talk about "religious liberty" often do not practice what they preach. They are willing to disallow certain clubs merely because of the name of the club (in this case "Satan" is offensive to them).

If actual Satan-worshippers wanted a club, it is easy to see they would be treated in a similar manner by the "religious liberty" crowd.

their "religious liberty" is being infringed, will not be taken seriously?

then why take the claims of Christians seriously? At least the ASS club is not about some wish-granting Sky Fairy who supposedly loves us but then gives children cancer...

Aren't all values subjective?

"Punching down" means one is insulting those below them. No one here is insulting kids, they are trying to play by the same rules as the "religious" clubs.

Anyway, I assume you would be 100% behind this if it had a different name, correct? If that is all that the opposition is about, then we really don't disagree on much substance...

and it's not the Satanist Club.

If you really believed what you were saying about it being forced on the kids, you'd be joining them in condemning the evangelical club that exists solely to convert children.

And you again show your prejudice.

Do you have a response to the content of my post? Or just cherry picking the part that you think will make you look better?

You know, like calling proponents of gay marriage tools of the devil, or inciting bigotry and violence against LGBT, or promoting the idea that women are second class citizens, or whining incessantly that their "right" to discriminate against others is being infringed. Those kind of things aren't unique to Westboro, BTW. They can be found pretty much everywhere throughout most mainstream organized religions.

eventually the ST will find a judge (if they haven't already), who is sympathetic to their parody of an organization.

But IMO, the victory will be a hollow - "Johnny" is not going to want to attend the 'ASS Club', and so it will be a flop.

Edit: and if the club is so-named, they must know that it will flop - which begs the question: do the actually want their own group?? I think not.

IMO, it's a tempest in a teapot - but that doesn't mean we can't call them out for what they are.

It's fun watching this get a rise out of precisely the people it was intended to. Thanks for not disappointing, jonno.

Yeah, we'll go with that.

Others see the larger point being made. Maybe someday when you can get past your religious privilege, you will too. In the meantime, thanks for helping to promote this story.

The exercise is intended to promote reason and critical thinking and to that end is far more worthwhile than promoting a book to children which advocates rape, murder, incest, and child slavery.

You might want to think about what actually did establish the precedent, which was kind of the whole critical thinking exercise to begin with and seems to be completely lost on you.

And why would this make them feel oppressed?

You haven't explained that.

Such great senses of humor. Unlike the people they are fighting against.

Even according to the bible, god killed millions, Satan only 10, and even those were on a bet with god.

the group a parody and a sham (satire)?

It seems that many of the respondents here want to have it both ways; On the one hand the ST is supposedly a repressed religious organization simply trying to exercise their right to religious liberty. But on the other hand we're supposed to understand the their ASS Club (apparently a club to which no one actually intends to send their kids) is satire.

Should the law guarantee religious liberty to parody orgs?

Particularly when they aren't obvious parodies?

In addition, the ASS clubs are a foil, a counterpart to the Good News Clubs, which are Christian clubs given, in many cases, exclusive access to public schools. The ST makes no secret that whether the GNCs are banned or ASS clubs are given equal access is practically irrelevant, either way is a victory for equal access and equal treatment.

To put this in a more serious context, should the courts have thrown out this case:

https://www.stlmag.com/news/missouri-abortion-satanic-temple/

Because Mary Doe is a member of a "parody" religion?

Obviously, the actual reason it was dismissed was moronic, and will be overturned on appeal, but that takes time, probably a couple of years, which sucks. This is particularly important to me being a Missourian.

past events (like dressing up your kids as goofy super-heroes for Halloween), can't be changed.

Otherwise, my experience is that older kids who want to be baptized (or not), normally have the choice.

What is hard to pin down in these ASS Club discussions is - did the founders actually intend for kids to belong to & attend this club?

IOW - were they so short-sighted that they didn't think that the conversation between Johnny & his dad wouldn't occur?

Must have hit a nerve.

What are they afraid of?



Can't take a little ribbing?

Of course they can. They are adults, aren't they?

but that was intentional, right?

We used 'Club' and 'Union' appropriately as part of these groups names, and did not drop them for the sake of insulting them.

The only people who made hay out of it, well... they sounded as gleeful as you.

People for whom the Union/Club had not injured, and done nothing to provoke, and who in turn, contributed nothing intellectually to the clubs.

Edit: but your concern is noted.

This sounds like it is meant for a different OP.

You and Jonno are making much hay out of the idea that kids might be mean and play games with an ALTERATION of the group's name. Calling it ASS Club instead of ASSC.

Guess what kids did to the Black Student Union at my school?

But you know what? The kids in the Black Student Union were bigger than that, and the issues they wanted to discuss were bigger than that, and chuckleheads that like to make mean names out of other people's ideas don't matter, and eventually shut up and lose interest because they have tiny attention spans anyway.


So even if this group ends up labeled the 'ASS Club', it is of little importance to anyone who matters.

You haven't explained this.

It seems like a great name for a church, doesn't it?

And after all, they're grown adults. They can take a little ribbing, can't they.

Have a nice day.

There's a reason why they don't name themselves that, and the reason is quite obvious, even if you don't want to admit it.

with?

Yes. Yes, there is a reason. An obvious reason.
Just not the reason you had in mind.

friends.

Good News Club v. Milford Central School, 533 U.S. 98 (2001)


Flip that decision with actual liberals on the court, and this wouldn't be an issue. I stand with Stevens and Souter on this one. Take the 'good news club' off the table, and we don't have an issue here at all.

Indoctrinating impressionable young children instead of presenting both sides of an issue and allowing the children to learn?

This idea, and the ridiculous name, sounds somewhat abusive. Intolerance cannot be fought with intolerance.

In Good News Club v. Milford Central School, 533 U.S. 98 (2001), the Good News Club got exactly what it wanted.

And they deserve to get it good and hard. Where courts may fail, satire finds a way.

Clubs dedicated to espousing religious messages should be restricted to church schools.

But calling a club the ASS Club is silly.

In fairness, it is a logical avenue of attack, and others will make the same leap as the people who turned it into a 'thing' here in this thread, but 'I've seen worse'.