For those unfamiliar, The Satanic Temple is an atheistic organization. Here are its tenets. I often ask people what they disagree with and get very little in the way of meaningful response.

THERE ARE SEVEN FUNDAMENTAL TENETS

I

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

II

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.

IV

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.

V

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.

VI

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.

https://thesatanictemple.com/blogs/the-satanic-temple-tenets/there-are-seven-fundamental-tenets

DO YOU WORSHIP SATAN?

No, nor do we believe in the existence of Satan or the supernatural. The Satanic Temple believes that religion can, and should, be divorced from superstition. As such, we do not promote a belief in a personal Satan. To embrace the name Satan is to embrace rational inquiry removed from supernaturalism and archaic tradition-based superstitions. Satanists should actively work to hone critical thinking and exercise reasonable agnosticism in all things. Our beliefs must be malleable to the best current scientific understandings of the material world — never the reverse.

https://thesatanictemple.com/pages/faq

She’s 13. Does anyone know if she’s allowed to become a member? The website isn’t clear on that.

    • PugJesus@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      1 year ago

      My argument there would be that genocide is wrong, not that every violation of bodily autonomy is wrong.

      • SuddenlyBlowGreen@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        So china shoudln’t have the right to genocide then?

        When you’re so enlightened, you can’t even answer if states should have the right to genocide, maybe it’s time to get off the “i’m-a-very-smart-internet-phisosopher” train 🤣

        • PugJesus@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          4
          ·
          1 year ago

          Yes, China doesn’t have the right to commit genocide.

          As a home owner (well, I’m not, because I’m a broke millennial, but let’s pretend), I have the right to control who comes into my house. That doesn’t mean I can deny the FBI knocking on my door with a warrant. Having the right to make decisions regarding something does not mean those decisions are inviolable, which is the whole point of disputing the idea of inviolable bodily autonomy.

          The community having a right to violate bodily autonomy for the needs of the community does not equate to the community always being right in doing so. A community mandating vaccinations in violation of bodily autonomy is probably right. A community committing genocide is pretty universally wrong.

          • SuddenlyBlowGreen@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            The community has a right to the use of individuals, according to the needs of the community. If your arm is stuck blocking an essential passage off, even if through no fault of your own, the community does have a right to remove your arm, if need be, to serve the needs of the community.

            The community would have the right to make that call and attempt to enforce it. Bodily autonomy is not an inviolable defense against a decision by the community to violate it.

            Yes, China doesn’t have the right to commit genocide.

            Congratulations, you managed to completely contradict yourself is just a few comments.

            • PugJesus@kbin.social
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              3
              arrow-down
              4
              ·
              1 year ago

              is not an inviolable defense against a decision by the community to violate it.

              I don’t know how much simpler I can make it, guy. You must be a Dogwood.

              • SuddenlyBlowGreen@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                2
                arrow-down
                2
                ·
                1 year ago

                is not an inviolable defense against a decision by the community to violate it.

                Never said it was.

                But I did say the community shouldn’t have a right to do anything, which you disagree with.

                You must be a Dogwood.

                I’m a type that doesn’t support the right to genocide. Probably not a lot of us where you fester.