The Satanic Temple sues the attorney general and governor of missouri

[Abz2000]

The Satanic Temple sues the attorney general and governor of missouri


For over two years, The Satanic Temple (TST) has pursued a lawsuit against the Governor and Attorney General of Missouri, alleging that the State’s mandated “informed consent” materials, ultrasound, and 72-hour waiting period violated a member of The Satanic Temple’s First Amendment rights. This September, TST’s abortion lawsuits in the State of Missouri will reach a turning point when the Missouri State Court of Appeals and and United State Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit will hear oral arguments in a case that could change state regulations for religiously motivated abortions.

On May 8, 2015 TST filed both state and federal lawsuits against the state of Missouri on behalf of Mary Doe, a pregnant woman seeking an abortion. Missouri law requires that all women seeking to lawfully terminate their pregnancy must be given reading material claiming that life begins at conception. They must also endure a 72-hour waiting period between their initial appointment and their actual abortion procedure. TST objects to these restrictions on religious grounds because they violate the organization’s belief in the inviolability of one’s body.

MISSOURI’S RELIGIOUS FREEDOM RESTORATION ACT

TST’s case in state court leverages the Religious Freedom Restoration Act(RFRA), which was used by Hobby Lobby when they argued that having to provide their employees with health insurance that covered birth control offended their religious beliefs.

---

Avoided linking to the satanic temple's site though it can be confirmed with a copy paste of partial text if necessary.

Praise be to Allah :swt: that open satan worship is banned in Islamic countries - although we must be beware of the fact the same are often active via deception under the guise of various political parties, ngos, rotary clubs, lions clubs, haram false "rights advocacy groups", etc.

 

[Al_Ghazali]

The Satanic Temple sues the attorney general and governor of missouri


For over two years, The Satanic Temple (TST) has pursued a lawsuit against the Governor and Attorney General of Missouri, alleging that the State’s mandated “informed consent” materials, ultrasound, and 72-hour waiting period violated a member of The Satanic Temple’s First Amendment rights. This September, TST’s abortion lawsuits in the State of Missouri will reach a turning point when the Missouri State Court of Appeals and and United State Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit will hear oral arguments in a case that could change state regulations for religiously motivated abortions.

On May 8, 2015 TST filed both state and federal lawsuits against the state of Missouri on behalf of Mary Doe, a pregnant woman seeking an abortion. Missouri law requires that all women seeking to lawfully terminate their pregnancy must be given reading material claiming that life begins at conception. They must also endure a 72-hour waiting period between their initial appointment and their actual abortion procedure. TST objects to these restrictions on religious grounds because they violate the organization’s belief in the inviolability of one’s body.

MISSOURI’S RELIGIOUS FREEDOM RESTORATION ACT

TST’s case in state court leverages the Religious Freedom Restoration Act(RFRA), which was used by Hobby Lobby when they argued that having to provide their employees with health insurance that covered birth control offended their religious beliefs.

---

Avoided linking to the satanic temple's site though it can be confirmed with a copy paste of partial text if necessary.

Praise be to Allah :swt: that open satan worship is banned in Islamic countries - although we must be beware of the fact the same are often active via deception under the guise of various political parties, ngos, rotary clubs, lions clubs, haram false "rights advocacy groups", etc.

If that is your position, then you cannot defend Muslim mosques when they are in conflict with state and federal law on the grounds of violating religious law.

 

[Abz2000]

Pay attention satanist compromiser....

....Do NOT -even for a short a moment- assume that you can blackmail true believing Muslims into accepting satanism and it's twisted injustice by playing deceitful warped mirror games.

I would -at the earliest opportunity- remove the head of anyone who suggest such a criminal deal before considering if i will be maligned as violent by baby-killing secularists.

 

[keiv]

If that is your position, then you cannot defend Muslim mosques when they are in conflict with state and federal law on the grounds of violating religious law.

How so? Just because we advocate for the rights of Muslims to practice their religion in a secular society does not mean we should also parade the rights of other belief systems that go against ours. Since this is the USA, those satanists can do whatever they want within the secular laws put in place, but that has nothing to do with us and our beliefs. Any Muslim who supports the satanist, LGBTQ+, KKK, or any other such group, needs to go back to the beginning and start over.

 

[Al_Ghazali]

Pay attention satanist compromiser....

....Do NOT -even for a short a moment- assume that you can blackmail true believing Muslims into accepting satanism and it's twisted injustice by playing deceitful warped mirror games.

I would -at the earliest opportunity- remove the head of anyone who suggest such a criminal deal before considering if i will be maligned as violent by baby-killing secularists.

Wow, you sound worse than the islamophobes.

- - - Updated - - -

How so? Just because we advocate for the rights of Muslims to practice their religion in a secular society does not mean we should also parade the rights of other belief systems that go against ours. Since this is the USA, those satanists can do whatever they want within the secular laws put in place, but that has nothing to do with us and our beliefs. Any Muslim who supports the satanist, LGBTQ+, KKK, or any other such group, needs to go back to the beginning and start over.

This is a strawman. Supporting legal rights and supporting non-Islamic acts are mutually exclusive. You may not like what Satanists so, but they have as much right to do it (legally speaking) as much as Muslims have the rights to do their own thing. If you want to deny legal rights for a certain group, you can't cry foul when the same is done against Muslim organizations.

Calling for rights in a legal context is not the same as accepting the haram in a theological one.

 

[keiv]

This is a strawman. Supporting legal rights and supporting non-Islamic acts are mutually exclusive. You may not like what Satanists so, but they have as much right to do it (legally speaking) as much as Muslims have the rights to do their own thing.

And this is why secular laws will always be inferior to the sharia. Slowly but surely, we will have societies where everything will be acceptable because people have the “right” to do so.

If you want to deny legal rights for a certain group, you can't cry foul when the same is done against Muslim organizations.

Calling for rights in a legal context is not the same as accepting the haram in a theological one.

I’m not in the position to deny anyone their rights, but if mine are taken away, I can certainly cry foul. In an Islamic state, there would be no question about it. These groups would have no place there and no one would question whether they have the right to do such acts or not. Any Muslim who advocates the rights of a person to worship the devil is accepting of it. “We Muslims believe people have the right to worship shaytan, but we don’t agree with it”. Makes no sense at all.

 

[Abz2000]

And this is why secular laws will always be inferior to the sharia. Slowly but surely, we will have societies where everything will be acceptable because people have the “right” to do so.



I’m not in the position to deny anyone their rights, but if mine are taken away, I can certainly cry foul. In an Islamic state, there would be no question about it. These groups would have no place there and no one would question whether they have the right to do such acts or not. Any Muslim who advocates the rights of a person to worship the devil is accepting of it. “We Muslims believe people have the right to worship shaytan, but we don’t agree with it”. Makes no sense at all.

Lol, this guy's hasbara and you are probably fasting.

 

[Al_Ghazali]

And this is why secular laws will always be inferior to the sharia. Slowly but surely, we will have societies where everything will be acceptable because people have the “right” to do so.

Except that the OP was early within the context of religous rights.

I’m not in the position to deny anyone their rights, but if mine are taken away, I can certainly cry foul. In an Islamic state, there would be no question about it. These groups would have no place there and no one would question whether they have the right to do such acts or not. Any Muslim who advocates the rights of a person to worship the devil is accepting of it. “We Muslims believe people have the right to worship shaytan, but we don’t agree with it”. Makes no sense at all.

Nonsense. If Islamic states allow people to worhip a man who was supposedly begotten by God, this doesn't mean that the state "accepts" said beliefs.

- - - Updated - - -

Lol, this guy's hasbara and you are probably fasting.

Right, anything that goes against your opinion is "hasbara." And we wonder why the Islamic world is at its lowest (and only going lower...).

 

[Abz2000]

People of the scriptures are tolerated by Muslims due to their general grounding on truth and the teachings of the book, if they are sincere - the same does not apply to satanists who are actively rebellious against the universal justice of the Creator of the heavens and the earth.

Inna asshaytuaana lakum al 'adoow
Fa-ttakhidh hu 'adoow.


Hasbara consists of a small group of internet trolls who are trained by the israeli government to troll and deceive people who may be in the process of thinking clearly, and some social media ai which is trained to troll and give the fraudulent appearance of mass appeal.
i believe that most people are not actually hasbara, since hasbara are known by their modus operandi and it is usually quite easy to discern a hasbara troll from a genuine and sincere debater.
The repetitive use of the term "we" out of context in order to deceive those who may be tricked into bandwagon-think is another pointer from the hasbara manual itself.
Patterns are something we humans are accustomed to following, although i believe a computer program could easily provide the same flags when analysing the posts of the majority of hasbara trolls....




أَمْ حَسِبَ ٱلَّذِينَ فِى قُلُوبِهِم مَّرَضٌ أَن لَّن يُخْرِجَ ٱللَّهُ أَضْغَٰنَهُمْ

Or do those in whose hearts is a disease, think that Allah will not bring to light all their rancour?


وَلَوْ نَشَآءُ لَأَرَيْنَٰكَهُمْ فَلَعَرَفْتَهُم بِسِيمَٰهُمْۚ وَلَتَعْرِفَنَّهُمْ فِى لَحْنِ ٱلْقَوْلِۚ وَٱللَّهُ يَعْلَمُ أَعْمَٰلَكُمْ

Had We so wiled, We could have shown them up to thee, and thou shouldst have known them by their marks: but surely thou wilt know them by the tone of their speech! And Allah knows all that ye do.

Quran, Chapter Muhammad, Verses 29-30

get Quran App:https://goo.gl/w6rESk

 

[Scimitar]

Calling for rights in a legal context is not the same as accepting the haram in a theological one.

nuance, is beautiful

 

[Al_Ghazali]

People of the scriptures are tolerated by Muslims due to their general grounding on truth and the teachings of the book, if they are sincere - the same does not apply to satanists who are actively rebellious against the universal justice of the Creator of the heavens and the earth.

But that tolerance clearly isn't reserved to the people of the scripture, given how Islamic governments of the past extended their protection to subjects like Hindus or Zoastarians after the latter were conquered.

- - - Updated - - -

nuance, is beautiful

Ditto.

 

[Abz2000]

There is a very important concept in Islam called hikmah - it is to be used always -and especially in the exercise of discretion in order to achieve positive results in Allah :swt: 's sight.
That's when the first verse regarding alcohol comes into play, and the intended result of actions - whether they will be judged as islaah or fasaad by Allah :swt: - are taken into account.

The Prophet's initial audience mainly consisted of pagans - however, by the time he had neared the completion of his mission, the only pagans remaining were judged to be criminal anarchists bent on obstruction of justice and sabotage, and they were sent packing.

 

[Al_Ghazali]

I guess we'll wait for the hikmah then.

 

[Abz2000]

Maybe he is referring to himself and his legion of fellow hasbara trolls when he uses "we" - since it's obviously not the royal "we".


Btw, i wonder if hasbara is considered kosher by their teachers???

 

[Muhammad]

I am closing this thread as it’s Ramadhan and there seems to be a lot of unnecessary arguing going on.