



"Once you open a public forum to religion, you can't then decide which ones you like best to represent in that public forum," said the temple's attorney, Stuart de Haan.







Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.



Controversy rages in the United States between those who wish to restrict government involvement with religious institutions and remove religious references from government institutions and property, and those who wish to loosen such prohibitions. Advocates for stronger separation of church and state emphasize the plurality of faiths and non-faiths in the country, and what they see as broad guarantees of the federal Constitution.



“Religious Liberty shall be interpreted to include freedom to worship according to conscience and to bring up children in the faith of their parents; freedom for the individual to change his religion; freedom to preach, educate, publish and carry on missionary activities; and freedom to organize with others, and to acquire and hold property, for these purposes.



According to the lawsuit filed this week in federal district court in Arizona, the Satanic Temple wasn't asked about community ties when it applied by phone to give the prayer. The group is asking a judge to find the city in violation of the U.S. Constitution's First Amendment right to free speech and to prevent the city from denying prayer opportunities to non-Christian religious groups.



It has sought to start after-school Satan programs in protest of what it says is the erosion of the separation of church and state, install statues of Satan outside state capitols to counter Ten Commandments monuments and give opening prayers at City Council meetings.

Should Freedom of Religion be extended to this Satanic Temple? If members of this Temple want to say a prayer, peacefully, what right do we have to stop them?Now, as an ex-Catholic, who still prays to God, I have no issue with people who think praying to an "imaginary" being is silly. That's their right not to believe and I shouldn't force my beliefs on anyone. Even though I feel Satan is the embodiment of evil, I can't deny others from practicing Satanism, as long as they aren't harming anyone, or sacrificing animals (I'm a dog lover...what can I say?)"The rights of conscience we never submitted, we could not submit. We are answerable for them to our God. The legitimate powers of government extend to such acts only as are injurious to others. But it does me no injury for my neighbour to say there are twenty gods, or no god. It neither picks my pocket nor breaks my leg. ... Reason and free enquiry are the only effectual agents against error." -Thomas JeffersonA spokesperson from Scottsdale, Arizonia, says the Temple "did not have close ties with Scottsdale" and therefore can't lead a prayer at a City Council meeting. What if there are members of this Temple who reside in Scottsdale? Shouldn't they have a right to have a prayer recited? This specific Satanic Temple, claim they don't "worship Satan or any deities" and feel they are being discriminated against. They applied over the phone to say a prayer at a City Council meeting and wasn't told that they had to have community ties.I must confess, as an Air Force "brat," I had a hard time watching wealthy football players kneeling for The National Anthem. I can't imagine what I would think, if I saw a statue of Satan staring at me in front of a state capitol.