Authors Note: This article is in no way, shape, or form an admiration, acceptance, endorsement of, or anything else that can be construed as support and or a belief in Satanism or the Church of Satan.
An improvised explosive device was thrown onto the front porch of a Satanic Temple in Salem, Massachusetts, early Monday morning, according to officials. Reports indicate that the device "fizzled out," which caused minor "scorching" damage to the outside of the building. Because the building was unoccupied at the time, the device was not found until later that day, when law enforcement was notified. Lucien Greaves, co-founder and spokesperson for the Satanic Temple, had entered the building from the rear entrance and was giving a guided tour of the building when the property manager found the bomb.
“This is certainly a terroristic threat,” Greaves said. “People could have been hurt. . . . People come and visit from all types of different places, [and] people come and bring their families. We have family friendly events.
“I don’t know how anybody could feel that they are justified in doing anything like this,” Greaves said.
This attack on the Temple was a fresh reminder of the fact that the Church of Satan and Satanism, in general, both have their enemies. This attempted bombing came just over four months after a Satanic display in Iowa, during the Christmas season in December of 2023, was destroyed by a man who admittedly dismantled the display because he believed it was hateful and should not be allowed to remain. The display, erected in the Iowa State Capital building, depicted the horned deity known as "Baphomet," a human figure with a horned goat head, behind a display of candles and other items related to the worship of Satan. On December 14th, a man identified by police as Michael Cassidy was arrested and charged with a hate crime for beheading the statue and rendering the display damaged "beyond repair," according to the members of the group that put it there.
The display was erected with permission given by the State Capitol building, which allows religious displays inside the building during the holidays. You can imagine the outrage from Christians across the country at seeing such a brazen display put up, especially during the Christmas holiday season. It should be noted that the Satanic Temple of Iowa stated that they did not believe in Satan but wanted to put up the display to symbolize their rights to religious freedom.
As far as the outrage was concerned, most of it came from those of us on the right side of the political spectrum. The Christian right was resoundingly supportive of Cassidy's act and even celebrated it. I respectfully disagree with that stance on this issue, and I will tell you why.
My first allegiance as an American citizen is to the United States Constitution, the Bill of Rights, and the freedoms that are enshrined in both. I have no faith and allegiance to anyone or anything else. I believe in the presence of God, but I do not practice any one faith or religion, nor do I denigrate or belittle anyone who does, especially my Christian brothers and sisters. I deeply cherish the Constitution as I have sworn an oath to support and defend it twice in my life, once as a Marine and again as a Deputy Sheriff.
Merriam-Webster defines religion as:
: a personal set or institutionalized system of religious attitudes, beliefs, and practices
: the service and worship of God or the supernatural
: commitment or devotion to religious faith or observance
: a cause, principle, or system of beliefs held to with ardor and faith
The First Amendment of the United States Bill of Rights says:
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.
When it comes to religion, the First Amendment does not say that we have the freedom of religion and the right to free exercise thereof unless it has something to do with Satan or Satanism. It is very clear and absolute. For example, when the left argues against guns or certain types of guns, they always say something like, "The Founders did not mention anything about assault rifles or machine guns, or weapons of war." Our response to that argument is that the Second Amendment was written to protect ALL arms, not just the ones we like. So, the First Amendment applies to ALL religions, not just the ones we like. I firmly believe that you and I should be able to worship any God or religion we want, just like you and I should own any gun we want, whether it's short or long, big or small, full auto or semi; it doesn't matter. I believe in the entirety of the First Amendment, the same way I believe in the Second — and all our civil liberties. So should you.
Now that we have defined what a religion is and what the First Amendment says, I present my case that the Church of Satan (not affiliated with the Satanic Temple of Iowa) not only qualifies as a religion according to the definition but also that it and its members and believers have the protections described in the First Amendment. By their admission, Satanists describe themselves as atheists and reject theist religions. However, through the auspices of the Church of Satan, they do believe in a set of core values and tenets. They have a hierarchy of "priests," rules, etc, everything a traditional religion has, with the sole exception of a "god." In one way, Satanism is not unlike Buddhism or Scientology, in the fact that a practitioner of Buddhism or Scientology does not believe in a god or deity either; rather, they focus on improving themselves. The Church of Satan, along with the Satanic Temple of Iowa, both make the same argument that they "consider ourselves a non-theistic religious organization."
“We feel that it’s our sense of cultural identity, narrative, and shared ethics that make us a religion.”
And in 2019, the IRS sent a letter to the Satanic Temple notifying them that they had been designated a “church or a convention or association of churches” and that they had received a tax-exempt status. It is for these reasons that I believe the Church of Satan, and in larger part Satanism, qualifies as a religion in the same way that the Church of Scientology does. This is not to say that I believe that they are a legitimate religion, as is Christianity, for example; rather it is the opposite.
For a Christian to denounce a display or writings as evil is completely fine, and I support that fully. However, to advocate for the destruction or use of physical force to prevent said display or writings is wrong and should not be allowed, no matter how much you believe it is justified to fight evil. That was not the teachings of Jesus Christ. When describing what Jesus said during the Sermon on the Mount in the Book of Matthew, the message was not just tolerance but love.
“You have heard that it was said, 'An eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth.' But I say to you, do not resist an evil person; but whoever slaps you on your right cheek, turn the other to him also. If anyone wants to sue you and take your shirt, let him have your coat also. Whoever forces you to go one mile, go with him two. Give to him who asks of you, and do not turn away from him who wants to borrow from you. You have heard that it was said, 'You shall love your neighbor and hate your enemy.' But I say to you, love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you. (Matthew 5:39-44)”
There are good, God-fearing Christians who do not believe in having unlimited authority or the right to act out against these displays or beliefs with impunity. However, those who use their religious beliefs to justify violence or aggression are little better than the forces of evil they claim to be fighting. Using Islam as an example, Islamic terrorists use religious terrorism to defend and or spread their faith, and that is wholeheartedly denounced by all sides, including Christianity. Again, to clarify, I am in no way saying that any Christian is in any way comparable to the likes of Islamic terrorists. I am simply making a point to put some clarity on this issue.
Even if I am dead wrong (I don't think I am) in the argument that the Church of Satan has religious protections to display and or advocate for their beliefs, even if they are an affront to your religion, they still have the protections mentioned in the First Amendment. The First Amendment was not written to protect the majority opinion from critique or violence. It was written to protect the minority opinion from the majority. "Evil" — and plain stupid — people have the absolute right to say or display whatever it is they want to, without any fear of being silenced, harassed, and/or attacked by those who wish to silence them. The amendment was not written to protect just Christians or their faith from criticism, insults, or any other written or verbal attacks. Rather, it was written to protect the Jews, the atheists and agnostics, and all other religions and faiths in the world from those that would silence them or prevent them from pursuing their faith and/or voice in public.
As an American, combat veteran, and political activist, I will always fight for the rights of all Americans, even those to whom I am diametrically opposed — because everyone deserves to have a voice and or an opinion without fear of being attacked or having their display destroyed. Think of all the conservative activists who go to colleges with their signs and messages or the pro-life advocates who go to abortion clinics on top of the college campuses. The right gets angry, and rightly so, when they are attacked and/or threatened. But sometimes I find the right oddly silent — and sometimes even proudly supportive — when the same thing happens to people or sides with whom we disagree. That, my friends, is hypocrisy defined.
