In defense of the sanctimonious women's studies set || First feminist blog on the internet

Satanists Agains Medical Misinformation

Caperton

So I’m actually of two minds about this. On the one hand, anti-abortion types already think feminists are in league with Satan, so this certainly won’t help. On the other hand, anti-abortion types already think feminists are in league with Satan, so how much damage can it do, really?

Following the Supreme Court decision in Burwell v. Hobby Lobby, which established that companies are free to enforce bullshit restrictions on women’s health care on their employees if said bullshit corresponds with their religious beliefs, another religious group has stepped forward to claim their religious exemption: the Satanic Temple.

On Monday, the group launched a campaign in support of accurate medical information for women and, specifically, exemption from “informed consent” laws requiring women to hear unequivocally inaccurate information and scary warnings before being allowed to get an abortion. The Satanic Temple “believes that the body is inviolable subject to one’s own will alone” and supports health decisions “based on the best scientific understanding of the world, regardless of the religious or political beliefs of others.”

In their statement, TST said:

Informed consent bills requiring abortion providers to give their patients official “informational” material regarding the procedure have been criticized in the past for providing biased and false information to women in a bald effort at dissuading them from abortions. Such materials have included claims of a link between abortion and breast cancer, as well as claims regarding a depressive “postabortion syndrome”, both of which The Satanic Temple view as “scientifically unfounded” and “medically invalid” and therefore an affront to their religious beliefs.

On their Web site, the group provides a letter that women can print out and take to their doctors to claim their religious exemption from informed consent laws.

Reports of JCPenney sacrificing pure-hearted employees to assuage the Dread Lord Cthulhu, Bringer of Madness, are as yet unsubstantiated.

17 thoughts on Satanists Agains Medical Misinformation

  1. This is great news! Whether they succeed or not, their real point is in highlighting the sheer hypocrisy of SCOTUS in making their inane HL decision in the first place.

    For any who don’t know, Satanists and Satanism has nothing to do with a belief in Satan. Their general stance is towards science advancement, free will and not prioritizing those who treat us poorly.

    It can be very fairly said that many practicing Satanists are far more “Christian” in their attitudes and behavior than those who profess to be.

    2. While I think some Satanists and TST in particular have been hitting it out of the park lately, I cannot fathom why you describe their values as more Christian than Christians. LeVeyan Satanism does not believe, for example, on “wasting” love on those they deem unworthy, and I mean, take this precept from the Church of Satan: “If a guest in your lair annoys you, treat them cruelly and without mercy.”

      Satanism can be fantastic performance art and I love its challenge to polite society and Christianity in particular, but its theoretical form does not really resemble the theoretical form of Christianity (not that it should).

    3. I was talking more in “spirit” if you’ll excuse the phrase, than an objective comparison.

      And I was referring to the LeVey form which is the much more well-known (as little known and misconstrued as all of it is) form of Satanism.
      Satanists who actually worship the biblical form of Satan are very rare and even they will acknowledge that to believe in Satan requires a belief in God and that there is some inherent confusion there.

      I think most of y’all got what I was going for though.

      1. “Satanists who actually worship the biblical form of Satan are very rare ”

        I’d be hesitant to say that – I’m sure you don’t know many, but then, I don’t know many LaVeyans. But even if they are rare, it’s important to be mindful of minorities when making blanket statements.

  2. Good on ’em. I hope other religious groups such as the Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster take a cue from this.

  3. I’m not of two minds. I think this is great! It’s about time someone besides right-wing Christians started exercising these “rights” we hear so much about. One of two things will happen:

    1) The US will contort itself to deny such rights to minority religions, and it will be explicit what kind of theocracy we live in.

    2) The US will have to extend the same rights to right-wing Christianity’s enemies that it does to right-wing Christianity, and that’s the only thing I can think of that might make these Christians stop in their tracks and reconsider their actions.

    1. Yea, I think the fact that this is Satanist group will push the courts towards the first option. They’re just not going to find respect.

      It would have been far better if a Jewish or Muslim group brought suit.

      1. Yeah, in theory…but they didn’t, y’know? And they’ve had time, what with conscience clauses and so on, to formulate lawsuits and objections. If the Satanists are the only ones with the guts to do this, then I say go, Satanists, go!

        I wonder if that’s not a coincidence, too. Part of the price you pay for respectability as a religion is having to at least pay lip service to other religions and not being openly hostile. But Satanists are so far from respectability in the US that they don’t have to worry about that…

        1. As I imagined asking my American colleagues about doing just this, it occurred to me that Jewish and Muslim groups might have anxiety regarding their relationships with the public and with governing powers in a way which Satanists just haven’t needed to have. For example, I have known other Jews worried about publicising a pro-choice religious stance for fear of this contributing to a sort of blood libel/babykillers image. I cannot imagine that Muslim groups feel easier about their safety. Satanists are actually kind of perfectly poised to take this on, and as noted above, the term Satanist does carry a certain power which, say, Pastafarian completely lacks.

        2. Yes, I understand and agree that they wouldn’t want to because of PR concerns. I’m from a Islamic community and I do understand the PR and safety concerns. However, I would like to think that somewhere there is a religious leader that understands their followers shouldn’t have to put up with emotional abuse to get an abortion. Pro-Lifers act like there is only one possible religious explanation for Abortion.

      2. It would have been far better if a Jewish or Muslim group brought suit.

        I’m not so sure about that, honestly. The very fact of Satanism’s (undeserved) ‘evil’ reputation might freak people out enough to wake them up to the full ramifications of religious exemption. I’ll take that as a victory, if it happens.

        1. Honestly I think for many people there’s no real gap between Satanism and Islam in terms of “respectability”.

    2. You forgot option 3, which seems to be the given for many controversial questions these days:

      Deny any action on the basis of standing.

      The courts ALWAYS leave themselves an out. I can’t imagine this resolving much differently.

      1. I’m sorry, I don’t understand what that means. Would you explain? (I mean, I get that you’re saying that they’ll do nothing, but I don’t think I get “on the basis of standing.”)

  4. Such materials have included claims of a link between abortion and breast cancer, as well as claims regarding a depressive “postabortion syndrome”, both of which The Satanic Temple view as “scientifically unfounded” and “medically invalid” and therefore an affront to their religious beliefs.

    Oh my god, I’ve found my religion. Just kidding — I did read the Satanic Bible way back when, and wasn’t completely impressed with it. But that sentence right there … That really sums up my beliefs about the perversion of the term “informed consent,” when abortion foes misuse the idea to perpetuate lies about breast cancer, emotional trauma, etc.

    The concept of informed consent is one of the most important ideas in medicine, if you ask me. True informed consent is based on the best scientific information we have available, so people can use it to make their own medical decisions based on their own values and risk/benefit calculations. It’s thoroughly offensive to my beliefs that I would have to sit through a state-mandated monologue of lies if I chose to have an abortion.

Comments are currently closed.