To Reign is Worth Ambition

I am a 40-something attorney and mother who lives in a quiet neighborhood with a yard and a garage full of scooters and soccer balls. I often walk with my children to get ice cream and spend weekends hiking through a national park. I am not the type of person who would normally consider becoming a Satanist, but these are not normal times.

Like so many other women in the United States, when I learned of Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg’s passing, my first reaction was not grief but fear. I fear that American citizens are inching closer to living in a theocracy or dictatorship and that the checks meant to prevent this from happening are close to eroding beyond repair.

When Justice Ginsburg died, I knew immediately that action was needed on a scale we have not seen before. Our democracy has become so fragile that the loss of one of the last guardians of common sense and decency in government less than two months before a pivotal election has put our civil and reproductive rights in danger like never before. And, so, I have turned to Satanism.

My comment: the thing here called by the gentle euphemism of reproductive rights is an infanticidal procedure, in its late stages, so grotesque that images and facts about it are strictly prohibited in any venue controlled by the Left.

It is done on a scale to make the Aztec blench, and the ghost of the history’s most successful genocidal eugenicist, Margaret Sanger, to grin a mirthless, hungry grin, despite the flames in hell. I have it on good authority that such wretched shades delight in the damnation of others. Misery loves company.

The stern Spartan elders, gazing down into the pit at Apothetae, where the bones of unfit children rotted, would wonder at the wastefulness of the sacrifice even of the healthy young for the sake of the convenience of the mother.

She continues:

Members of the Satanic Temple do not believe in the supernatural or superstition….

I beg pardon to interrupt again. One is reminded of that learned and accomplished Master Tempter of the Lowerarchy, Uncle Screwtape, who reports that plans are in motion in Hell to emotionalize and mythologize human materialist thought to such an extent that what is, in effect, belief in demons will creep in while the human mind remains closed to belief in God. He says “If once we can produce our perfect work—the Materialist Magician, the man, not using, but veritably worshipping, what he vaguely calls “Forces” while denying the existence of “spirits”—then the end of the war will be in sight.”

We see here the end-point, predicted so long ago, a materialist satanist: one who adopts the symbols and lingo of hell, but believes in nothing but herself and her all-potent willpower.

Our materialist devil-worshiper continues:

Members of the Satanic Temple do not believe in the supernatural or superstition. In the same way that some Unitarians and some Jews do not believe in God, Satanic Temple members do not worship Satan and most are atheists….Instead, the Satanic Temple uses the devil as a symbol of rebellion.

My comment: Hillary Clinton’s mentor Saul Alinksy in the dedication of RULES FOR RADICALS, likewise dedicates his work to Lucifer as the father of all rebels.

Just like other faiths, the Satanic Temple has a code that their members believe in deeply and use to guide their lives. These Seven Fundamental Tenets include that “one should strive to act with compassion and empathy toward all creatures in accordance with reason,” that “the struggle for justice is an ongoing and necessary pursuit that should prevail over laws and institutions,” and that “one’s body is inviolable, subject to one’s own will alone.”

My comment: Nietzsche, as self proclaimed Antichrist, has a similar devotion to the power of the will and the will to power.

Reading through the Seven Tenets, I was struck by how closely they aligned with the unwritten code I had used to try to guide my own life for several years. I realized, happily, that these were my people and that I had been a Satanist for several years without even knowing it.

My comment: More fool thou. We knew it. All men with souls know whence comes the doctrines of pride, selfishness, and infanticide. We knew.

When Justice Ginsburg’s death suddenly made combating the threats to reproductive rights and a government free from religious interference more urgent, I knew it was time to join them and support their conceptual and legal battles.

Even before Ginsburg’s death, the Supreme Court was unwilling to provide adequate protection for a woman’s right to choose and to control her body. The court was unwilling to keep church and state separate. Now, without her voice of reason on the court ― let alone her vote ― Roe v. Wade is in imminent danger of being overturned not based on legal arguments or scientific reasoning…

My comment: The legal and scientific argument is pellucid. The argument against is based on the self evident truth that all men are created equal, endowed with a right to life, and the biological fact that two parents of a given species cannot produce an offspring of a different species. Nor is membership in a species gradual, or a matter of development.

Just for the record, I was a fervid anti-abortionist long before I was Christian. Opposition to abortion, like opposition to murder, theft, perjury, and so on, is upheld by all world religions, but this is not due to religion, but due to moral and rational faculties instinct in all human hearts.

And, again, just for the record, I am a lawyer. Any honest man of my profession who has read the case of Roe v Wade can see clear and plain that the legal reasoning therein is the worst of any Supreme Court decision.

It flaws are infinite: No precedents are cited. No laws are interpreted. The Ten Amendment principle that the Bill of Rights protects rights not explicitly enumerated is mentioned, but without mentioning that the Tenth Amendment explicitly reserves those rights to the states or the people. No origin of the alleged right to privacy is shown. So even granting the High Court’s argument that a right to privacy does exist, the Court does not say how or why it has the power to legislate protection of that right over and above contravening state interests in protecting life and family structure, or maintaining medical decency.

In other words, even the staunchest advocate of an alleged right to infanticide should agree that Roe v. Wade is bad law, must be stricken down, and if the states wish to create new laws to allow child murder, let them do so with a properly-written statute.

… but because of religious objections to what is a safe and necessary procedure for the women who seek it out after discussion with their physician.

My comment: I have often wondered why murdering my rich uncle in bed by smothering him with a pillow, so that I could inherit the estate, is not also considered a safe and necessary procedure.

Ginsburg’s replacement is all but certain to be vehemently anti-choice, with one of the top contenders belonging to a sect that actually used the term “handmaid” to refer to some women until the popularity of the TV series “The Handmaid’s Tale” gave the term negative connotations.

My comment: The author does not here say in what context she heard Ginsburg’s replacement actually use the term handmaid. Such since I am of the same sect, I can make an educated guess:

My soul doth magnify the Lord : and my spirit hath rejoiced in God my Savior.
For he hath regarded : the lowliness of his handmaiden.
For behold, from henceforth : all generations shall call me blessed.

This is hardly being used in a demeaning tone. As a bit of rhetoric, this straining and stretching merely to mention only of the most shallow bits of anticlerical agitprop ever to disgrace the bookshelves of sci-fi stores, is awkward to the point of laughter.

Let not fact or logic hinder the narrative sweep of our empty-headed, empty-hearted child-murderess.

She continues:

In the hours after Justice Ginsburg’s death, I sat wondering what the future would hold for my daughters. Their ability to live in a country where the religious beliefs of others would not play a role in their right to assert autonomy over their own bodies was suddenly, starkly, in danger. Traditional means of keeping abortion safe and legal seemed woefully inadequate to protect the rights that women in the generation before me had fought so hard to secure.

Almost immediately I sought strength in the Satanic Temple’s efforts to turn religious arguments on their head by pushing for religious liberty for their members on an equal basis with believers in the dominant Christian faiths. And this is not just a theoretical push. The temple has launched campaigns and filed lawsuits to compel the government to do this in matters ranging from exemptions from legal mandates to cover birth control to the ability to display religious symbols in government buildings or allow religious clubs in public schools. By pointing out instances where the government has favored Christian rhetoric ― and filing legal challenges to stop it ― the Satanic Temple has transformed belief into action and has demonstrated what freedom fighting truly looks like.