Religious pluralism and the satanic temple Pluralism is defined by Webster's dictionary as “a condition or system in which two or more states, groups, principles, sources of authority, etc. ., coexist,” and Harvard writer Diana Eck highlights this idea regarding religion in her two articles “What is Pluralism?” and “From diversity to pluralism”, but is pluralism really that simple and attainable? Russell McCutcheon criticizes Eck's ideas on pluralism in his work "Our 'Special Promise' as Teachers: Scholars of Religion and the Politics of Tolerance" stating that his view of pluralism is biased based on its position in society. In this essay, these opposing views on religious pluralism will be discussed in reference to a debate over whether or not to display a statue of Baphomet in front of an Oklahoma state court at the request of the Satanic Temple. This essay will also serve to explain how the Satanic Temple self-identifies versus how other, more dominant groups label it to support McCutcheon's idea that Eck's views on pluralism are problematic. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on "Why Violent Video Games Shouldn't Be Banned"? Get an original essay. Eck defines pluralism as “energetic engagement with diversity.” Eck believes that pluralism means “keeping our deepest differences, even our religious differences, not in isolation, but in relation to each other” (Eck). He talks about how simple tolerance isn't enough, how tolerance allows ignorance to thrive. “The foundations are too weak for a religiously diverse and complex society like America” (Eck). He explains how pluralism does not require us to leave our beliefs in the dust, but rather to actively engage with the beliefs of others by proudly displaying our own. McCutcheon believes that pluralism is just “the friendly face of tolerance.” He believes that Eck shares his beliefs about pluralism only from his perspective, which he believes is privileged and in control, rather than "politically oppositional or socially marginalized" (McCutcheon). McCutcheon believes that these groups are not the ones who tolerate, but the ones who are tolerated, therefore “they do not set the standards for what counts as real commitment nor can they change their situation, even if they wanted to” (McCutcheon) . Eck believes that the religions that are allowed to speak in the public square are all those religions that do not believe in exclusivity. However, according to McCutcheon, the characteristics that Eck would require for a religion to speak in the “public square” include “already operating according to a set of sociopolitical values ​​and rhetorical standards that make it possible, attractive, meaningful and compelling to 'meet,' 'understand.' ', and 'appreciate' the other in precisely this way, precisely in this context, precisely for this purpose” (McCutcheon). McCutcheon criticizes Eck's project as "liberal sentiment" because he believes that pluralism is not as simple as Eck makes it seem by using words like "openness" and "engagement." McCutcheon argues that by Eck's standards for open engagement, "only a fairly narrow party line of commitment will gain admittance into this public square." She argues that Eck speaks from a perspective of privilege, having never actually been religiously oppressed, which makes it easy for her to believe that religions can mix so peacefully. “Apparently benign discourses on tolerance therefore have a subtle irony within them: they are discourses of the powerful” (McCutcheon). In Oklahoma, the Satanic Temple wants them toits members' voices are heard and it wants a statue of Baphomet in front of a state court. After all, does the United States really demonstrate pluralist values ​​if it doesn't let any and ALL religious voices have a say? Satanic Temple spokesman Lucien Greaves is outraged that the Ten Commandments are being displayed in court when there are so many many other religions existing in the United States. This situation is controversial due to the high percentage of Christians in the United States and their belief that the Satanic Temple has evil intentions. For the Satanic Temple, Satan is “a rebellious angel who challenges the autocratic structure and is concerned with the material world” (Greaves, VICE). This group supports religious pluralism in the United States "We have gone far beyond being a simple political ploy and have become a very sincere movement that seeks to separate religion from superstition and contribute positively to our cultural dialogue" (Greaves, Vice) . This religious organization should not be taken literally, because an act of kindness in the name of Satan is still an act of kindness. If so, then why are they and their desires discriminated against? McCutcheon weighs in on this issue in “Our Special Promise as Teachers.” Eck makes his pluralistic religious agenda seem so achievable. Eck believes that “people of all faiths or none can be themselves, with all their particularities, as they engage in the creation of a civil society,” and McCutcheon criticizes his beliefs, stating that “tolerance is part of a discourse normative domain and is the trace of an ongoing sociopolitical contestation". McCutcheon's version of pluralism is more realistic and therefore more correct. He explores the “public square” to which Eck belongs and states that many religious groups would refuse to be part of it and that those who would agree are already in power, causing no change in society. While his views may be “practical and banal,” Eck's seem much less realistic. One issue that prevents pluralism from thriving in the United States is the difference between how religious groups identify themselves and how outsiders classify them. The Satanic Temple, for example, is classified by other religions as a group that advocates evil, when it identifies itself as a group that uses blasphemy to distance itself from traditional norms that they deem counter-progressive. In a VICE interview with the Satanic Temple spokesperson, Greaves states, "this Satan, of course, bears no resemblance to the embodiment of all the cruelty, suffering and negativity that some apocalyptic segments of Judeo-Christian culture believe in." . This classification by outsiders causes ignorance and does not promote pluralism. This particular group does not fit into Eck's understanding of pluralism because so many other religious groups look down on them and, just as the idea of ​​placing a statue of Baphomet in front of the Oklahoma courthouse seems ridiculous to many, this shows how this group is not allowed to “talk at the table”. If McCutcheon were talking about this situation, he would say that the place of this group in a pluralistic society like America is that of a group tolerated by the dominant rather than a group that tolerates others. In the VICE interview, Greaves states that "religious freedom applies to everyone, and the United States is a nation based on religious pluralism" (Greaves, VICE). In this regard, let's explore what the Constitution says about religion. The “establishment clause” and the “free exercise clause” are part of the First Amendment, which “guarantees a religious marketplace in which religious organizations are neither.