[graciegirl]

Group Unveils Satan Statue Design for Oklahoma - ABC News


It is a smack at people who are causing no harm and it is directed at a place that is known for being mostly Christian and conservative.


I hope it will be disallowed. I understand and support the separation of church and state, but this just is a bunch of ugly troublemakers in my opinion.


First do no harm.

[Golfingnut]

The fair thing to do would be: Remove the ten commandment monument and block all religious statues. Even minorities have rights in America. The thought that Christianity should be the chosen faith over all others is uncaring and possibly one of the reasons that Christianity is declining faster than any other faith in the USA. Islam is the fastest growing of the major faiths in this country.

Wake up Christians before you drive away so many followers that you become a minority American faith.

[redwitch]

Not sure what to say. I don't think a statue of the 10 Commandments belongs in a government enclave. I don't think a statue of Satan belongs, either. But, if you're going to allow one, I think you should allow the other. At least people can sit on Satan's lap. In reading the article, several other religious groups have also petitioned to allow statues showing their beliefs. Maybe a circle of statues honoring all religions could be a good thing?

[graciegirl]

Originally Posted by redwitch

Not sure what to say. I don't think a statue of the 10 Commandments belongs in a government enclave. I don't think a statue of Satan belongs, either. But, if you're going to allow one, I think you should allow the other. At least people can sit on Satan's lap. In reading the article, several other religious groups have also petitioned to allow statues showing their beliefs. Maybe a circle of statues honoring all religions could be a good thing?

Point taken. My point is that this kind of change was probably initiated by a gifted (previous) kid who never had his pants kicked. There are ways and there are ways to change things.


Choosing this place was just mean.

[blueash]

Sorry to disagree GG but choosing this place is not mean it is symbolic. When the members of the dominant religion in this country feel it has become their "right" because this is a "Christian" country to place symbols of their gods and their books and their tenets on public land and buildings the message heard by many is a big FU to people who don't share those stories. Apparently some Christians feel that having to opportunity to express their beliefs in their own homes, in their own tax-free buildings, in their schools, and dominating the culture in the country is not enough. Apparently needing to see symbols of their faith displayed on property they don't own or religiously control is needed to reaffirm their beliefs. When the reason given is that the public location is equally available to others and that the placement of Christian symbols is not any endorsement by government of that religion then members of any religion or non-religion must be allowed to counterbalance the appearance of government favoritism so as to prove there is none. Thus Oklahoma is perfect. If the heart of the bible belt understands that unless atheists, Satanists, Mormons, Hindus, Jains, Muslims, Animists, Pastafarians.... etc. are given equal opportunity to express themselves in a public forum then and only then does the promise of religious freedom have any chance of being fulfilled. If only Christian (which Christian? I seem to recall wars fought over which version is "true") symbols are to be on public display then the first amendment means nothing. Religion is only mentioned twice in our Constitution. Both times the Founders were taking the time to make clear that religion has nothing to do with governing. So if seeing a statue of Satan, or of Krishna, or the Flying Spaghetti Monster at the Florida state capitol Florida Capital approves Pastafarian Holiday display « Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster given equal consideration on public property and in public hearings makes Christians uncomfortable then all that needs to happen is for Christians to push for laws to prohibit the use of public facilities for any religious purpose. I am sure the Satanists will support such legislation.

[graciegirl]

Originally Posted by blueash

Sorry to disagree GG but choosing this place is not mean it is symbolic. When the members of the dominant religion in this country feel it has become their "right" because this is a "Christian" country to place symbols of their gods and their books and their tenets on public land and buildings the message heard by many is a big FU to people who don't share those stories. Apparently some Christians feel that having to opportunity to express their beliefs in their own homes, in their own tax-free buildings, in their schools, and dominating the culture in the country is not enough. Apparently needing to see symbols of their faith displayed on property they don't own or religiously control is needed to reaffirm their beliefs. When the reason given is that the public location is equally available to others and that the placement of Christian symbols is not any endorsement by government of that religion then members of any religion or non-religion must be allowed to counterbalance the appearance of government favoritism so as to prove there is none. Thus Oklahoma is perfect. If the heart of the bible belt understands that unless atheists, Satanists, Mormons, Hindus, Jains, Muslims, Animists, Pastafarians.... etc. are given equal opportunity to express themselves in a public forum then and only then does the promise of religious freedom have any chance of being fulfilled. If only Christian (which Christian? I seem to recall wars fought over which version is "true") symbols are to be on public display then the first amendment means nothing. Religion is only mentioned twice in our Constitution. Both times the Founders were taking the time to make clear that religion has nothing to do with governing. So if seeing a statue of Satan, or of Krishna, or the Flying Spaghetti Monster at the Florida state capitol Florida Capital approves Pastafarian Holiday display « Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster given equal consideration on public property and in public hearings makes Christians uncomfortable then all that needs to happen is for Christians to push for laws to prohibit the use of public facilities for any religious purpose. I am sure the Satanists will support such legislation.

Point made. It is HOW one tries to effect change that I am making an issue of.


You Blueash like all others have things you hold "sacred" and I see you defend them on this forum. I am not taking a stand against what you said. I am saying that this kind of thing was designed to cause anger and pain. I know that they were trying to take it to the courts, in order to settle it, but a not all people can see that. There is a right and a wrong way to effect change. The symbol of Satan means horrible things to most fundamentalists.


When I was twelve years old, I wrote a letter to the Columbus Dispatch defending Darwin, much to the embarrassment and chagrin of my family. But it was a letter. I still am in many ways as much a scientist as you are, but I try really hard to see what hurts people's hearts and try to avoid it. You can change some things with teaching and some things you cannot.


I very much do not like how these people were trying to effect change. I think it is wrong.

[Golfingnut]

Like minorities, gays, and non-Christians, to call fowl was the kiss of death for person and employment; hence anti discrimination laws came to the defense of those effected. When the 10 Commandment memorial was placed in this public facility in 2012 it was a slap in the face of anyone with a different view of GOD. In my progressive opinion, the protest is not mean spirited but rather a cry for justice. Back to my first post, don't pick for any specific group. Allow all religious figures or ALLOW NONE.

[rubicon]

What is this world coming to when people cannot differentiate between Satan and God. The ten commandments irrespective of one's belief in their progenitor are excellent guidelines for a people to follow and emulate.

Christianity is being beaten down and killed in every country and to my surprise of all places here in the USA. The founding fathers were establishing rules whereby people would have freedom of religion and not freedom from religion. This country was built on a Judeo-Christian beliefs. To have someone suggest that if one can practice Christianity then one should have the right to practice Satanism is disingenuous and worse yet harmful

Look at our youth and do you see whom they idolize (I doll ize) as some call it. I have said in the past that I am a nominal catholic but in my view the Judeo-Christian beliefs should continue to be freely expressed. The Ten Commandments do belong in our legal courts because perhaps it will remind those testifying under oath and those administering such oaths remain true, honest and ethical and every public institution in our country for similar reasons.

In my opinion a macro-view of Christianity clearly demonstrates that it has done much more good than harm. Because this push by special interests groups to fight Christianity ultimately results in people not believing in anything. so if you want the young to continue to i doll ize then continue down this path and see if that rock star or movie actor can turn this country around. "Thou shalt not have false gods before me."

[onslowe]

Well said Gracie and Rubicon. And in the most civil manner possible, I do find humor in the assertion above that the Decalogue of Judaism and Christianity set up in public (Thou Shalt Not Kill, Thou Shalt Not Steal, etc) should be a "slap in the face" or a big "FU" to our oft persecuted little Satanists and other precious 'minorities.'

The Founders did not ever ever write a 'separation' of church and state into the Constitution. They said Congress could make no law 'establishing' a religion, like the Church of England! That's all. Our media experts have been trying to say that Christianity, and indeed Judaism is a monolithic 'religion' when such is absolutely laughable and reveals ignorance of terms. The founders meant specific religions, i.e. Anglicianism, Quakerism, Lutherans, etc. Not an all out prohibition against anything Christian! Please look at our history and not MSNBC. One letter, 13 years later, by Thomas Jefferson to a Baptist church in Danbury, contained the seed of this errant position not embraced by the Founders.

In 1947, Justices Black and Douglas, among some others, decided it was 'separation' and applied it to the states. Something not in the Constitution suddenly became a 'corner piece' to one segment of this society, and shoved down the throat of the, excuse the bad word, majority.

Now what if a little boy or girl sees the statue of Satan and get really spooked and scared and needs psychological help? Can the parents sue the State of Oklahoma? What if the statue of Satan is 'vandalized?' Is that a hate crime to our 'live and let live folks?

Funny, I've not heard of Moslem, Buddhist, or other faith communities complaining.

Sorry, the motive here is exactly what Gracie said.

[Golfingnut]

Christianity is shrinking because it is unable to attract young people. The Pope is trying to change the way the church treats those different than the 18th & 19th century view of what is or is not normal. Wanting only one religious statue or a narrow view of what marriage is etc. is the problem. Youth today no longer follows the archaic TO BE SEEN AND NOT HEARD MENTALITY. America talks the freedom for all, but puts restrictions on those not toeing the Christian line.

I say it's time we practice what we preach. Keep in mind, my parents generation thought my generation was destroying the world. I won't follow that trend as I feel this generation of youth can make the world better and in fact are doing just that right now.

[graciegirl]

Originally Posted by Golfingnut

Christianity is shrinking because it is unable to attract young people. The Pope is trying to change the way the church treats those different than the 18th & 19th century view of what is or is not normal. Wanting only one religious statue or a narrow view of what marriage is etc. is the problem. Youth today no longer follows the archaic TO BE SEEN AND NOT HEARD MENTALITY. America talks the freedom for all, but puts restrictions on those not toeing the Christian line.

I say it's time we practice what we preach. Keep in mind, my parents generation thought my generation was destroying the world. I won't follow that trend as I feel this generation of youth can make the world better and in fact are doing just that right now.

You want to talk about the Westboro Baptist church at their hurtful campaign? That is NOT the way to change things either. I do NOT agree with their methods either. Nor their premise.


Does the end justify the means? Can we just attack and hurt and walk on peoples tender feelings in order to get our point across?


When is it just TOO much?

[Golfingnut]

Originally Posted by graciegirl

You want to talk about the Westboro Baptist church at their hurtful campaign? That is NOT the way to change things either. I do NOT agree with their methods either. Nor their premise.


Does the end justify the means? Can we just attack and hurt and walk on peoples tender feelings in order to get our point across?


When is it just TOO much?

I am with you on this, but when it is wrong I.e. Allowing one religious statement while not allowing another, that is an injustice. Do not allow one to slap the face of another without them being able to defend themselves. When we were young our lives were simple and so was our understanding of the world. It is complicated now so we all must open our minds to justice for all. Imagine how we would feel being taxed by a city with a majority population being Muslim and not allow but one method of prayer at the town council meeting and it was not Christian.

[blueash]

Originally Posted by rubicon

What is this world coming to when people cannot differentiate between Satan and God. The ten commandments irrespective of one's belief in their progenitor are
Christianity is being beaten down and killed in every country and to my surprise of all places here in the USA. The founding fathers were establishing rules whereby people would have freedom of religion and not freedom from religion. This country was built on a Judeo-Christian beliefs. To have someone suggest that if one can practice Christianity then one should have the right to practice Satanism is disingenuous and worse yet excellent guidelines for a people to follow and emulate.
harmful

Look at our youth and do you see whom they idolize (I doll ize) as some call it. I have said in the past that I am a nominal catholic but in my view the Judeo-Christian beliefs should continue to be freely expressed. The Ten Commandments do belong in our legal courts because perhaps it will remind those testifying under oath and those administering such oaths remain true, honest and ethical and every public institution in our country for similar reasons.

In my opinion a macro-view of Christianity clearly demonstrates that it has done much more good than harm. Because this push by special interests groups to fight Christianity ultimately results in people not believing in anything. so if you want the young to continue to i doll ize then continue down this path and see if that rock star or movie actor can turn this country around. "Thou shalt not have false gods before me."

Thank you for so excellently making my point. Some Christians see this country as theirs and their faith under attack. They don't see the 10 commandments as religious just some nice set of 10 rules to live by. Like "have no other god" clearly not religious. Like remember the Sabbath and keep it holy, not a religious thought there. Like don't worship idols or I'll smite you and your offspring for four generations.. Nothing religious there. And of course the "not take the name of the lord in vain" nothing religious there either. That's 4 of the 10 already. You see the 10 commandments are not a non-religious set of rules for everyone. So for anyone to state as a given that the 10 are "excellent guidelines for a people to follow and emulate." suggests you haven't read them all or considered how a non-Christian might see my government supporting posting of a threat to smite me and my children, grandchildren, and great grandchildren for not believing in your god as antithetical to the idea of no government promotion of any religion.
There is no attack on Christianity. There is an attack on the idea that Christians can have freedom to push their gods and their stories as the ones to get special government protection from that unenlightened Hell bound satan worshipping group of Americans who apparently were not sufficiently kicked in the pants as children to become good Christians.

And your understanding that the Founders were establishing rules for freedom of religion not freedom from religion is a cute phrase but the Constitution is very clear that there is not to be any religious test for governing thus the Founders clearly understood that a nation ruled by atheists or other non-Christians was entirely permissible. The oath of office does not include so help me god, that has been a voluntary addition by some Presidents. When some fundamental Christians objected to postmasters having to work on the sabbath (see commandment #3 or #4 depending on your particular religion) in the 1810's they asked the Congress to change the law to give postmasters the sabbath free from work. Instead the Congress, with its historical proximity much closer to mine to what the Founders meant when they wrote the Constitution responded by writing a law requiring postmasters to work on Sunday. This was reinforced several times in the 1800's despite petitions from Christians to enforce their sabbath. Not until President Taft was the mail week changed to eliminate Sunday deliveries in part due to religious concerns but in greater measure the new labor laws limiting the number of hours an employee could work and the power of the Postal Workers Union asking for the day off.

Many Americans believe that public Christianity has always been the way it worked until now when mean people like me arrived. No, it was the other way around until the mid 20th century when Christianity went into stores, public squares, the beginning of super-churches and as the signs say, taking Christ out of Christianity to make it not holy but secular, Santa in the square. Religion used to be a private matter, kept private. When was the first official Xmas tree in the white house? When was god added to the pledge of allegiance?

I am not fighting Christianity and I agree it has done more good than harm, but plenty of harm. I think Islam has done more good than harm, I think Hinduism, Buddhism, Thor, Jupiter, Baal, and Zeus have done more good than harm too. I think faith (small f) is a positive influence for many many people. It provides a framework for dealing with the stresses in life and solace when bad things happen. Pastafarians look forward to a beer volcano in the afterlife. But my faith or yours belong in the privacy of my home, or my church, with my loved ones and my private community. I do not have any reason to expect the government to push my religion. I have every reason to expect the government to NOT take sides. And when the government says it is not taking a side, just opening the public space for free expression I then expect it to truly be open to all. If someone produces a statue of the tenets of a faith which positively asserts that no god exists or that Jesus was a gay black schizophrenic if it offends you, keep in mind that the Christian statue saying that Jesus is the one and only and that those who don't share that belief are incomplete and need to be saved and prayed over or they go to hell just might be offensive to me. All or nothing.

[Golfingnut]

Originally Posted by blueash

Thank you for so excellently making my point. Some Christians see this country as theirs and their faith under attack. They don't see the 10 commandments as religious just some nice set of 10 rules to live by. Like "have no other god" clearly not religious. Like remember the Sabbath and keep it holy, not a religious thought there. Like don't worship idols or I'll smite you and your offspring for four generations.. Nothing religious there. And of course the "not take the name of the lord in vain" nothing religious there either. That's 4 of the 10 already. You see the 10 commandments are not a non-religious set of rules for everyone. So for anyone to state as a given that the 10 are "excellent guidelines for a people to follow and emulate." suggests you haven't read them all or considered how a non-Christian might see my government supporting posting of a threat to smite me and my children, grandchildren, and great grandchildren for not believing in your god as antithetical to the idea of no government promotion of any religion.
There is no attack on Christianity. There is an attack on the idea that Christians can have freedom to push their gods and their stories as the ones to get special government protection from that unenlightened Hell bound satan worshipping group of Americans who apparently were not sufficiently kicked in the pants as children to become good Christians.

And your understanding that the Founders were establishing rules for freedom of religion not freedom from religion is a cute phrase but the Constitution is very clear that there is not to be any religious test for governing thus the Founders clearly understood that a nation ruled by atheists or other non-Christians was entirely permissible. The oath of office does not include so help me god, that has been a voluntary addition by some Presidents. When some fundamental Christians objected to postmasters having to work on the sabbath (see commandment #3 or #4 depending on your particular religion) in the 1810's they asked the Congress to change the law to give postmasters the sabbath free from work. Instead the Congress, with its historical proximity much closer to mine to what the Founders meant when they wrote the Constitution responded by writing a law requiring postmasters to work on Sunday. This was reinforced several times in the 1800's despite petitions from Christians to enforce their sabbath. Not until President Taft was the mail week changed to eliminate Sunday deliveries in part due to religious concerns but in greater measure the new labor laws limiting the number of hours an employee could work and the power of the Postal Workers Union asking for the day off.

Many Americans believe that public Christianity has always been the way it worked until now when mean people like me arrived. No, it was the other way around until the mid 20th century when Christianity went into stores, public squares, the beginning of super-churches and as the signs say, taking Christ out of Christianity to make it not holy but secular, Santa in the square. Religion used to be a private matter, kept private. When was the first official Xmas tree in the white house? When was god added to the pledge of allegiance?

I am not fighting Christianity and I agree it has done more good than harm, but plenty of harm. I think Islam has done more good than harm, I think Hinduism, Buddhism, Thor, Jupiter, Baal, and Zeus have done more good than harm too. I think faith (small f) is a positive influence for many many people. It provides a framework for dealing with the stresses in life and solace when bad things happen. Pastafarians look forward to a beer volcano in the afterlife. But my faith or yours belong in the privacy of my home, or my church, with my loved ones and my private community. I do not have any reason to expect the government to push my religion. I have every reason to expect the government to NOT take sides. And when the government says it is not taking a side, just opening the public space for free expression I then expect it to truly be open to all. If someone produces a statue of the tenets of a faith which positively asserts that no god exists or that Jesus was a gay black schizophrenic if it offends you, keep in mind that the Christian statue saying that Jesus is the one and only and that those who don't share that belief are incomplete and need to be saved and prayed over or they go to hell just might be offensive to me. All or nothing.

That is using your head for something other than a hat rack. Wonderful post and very easy to understand. No spin, just truth. Thank you very much for that post.

Lou

[graciegirl]

Originally Posted by Golfingnut

That is using your head for something other than a hat rack. Wonderful post and very easy to understand. No spin, just truth. Thank you very much for that post.

Lou

I am NOT fighting any form of religion or supporting it in this argument. In fact I support the separation of church and state. I HATE when people try to accomplish their goals with this kind of hatred.


When you win, you lose. What have you accomplished? You have not done it in the right way.