• Satanists Want Own Statue Outside of Oklahoma Capitol Building
    216 replies, posted
[QUOTE=Silence I Kill You;43130766]I'm sorry, I didn't know that they let people who haven't passed reading comprehension onto these forums. Let me break it down in a way you understand..... Me see that other religion no ask for statue until after christian statue approved Me see people accuse in-charge people of no approving other statue besides theirs Me see that since other group didn't ask before, nobody can say other group was denied while christian approved There can be no reaction without action Is my point of view clear to you now? I tried to put it in a way you would understand. I'm not saying that they wouldn't have denied it. I'm saying that you can't say they would because if it didn't happen, you don't know for sure that they would.[/QUOTE] You still haven't addressed the fact that the Capitol building is not land for the people, it's land for the state government.
[QUOTE=RenegadeCop;43130777]Even if I was confused, this post is gibberish to anyone who speaks a modern language. You always argue terrible points, seemingly for the sake or arguing, you're not worth even debating with :v: Like I don't even want to put forth effort into my argument against you, because your argument speaks for itself in terms of right or wrong. (it's wrong)[/QUOTE] So what you're saying is that it's ok to say with 100% confidence what people would have done in a situation? Because there is no free-will in this earth? Are you saying it's OK to stereotype people? Because I'm saying it's not. You can't say, with 100% certainty, that they would have turned down another statue. You can only ASSUME, based on the generalizations from the information that you have. That's all I'm saying. [QUOTE=Lijitsu;43130841]You still haven't addressed the fact that the Capitol building is not land for the people, it's land for the state government.[/QUOTE] It is for the people. The government, and all of it's assets are FOR THE PEOPLE. The government is not it's own entity. The government is created by, for, and of the people, not the other way around.
[QUOTE=RenegadeCop;43130884]Yes[/QUOTE] Well then, there is the problem, or breakdown in communication. You are a bigot, whereas I may fail, but at least I try to keep an open mind.
[QUOTE=Silence I Kill You;43130896]Well then, there is the problem, or breakdown in communication. You are a bigot, whereas I may fail, but at least I try to keep an open mind.[/QUOTE] I'm sure you make no assumptions in your life whatsoever. You are a God among men. Maybe you should put a statue of yourself in front of your local government building so others can be inspired. It's public space right?
[QUOTE=Finkleburg;43130939]I'm sure you make no assumptions in your life whatsoever. You are a God among men. Maybe you should put a statue of yourself in front of your local government building so others can be inspired. It's public space right?[/QUOTE] I never said that. And when I realize I'm doing it, I WILL try to back away and look at an issue again. I'm not perfect, but at least I TRY to keep an open mind.
[QUOTE=Silence I Kill You;43130997]I never said that. And when I realize I'm doing it, I WILL try to back away and look at an issue again. I'm not perfect, but at least I TRY to keep an open mind.[/QUOTE] Yet you insist that we don't. The "assumptions" being made are just logical deductions that you even agreed with. And because the many people participating in this thread discussion are concerned with equal representation of religion in front of this particular OK courthouse, we are bigots? I'll say it again, you're missing the point of this thread and trying to turn it into something it's not and in the process, are making yourself look foolish. I even tried to agree with you at one point, yet you still continued to argue for the sake of argument.
[QUOTE=Finkleburg;43131070]Yet you insist that we don't. The "assumptions" being made are just logical deductions that you even agreed with. And because the many people participating in this thread discussion are concerned with equal representation of religion in front of this particular OK courthouse, we are bigots? I'll say it again, you're missing the point of this thread and trying to turn it into something it's not and in the process, are making yourself look foolish. I even tried to agree with you at one point, yet you still continued to argue for the sake of argument.[/QUOTE] As for equal representation, I'm all for it! I even said it's perfectly fine for the religions in that area to put up their monuments too, or even better would be to pool together to create one statue encapsulating all of the area's beliefs, because religion tends to be a main influence in a believer's life, no matter what religion it is. I'm just trying to point out that while I do agree with the logical deductions, I, nor anyone else, can hold them as fact. I am not trying to argue, I'm just trying to have a fair discussion. And I'm not calling everyone bigots, but what else do you call someone who unjustly pushes generalizations onto a whole group of people? But I digress, it probably wasn't the best term to use.
[QUOTE=Silence I Kill You;43131256]As for equal representation, I'm all for it! I even said it's perfectly fine for the religions in that area to put up their monuments too, or even better would be to pool together to create one statue encapsulating all of the area's beliefs, because religion tends to be a main influence in a believer's life, no matter what religion it is. I'm just trying to point out that while I do agree with the logical deductions, I, nor anyone else, can hold them as fact. I am not trying to argue, I'm just trying to have a fair discussion. And I'm not calling everyone bigots, but what else do you call someone who unjustly pushes generalizations onto a whole group of people? But I digress, it probably wasn't the best term to use.[/QUOTE] Or people can realize they don't need a crucifix/pentagram/yin-yang/star of David/star and moon/plate of pasta/etc. plastered all over the place to believe what they believe and can go about their business.
[QUOTE=strayebyrd;43125517]commandment 4 of the satanic bible 'If a guest in your home annoys you, treat them cruelly and without mercy' commandment 11 of the Satanic Bible 'When walking in open territory, bother no one. If someone bothers you, ask them to stop. If they do not stop, destroy them.' hmmm[/QUOTE] yeah i did say there were weird bits, :v: the bit about women wearing skimpy clothing being required to bolster the bio-electrical energy of male Satanists was also pretty strange.
So this thread is basically saying that Christianity being endorsed by the government is bad, but Satanism being endorsed by the government is good. Both are religions, so either case is equally unconstitutional. If you honestly think this [I]isn't[/I] about pissing people off and starting a shitstorm, you're kidding yourself. If Christianity can't be endorsed, neither can Satanism.
[QUOTE=slayer64;43134452]So this thread is basically saying that Christianity being endorsed by the government is bad, but Satanism being endorsed by the government is good. Both are religions, so either case is equally unconstitutional. If you honestly think this [I]isn't[/I] about pissing people off and starting a shitstorm, you're kidding yourself. If Christianity can't be endorsed, neither can Satanism.[/QUOTE] If anyone is using their religion to start "shitstorms", Christian or Satanist, they are still wrong for doing so.
[QUOTE=slayer64;43134452]So this thread is basically saying that Christianity being endorsed by the government is bad, but Satanism being endorsed by the government is good. Both are religions, so either case is equally unconstitutional. If you honestly think this [I]isn't[/I] about pissing people off and starting a shitstorm, you're kidding yourself. If Christianity can't be endorsed, neither can Satanism.[/QUOTE] i think the point is that it's dumb to endorse one religion over the other. if you can have a Christian statue, there's no reason to deny putting up a satanist one that doesn't rely on some kind of crazy superiority complex. and if you can have a satanist one, why isn't there one for every other religion? it's all entirely arbitrary.
[QUOTE=slayer64;43134452]So this thread is basically saying that Christianity being endorsed by the government is bad, but Satanism being endorsed by the government is good. Both are religions, so either case is equally unconstitutional. If you honestly think this [I]isn't[/I] about pissing people off and starting a shitstorm, you're kidding yourself. If Christianity can't be endorsed, neither can Satanism.[/QUOTE] That's the bloody point man. If they deny the Satanist monument they have to remove the 10 commandments monument as well, otherwise they're blatantly showing religious bias. Oklahoma's justification for the 10 commandment monument was that they would let other religious displays be put up indiscriminately. Most people in this thread are saying that it's good that someone is challenging Oklahoma on this, because it's blatantly obvious that religious displays on public lands is a dumb thing to do. The shitstorm already started when they put the 10 commandment monument up. Now we're sitting and waiting to see whether lawmakers in Oklahoma will continue to show bias, which will most likely result in removal of the 10 commandments monument through legal action, whether they will end the nonsense themselves and take down the monuments by their own free will, or whether they will erect a satanic monument and open up that can of worms. Personally, I'm waiting for the Dudist and Jedi monuments
[QUOTE=slayer64;43134452]So this thread is basically saying that Christianity being endorsed by the government is bad, but Satanism being endorsed by the government is good.[/QUOTE] No it's not, most of the thread after a few people saying it should be the same for all religions are people joking and discussing how Satan was "created". No wonder you label atheists as "elitist" when you come up with imaginary viewpoints and hold it over a whole group of people like this. [QUOTE=slayer64;43134452]Both are religions, so either case is equally unconstitutional. If you honestly think this [I]isn't[/I] about pissing people off and starting a shitstorm, you're kidding yourself. If Christianity can't be endorsed, neither can Satanism.[/QUOTE] Which is the point they are trying to make, except looking at it from the other side (if Satanism can't be endorsed, neither can Christianity). Of course it's about pissing people off, that's a super effective way of proving a point.
[QUOTE=slayer64;43134452]So this thread is basically saying that Christianity being endorsed by the government is bad, but Satanism being endorsed by the government is good. Both are religions, so either case is equally unconstitutional. If you honestly think this [I]isn't[/I] about pissing people off and starting a shitstorm, you're kidding yourself. If Christianity can't be endorsed, neither can Satanism.[/QUOTE] Any endorsement of any religious stance, be it Christianity, Islam, Satanism or even non-religion by the government should not be allowed. but considering a few Christians have decided this rule no longer applies to them, and successfully built a Christian monument on government property- why should Satanists, or members of other religions continue to respect the rule?. i see it less as "starting a shit-storm" and more giving them a taste of their own medicine in order to prove a point.
Sorry to bump this thread but here's some updated information about what's going on. [IMG]http://i.imgur.com/HWORkXM.png[/IMG] [IMG]http://i.imgur.com/PCS2fXu.png[/IMG] "[I]The Satanic Temple has taken a step toward erecting a 7-foot-tall statue of Satan at the Oklahoma state Capitol. The New York-based group wants it placed next to a monument of the Ten Commandments.[/I]" [URL="http://www.nbcdfw.com/news/weird/Satanists-Unveil-Lucifer-Statue-Design-for-Oklahoma-Capitol-239127121.html"]Source. (posted jan 8th)[/URL]
-sigh- Does it [I]have[/I] to be next to the ten commandments of all things? I mean really. I'm all for expressing religious freedom and all, but it seriously feels like they picked [I]that spot[/I] out of spite. Although I did find this humorous [quote]"The statue will also have a functional purpose as a chair where people of all ages may sit on the lap of Satan for inspiration and contemplation."[/quote]
I'd pay money to get a photo sitting on that, there's a shitload of tourism here waiting to happen.
I've always wanted to sit on Baphomet's lap. It will be just like Santa Claus with satanic overtones. "What do you seek, my dark child?"
That statue looks amazing
[QUOTE=S31-Syntax;43489794]-sigh- Does it [I]have[/I] to be next to the ten commandments of all things? I mean really. I'm all for expressing religious freedom and all, but it seriously feels like they picked [I]that spot[/I] out of spite. Although I did find this humorous[/QUOTE] that isn't a photo of the two in their final spots, it's a real photo of the commandments and a render of the proposed statue side by side for comparison. HOWEVER the entire point of them putting it up is because the commandments got put up at a [i]government building[/i], and that's usually banned. It's a huge point to say "hey if they can do it, everyone can do it". To deny the statue but keep the commandment monument would put the government officials doing this in hot water, which they've already earned by allowing the 10c in the first place.
[QUOTE=dai;43490049]that isn't a photo of the two in their final spots, it's a real photo of the commandments and a render of the proposed statue side by side for comparison. HOWEVER the entire point of them putting it up is because the commandments got put up at a [i]government building[/i], and that's usually banned. It's a huge point to say "hey if they can do it, everyone can do it". To deny the statue but keep the commandment monument would put the government officials doing this in hot water, which they've already earned by allowing the 10c in the first place.[/QUOTE] [quote]The Satanic Temple has taken a step toward erecting a 7-foot-tall statue of Satan at the Oklahoma state Capitol. The New York-based group wants it placed next to a monument of the Ten Commandments.[/quote] The description for the vid states they want it next to the commandments. I understand the [I]point[/I] of putting it up, I get that I really do, and despite being Christian I support that motive, BUT... why [I]right next to the commandments.[/I] Put it anywhere else on the capital grounds where it'll get equal view-ability, but next to the commandments is an obvious "fuck you". If that is what they're going for, then whatever, but it just annoys me.
[QUOTE=S31-Syntax;43490307]The description for the vid states they want it next to the commandments. I understand the [I]point[/I] of putting it up, I get that I really do, and despite being Christian I support that motive, BUT... why [I]right next to the commandments.[/I] Put it anywhere else on the capital grounds where it'll get equal view-ability, but next to the commandments is an obvious "fuck you". If that is what they're going for, then whatever, but it just annoys me.[/QUOTE] And the commandments on government property wasn't a massive and obvious "fuck you" to every non christian in the state? These things shouldn't be there in the first place.
[QUOTE=S31-Syntax;43490307]The description for the vid states they want it next to the commandments. I understand the [I]point[/I] of putting it up, I get that I really do, and despite being Christian I support that motive, BUT... why [I]right next to the commandments.[/I] Put it anywhere else on the capital grounds where it'll get equal view-ability, but next to the commandments is an obvious "fuck you". If that is what they're going for, then whatever, but it just annoys me.[/QUOTE] this is the entire point, but the fuckyou isn't directed at religion, but the idiot politicians who thought it'd be ok to put religious monuments on "separation of church and state" land honestly I think it would have been far better if they put up the satanic rules much like the 10c, for pure equality's sake, but the statue is pretty kickass [quote]Do not give opinions or advice unless you are asked. Do not tell your troubles to others unless you are sure they want to hear them. When in another’s lair, show him respect or else do not go there. If a guest in your lair annoys you, treat him cruelly and without mercy. Do not make sexual advances unless you are given the mating signal. Do not take that which does not belong to you unless it is a burden to the other person and he cries out to be relieved. Acknowledge the power of magic if you have employed it successfully to obtain your desires. If you deny the power of magic after having called upon it with success, you will lose all you have obtained. Do not complain about anything to which you need not subject yourself. Do not harm little children. Do not kill non-human animals unless you are attacked or for your food. When walking in open territory, bother no one. If someone bothers you, ask him to stop. If he does not stop, destroy him.[/quote]
The one they proposed is lame, sculpt Doré's one instead [t]http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/e/ec/Paradise_Lost_13.jpg[/t]
Whatever happened to the Azathoth statue that appeared somewhere? They should put another one nearby.
[QUOTE=dai;43490629]honestly I think it would have been far better if they put up the satanic rules much like the 10c, for pure equality's sake, but the statue is pretty kickass[/QUOTE] But then again the 'rules of earth' are entirely optional..
I thought they would have chosen something less prone to giving small children nightmares, but to each his own. Can't wait to see the reactions when it goes up lol.
[QUOTE=Silence I Kill You;43491097]I thought they would have chosen something less prone to giving small children nightmares, but to each his own. Can't wait to see the reactions when it goes up lol.[/QUOTE] The Decalogue is nightmarish in its own right once you understand then context behind it.
I still don't get how this is reasonable. The Ten Commandments aren't just Christians trying to exclude people. Jewish people and Muslims also have it included in their religion. Also it is an example of an early law system creating an effect similar to that as putting a piece of the Code of Hammurabi or ancient Roman law there. This monument is purely being created out of spite from a religion fueling hate. Would be building a swastika there be just as acceptable? There are a lot of neo-Nazis out there who consider it to be part of their religious views.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.