Florida Agrees That Satanists Must Have Equal Representation In Capitol

[Captain Obvious]

Ahhh, Florida...

I'd actually rather see this group politically involved rather than the Catholic church - I trust the Satanists more - or more specifically I trust the Catholic church less.

http://io9.com/florida-agrees-that-satanists-must-have-equal-represent-1666410117


The Satanic Temple (http://thesatanictemple.com/) scored a free-speech victory in its quest for equal representation among the Florida state capitol building's religious-themed holiday displays.

The Satanic Temple — not to be confused with the Church of Satan (http://churchofsatan.com/), with which TST is not affiliated — describes its mission as "facilitating the communication and mobilization of politically aware Satanists, secularists, and advocates for individual liberty," as well as "to encourage benevolence and empathy among all people. In addition, we embrace practical common sense and justice. As an organized religion, we feel it is our function to actively provide outreach, to lead by example, and to participate in public affairs wheresoever the issues might benefit from rational, Satanic insights."

The group's causes are quite progressive; current campaigns (http://thesatanictemple.com/category/campaigns) advocate for women's reproductive health rights and same-sex marriage, among other causes. But the media-savvy organization (check out the merch (http://shopsatan.com/)) gets the most attention for its freedom-of-religion efforts, like that time they argued that if a statue of the Ten Commandments could be displayed in the Oklahoma State Capitol, it was only fair that a statue of Baphomet (along with any other religious representation that anyone cared to donate) be allowed to hang out, too.



http://i.kinja-img.com/gawker-media/image/upload/s--nMI9fsdP--/i4mjldsaoaz4rlalperr.jpg

[Peter1469]

We bend over backwards for miniscule portions of our population.

[Green Arrow]

We bend over backwards for miniscule portions of our population.

I don't really see how "Yeah, whatever, go ahead" is bending over backwards.

[Peter1469]

I don't really see how "Yeah, whatever, go ahead" is bending over backwards.

Moving the case through the court system was a waste of resources.

[Common]

We bend over backwards for miniscule portions of our population.

Thats what has us all divided and screwed up and has allowed the powerful few to OWN US, we are all lackies.

[Mac-7]

Thats what has us all divided and screwed up and has allowed the powerful few to OWN US, we are all lackies.

Worshiping Satan in the Florida state capital offends more people than it pleases.

[Green Arrow]

Worshiping Satan in the Florida state capital offends more people than it pleases.

So what? Aren't Republican partisans like you supposed to be anti-PC?

[Captain Obvious]

So what? Aren't Republican partisans like you supposed to be anti-PC?

Well, you know how that works.

"Do as I say, not as I do"

[Common]

Worshiping Satan in the Florida state capital offends more people than it pleases.

The fla legislature is overwhelmingly right wingers

[Mac-7]

So what? Aren't Republican partisans like you supposed to be anti-PC?

Are you kidding?

The world is upsidedown now so that atheists are pc and faith in Christ is considered un pc.

[Mac-7]

The fla legislature is overwhelmingly right wingers

Many of them obviously lack the courage of their convictions.

[Paperback Writer]

Sometimes Captain I just don't know about you.

When people are actually willing to say, "Oi, give those satanists an equal portion, they're like everyone else" the world has gone absolutely mad.

I always hear from them and others "we don't believe in Satan" (they do) and "we're only about liberty" (they're not) and the reality is that's not the case. Their religion allows them to lie about their intentions and beliefs. Some probably do it for show, but most, yes, believe in old Scratch. I know, cos we've interviewed countless here. Why? Cos they're always breaking the law. We interview them because they've committed crimes.

It's not your local Methodists you hear about in vampire rituals killing people or stabbing pregnant women and other in a mass murder ritual.

The Manson family were all members of the Process Church, a form of satanism, and good friends with Anton LeVey, a man who said he was an atheist and his exes have all said literally worshiped Satan. Then there's your Nightstalker, Richard Ramirez.

Permissiveness and acceptance has gone way too far. It's like saying you should respect pedophilia because it's just another orientation.

This has made me give up on my last vestige of belief in humanity when an alleged centrist says "Oi, give those satanists equal representation they're not as bad as Catholics." The world has officially gone mad.

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_Kunig8rqaR8/S_r1NQmDiPI/AAAAAAAAAks/BFlQdglW2QM/s1600/ramirez+night+stalker.jpg

Occult related killings on the rise in US:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2556446/The-sickening-smile-teen-accused-satanic-ritual-murder-15-year-old-girl-kidnapped-raped-bashed-death-lid-toilet.html
http://guardianlv.com/2014/02/craigslist-killer-confesses-to-22-more-satanic-cult-related-killings/
http://www.news.com.au/world/a-spate-of-occultbased-killings-in-the-united-states-has-an-exorcist-decrying-the-rise-of-the-demons/story-fndir2ev-1226840321266


The difference, before anyone asks, is in the canon and practice. The average Catholic isn't caught snatching pups and cutting them open or killing 100 people they met on Craigslist. The Church hierarchy, much like your government, was full of fuckwits who covered up crimes for each other, but the doctrine and the people are sound.

When your religion tells you that the younger the victim, the better, because their lifeforce is stronger not sure you want that in the schools. Just my advise, take it or leave it.

[Captain Obvious]

Many of them obviously lack the courage of their convictions.

...who you would readily vote for because of the label they wear.

[Captain Obvious]

Sometimes Captain I just don't know about you.

Take note that I did not take a position on the matter one way or another before you judge.

[Mac-7]

...who you would readily vote for because of the label they wear.

I might because there is more than one issue to consider.

[Green Arrow]

Take note that I did not take a position on the matter one way or another before you judge.

To be fair, you kinda did. You said you'd trust a Satanist before you trusted a Catholic, which is frankly ridiculous.

[Paperback Writer]

If satanism is like any other religion, then pedophilia is like any other orientation and ought to be legal, too.

The influence of moral relativism, and I can't believe I am saying this at 32, is prolly the worst thing to happen to western civilisation in this century. I think I'm going to grow my beard out more, buy a jellyibiya and move to Iran. I'm now starting to believe my grocer that Islam will save me from the secular idiots that surround me.

Allahu akbar.

[Paperback Writer]

Take note that I did not take a position on the matter one way or another before you judge.

Did you read your own post?

[Paperback Writer]

To be fair, you kinda did. You said you'd trust a Satanist before you trusted a Catholic, which is frankly ridiculous.

I'm not Catholic, but the average Catholics I've met are some of the kindest, family oriented people I know outside the LDS church. Blaming the religion and worshipers for the cunts that got into power and stayed is like saying Americans are arseholes because of all the shite your government does.

[Captain Obvious]

To be fair, you kinda did. You said you'd trust a Satanist before you trusted a Catholic, which is frankly ridiculous.

Sarcasm, sort of.

I don't trust the institution (Catholic church), but individuals I consider... individually.

[Paperback Writer]

Sarcasm, sort of.

I don't trust the institution (Catholic church), but individuals I consider... individually.

How do you reconcile that with your government institution? Do you eschew it and only consider your individual neighbors?

That's about how I feel. I've given up on the childish belief that I have a say in my government with my vote. That's why if I'm to be ruled, and I am always going to be ruled, give me one point of focus such as a monarch. If a monarch gets out of line you have one person to blame and behead. When Parliament is naffed, fuck all you can do about it.

[Captain Obvious]

How do you reconcile that with your government institution? Do you eschew it and only consider your individual neighbors?

That's about how I feel. I've given up on the childish belief that I have a say in my government with my vote. That's why if I'm to be ruled, and I am always going to be ruled, give me one point of focus such as a monarch. If a monarch gets out of line you have one person to blame and behead. When Parliament is naffed, fuck all you can do about it.

I've given up on "my vote matters" a long time ago but I still vote and I support third parties, almost exclusively.

I figure someone out there is collecting my voting data and as a former registered Republican at least I'm being counted in the category of "I used to support your system but I think you suck now".

Local politics are wholly different on a much broader spectrum.

[Bo-4]

I'm not Catholic, but the average Catholics I've met are some of the kindest, family oriented people I know outside the LDS church. Blaming the religion and worshipers for the cunts that got into power and stayed is like saying Americans are arseholes because of all the shite your government does.

Would you care to visit links about murderous child abusing Mormons, Christians and Catholics PW?

Thought not. :rolleyes:

[Green Arrow]

Would you care to visit links about murderous child abusing Mormons, Christians and Catholics PW?

Thought not. :rolleyes:

You're not seriously going to defend Satanism.

[Captain Obvious]

You're not seriously going to defend Satanism.

You're a self-proclaimed pagan, aren't they somewhat joined at the hip?

[Bo-4]

You're not seriously going to defend Satanism.

No, but i have only mildly higher regard for the nutters on "God's side".

I'm an agnostic but also a seeker, which for me (and most others) is the most realistic path.

[Green Arrow]

You're a self-proclaimed pagan, aren't they somewhat joined at the hip?

No. Two completely different things. We have more in common with wicca than Satanism.

[Paperback Writer]

Would you care to visit links about murderous child abusing Mormons, Christians and Catholics PW?

Thought not. :rolleyes:

You ask a question and answer it with "thought not" without allowing me a word edgewise. Oh, Bo, you really are a partisan simpleton.

When a Mormon or Catholic sets up an altar in the backyard or attic and then murders someone on Craigslist in order to gain magical powers they're not keeping with the ideology and in fact are going against it. They are "bad" Mormons and Catholics.

When a satanist does such, they're keeping with the ideology and doing it because of it. They are "good" satanists.

That's the difference. The belief system themselves are different, not the people.

If you weren't a shallow-thinker and understood terms like "ideology" and "philosophy" you could then make an actual argument using rational and consistent debate. Instead you fall back on illogical, knee-jerk memes you inherit from other buffoons who make the same illogical, emotion-based arguments of ideological equivalency.

In other words, you've got no game.

[Paperback Writer]

You're not seriously going to defend Satanism.

Of course he's not. He's just reproducing the "American liberal" modus of defending anything over Christianity by pointing out Christians who do something wrong as if the debate is about individuals and not the philosophy behind their religion.

You can't say anything is wrong in America but Christianity to a Democrat.

Irony, oh irony!

[Paperback Writer]

No. Two completely different things. We have more in common with wicca than Satanism.

He won't bother to delve into it.

[Mister D]

You ask a question and answer it with "thought not" without allowing me a word edgewise. Oh, Bo, you really are a partisan simpleton.

When a Mormon or Catholic sets up an altar in the backyard or attic and then murders someone on Craigslist in order to gain magical powers they're not keeping with the ideology and in fact are going against it. They are "bad" Mormons and Catholics.

When a satanist does such, they're keeping with the ideology and doing it because of it. They are "good" satanists.

That's the difference. The belief system themselves are different, not the people.

If you weren't a shallow-thinker and understood terms like "ideology" and "philosophy" you could then make an actual argument using rational and consistent debate. Instead you fall back on illogical, knee-jerk memes you inherit from other buffoons who make the same illogical, emotion-based arguments of ideological equivalency.

In other words, you've got no game.

Let me see if I can illusttrate this thought process for you.

Christianity = Religious right = GOP
Bo does not like the GOP.
Ergo, Bothinks Christianity sucks.

This is a phenomenon of the American left if one can call it a left. I understand kilgram to an extent because there is a real history of conflict there but these people are embarrassing.

[Green Arrow]

Let me see if I can illusttrate this thought process for you.

Christianity = Religious right = GOP
Bo does not like the GOP.
Ergo, Bothinks Christianity sucks.

This is a phenomenon of the American left if one can call it a left. I understand kilgram to an extent because there is a real history of conflict there but these people are embarrassing.

It's not left. It's not right. It's not center. There's not really anything to call it, really.

[Mister D]

You're not seriously going to defend Satanism.

No, it's always the same. If the topic is something a black guy, a gay guy, or a progressive did then it becomes a matter of the white guy, the straight guy, or the conservative.

[Alyosha]

I've studied the occult for years. It's a hobby. The Church of Satan is one aspect of satanism. Anton LeVay produced the Satanic Bible, and his son is now the head of the organization. When asked by mainstream media they will tell you that you don't have to believe in any god or in Satan to be a member and that it is a philosophy. At times, they will say they do not believe in Satan, but that's not true if you do your research on them. They very much worship "Lucifer" but do not call that entity "Satan" as they feel it is a Christian term.

This was a huge church in California during the late 60's and early 70's and had a lot of movie stars involved in it. LeVay was a disciple of Aleister Crowley and the OTO, as were the Process Church people, and Scientology.

This cult performed a lot of blood rituals and they believe that man (the individual) is "god" and that we have dominion over all life on earth through our strength of will. He who is strongest survives. When they say they are "libertarian" they mean they are anarchistic with each of us having whole self-determination and that "law" is what we decide it is.

They conjure entities routinely. These entities can be conjured in one of three ways: sex, drugs, or blood.

Since their will and goal is more important than yours, they are allowed to lie to you about their church but also understand that in doing so they believe and expect that others will lie to them. So Bo-4 and Captain Obvious it isn't a religion that is remotely similar or should be compared with other religions in a society that bases itself on law, order, and "moral law".

Unlike Christian, Buddhist, or Islamic dogma, their dogma is about asserting their will over yours, about asserting man over beast, and to attain knowledge at very high levels they must do blood rituals to call higher demons. Where or not any of you believe in them, they do.

As Andrew said, when a Catholic is a pedo or murders they are not keeping with the scripture of the Gospels. When a Satanist does, they are.

This is the difference, Bo.

It's also depressing that this is being defended and why we can't as a society say "Hold up, there are exceptions to some of our rules so that we can maintain fucking order." Democrats are willing to do it with gun control, they're willing to do it with some forms of speech, Republicans are willing to let the 4th Amendment go, but we can't see why it might be reasonable to tell people at the Church of Satan to fuck off?

I knew we were headed in this direction as a country and it's pretty fucked, actually.

[Bo-4]

Alyosha - adore you and your quest for facts. You've influenced me more than you know.

[Alyosha]

@Alyosha (http://thepoliticalforums.com/member.php?u=863) - adore you and your quest for facts. You've influenced me more than you know.

I may have dabbled in my esoteric knowledge a bit too far. It's interesting stuff, way too interesting.

[Alyosha]

I could write my own book on Aleister Crowley and the OTO, it's influence on American culture, etc.

Did you know Bo-4 that the inventor of rocket fuel and early rocket engineer, Jack Parsons, was a member of the OTO and believer in Thelema and called himself "the anti-Christ".

Note: there can be more than one anti-Christ.

They mean it literally, to be anti-Christ, as in the words of the Gospels. They considered Jesus a weak, person, with weak ideals and that money and power were more important than charity and pacifism.

Jack Parsons and others in that golden age of Hollywood all partook in sex magick rituals. Interesting stuff.

[Professor Peabody]

Ooofffaaa!

Just look at the OP website he got the article from..........

Domain Name: io9.com
Registry Registrant ID:
Registrant Name: Domain Administrator
Registrant Organization: Kinja Kft.
Registrant Street: Csorsz u. 41.,
Registrant City: Budapest
Registrant State/Province: HU
Registrant Postal Code: H-1124
Registrant Country: HU

http://www.whois.com/whois/io9.com

A kook blog from Hungary! Some folks will believe any shit put on their plate. What's next Martian anal probe websites for the latest news? :rollseyes:

[Alyosha]

Ooofffaaa!

Just look at the OP website he got the article from..........

Domain Name: io9.com
Registry Registrant ID:
Registrant Name: Domain Administrator
Registrant Organization: Kinja Kft.
Registrant Street: Csorsz u. 41.,
Registrant City: Budapest
Registrant State/Province: HU
Registrant Postal Code: H-1124
Registrant Country: HU

http://www.whois.com/whois/io9.com

A kook blog from Hungary! Some folks will believe any shit put on their plate. What's next Martian anal probe websites for the latest news? :rollseyes:

Professor Peabody,


are you fucking high? What the hell is wrong with you with this "whois" crap? The article contains links like this one:

http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_slatest/2014/12/03/florida_satanic_temple_government_allows_holiday_d isplay_in_capitol.html

Try sticking to the point or doing a slight bit more research before you do another "gotcha" which amounts to a huge pile of shit, both times.

Thanks.

[Professor Peabody]

@Professor Peabody (http://thepoliticalforums.com/member.php?u=265),


are you $#@!ing high? What the hell is wrong with you with this "whois" crap? The article contains links like this one:

http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_slatest/2014/12/03/florida_satanic_temple_government_allows_holiday_d isplay_in_capitol.html

Try sticking to the point or doing a slight bit more research before you do another "gotcha" which amounts to a huge pile of $#@!, both times.

Thanks.

Like I said......Some folks will believe any $#@! put on their plate.

[Alyosha]

Like I said......Some folks will believe any $#@! put on their plate.

From the Slate article that the OP's article referenced:


Last month, I wrote about the Satanic Temple’s efforts to erect a religious display (http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/jurisprudence/2014/11/atheist_humanist_and_pastafarian_holiday_displays_ on_public_land_satanic.html) of an angel falling into a pit of fire in the rotunda of the Florida Capitol. The Florida government officially permits religious displays during the holiday season; in 2013, it allowed Christians, Jews, secular humanists, atheists, and Pastafarians (http://www.venganza.org/2013/12/florida-holiday-display/) to construct testaments to their faith. But Florida forbade the Satanic Temple from placing its own display in the Capitol, labeling it “grossly offensive.” So this year, the temple reapplied, with some additional legal backing (http://www.tallahassee.com/story/news/local/state/2014/10/15/letter-submitted-in-support-of-satanic-temple-capitol-display/17299829/): Americans United for the Separation of Church and State threatened to sue (https://drive.google.com/viewerng/viewer?url=https://www.au.org/files/Letter+Re+Satanic+Temple+Florida+Display+-+Standalone+letter.pdf) Florida for violating the temple’s free speech rights if the state refused to permits its display.


On Tuesday, the temple won. Florida’s Department of Management Services officially approved (https://www.au.org/media/press-releases/florida-officials-agree-to-permit-display-by-satanic-temple-at-state-capitol) the satanic display for the 2014 holiday season, to be hosted from Dec. 22-29 in the Capitol rotunda. What changed between 2013 and 2014? Unless the state spontaneously changed its mind about how “grossly offensive” the satanic display is, it seems likely that the looming lawsuit convinced the government that the temple had free speech rights, after all.




http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_slatest/2014/12/03/florida_satanic_temple_government_allows_holiday_d isplay_in_capitol.html


I think you're dabbling in something because you're way off on your own program today.

[sachem]

We bend over backwards for miniscule portions of our population.Pesky constitution. :p

[del]

Worshiping Satan in the Florida state capital offends more people than it pleases.

tough shit

[Alyosha]

Pesky constitution. :p

Actually the Constitution made this a state decision, not a federal one. For 40 years post-Constitution states had their own churches, so its more like pesky interpretation of case law.

Sort of like Citizens United and the ACA...things we're stuck with unless we don't feel like being stuck with them. The SCOTUS is not an enforcement agency as FDR proved.

[Captain Obvious]

I've studied the occult for years. It's a hobby. The Church of Satan is one aspect of satanism. Anton LeVay produced the Satanic Bible, and his son is now the head of the organization. When asked by mainstream media they will tell you that you don't have to believe in any god or in Satan to be a member and that it is a philosophy. At times, they will say they do not believe in Satan, but that's not true if you do your research on them. They very much worship "Lucifer" but do not call that entity "Satan" as they feel it is a Christian term.

This was a huge church in California during the late 60's and early 70's and had a lot of movie stars involved in it. LeVay was a disciple of Aleister Crowley and the OTO, as were the Process Church people, and Scientology.

This cult performed a lot of blood rituals and they believe that man (the individual) is "god" and that we have dominion over all life on earth through our strength of will. He who is strongest survives. When they say they are "libertarian" they mean they are anarchistic with each of us having whole self-determination and that "law" is what we decide it is.

They conjure entities routinely. These entities can be conjured in one of three ways: sex, drugs, or blood.

Since their will and goal is more important than yours, they are allowed to lie to you about their church but also understand that in doing so they believe and expect that others will lie to them. So @Bo-4 (http://thepoliticalforums.com/member.php?u=1297) and @Captain Obvious (http://thepoliticalforums.com/member.php?u=3) it isn't a religion that is remotely similar or should be compared with other religions in a society that bases itself on law, order, and "moral law".

Unlike Christian, Buddhist, or Islamic dogma, their dogma is about asserting their will over yours, about asserting man over beast, and to attain knowledge at very high levels they must do blood rituals to call higher demons. Where or not any of you believe in them, they do.

As Andrew said, when a Catholic is a pedo or murders they are not keeping with the scripture of the Gospels. When a Satanist does, they are.

This is the difference, Bo.

It's also depressing that this is being defended and why we can't as a society say "Hold up, there are exceptions to some of our rules so that we can maintain fucking order." Democrats are willing to do it with gun control, they're willing to do it with some forms of speech, Republicans are willing to let the 4th Amendment go, but we can't see why it might be reasonable to tell people at the Church of Satan to fuck off?

I knew we were headed in this direction as a country and it's pretty fucked, actually.
Alyosha - I've not studied the occult like you have but I have a passing interest in it. I definitely consider your viewpoints and I by no means discount them. I trust your judgment.

My take on this stuff is that Satanists are people who are atheists or agnostic to some degree. By definition a Satanist would have to believe in a "god" to a degree but I think the average Satanist is like "who cares, I don't believe, here I get some attention, do some weird shit and drugs". But the hierarchy might be different. Like corporations, government, religion - people are drawn to the political structure. I'm guessing some Satanists are in it for just that - they get to be part of an inner circle of sorts. You also see this in communities with Rotary clubs, Lions Clubs, etc. There's always some group with a structure doing their thing, it's a common common denominator typical of human interaction.

On the "fucked up 'this is where we're heading'" thing, I rail on this all the time. This is why I think it's so dangerous when we talk about shit like the 10 commandments in the courthouse. Get that shit, all of it out of the public sector, do that on your own time. I'm a strong advocate of keeping this shit, all of it out of the public sector, that way nobody can cry "foul" and do shit like this.

Our forefathers never imagined this and we aren't smart enough to say "ok - this works, this doesn't", we need some guidance to make these decisions. This is why I think the oft attachment to the Constitution is dangerous. If it isn't written down and spelled out for us, we're fucked. You're a lawyer, I'm sure you see this in the legal field. Law follows precedent, written doctrine - not common sense. The Constitution is a great example. Fuck common sense, the forefathers wanted this, etc. It's a hideous handicap when you think of it. Plumbing would have blown the fucking minds of the writers of the constitution, just think what they would do if the saw shit like the internet, abortion, Islam in America - I think they were cool with religious freedom as long as it was Christian based. I think the forefathers had landownership rights in mind and wanted a divided class structure, I think they had little interest in common people governing and ruling like all the textbooks say how democracy works. I also think that they would be stunned to see how class rule won out, I'm pretty sure it wasn't their design.

We don't think as a society, we collectively want to be guided.

That's my rant, thanks for listening. And thanks for your angle, I do appreciate it.

[Peter1469]

Education in the US..., what can I say Aly? :wink:
Actually the Constitution made this a state decision, not a federal one. For 40 years post-Constitution states had their own churches, so its more like pesky interpretation of case law.

Sort of like Citizens United and the ACA...things we're stuck with unless we don't feel like being stuck with them. The SCOTUS is not an enforcement agency as FDR proved.

[Alyosha]

I don't believe that we have a moral government so I personally believe a shrine to Satan in the courthouse is appropriate and "tells it like it is".

Evil has had far more influence on US "justice" than Jesus, IMO.

But Satanism is a religion and they do believe in Satan. There are people who joke about Satanism like kilgram who are agnostic, but I've been around Satanists. In fact people who don't even look it. They do believe but they believe some other things I could go into depth on regarding Lucifer but that's for a religion thread.

[Professor Peabody]

From the Slate article that the OP's article referenced:



http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_slatest/2014/12/03/florida_satanic_temple_government_allows_holiday_d isplay_in_capitol.html


I think you're dabbling in something because you're way off on your own program today.

Slate = same plate

[Ransom]

Evil has had more influence than Jesus? Perhaps that's because for the most part we've separated church from state. While we've allowed evil(ewe democrats) to influence justice systems and society as a whole.

[Max Rockatansky]

We bend over backwards for miniscule portions of our population.
I think it's that the Satanists are better organized and have the money to fight this 1st and 14th Amendment issue in court.

The solution is obvious; either let the Satanists, Muslims, Wiccans and all other religions have their displays along side the Christian ones or just ban all religious displays on public property. Personally, I favor option #2.

[Ransom]

I think it's that the Satanists are better organized and have the money to fight this 1st and 14th Amendment issue in court.

The solution is obvious; either let the Satanists, Muslims, Wiccans and all other religions have their displays along side the Christian ones or just ban all religious displays on public property. Personally, I favor option #2.

Ban religious displays? Big government advocate?

[Max Rockatansky]

Ban religious displays? Big government advocate?
Anti-Constitution? There are only two Constitutional options.

[kilgram]

Worshiping Satan in the Florida state capital offends more people than it pleases.

And? Offending someone else is a crime, now?

Отправлено с моего MT15i через Tapatalk

[sachem]

Actually the Constitution made this a state decision, not a federal one. For 40 years post-Constitution states had their own churches, so its more like pesky interpretation of case law.

Sort of like Citizens United and the ACA...things we're stuck with unless we don't feel like being stuck with them. The SCOTUS is not an enforcement agency as FDR proved.Well, the Satanists threatened to sue Florida under the freedom of speech clause. They caved. I'm sure that either the state or federal constitution would have come into play.

[Max Rockatansky]

And? Offending someone else is a crime, now?

If it was a crime, then the majority of TPF members would be under indictment faster than a New York cop could put you in a choke hold.

[Captain Obvious]

If it was a crime, then the majority of TPF members would be under indictment faster than a New York cop could put you in a choke hold.

I'm offended by that suggestion...

[Max Rockatansky]

I'm offended by that suggestion...

Good thing it isn't against the law!

[Ransom]

Anti-Constitution? There are only two Constitutional options.

Ban the first name Max?

[Ransom]

Anti-Constitution? There are only two Constitutional options.

Banning freedom of religious expression isn't an option in the Constitution, Max. It's sad you think so.

[Max Rockatansky]

Banning freedom of religious expression isn't an option in the Constitution, Max. It's sad you think so.
Who is banning freedom of religious expression? Aren't the Satanists being allowed their display? The Muslims? The Jews? Why are you anti-religion, Ransom?

[Alyosha]

Anti-Constitution? There are only two Constitutional options.

No. People confuse case law with the Constitution. Case law can be amended by future rulings and have been. Citizen's United is case law that will be amended or thrown out (maybe) by future courts.

The Lemon Test was probably where we should have stopped on the Church and State issue when it said "excessive displays". More liberal and recent rulings have made all public areas a religion-free zone.

This, however, could change in the future. Again, for 30 years post-Contitution with the original writers available to write "papers" and "editorials" we had states with official religions and churches. Had the Founders intended for the First Amendment to apply to state government buildings, to make them religion-free zones they would have taken out editorials and probably put it before the courts back then.

This is more living Constitution shit that liberals love when it is on their side (gay marriage, ACA) and what they hate when it's not (Citizens United, Hobby Lobby).

We were created as a republic with dictated federalism. States should have more autonomy and if they aren't going to have it, use the amendment process, not the courts to change that. Or else, understand that your opinion is just a hypocritical joke.


All that aside, I'm glad there will be a Satanic altar in the courthouses now. It is 100% appropriate for our current "justice" system. At least now it's open and honest about who runs the show.

[Polecat]

And? Offending someone else is a crime, now?

Отправлено с моего MT15i через Tapatalk
Where have you been? Offending certain people is a crime here. Has been for quite some time now.

[Peter1469]

I think it's that the Satanists are better organized and have the money to fight this 1st and 14th Amendment issue in court.

The solution is obvious; either let the Satanists, Muslims, Wiccans and all other religions have their displays along side the Christian ones or just ban all religious displays on public property. Personally, I favor option #2.

Allowances on religious displays have often relied on their historical significance to the nation. Satanism has no such historical significance to the nation. At least not an overt significance.

[PolWatch]

Didn't Satanists have a presence in Salem? the Puritans seemed to spend some time looking for them anyway.

[sachem]

Didn't Satanists have a presence in Salem? the Puritans seemed to spend some time looking for them anyway.Witches did. And they found a few. Or so they said.

[Max Rockatansky]

Witches did. And they found a few. Or so they said.

Whether they found any witches or not, their actions did result in the deaths of 27 human beings. Despite their actions, I doubt they were being good Christians.

http://www.salemwitchmuseum.com/education/
In January of 1692, the daughter and niece of Reverend Samuel Parris of Salem Village became ill. When they failed to improve, the village doctor, William Griggs, was called in. His diagnosis of bewitchment put into motion the forces that would ultimately result in the death by hanging of nineteen men and women. In addition, one man was crushed to death; seven others died in prison, and the lives of many were irrevocably changed.

[sachem]

Whether they found any witches or not, their actions did result in the deaths of 27 human beings. Despite their actions, I doubt they were being good Christians.

http://www.salemwitchmuseum.com/education/
In January of 1692, the daughter and niece of Reverend Samuel Parris of Salem Village became ill. When they failed to improve, the village doctor, William Griggs, was called in. His diagnosis of bewitchment put into motion the forces that would ultimately result in the death by hanging of nineteen men and women. In addition, one man was crushed to death; seven others died in prison, and the lives of many were irrevocably changed.Yup. Not a pleasant time in Salem.

[iustitia]

The Constitution prevents the establishment of state religion and the prohibition of religion. Nowhere is it prohibited that a community can't have their values represented by their government or that said government must revere the beliefs of a miniscule portion of the community.

[Alyosha]

Didn't Satanists have a presence in Salem? the Puritans seemed to spend some time looking for them anyway.

They did, actually. There were actual practicing witches there. Mostly though it was a land grab.

[sachem]

The Constitution prevents the establishment of state religion and the prohibition of religion. Nowhere is it prohibited that a community can't have their values represented by their government or that said government must revere the beliefs of a miniscule portion of the community.I don't believe the government was asked to revere anything.

[Alyosha]

In the classic sense of putting something on a pedestal (display) it is being asked to revere it.

[Max Rockatansky]

The Constitution prevents the establishment of state religion and the prohibition of religion. Nowhere is it prohibited that a community can't have their values represented by their government or that said government must revere the beliefs of a miniscule portion of the community.

True, which is why the Satanists now have a display. By the example you've provided, as this country becomes both more Catholic and Muslim, we can expect to see more representation on public grounds of citizens having "their values represented by their government" in our courts, at our capitals and other governmental areas.

[Max Rockatansky]

I don't believe the government was asked to revere anything.

Several members of this forum are, indeed, asking our government to revere the, currently, most popular religion of the land. They obviously don't care about the precedent being set nor what happens 50 years down the road.

[sachem]

In the classic sense of putting something on a pedestal (display) it is being asked to revere it.:rolleyes:

[iustitia]

In the classic sense of putting something on a pedestal (display) it is being asked to revere it.


^This

The First Amendment, like the others in the Bill of Rights, had historical roots. Sectarianism, religious wars, and in the case of the British a national church aka the Anglicans, were things the Founders sought to prevent. Notice that the prohibition in the First Amendment is not on "government" but on Congress. Congress shall make no law. A state or city or whatever having a nativity scene on public land, or crosses in a cemetery, or any other bullshit that secularists cry about so we waste resources on retarded court cases for the sake of a loud minority of douchebags -- has nothing to do with the First Amendment. It's a testament to the contempt we have for civilization that these people were ever allowed in a courtroom.

[iustitia]

Several members of this forum are, indeed, asking our government to revere the, currently, most popular religion of the land. They obviously don't care about the precedent being set nor what happens 50 years down the road.
I can't speak for anyone else, but the precedent isn't being set by the Catholics or Christians who've always been a part of America's cultural dynamic; the precedent is by secularists and fringe minorities that believe the norms of society should be challenged just because they're not the norm.

Secularism is the problem, not Catholicism. And I'm very much not Catholic.

[Alyosha]

Several members of this forum are, indeed, asking our government to revere the, currently, most popular religion of the land. They obviously don't care about the precedent being set nor what happens 50 years down the road.

Are they? Or are they supporters of federalism? I've said repeatedly I find a shrine to Satan in our courthouses appropriate.

I'm not joking. I think it is 100% highly appropriate.

[Alyosha]

:rolleyes:

Yes? That is one definition, and iustitia seems very literal and specific.

Again, I personally applaud the decision. We should also slap a pic of Baphomet on the currency, too.

[Alyosha]

Like I said before it is not unconstitutional to prohibit or place a religious icon in a state building. The First Amendment prevents the establishment of an official religion for the United States like the Church of England.

Massachusetts had an official state religion until 1833: https://digital.library.txstate.edu/handle/10877/3331

Case law has changed over time and like all things grabs federal powers to approve what states do or don't do. Another court could change that. However, it is the Executive Branch which has to implement court rulings and they can do it or not. Franklin Roosevelt threw out several SCOTUS rulings as he felt like.

However, I personally approve and like Satan being respected for his role in Florida's judicial system so: Go Satan!

[Peter1469]

Several members of this forum are, indeed, asking our government to revere the, currently, most popular religion of the land. They obviously don't care about the precedent being set nor what happens 50 years down the road.

The historic standard I mentioned above would allow newer traditions over time. That is fine.

[Max Rockatansky]

The historic standard I mentioned above would allow newer traditions over time. That is fine.

Allowing traditions overtime is fine. Does this mean Satanists, Wiccans, Muslims, Catholics or anyone else should be denied having a display? No, as the court ruled. Therefore, the choice is to either allow the new displays or remove the old ones.

[Peter1469]

Allowing traditions overtime is fine. Does this mean Satanists, Wiccans, Muslims, Catholics or anyone else should be denied having a display? No, as the court ruled. Therefore, the choice is to either allow the new displays or remove the old ones.

I disagree - my posts above cover it and I don't have anything to add.

[Ransom]

Who is banning freedom of religious expression? Aren't the Satanists being allowed their display? The Muslims? The Jews? Why are you anti-religion, @Ransom (http://thepoliticalforums.com/member.php?u=724)?

Did you not just call for the ban of all religious expression on public properties? Max?

[Ransom]

Are they? Or are they supporters of federalism? I've said repeatedly I find a shrine to Satan in our courthouses appropriate.

I'm not joking. I think it is 100% highly appropriate.

A shrine to Satan you find appropriate...... in our courthouses? We continue to define ourselves.

[Max Rockatansky]

Did you not just call for the ban of all religious expression on public properties? Max?
I offered two solutions to keep the matter Constitutional. What is not Constitutional is the suggestion that only Christian, specifically Protestant, displays be allowed and no others.

[Peter1469]

I offered two solutions to keep the matter Constitutional. What is not Constitutional is the suggestion that only Christian, specifically Protestant, displays be allowed and no others.

Ransom is a neocon. Probably John Bolton. He could care less about Constitutional restraints on government action. :smiley:

[Ransom]

I offered two solutions to keep the matter Constitutional. What is not Constitutional is the suggestion that only Christian, specifically Protestant, displays be allowed and no others.

You suggested a 'ban' on all such religious expressions, that's unconstitutional, Chief. Sorry.

[Ransom]

Ban me again if I keep dominating you Pete, but allow me to make my own argument while schooling ewe INNs.

[Max Rockatansky]

You suggested a 'ban' on all such religious expressions, that's unconstitutional, Chief. Sorry.
Your inability to comprehend the Constitution is not my problem, slick.

[Peter1469]

Ban me again if I keep dominating you Pete, but allow me to make my own argument while schooling ewe INNs.

You are a Neocon. Likely John Bolton in the flesh. I want you to be the US Ambassador to the UN for life. You would do a great job there and couldn't start any wars. :smiley:

That dominating thing gave me a chuckle. And you were never banned, although you asked to be.

[Ransom]

Your inability to comprehend the Constitution is not my problem, slick.

It's your mistaken interpretation that was the problem, I provided the solution. Your preference of a ban is unconstitutional. End of problem.

[Ransom]

You are a Neocon. Likely John Bolton in the flesh. I want you to be the US Ambassador to the UN for life. You would do a great job there and couldn't start any wars. :smiley:

That dominating thing gave me a chuckle. And you were never banned, although you asked to be.

I'll assume that rant is my thanks and you're welcome. I can accept grace given from an INN, I'm that humble.

[Peter1469]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qIJN8IiDse0

[iustitia]

I'm still trying to understand how this has anything to do with the Constitution.

[Mini Me]

Yup. Not a pleasant time in Salem.

Salem. The forerunners of the McCarthy witch trials!

[Mini Me]

Anton LaVay talked a lot of shit, and got a lot of publicity from the Hollyweird crowd.

https://encrypted-tbn2.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcQs07KbSnQNR1kvi43HGlJ2f2SNd4Qjz xtCqHw15gtaAXTmpQqfjA

But this dude was the real Satanist!

https://encrypted-tbn3.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcTgvj4_Umv7fOKchpY09zoSqv34dNDSa we8EOyOU_QAwf5jFTIZ3g

And lets not forget the notorjious Manson Family.

Manson studied under AntonLaVey, and lived on the same street in the Haight Ashbury of San Fran. And he was a Scientologist and purportedly was with the Process Church, and did professional hits on people(see Demonic Possession tract)

Lavey had a temple less than 3 miles where I live now on Wolf Mountain near Grass Valley, CA. Oh! The stories I have heard about it! Animal and human sacrifice, blood orgies and drugs, etc. He lived in N. San Juan nearby, where even the sheriffs stay away from, its so violent and renegade today, rife with speed labs, outlaw bikers, and Cartel pot growers and latter day hippies.

[sachem]

Salem. The forerunners of the McCarthy witch trials!And very crowded on Halloween.

[Peter1469]

McCarthy was right.

[sachem]

McCarthy was right.That there were communists, yup.

People were hounded and persecuted for not naming names. Not cool.

[Peter1469]

That there were communists, yup.

People were hounded and persecuted for not naming names. Not cool.

I don't have a problem with that. Keep in mind that the big civil rights violations were not from the Senate, but from the House.

[sachem]

i don't have a problem with that. Keep in mind that the big civil rights violations were not from the senate, but from the house.huac.


Is there anyway to keep things in caps? I realize the reason they are generally blocked, but.....