Aswyng and Amyss
- Dec 3, 2008
B should be the correct one. A leaves open the options for more, and that is where it kind of gets absurd. In the option to cater to all or none, the default should be "none." Even the Baphomet statue should demonstrate this in itself. This church does these things often with a point in mind.Timedraven 117 said:I think either Oklahoma should either A: Remove the current statue, or B: allow the Satanists to put up their own.
No no no. You don't speak for all Theists. You don't even speak for all Christians.michael87cn said:An idol is an idol, regardless of where it comes from... to those of us that believe in God, statues of any kind are a no-no.
And they should be arrested, then. Your religious beliefs do not allow you to break the law (or break anything else).I wouldn't be surprised if this gets destroyed relatively quickly by people that take this kind of thing seriously.
And yes, I would apply that to Christian iconography, too.
I don't care how seriously they take it. I doubt any of those people are truly Biblical literalists anyway. But even if they are, that's no excuse.
One can be represented by their government without explicit iconography.Boba Frag said:Would I like to see several religions represented instead of just one?
Of course, it takes all sorts to make a community and every citizen should be represented by their government.
This story alone should demonstrate why it's in our best interest to leave religion out of government. Hell, this thread should demonstrate it. Hell, the guy you posted, talking about how he wouldn't be surprised if people vandalised legally displayed iconography.