Satanic Temple Unveils Baphomet Statue For Oklahoma

[Kerethos]

The thing about it is that all they have to do is instead claim what the 10 Commandments are and then it won't be an issue any more. What are they? They are base historical teachings that are the foundation for modern day law. Get it? Basically it's an adorning replica that appreciates the basis for laws against murder, theft, false testimony, and so on. That's where our modern day laws come from and that's why they fit so appropriately without being simply labeled as a "a religious relic". If Oklahoma were to use this explanation for reasoning behind those sitting there, they can totally get away with it without giving in to a bunch of Satan worshipers trying to find a loophole to place a nutter statue in the lawn.

They are not, at all, the foundation of modern law. I offer you this easily digested explanation by Christoper Hitchens:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x9weXGtCk7c

In short, they are an absurd set of rules that mostly don't make sense in modern society, as the priorities are way off, most of them are just "Worship God and only God", considers women as equal to cattle, punishes though, and the good ones span every working society that has ever been: don't steal, murder or commit perjury.

And does law punish you for adultery? I'd say society or your spouse might do that (just as well as they'd be cool with it for a number of reasons) - but none of the US laws makes cheating on your spouse a crime (to my knowledge, as a foreigner, at least).

The christian 10 commandments are nothing but a set of religious rules, making the monument a religious monuments. Thus (if state and church is truly separated and all religions to be treated equal) any recognized religion should have the same right to place their own monument. So bring on any of the millions of Hindu gods, bring on the Buddha, bring on the Muslim star and moon, bring on a giant cross, statue of Jesus or flying spaghetti monster. Basically any religious iconography is now up for placement - so long as the law is followed and no law is broken.

To me that sounds like the start of a fascinating tourist destination, if they can get all (or at least some) of the recognized religions to place monuments of their own there. Then it could possibly even become a celebration of the USA as a country that accepts and treats everyone as equals regardless of faith (at least at that place).

But people are stupid, so it's probably going to descend into legal battles and vandalism over shit that doesn't really matter.

 

[The_Echo]

Weird idea to put it in front of a building they don't own. Especially in a state where it's certainly going to start a fight.

But maybe that's what they're looking for.

What they've come up with so far is actually pretty fantastic. The Baphomet itself is impressive and imposing, but it's the children that really sell it: You can almost see the rapturous joy on their faces as they gaze up at the fearsome visage of the Dark Lord Lucifer.

Baphomet isn't Lucifer. It's a symbol of Satanism.

In fact, LeVeyan Satanism (which the Church of Satanism follows) is actually atheistic.

 

[cthulhuspawn82]

I really don't see why Christians are having problems with this. They always get pissed off at the "secular state" people. Even I, as an atheist, think the secular state supporters can be a bunch of a-holes at times. Anyway, allowing all religions to be shared and displayed equally is the best way to stick it to the supporters of the secular state. Christians should be totally on board with this.

 

[Azure23]

The thing about it is that all they have to do is instead claim what the 10 Commandments are and then it won't be an issue any more. What are they? They are base historical teachings that are the foundation for modern day law.

Except that isn't. The Code of Hammurabi [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Code_of_Hammurabi] dates back a solid 500 years before the Bible's Old Testament [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Law#History]. The Sumerians predated this by 500 years with their own legal code. And the Egyptians go back a further 800 years from that with their legal code (arguably the first known of today).

Get it? Basically it's an adorning replica that appreciates the basis for laws against murder, theft, false testimony, and so on. That's where our modern day laws come from and that's why they fit so appropriately without being simply labeled as a "a religious relic".

Except it isn't [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legal_history#European_laws]. US law is descends from English law, which, in turn, descends from Roman law, which, in turn, descends from Greek notions of what would be referred to as law, which had little, if any, influence from the Middle East. To claim some genealogical link is absurd, especially when better links already exist.

If Oklahoma were to use this explanation for reasoning behind those sitting there, they can totally get away with it without giving in to a bunch of Satan worshipers trying to find a loophole to place a nutter statue in the lawn.

And if they forwarded this argument, than the suing party would just start calling legal scholars, historians, and archaeologists to the stand to demonstrate the clear attempt to mislead the public and court rather than satanists to demonstrate a bona fide faith.

Thank you......my heard hurt when I read someone just assuming that all modern law came from the Ten Commandments. You have spared me the trouble of legal history. I owe you a debt.

 

[Queen Michael]

AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA! Oh, this is good. This is good. Well played, Satanists, well played.

 

[AgedGrunt]

So it's an all-or-nothing argument, and that's the dilemma Christians face. It's always been that, right?

Wrong. Historically, the argument has overwhelmingly been for separation of church and state.

But that's no longer vogue now that there's a big opportunity to piss off Christians, maybe send them packing. Now would you look at all the people that suddenly love this idea of religious display?

I do too. In fact, anyone who signs on to this satanist monument needs to immediately forfeit any argument for separation. You can't have it both ways.

Of course Satan upsets Christians, but look at this thread, all the people forgetting about the whole separation thing for a glorious opportunity to spite them and force their position to change. But if you support the dark lord here, you just forced yourself into a position, too.

If you're one of these people, then from now on let's not hear a word from you about separation. If this is an "all-or-nothing" deal, then you've made your choice.

 

[infinity_turtles]

I get the idea behind it, but that statue... It just seems to plain to me. I suppose though that's what you get when you need to be able to recreate it with a simple mold.

That's pretty unfair. The Court already made the choice. People in this thread are just cheering for those who have decided to make the potential consequences of that choice very obvious.

 

[Programmed_For_Damage]

I love it how the children are gazing in awe at the abomination before them rather than fleeing in terror.

 

[JMac85]

That's no Baphomet. Where is the humungous erect penis and the big boobs?

Because this is America. Statues glorifying Satan are an inalienable right, but public nudity? Protect the children!

 

[Mr.Mattress]

As an American Catholic, I myself am in Complete Support of the Satanists putting their Goat God Statue up in Oklahoma. Freedom of Speech means Freedom for All Speech, unless it's dangerous speech (Like Saying "Fire" in a Crowded Lobby when there is no Fire). They deserve to have a Satanist Statue as much as Christians can have Crosses and the 10 Commandments and statues of Jesus or God, especially on Public Ground and Governmental Space.

But you know what I'd really like to see? A Muslim statue. It would piss them off so much their heads would explode!

... Of what? Islam doesn't really like Depictions of Gods or their Prophets (Which is why Muhammad Drawings cause Controversy and Terror threats/Terrorist Attacks).

 

[Eve Charm]

This is amusing and I want updates... Well played on the using the laws and crowd funding to basically troll people. If they coan find someone who'd insure that is the hard part to.

 

[direkiller]

Now all we need to do is commision a statue of Mohammed.
First it will piss off most Americans, since most of them seem to associate Muslims with terrorists, and next it will piss off all Muslims, since it's forbidden to make images of Mohammed.

Muslums can draw Muhammad, it just can't be in a disrespectful manner or used for worship.

 

[Therumancer]

SNIP

*blink*

Dafuq did I just read?

Are you honestly arguing that we should ignore the constitution because of some crazy conspiracy-theory bullshit about Freemasons?

If that's what you got from what I wrote, you might want to read it again. Granted I was tired when I put that down, but in re-reading it I'm pretty sure you missed the point, especially seeing as more was mentioned there than Masonry.

Also the whole "Founding Fathers as Freemasons" schtick is not "conspiracy theory garbage" it's well documented fact at this point, indeed they do stuff about it on The History channel periodically and there have been books, shows, etc.. breaking down Masonic symbolism throughout the nation. Likewise another group involved in the founding of the US was "The Hellfire Club" a real group the Marvel villain society was named after. Ben Franklin was a member.

The gist of me bringing up The Masons was that one can't really quote Thomas Jefferson on separation of church and state given that he's a known Hypocrite. Whether he was on the rolls or not he was a well documented Masonic associate, and a lot of Masonic sects claim him. Like most of the Founding Fathers he was saying "separate the church and state" while at the same time working to build the foundation of the country around Masonry. I'm not going to do your research for you, especially seeing as I'm not talking about anything that is really obscure anymore. I'd start by looking into the symbol (the Pyramid with an eye inside of it) on the back of some of your money, and working from there if your really curious as opposed to just argueing with me for the heck of it.

That said the point about Masonry is secondary to the central point that religious symbolism in government buildings does not equate with the state sponsorship of any particular religion. While it various from area to area, the basic standard is that they can use symbolism that represents law, order, etc... a more solid point than Masonry I laid down had to do with "Lady Justice" who is a Greco-Roman deity. As a general rule showing the 10 Commandments, a statue of Lady Justice, etc... are all fine based on that theme. Zeus, Jesus, Kali, etc... none of those would be appropriate however. Oklahoma can of course set it's own policies and interpet them as they want though.

 

[Therumancer]

That's no Baphomet. Where is the humungous erect penis and the big boobs?

Because this is America. Statues glorifying Satan are an inalienable right, but public nudity? Protect the children!

I don't care for it either, but I have to defend Oklahoma's right to set it's own policies. Of course I am also free to judge them for putting something like that outside their public buildings.

To be blunt from what I know about this branch of Satanism it gets by through claiming everything you hear about the devil is a lie, and he has more in common with mythological trickster deities than any kind of evil. He pretty much disrespects authority, encourages rebellion, and acts to benefit humanity. He's akin to say Prometheus who gave man fire but spent an eternity being punished for it. Indeed according to that school of Satanism they might claim that the tale of Prometheus wss actually about him.

I'm not a deeply spiritual person so I won't go into my thoughts on the entire thing, but you should be able to guess when you consider I'm a Christian and the devil is "the great deceiver" so to speak. That said it's not something I dwell on too much.

This particular image there is roughly equivalent to say putting down an image of Eris, goddess of discord down. Or say allowing someone to swear into court on a statue of Janus the two faced god of lies. The symbolism is pretty much counter productive given the purpose of the building.

To be honest, if they put that down and someone pretty much tells the government of Oklahoma they believe it means they should no longer follow any laws Bapomet wouldn't approve of, they might have a point symbolically speaking... and given that "the only law is do as you will"... yeah. Granted it wouldn't fly (no cop or judge would likely accept that) but allowing this falls under the heading of "Asking for it".

 

[Schadrach]

The thing about it is that all they have to do is instead claim what the 10 Commandments are and then it won't be an issue any more. What are they? They are base historical teachings that are the foundation for modern day law. Get it? Basically it's an adorning replica that appreciates the basis for laws against murder, theft, false testimony, and so on. That's where our modern day laws come from and that's why they fit so appropriately without being simply labeled as a "a religious relic". If Oklahoma were to use this explanation for reasoning behind those sitting there, they can totally get away with it without giving in to a bunch of Satan worshipers trying to find a loophole to place a nutter statue in the lawn.

Not necessarily. There is the Lemon Test, which it would undoubtedly fail. The whole ordinance that allows it is saying that monuments, specifically religious monumets, are allowed on government property as long as they're paid for with private funding. The Ten Commandments clearly do not serve a secular purpose there, especially since many of them are strictly Christian commandment. "Thou shalt have no other Gods before me" isn't exactly "secular".

They might be able to get away with it if they permitted other "ancient codes of law" be put up alongside it (Code of Hammurabi and such), rather than other religious monuments. You know, the logic that justifies the Ten Commandments on the mural in the SCOTUS?

 

[Commissar Sae]

Those dumb religious nuts in the US don't realize that freedom of religion doesn't mean freedom of Christianity and no other religion. And they seem to live in this bubble where religion in America is somehow under attack? So I fuckin' love this idea.

But you know what I'd really like to see? A Muslim statue. It would piss them off so much their heads would explode!

It would also piss off all the muslims, making for a great double wammy. Since there can be no representations of the prophet or Allah according to the Qu'ran.

I love the idea and would happily take photos sitting in the lap of Baphomet, hell, they should allow it as a tourist attraction if nothing else.

 

[Something Amyss]

I don't care for it either, but I have to defend Oklahoma's right to set it's own policies.

Except where it violates the law and/or constitution.

 

[Ikasury]

If anything it's just kind of a cool statue, satanism aside this does draw attention to the "The US is constitutionally supposed to be a secular state except it totally isn't". Throws into sharp relief those loud constitution worshiping, gun toting, individual rights voices that the letter of the law is only sacred when it comes to their point of view. Yes you can interpret the constitution to say you can carry a loaded M16. You can also interpret it to say your bible-bashing monuments require a counterbalance by law.

I'd like to see some colorful Hindu gods on there too, if anyone knows about awesome religious statues it's the Hindus. How wouldn't want lord Shiva on their lawn? Look at those pecs!

Spoiler

Live by an outdated document, die by an outdated document i say.

i would love to have a statue of Shiva AKA 'the Destroyer of Worlds' on the front lawn of a court house, really would bring into perspective 'don't screw up' :3

i also like the statue of Baphomet on the lawn of a place of law, he is a god of law from what i remember, as in STRICT 'i will break you and steal your soul because you swore it to me' law...

seriously, have these guys up there and i think people might actually pay attention to 'following the law' more seriously... 10 commandments? feh... what threat is that, pieces of rock written by a blood and fire god too lazy to threaten you itself -.-

Destoyer of Worlds, Absolute Law? YES!! where do i sign

 

[Ikasury]

Baphomet is a god of law, he SHOULD be in front of all court houses in all countries as it is... why satanists and anti-satan people always associate this god of medicine, alchemy, change, law, and order as something 'evil' or specifically 'satan' is beyond me... law and order are NEUTRAL when it comes to 'good vs. evil' i don't think Baphomet would care either way, he'll judge you the same as anyone else, like Anubis...

if they allow one form of expression for religious law, they should allow for expression of all other religious law icons... its only fair, right, and according to the law :3 i mean 'Justice' is an icon herself, maybe she's a bit lonely, needs some company besides a few dusty old rock-tomes XD

plus, ya know, he's totally more boss~

 

[balfore]

SNIP

*blink*

Dafuq did I just read?

Are you honestly arguing that we should ignore the constitution because of some crazy conspiracy-theory bullshit about Freemasons?

If that's what you got from what I wrote, you might want to read it again. Granted I was tired when I put that down, but in re-reading it I'm pretty sure you missed the point, especially seeing as more was mentioned there than Masonry.

Also the whole "Founding Fathers as Freemasons" schtick is not "conspiracy theory garbage" it's well documented fact at this point, indeed they do stuff about it on The History channel periodically and there have been books, shows, etc.. breaking down Masonic symbolism throughout the nation. Likewise another group involved in the founding of the US was "The Hellfire Club" a real group the Marvel villain society was named after. Ben Franklin was a member.

The gist of me bringing up The Masons was that one can't really quote Thomas Jefferson on separation of church and state given that he's a known Hypocrite. Whether he was on the rolls or not he was a well documented Masonic associate, and a lot of Masonic sects claim him. Like most of the Founding Fathers he was saying "separate the church and state" while at the same time working to build the foundation of the country around Masonry. I'm not going to do your research for you, especially seeing as I'm not talking about anything that is really obscure anymore. I'd start by looking into the symbol (the Pyramid with an eye inside of it) on the back of some of your money, and working from there if your really curious as opposed to just argueing with me for the heck of it.

That said the point about Masonry is secondary to the central point that religious symbolism in government buildings does not equate with the state sponsorship of any particular religion. While it various from area to area, the basic standard is that they can use symbolism that represents law, order, etc... a more solid point than Masonry I laid down had to do with "Lady Justice" who is a Greco-Roman deity. As a general rule showing the 10 Commandments, a statue of Lady Justice, etc... are all fine based on that theme. Zeus, Jesus, Kali, etc... none of those would be appropriate however. Oklahoma can of course set it's own policies and interpet them as they want though.

I think the biggest problems with your posts are you have a darkly cartoonish understanding of the Freemasons and their involvement in "shaping society". Also taking symbols from a secret society or referencing old religious symbols that no one practices are two different things than the state recognizing and giving preferential treatment to a modern religion.