Satanic Temple Unveils Baphomet Statue For Oklahoma

[DugMachine]

Well fair is fair. They'll find some loophole to not have it placed and even if it does the thing will be vandalized over and over again. It is a nice sculpture nonetheless.

 

[Baresark]

This is pretty ridiculous. If they were smart they would remove the monument with Ten Commandments on it. But this is probably gonna go sour.

Also, people need to stop confusing the Federal Separation of Church and State with the states rights to put whatever their legislation wants on their front lawns.

The federal constitution supercedes anything and everything that a state chooses to do, period. We fought a Civil War over the idea that the states didn't have to follow federal laws or the federal constitution, and we know which side won that, right? It was the North, the side who said "No, you can't secede, and you must obey federal law." So if anybody is making, it is, by far, you. Its been the way the federal government operates and since the 1780s'. Shay's Rebellion, the Whiskey Rebellion, the Nullification Crisis in which Andrew Jackson almost started a war with the state of South Carolina. If anybody is mistaken, its you.

Remember the Cliven Bundy stuff from a bit ago? He lives in this history revisionist fantasy world, and what he did was no different than any of the other tax protests that have been quashed in history. States must submit to the federal government, period. No debating that point. Often times, states are given a lot of autonomy, but federal law always supercedes state law. There's a reason why medical marijuana is grown in secret. The federal government isn't lodging "complaints" about marijuana possession.

The civil war was not fought over that. It was specifically fought for the right of secession (which is not the same thing as this) and it was fought over laws that specifically hurt the southern economy that did not apply to northern states.

When it comes down to it, it's really a matter of opinion. There are lots of things that identify states having rights over federal, and that relies completely on reason. The question is: Will any state protect their citizens by blocking or arresting a federal agent when they try to arrest someone who is not breaking a law of the state? It has actually happened, but no major legal proceedings occurred. The states officers simply drove them to the border and let them go.

That is why states like Arizona can make laws that are unpleasant towards immigrants and the federal government only wags it's finger and asks them to reconsider.

You cannot definitively say that one precedes the other, technically. We won't know till it comes to a head. But individual state rights are by far the most important. It enforces what's called a foot vote. You don't like the state you live in, you can move to another that is in alignment with how you think things should be done. But yes, you will always have to pay federal taxes. Yes, murder will never be legal again (thank the gods for that) and the Federal government would be expected to step in where it's not that way.

Edit: Also, up until the civil war, secession was legal. So it was fought to make something that was previously legal, illegal. That was the first act of a government that started moving beyond it's intended responsibilities. And just because secession is not considered the right thing to do these days (I can't agree or disagree, to be honest), it does not mean that states have forgone all other rights. Ergo, we have a disparity between what the Federal Government dictates and what States do.

 

[schrodinger]

When will crazy religious Christians realize that Christianity isn't the ONLY religion allowed in this country, especially when ALL religions are free to be practiced(though Scientology can get the fuck out of here). I congratz the satanist for their awesome looking statue.

I hope that one day there will be a life-sized statue of Odin beating the ice giants right there next to this one. Not because I believe it actually happened, but because it would look way more awesome than a piece of execution equipment. Of course that won't happen because the bible says that 'Murica was founded by jesus and everything else is literally satan and to give equal billing to other religions would be unfairly opressing the majority.

I'm kind of suprised that the Pastafarians haven't made a noodly statue of their own too. Unless they did and someone ate it.

That reminds me:

 

[The White Hunter]

I demand a statue of Emperor Palpatine be put on their lawn, their blatant disregard for the Sith offends me.

 

[Reincarnatedwolfgod]

That is a pretty cool statue. I am not religious so I give no shits about its religious significance.

 

[CriticalMiss]

I hope that one day there will be a life-sized statue of Odin beating the ice giants right there next to this one. Not because I believe it actually happened, but because it would look way more awesome than a piece of execution equipment. Of course that won't happen because the bible says that 'Murica was founded by jesus and everything else is literally satan and to give equal billing to other religions would be unfairly opressing the majority.

I'm kind of suprised that the Pastafarians haven't made a noodly statue of their own too. Unless they did and someone ate it.

 

[StriderShinryu]

First off, that's a pretty cool looking statue. Second, I absolutely think they should be able to display it. If government space is being given over to displays from one religion, it should be open to all religions.

 

[Fox12]

Baphomet isn't Lucifer though, he's just a symbol from an earlier pagan religion.

Can we add a statue of Guts to the lawn as well, since he totally kicked Baphomets furry but? While we're at it, lets add Shiva, achiles, and Fenrir, just so we can build a little menagerie of gods.

NOTE: Also, most of you do realize that Separation of Church and State isn't in the constitution, right? The state didn't break the law by putting up the ten commandments, it's only breaking the law if it refuses to put up the other statue (which it will). Most likely, both statues will be removed.

 

[Nielas]

Edit: Also, up until the civil war, secession was legal.

Legal? Maybe, Im not sure if a law for that actually existed. Constitutional? Absolutely not.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Texas_v._White

Look into constitutional law. Most all of what you're saying is unfounded.

There was also the Whiskey Rebellion where the residents of some counties in Pennsylvania rebelled against a new whiskey tax. Some of the rebels declared independence and wanted to secede from the Union. George Washington ended up sending in the federal army and 20 men were tried for high treason.

 

[Shoggoth2588]

...And now I have a reason to visit Oklahoma! No offense to natives but I know next to nothing about other features, attractions and, local cuisine your state offers up for visitors to enjoy. It's not quite as bad ass as the Detroit Robocop statue but I haven't really been into Satanism for a few years. Either way though, I look forward to seeing if any Atheist groups will try crowdfunding a third statue...perhaps the Flying Spaghetti Monster?

 

[New Frontiersman]

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.

Except that our laws don't come from there. We have countless laws that either don't comply with or even contradict the Ten Commandments. Hell, the first four commandments are religious laws commanding followers to obey and respect god, something that's completely at odds with the concepts of both freedom of religion and freedom of speech that're enshrined in the United States Constitution. We also don't have laws against adultery or requiring children to respect their parents, both of which are commandments. Only the three commandments you specifically mentioned against killing, stealing and bearing false testimony have any basis in modern day law, and those rules have analogues in every existing culture, not just the ones that have used biblical law.

If we're putting up historical documents relating to the ancient origins of modern law why not put up the Twelve Tables or the Code of Hammurabi, both of which are sets of laws which were far more influential on our own?

It looks like some people have beaten me to this, but I thought might as well say it anyway.

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.

This is just me focusing way too much on semantics but Baphomet and Lucifer aren't the same person. I just felt I should put that out there.

 

[Someone Depressing]

It's beautiful, even if the reason why it exists is absoloutely insane.

I imagine this'll also raise hell in oh so many Christian communities, what with encouraging "Satanic behaviour and opposition to the Lord" and many other things that people of any religion will find offensive.

And it's going to be fun to watch.

 

[martyrdrebel27]

i'm seeing a surprising amount of positive feedback here. i love the idea, and that statue is badass. to really nail the message though, the satanic group should coordinate with people of other religions and get them to do the same thing, the same night, the same place. imagine a group of religious statues, representing all faiths, standing proudly next to the 10 commandments. the state would then be FORCED to face it's hypocrisy. either take them all down, or leave them all up, picking and choosing would cause the necessary shitstorm.

 

[Ukomba]

Religions equally doesn't cover trolling. Also not sure that this is the way to win public opinion.

 

[superstringz]

This is pretty ridiculous. If they were smart they would remove the monument with Ten Commandments on it. But this is probably gonna go sour.

Also, people need to stop confusing the Federal Separation of Church and State with the states rights to put whatever their legislation wants on their front lawns. That much quoted separation only applies to the Federal Government in the need to not enforce a state (read: federal) religion, as that is basically one of the factors that lead to initial declaration of separation from Britain. A state right (read: individual states)(the verbiage confuses most, it's just poorly thought out) technically preempts federal law. So, an individual state can do stuff like that without the need to worry about Church and States separation. You may not agree with it, but it's because of that very thing that states have started to legalize Marijuana, despite the Federal Governments complaints about it.

I also feel that while the Ten Commandments are Christian concept, they are representative of a system of laws. It's a state legislator building, they make laws, so it's not like it's something that should surprise anyone and it's certainly not an outlandish idea.. I haven't seen it but they don't have actual Christian symbols out there. No Jesus, no Mary, no Cross. People just freak out about this kind of thing. I would personally classify an image of someone's "God" of worship is not nearly the same thing.

WROOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOONG!
Seriously, we fought a war over this. The Federal constitution is the highest law of the land, superseding everything else. Anyone who says otherwise is a confederate sympathizer.

There is no constitutional amendment governing marijuana, which is why state laws take precedence.
When the 18th amendment (prohibition of alcohol) was established, it overrode any state laws to the contrary. Thats how the feds were able to enforce prohibition. When the 21st amendment passed repealing the 18th, it put alcohol laws back in the hands of states.

The separation of church and state is guaranteed by the constitution, which is why OK is treading thin ice with this.

 

[Baresark]

snip

I had a bunch of stuff to say here, but I'm gonna skip it. I'm going to ask you one question:

Where in the constitution does it say the federal government can dictate what goes out in front of a state legislative building?

 

[Baresark]

This is pretty ridiculous. If they were smart they would remove the monument with Ten Commandments on it. But this is probably gonna go sour.

Also, people need to stop confusing the Federal Separation of Church and State with the states rights to put whatever their legislation wants on their front lawns. That much quoted separation only applies to the Federal Government in the need to not enforce a state (read: federal) religion, as that is basically one of the factors that lead to initial declaration of separation from Britain. A state right (read: individual states)(the verbiage confuses most, it's just poorly thought out) technically preempts federal law. So, an individual state can do stuff like that without the need to worry about Church and States separation. You may not agree with it, but it's because of that very thing that states have started to legalize Marijuana, despite the Federal Governments complaints about it.

I also feel that while the Ten Commandments are Christian concept, they are representative of a system of laws. It's a state legislator building, they make laws, so it's not like it's something that should surprise anyone and it's certainly not an outlandish idea.. I haven't seen it but they don't have actual Christian symbols out there. No Jesus, no Mary, no Cross. People just freak out about this kind of thing. I would personally classify an image of someone's "God" of worship is not nearly the same thing.

WROOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOONG!
Seriously, we fought a war over this. The Federal constitution is the highest law of the land, superseding everything else. Anyone who says otherwise is a confederate sympathizer.

There is no constitutional amendment governing marijuana, which is why state laws take precedence.
When the 18th amendment (prohibition of alcohol) was established, it overrode any state laws to the contrary. Thats how the feds were able to enforce prohibition. When the 21st amendment passed repealing the 18th, it put alcohol laws back in the hands of states.

The separation of church and state is guaranteed by the constitution, which is why OK is treading thin ice with this.

Alright, for the sake of argument I'll say you are right. Tell me where in the constitution it states the federal government can dictate what goes in front of a legislative building. If you can tell me that, I'll cede all other points, no matter how I feel or what historical facts actually dictate.

 

[Nurb]

Hypocrites, all of them. The Ten Commandments shouldn't be allowed in the courthouse, it's not even a question. But using imagery created to attack common beliefs as a way to fight back against a faith you don't believe in because of the way it attacked common beliefs is a special kind of stupid.

Religion is supposed to make the world better by making people better, and though it often falls short of that goal, creating a religion to counter-proselytize dominant beliefs in an attempt to undermine, eliminate, and/or deconstruct said beliefs is trading an ass for a donkey. Mocking the ignorant won't change them, and is a self-destructive platform with which to forward your agenda with.

This gesture helps no one.

This gesture points out the idiocy of mixing religion and government.

If those Okie Fundies didn't act all stupid try to plant religious symbols on state property, this wouldn't even be an issue.

 

[Callate]

Part of me says I really shouldn't applaud silly people getting into a pissing contest with other silly people, all with the unspoken agenda of rubbing people's noses in things they find uncomfortable, if not deeply offensive.

But I would be lying if I didn't admit that another part of me was saying, "Well, the fundamentalist 'America is a Christian nation' folk started it, and if they didn't want to go here, they should have kept their monument off in the first place."

 

[Timedraven 117]

I think either Oklahoma should either A: Remove the current statue, or B: allow the Satanists to put up their own. Just on principle alone the local government should not even be questioning this, its government property (Yes it is government property, it represent the state, which represents the federal government) so they must allow it, and any stalling or such is pure incompetence on their part and refusal to hold up the US constitution.Its like Southern state leaders refusing to allow integration, and these people will be remembered as such if they don't do their jobs and solve this matter quickly and efficiently.

I mean if they actually did their jobs this could turn out to be a boon for their tourism if instead of refusing them allowed them and encouraged other religions to build statues to do as others said like making a garden with the various statues. I mean the one the Satanists have is pretty cool, not imagine if you had the Buddhist and Hindu statues which are pretty good looking as well. I would go to see it.