(September 9, 2015 at 4:12 pm)Catholic_Lady Wrote: It's the principle, Abaris. To the people who invented the demon, it is a symbol of hatefulness and evil. So to put one right next to something else that is sacred to those people, is a sign of hostility and hate.

Yes, shock value. Provocation to make a point. A point that has also been made by the courts by ordering the removal of the commandments. And your reaction to it is evidence that their strategy worked.

(September 9, 2015 at 4:15 pm)TheRocketSurgeon Wrote:

(September 9, 2015 at 3:11 pm)Stimbo Wrote: How about not putting up any religious symbols on public land out of respect? Why has that not occurred to you?

No, no, no, Stimbo. Don't you get it? Only the Christians should be able to make everyone else feel like they're under the thumb of their religious ideologies via symbols placed on public lands like a dog peeing on a fire hydrant.

When the rest of us do something similar, we're being disrespectful, you see. It's so ludicrous I could cry.

Catholic_Lady Wrote:My objection is to the hateful implication of putting a Demon next to the 10 Commandments

You know what's disrespectful, Cath? Trying to put things like the Ten Commandments (either version) on our courthouses and places of lawmaking. Those violate of every precept of our secular, democratic Constitutional Repulic:

1.“You shall have no other gods before me."

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;


2. “You shall not make for yourself an image in the form of anything in heaven above or on the earth beneath or in the waters below."

or abridging the freedom of speech,

+2."You shall not bow down to them or worship them; for I, the Lord your God, am a jealous God, punishing the children for the sin of the parents to the third and fourth generation of those who hate me, but showing love to a thousand generations of those who love me and keep my commandments."

nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law

3. "You shall not misuse the name of the Lord your God, for the Lord will not hold anyone guiltless who misuses his name."

or abridging the freedom of speech,

4. "Remember the Sabbath day by keeping it holy. Six days you shall labor and do all your work, but the seventh day is a sabbath to the Lord your God. On it you shall not do any work, neither you, nor your son or daughter, nor your male or female servant, nor your animals, nor any foreigner residing in your towns. For in six days the Lord made the heavens and the earth, the sea, and all that is in them, but he rested on the seventh day. Therefore the Lord blessed the Sabbath day and made it holy."

http://www.nfl.com/ Because 'Murka.

5. "Honor your father and your mother, so that you may live long in the land the Lord your God is giving you."

https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/childrens_rights

6. "You shall not murder."

Hey, we found one that's okay! Hooray!

7 "You shall not commit adultery."

Oops. We're actually still fighting over this one.

8. "You shall not steal."

Hooray! We've now found two Commandments which don't violate the U.S. Constitution.


9. "You shall not give false testimony against your neighbor."

Hooray! The total is up to three out of ten.

10. "You shall not covet your neighbor’s house. You shall not covet your neighbor’s wife, or his male or female servant, his ox or donkey, or anything that belongs to your neighbor."

So the entire American economic system, then. I happen to agree with Pope Francis on this one.

But my point remains, here, that if you're truly concerned about not putting up religious symbols that are offensive and directly contrary/hostile to the things they stand beside, then nothing could be more so than the Bible itself, in any form, placed next to the monuments of American (Constitutional) government. Christianity, particularly in its Old Testament form, is against everything for which this country was created to stand.

I have no strong feelings either way with the 10 Commandments being there. You guys are acting like I do. I wouldn't care if there was a Buddha, or Mohammed sitting there instead of the 10 Commandments. I simply don't care about that type of thing. It doesn't bother me. I shouldn't get badgered for not caring about this.

(September 9, 2015 at 4:21 pm)Catholic_Lady Wrote: I have no strong feelings either way with the 10 Commandments being there. You guys are acting like I do. I wouldn't care if there was a Buddha, or Mohammed sitting there instead of the 10 Commandments. I simply don't care about that type of thing. It doesn't bother me. I shouldn't get badgered for not caring about this.

That completely misses my point. Completely!

You should care. And I listed why.

If you can or will not understand why religious symbols, especially the Ten Commandments, have no place being erected beside our government buildings and public spaces, then you are against everything for which this nation stands.

Religion is a private thing, and the "wall of separation" protects religion against the very kind of offensiveness about which YOU are complaining. What we're trying to get you to see is the reason it is offensive is not because the religious symbols are or are not there, but why they're there, and what they stand for (and against) when they stand there.

(September 9, 2015 at 4:17 pm)Catholic_Lady Wrote:

(September 9, 2015 at 4:01 pm)rexbeccarox Wrote: When did the Satanists attempt genocide on the Christians?

They didn't. But it's the principle I'm talking about. 

Wouldn't you say there's a difference between having the swastika as a Hindu sign somewhere, and having it right next to the Jewish Star? Don't you think there's a difference and that it would imply something different?

Ok. Holy effing shit. I just...

How can you not see how utterly disgusting it is what you're saying? Are you seriously able to compare these things so flippantly?  Again: the Swastika, not only represents a positive thing in Hinduism, but it also represents mass genocide of almost an entire culture... that actually happened. What has Satan ever actually, demonstrably done?

(September 9, 2015 at 4:26 pm)rexbeccarox Wrote:

(September 9, 2015 at 4:17 pm)Catholic_Lady Wrote: They didn't. But it's the principle I'm talking about. 

Wouldn't you say there's a difference between having the swastika as a Hindu sign somewhere, and having it right next to the Jewish Star? Don't you think there's a difference and that it would imply something different?

Ok. Holy effing shit. I just...

How can you not see how utterly disgusting it is what you're saying? Are you seriously able to compare these things so flippantly?  Again: the Swastika, not only represents a positive thing in Hinduism, but it also represents mass genocide of almost an entire culture... that actually happened. What has Satan ever actually, demonstrably done?

Ok, nevermind. I think I need to stop responding now.

(September 9, 2015 at 4:25 pm)TheRocketSurgeon Wrote:

(September 9, 2015 at 4:21 pm)Catholic_Lady Wrote: I have no strong feelings either way with the 10 Commandments being there. You guys are acting like I do. I wouldn't care if there was a Buddha, or Mohammed sitting there instead of the 10 Commandments. I simply don't care about that type of thing. It doesn't bother me. I shouldn't get badgered for not caring about this.

That completely misses my point. Completely!

You should care. And I listed why.

If you can or will not understand why religious symbols, especially the Ten Commandments, have no place being erected beside our government buildings and public spaces, then you are against everything for which this nation stands.

Religion is a private thing, and the "wall of separation" protects religion against the very kind of offensiveness about which YOU are complaining. What we're trying to get you to see is the reason it is offensive is not because the religious symbols are or are not there, but why they're there, and what they stand for (and against) when they stand there.

As long as it doesn't effect our laws, I really wouldn't care if there was a Buddha sitting on public property. Shoot me I guess. Sheesh.

(September 9, 2015 at 4:21 pm)Catholic_Lady Wrote: I have no strong feelings either way with the 10 Commandments being there. You guys are acting like I do. I wouldn't care if there was a Buddha, or Mohammed sitting there instead of the 10 Commandments. I simply don't care about that type of thing. It doesn't bother me. I shouldn't get badgered for not caring about this.

Yes, I'm sure you have no strong feelings over the ten commandments being there or not being there. That's not the point. You have strong feelings about the claim to put Satan up there too. So, the strategy worked. People took notice and a discussion ensued. A discussion that ultimately led to a verdict.

(September 9, 2015 at 12:59 pm)Catholic_Lady Wrote: I have a problem with them wanting to put that up right next to a Christian/Jewish symbol, though. Those Satanists did not invent the symbol of the Demon, the bible did. They took something that was made up to represent evil, and are trying to make it their own. Which is fine, I guess, but by putting it next to the 10 commandments statue, they are deliberately and knowingly trying to "defile" something that is very sacred for the majority of people in this country. Why not just choose a different spot to put their statue in? Its own spot?

Did we get to this yet - the Christians and Jews borrowed the shit from other ancient gods. Who the fuck cares if the satanists borrow from them?

(September 9, 2015 at 12:59 pm)Catholic_Lady Wrote: I have a problem with them wanting to put that up right next to a Christian/Jewish symbol, though. Those Satanists did not invent the symbol of the Demon, the bible did. They took something that was made up to represent evil, and are trying to make it their own. Which is fine, I guess, but by putting it next to the 10 commandments statue, they are deliberately and knowingly trying to "defile" something that is very sacred for the majority of people in this country. Why not just choose a different spot to put their statue in? Its own spot?

Protecting religious symbols from defilement by other viewpoints in their proximity is establishment of religion and therefore a violation of the Establishment Clause.   If it's important not to have the Christian/Jewish symbol "undefiled" by the mere presence of differing views, put them on private land.  Otherwise, too bad, so sad, another Unconstitutional privilege taken away.

(September 9, 2015 at 4:28 pm)abaris Wrote:

(September 9, 2015 at 4:21 pm)Catholic_Lady Wrote: I have no strong feelings either way with the 10 Commandments being there. You guys are acting like I do. I wouldn't care if there was a Buddha, or Mohammed sitting there instead of the 10 Commandments. I simply don't care about that type of thing. It doesn't bother me. I shouldn't get badgered for not caring about this.

Yes, I'm sure you have no strong feelings over the ten commandments being there or not being there. That's not the point. You have strong feelings about the claim to put Satan up there too. So, the strategy worked. People took notice and a discussion ensued. A discussion that ultimately led to a verdict.

Only to put it right next to it, because it would become a symbol of hate towards a particular group of people.