Should the Satan religious display be allowed in the florida state capital?

Paschendale said:

A person isn't entitled to their own religious beliefs in Florida? They have to be sanctioned by an established group with money? That seems pretty contrary to religious liberty.



Or perhaps we could simply stop affording any special legal status to religious organizations and treat them just like secular ones. Then there needn't be any determination of legitimacy. Nothing in law should be dependent on someone's beliefs. No beliefs should entitle someone to not pay taxes. Some beliefs (those recognized as a religion) shouldn't get special treatment over others.



Let's not give up and keep trying to get it back into port.

Click to expand...

You know, there's a house not too far from that's labelled as a church. We hear rumors it's for the tax breaks. But I hope they are doing a little good along the way. Who am I to question?

Kal'Stang said:

Except that they don't believe in Satan. They believe that Man made up all deities (which would include Satan). That is from their own website. If you don't believe in a deity or several deities then you are, by definition, an atheist.

As I said, their own statements make it for themselves.

Click to expand...

"The idea that religion belongs to supernaturalists is ignorant, backward, and offensive. The metaphorical Satanic construct is no more arbitrary to us than are the deeply held beliefs that we actively advocate for. Are we supposed to believe that those who pledge submission to an ethereal supernatural deity hold to their values more deeply than we? Are we supposed to concede that only the superstitious are proper recipients of religious exemption and privilege? In fact, Satanism provides us all that a religion should, without a compulsory attachment to untenable items of faith-based belief: It provides a narrative structure by which we contextualize our lives and works. It provides a body of symbolism and religious practice — a sense of identity, culture, community, and shared values."

--Sounds like religion to me.

TheDemSocialist said:

"The idea that religion belongs to supernaturalists is ignorant, backward, and offensive. The metaphorical Satanic construct is no more arbitrary to us than are the deeply held beliefs that we actively advocate for. Are we supposed to believe that those who pledge submission to an ethereal supernatural deity hold to their values more deeply than we? Are we supposed to concede that only the superstitious are proper recipients of religious exemption and privilege? In fact, Satanism provides us all that a religion should, without a compulsory attachment to untenable items of faith-based belief: It provides a narrative structure by which we contextualize our lives and works. It provides a body of symbolism and religious practice — a sense of identity, culture, community, and shared values."

--Sounds like religion to me.

Click to expand...

Not even close to me. Sounds like spin to try and justify them provoking any religion that they want off public property. Or are you now saying that atheism is indeed a religion? There's been lots of threads here at DP about that subject and I've yet to see any atheist admit that atheism is a religion.

Or are you just ignoring the definition of atheism in favor of promoting these liars and to push your own agenda?

Kal'Stang said:

Not even close to me. Sounds like spin to try and justify them provoking any religion that they want off public property. Or are you now saying that atheism is indeed a religion? There's been lots of threads here at DP about that subject and I've yet to see any atheist admit that atheism is a religion.

Or are you just ignoring the definition of atheism in favor of promoting these liars and to push your own agenda?

Click to expand...

Since it was a free speech zone, religion or not is immaterial.

paddymcdougall said:

Since it was a free speech zone, religion or not is immaterial.

Click to expand...

I agree. :shrug:

However misrepresentation (ie lying) is the issue imo. And lying on government forms is a crime.

tacomancer said:

Woman arrested after damaging Satanic display at Florida Capitol | Fox News

Branching off the discussion from this article, should the state of florida have even put up the display in the first place?

Why or why not?

Click to expand...

I picked other.Yes if the people actually wanting the statue up are actual practicing satanists. Meaning they regularly attend a satanic church,pray to Satan,celebrate satanic holidays, engage in satanic religious customs and etc. No if the people wanting the statue up are not real satanist. I suspect that the individuals wanting the satanic statue up are merely extremist whack job atheists trying to stick it to Christians to try to coerce Christians to take down what ever religious displays they have on tax payer funded property.

WCH said:

2Cor 4:4

Satan, who is the god of this world, has blinded the minds of those who don't believe. They are unable to see the glorious light of the Good News. They don't understand this message about the glory of Christ, who is the exact likeness of God.

Click to expand...

"Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image, or any likeness of any thing that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth." --Exodus 20:4. The construction of these religious displays, even if Christian in nature, is a sin.

Kal'Stang said:

Not even close to me. Sounds like spin to try and justify them provoking any religion that they want off public property. Or are you now saying that atheism is indeed a religion? There's been lots of threads here at DP about that subject and I've yet to see any atheist admit that atheism is a religion.

Or are you just ignoring the definition of atheism in favor of promoting these liars and to push your own agenda?

Click to expand...

Promoting liars to push their own agenda? Sounds like a religion to me!

I find your position rather hypocritical. You seem to think that the religious deserve special privileges with the government but atheists can go **** themselves. Why should the government treat people differently based on their religiosity?

If a christian writes christianity down on a government form (why would they need to do that??) but he deep down doesn't really believe, do you want him sent off to the gulag, comrade? You're not the decider of whose religion is real or not, and the realness of it has absolutely no bearing on anything whatsoever. If I had the job you've given yourself I would find all religions to be fictitious.

RabidAlpaca said:

I find your position rather hypocritical. You seem to think that the religious deserve special privileges with the government but atheists can go **** themselves. Why should the government treat people differently based on their religiosity?

If a christian writes christianity down on a government form (why would they need to do that??) but he deep down doesn't really believe, do you want him sent off to the gulag, comrade? You're not the decider of whose religion is real or not, and the realness of it has absolutely no bearing on anything whatsoever. If I had the job you've given yourself I would find all religions to be fictitious.

Click to expand...

:lamo I don't think the religious deserve special treatment at all. And I dare you to show where I said or implied that. I'll bet that you'll find plenty of posts stating that I am against religion faster though. IE: you're barking up the wrong tree here.

And as I said before, I'm not deciding, or judging anything here. Unless you want to now claim that atheism is a religion? Just how many atheists are going to support you on that absurdity? Be sure to change the definition of atheism while you're at it. Good luck to you on that.

RabidAlpaca said:

Promoting liars to push their own agenda? Sounds like a religion to me!

I find your position rather hypocritical. You seem to think that the religious deserve special privileges with the government but atheists can go **** themselves. Why should the government treat people differently based on their religiosity?

If a christian writes christianity down on a government form (why would they need to do that??) but he deep down doesn't really believe, do you want him sent off to the gulag, comrade? You're not the decider of whose religion is real or not, and the realness of it has absolutely no bearing on anything whatsoever. If I had the job you've given yourself I would find all religions to be fictitious.

Click to expand...

BTW, you want to talk about hypocritical? Try this....Is Atheism a religion? poll I take note of where you voted...

Kal'Stang said:

BTW, you want to talk about hypocritical? Try this....Is Atheism a religion? poll I take note of where you voted...

Click to expand...

Kal'Stang said:

:lamo I don't think the religious deserve special treatment at all. And I dare you to show where I said or implied that. I'll bet that you'll find plenty of posts stating that I am against religion faster though. IE: you're barking up the wrong tree here.

And as I said before, I'm not deciding, or judging anything here. Unless you want to now claim that atheism is a religion? Just how many atheists are going to support you on that absurdity? Be sure to change the definition of atheism while you're at it. Good luck to you on that.

Click to expand...

I've never implied atheism was a religion, I simply stated that you can't tell someone their religion is made up, because they're all made up and completely subjective.

You've stated over and over again that you don't think their religion is real enough and that there should be consequences for "lying about it". You're saying the religious should be able to set up displays in government buildings but those you don't deem worthy enough shouldn't. As I stated before, it's all or nothing for the government. They can not pick winners and losers. Either all religions are welcome to set up displays, or none are. What YOUR opinion of satanism is, is completely irrelevant.

Perhaps the core tenant of the satanist religion is to annoy people like you. Every bit as legitimate as any other religion.

By the way, I thought we settled this whole church and state thing a few hundred years back and we've seen quite a bit of benefit from it. Why are we re-opening this discussion and asking whether it might be good to infuse the two again?

tacomancer said:

Woman arrested after damaging Satanic display at Florida Capitol | Fox News

Branching off the discussion from this article, should the state of florida have even put up the display in the first place?

Why or why not?

Click to expand...

in this situation the answer is yes of course

everybody gets to participate or nobody does, its a free speech zone or its a no speech zone, it can't be in the middle. :shrug:

this is probably the best post i read

Visbek said:

Either: The state set up a "free speech zone" as a genuine forum for open speech, including expressions of religious devotion. As such, the state has no right to censor a group on the basis of their religion.

Or: Legislators set up the "free speech zone" as a back-door effort to promulgate their own religious beliefs. In which case, they got exactly what they deserved -- a bunch of wise-asses who mercilessly mocked their attempts to violate the establishment of religion.

Click to expand...

RabidAlpaca said:

I've never implied atheism was a religion, I simply stated that you can't tell someone their religion is made up, because they're all made up and completely subjective.

Click to expand...

No, that is not what you "simply" said. You are defending these Satanists and by defending them you are saying that they are religious. They are not. By their own definition of themselves and the definition of atheism they are not. And no, they didn't "make up" their own religion. They stole a religious term as a means to provoke. That's not making up anything.

RabidAlpaca said:

You've stated over and over again that you don't think their religion is real enough and that there should be consequences for "lying about it". You're saying the religious should be able to set up displays in government buildings but those you don't deem worthy enough shouldn't. As I stated before, it's all or nothing for the government. They can not pick winners and losers. Either all religions are welcome to set up displays, or none are. What YOUR opinion of satanism is, is completely irrelevant.

Click to expand...

I've stated over and over again that per their own website and explanation, or definition, of themselves and the definition of atheism they are not religious at all. But atheists. By saying that they are religious and claiming such titles then they are, by definitions, lying. That is a fact. Indisputable. Or are you now claiming that atheism is now a religion?

You should also note that in my first post in this thread I specifically stated that if these atheists had not lied then I would have no problem with what they are doing and if I were on the city council I would have also approved their permit to place their display. I also said that I would even have allowed real Satanists their displays. Funny how you ignore that in your jump to defend these so called "Satanists". Gotta push the Agenda right?

Kal'Stang said:

No, that is not what you "simply" said. You are defending these Satanists and by defending them you are saying that they are religious. They are not. By their own definition of themselves and the definition of atheism they are not. And no, they didn't "make up" their own religion. They stole a religious term as a means to provoke. That's not making up anything.



I've stated over and over again that per their own website and explanation, or definition, of themselves and the definition of atheism they are not religious at all. But atheists. By saying that they are religious and claiming such titles then they are, by definitions, lying. That is a fact. Indisputable. Or are you now claiming that atheism is now a religion?

You should also note that in my first post in this thread I specifically stated that if these atheists had not lied then I would have no problem with what they are doing and if I were on the city council I would have also approved their permit to place their display. I also said that I would even have allowed real Satanists their displays. Funny how you ignore that in your jump to defend these so called "Satanists". Gotta push the Agenda right?

Click to expand...

Christians say the world was created in 7 days about 6,000 years ago. That's a lie, should we prosecute them? Religion is based on lies, and so is satanism. If you don't want lies in your government you should oppose religion in government. Sometimes I say I'm a pastafarian when really I'm an atheist. Would you like to have me arrested?

Besides, officially this is a free speech zone, not a religious zone, and they're exercising that free speech. You can continue pouting, equality is a bitch sometimes isn't it?

Either one religion or all religions. I do not see why one religion should be enjoy freedom of practice while the other one should not.

:2razz:

RabidAlpaca said:

Perhaps the core tenant of the satanist religion is to annoy people like you. Every bit as legitimate as any other religion.

Click to expand...

Here is a good potential line to put in the signature! :lol:

For those of you who have more space I mean?

Yes assuming other religious paraphernalia are permitted to be displayed on government property. But the better policy would be to not display any religious paraphernalia on government property.

Kal'Stang said:

The fail is on your side. In order for these atheists to put up their display they have to fill out a form correct? Lying on official forms is ILLEGAL. Don't believe me? Go and fill out a public form for the government and lie on it. Let them know you lied after you submit it.

Click to expand...

You haven't seen any such forms. Where would be the "lie" on the form? The name of the group? Is there a quiz about the religious beliefs of applicants on the form? Is an organization that calls itself the "Satanic Temple" obligated to actually be Satanists? Are members of the local Mason lodge required to actually be masons? Is the man who put up a Festivus pole required to genuinely believe in Festivus? There's no indication that any applications were rejected for "lying on official forms."

The group openly and overtly states they are not actually Satanists. They're using the free speech zone to protest against the free speech zone, because they realize what it is -- an attempt to circumvent the constitutional injunctions against endorsement of a religion.



By the way, if I lie on a park permit, I'm not going to jail.

Its also screamingly obvious that they have let even liars put their display's up. And as you keep re-iterating its a free speech zone, not just a religious display zone. You defeat your own argument.

Click to expand...

Yes, only if you have no idea of the history of these displays. What happens is a local official puts up a nativity scene or religious iconography; locals object to the violation of the separation of church and state; the state is compelled to allow other displays. As is the case in other such sites, people use the space to criticize the misuse of public land for religious displays.

I.e. it's only a "free speech zone" because that's the only way someone can put a nativity scene on public property. And again, they are getting what they deserve, in the form of protests.

Oh look, you provided you're own answer here. Displays are perfectly constitutional so long as the government doesn't play favorites. And it sure seems to me that is exactly what happened here. No favorites was played. Which means its perfectly constitutional.

Click to expand...

Yes, favorites were played. This group's application was rejected last year, and was only approved this year after they threatened to sue.

jamesrage said:

I picked other.Yes if the people actually wanting the statue up are actual practicing satanists. Meaning they regularly attend a satanic church,pray to Satan,celebrate satanic holidays, engage in satanic religious customs and etc. No if the people wanting the statue up are not real satanist. I suspect that the individuals wanting the satanic statue up are merely extremist whack job atheists trying to stick it to Christians to try to coerce Christians to take down what ever religious displays they have on tax payer funded property.

Click to expand...

I agree on principal, but I also agree with other folks that government should not get into the business of determining which religion is or is not valid.

I support some minimum standards like 100 members, a designated place of worship, and some other stuff, but only because there is limited space in the capital and it makes sense that the more popular ones would get first crack at that space.

Kal'Stang said:

The fail is on your side. In order for these atheists to put up their display they have to fill out a form correct? Lying on official forms is ILLEGAL. Don't believe me? Go and fill out a public form for the government and lie on it. Let them know you lied after you submit it.




Its also screamingly obvious that they have let even liars put their display's up. And as you keep re-iterating its a free speech zone, not just a religious display zone. You defeat your own argument.



Oh look, you provided you're own answer here. Displays are perfectly constitutional so long as the government doesn't play favorites. And it sure seems to me that is exactly what happened here. No favorites was played. Which means its perfectly constitutional.

Click to expand...

Can you show me the line on the form that asks about what the religion of the applicant is? https://adobeformscentral.com/?f=AloLt8zY10vQaoRG157VIg#

Once we have a Satanismas or something like that as a national holiday and stores selling Satanismas gifts and such, we should join the fun. Of course we should also have some Muhammad skeletons flying on a rug on a special day. Of course the cowards dejour wouldn't dare.
When that day comes, I'll put a little something on my front stoop.
Until then, have some respect. Christmas is only once a year.

Krhazy said:

Yes assuming other religious paraphernalia are permitted to be displayed on government property. But the better policy would be to not display any religious paraphernalia on government property.

Click to expand...

yep its all or none, theres no other way and the best way would be none since that follows the law and doesnt work any grey areas people like to play in until others wanna play too.

Phys251 said:

"Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image, or any likeness of any thing that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth." --Exodus 20:4. The construction of these religious displays, even if Christian in nature, is a sin.

Click to expand...

No one is bowing down to or worshiping these displays.

tacomancer said:

I would just choose some minimum standards such as:

100+ adherents
has existed for more than five years

established worship site (even if its bob's shed in the back yard)

Click to expand...

is not based on a work of popular fiction


Thats probably all thats needed.

Click to expand...

Wicca and other pagan variations are large religions with all the other qualifications but is one that is as structured to be practiced solitary as well as with a group. For that matter many religions are. Additionally, with many pagan religions, there is no one place of worship. You are running off the stereotype of worship that comprises the majority of the big 3.

I agree, for the purposes of legal recognition, that there should be some kind of criteria. Much in the way that a couple can be married yet not legally recognized if they don't obtain the paperwork, so can a religion exist without legal recognition by the government. In both cases, they participants should not expect to receive any associated rights for not having such legal status. Likewise, it is not unreasonable for there to be guidelines on what is or isn't for legal purposes, as long as those guidelines are reasonable and do not isolate out any group in particular.

RabidAlpaca said:

Christians say the world was created in 7 days about 6,000 years ago.

Click to expand...

Some Christians believe that, not all.