Suspect charged with hate crime for destroying Satanic Temple display at Iowa Capitol

[crossfire]

Soo your saying that the Christians weren't super ticked, that their private property was destroyed? That doesn't quite sound right. And shame on them too.

Sorry, I'm just a bit confused by your statement.

Let's look at your original statement:

The point is you either allow anyone to have their display up, or if people can't act civil about it, they don't get to have any up either. The willful destruction only proved the second point. Frankly, I'd rather not see large religious displays in any building of that sort. Small personal ones are fine, like a piece of jewelry, or a small statuette on your desk. You could bet your bottom if willful destruction of the Christian display had happened, they'd be foaming at the mouth.

So they can't have Nativity scenes at their own Churches? I was pretty upset at what I saw, and I'm not even Christian.

 

[Father Heathen]

Do Satanists respect Christians?

I mean...Satan hated Jesus Christ...so why should it be different, between Satanists and Christians?

Satanist - such as those in TST (and not literal devil worshippers, who exist mostly in the imaginations of Hollywood, conspiracy theorists, and religious conservatives; which is silly nonsense and not a part of this conversation) have no reason to hate Christ, and as demonstrated by their tenets (see post #21), clearly have far more in common with Christ than most Christians.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Why would I, as a follower of Christ, not want a satanic display to not be smashed?

If you want a reason drawn from your own religion, then think about how much hypocrisy riled up Jesus.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Oh goodie, a quote from scripture!

"12 So in everything, do to others what you would have them do to you, for this sums up the Law and the Prophets."

Praise God. So, you think that means I should not smash tributes to Satan?

I am not a betting person, but if I was would bet you $100 Matthew would be on my side.

Basic decency should be enough to make you not smash displays of other religions.

 

[Father Heathen]

The USA is a historically and culturally Christian country. Even to many atheists.
So they should assume that. And accept that.

Wrong. It's Christians who need to accept that The Founding Fathers intended the U.S. to be a secular nation free of religious tyranny, hence the establishment clause of The First amendment of the Constitution:

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."​

and Article 11 of The Treaty of Tripoli:

"As the government of the United States of America is not in any sense founded on the Christian Religion."​

Thus their religion does not entitle Christians to special rights and liberties that supersede those of others. So they should except that.

​

​

 

[Father Heathen]

Now it's your turn to answer my questions on post #77

@Estro Felino Don't be scared.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Let's look at your original statement:

So they can't have Nativity scenes at their own Churches? I was pretty upset at what I saw, and I'm not even Christian.

I don't agree with smashing a nativity scene on a church lawn, but at the same time, when Christian churches have undue influence over our society and government, I don't think we can say that what Christians do at their own churches is a purely private affair.

The wall of separation of church and state is a two-way thing. When that wall breaks down, citizens' participation in - and criticism of - government requires participation in and criticism of the churches that have breached that wall of separation, even if the citizen isn't a member of that church. The alternative is some degree of theocracy.

I don't think that unilaterally smashing the nativity scene is the right sort of participation, but I do think I should be entitled to a say about what goes on church lawns.

 

[Shaul]

As a matter of general principle I think the concept of "hate crime" is flawed and should be eschewed.

 

[Father Heathen]

As a matter of general principle I think the concept of "hate crime" is flawed and should be eschewed.

Even if it were some Nazi that attempted to fire bomb your synagogue?

 

[☆Dreamwind☆]

Let's look at your original statement:

So they can't have Nativity scenes at their own Churches? I was pretty upset at what I saw, and I'm not even Christian.

In their own churches, temples, stores etc. is fine. I'm saying non-religious public buildings should not be permitted to have theirs up, if another cannot. It's about fairness.

 

[Soandso]

I see.

That "most" is incredibly disturbing. And not reassuring at all.

Again. Most and not all sounds concerning to me.

You do realize that most applies to everything; even Christianity. Most Christians don't protest the funerals of soldiers who's families are grieving. Some do

The fact that a minority of people from a people group do something bad isn't indicative of what the people group does or believes as a whole. There will always be bad apples

 

[☆Dreamwind☆]

I see.

That "most" is incredibly disturbing. And not reassuring at all.

Again. Most and not all sounds concerning to me.

I have already condemned that person's action. It's a crime to damage other people's property.


The USA is a historically and culturally Christian country. Even to many atheists.
So they should assume that. And accept that.

It is not. The pilgrims did not magically stumble upon an entire continent completely devoid of human life. The Native Americans have their own beliefs.

As for not showing each other respect, two religions don't hafta like each other. They are granted equal protection under the law.

 

[crossfire]

In their own churches, temples, stores etc. is fine. I'm saying non-religious public buildings should not be permitted to have theirs up, if another cannot. It's about fairness.

I don't have a problem with religious displays (from any or all religions) on public property, especially seasonal ones. I see it as upholding our First Amendment. Your mileage may vary.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

Do Satanists respect Christians?

I mean...Satan hated Jesus Christ...so why should it be different, between Satanists and Christians?

You'll find Satanists are generally way better at that respecting others thing than Christians.
Why can't Christians here accept that? They hate helping the poor, they cast the first stone, bear false witness, and try to trample thise whi aren't like them and deny them rights. If anything, it's Christians who are so terrible at respect and getting along with others, Christians who treat tue least among them awefully, Christians who baulk at efforts to fix America's gun violence amd Christians whibare so poorly behaved many Christians now call themselves "followers if Christ" because they don't want attached to the hypocritical rubbish of Christians.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

Do Satanists respect Christians?

I mean...Satan hated Jesus Christ...so why should it be different, between Satanists and Christians?

Also, the Unuted States wasn't founded as a Christian nation.
As the government of the United States of America is not in any sense founded on the Christian Religion, – as it has in itself no character of enmity against the laws, religion or tranquility of Musselmen [Muslims], – and as the said States never have entered into any war or act of hostility against any Mehomitan nation, it is declared by the parties that no pretext arising from religious opinions shall ever produce an interruption of the harmony existing between the two countries. -Treaty of Tripoli

 

[Evangelicalhumanist]

Why would I, as a follower of Christ, not want a satanic display to not be smashed?

Because it is not yours to do what you will with. Follower of Christ or not, who cares? Other people don't follow Christ, and if you think that is not their right -- then you think wrongly.

 

[Evangelicalhumanist]

I asked a question.
Can I have an answer?
Who is it?

The question was answered in the linked site: Satan is not a "who" in any sense: "the group does not view Satan as either a supernatural being, nor a symbol of evil; but in the literary as a symbol representing "the eternal rebel" against arbitrary authority and social norms, or as a metaphor to promote pragmatic sketpicism, rational reciprocity, personal autonomy, and curiosity."

We humans use personal names to represent ideas that are not in fact "people" at all. Think "Uncle Sam," or "John Bull."

 

[Evangelicalhumanist]

I'll bet money that Italian pizzas can be great.
So can American pizzas, but the most common
varieties don't appeal to me.
I like thin crust with tomato sauce, feta cheese,
& anchovies.

I like thin crust with white sauce (milk, salt, pepper, garlic, and parmesan cheese), artichokes and asiago cheese.

 

[Evangelicalhumanist]

By the way...my respect towards other people's free will (not everyone respects other people's free will on Earth, but I do) imposes me to respect Satanists and their choice.

But I feel nothing but contempt towards those people, especially politicians who are Satanists and hide it.

A bit hard to see how you can feel both respect and contempt for the same thing.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

Because it is not yours to do what you will with. Follower of Christ or not, who cares? Other people don't follow Christ, and if you think that is not their right -- then you think wrongly.

Many have shown they aren't the beacons of light unto the world that Jesus wants them to be.