19 votes

Satanic Church Proposes Daemon Statue Baphomet To Be Placed At Oklahoma State house

OKLAHOMA CITY, OK - The Satanic Temple in New York City is working on a new monument that is being built to erect at the Oklahoma Statehouse. The statue of Baphomet will sit at 7 feet tall and feature the goat-headed daemon flanked on either side by two children.

“The monument has been designed to reflect the views of Satanists in Oklahoma City and beyond. The statue will serve as a beacon calling for compassion and empathy among all living creatures. The statue will also have a functional purpose as a chair where people of all ages may sit on the lap of Satan for inspiration and contemplation,” spokesman Lucien Greaves explained.

Read more: http://thelibertarianrepublic.com/satanic-church-proposes-da...

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

Ditto

"Again I am no satanist; I am an atheist. But I tend to side with rationality, logical consistency, and non-aggression."

and "Amen"

cite your source for "60 Million"

or your assertion is unsubstantiated and invalid

you don't have to be a rocket

you don't have to be a rocket scientist to figure it out. There is nothing that is more pure evil than sacrificing 60 million babies.

Does the Satanic church do blood sacrifices? Lets get into what the Satanists believe, shall we? Do you know what the illuminati is? Do you know who Lucifer is?

still no source....

all I see is subjective assertions, no objective proof. But you religious people are not real good at "Objective Truth."

Also you are asserting that if people have an abortion then they are not christian; so they must be "satanists."

2 words: AD HOMINEM

You should check out vigilant

You should check out vigilant citizen dot com. It's pretty interesting. It's a huge website to navigate but it comes with instructions.

Yeah you love Liberty..

Yeah you love Liberty..

evil is evil

I love liberty more than life.
But I love God more.

"You only live free if your willing to die free."

So you let your brainwashing

So you let your brainwashing trump Liberty? You are awesome!

Thanks :)

According to your definition then the signers of the declaration of independence were brain washed.
I thank you for putting me in the same box as the founding fathers.
I hope some day to display even half of George Washington's faith in God.

"You only live free if your willing to die free."

And you are not.

And you are not.

the level of discourse here

on both sides is just inspiring

“With laws shall our land be built up, but with lawlessness laid waste.”
-Njal Thorgeirsson

Evil?

Evil is the mistreatment of people...not some stupid statue.

As far as I can tell, destroying their statue is more evil than the statue itself.

I can't believe people here would up-vote these comments. Sheep.

Yeah it shows how clearly

Yeah it shows how clearly these christian sheeple are actually opposed to liberty.

As far as you are telling,

As far as you are telling, you are wrong.

Satan is the Author of Confusion.

The church of Satan was acknowledged as a religion by the military in 1966. ORIGINS IN THE U.S.: The Church of Satan was formed on Walpurgisnacht, April 30, 1966, in San Francisco California, when Anton LaVey proclaimed the beginning of the Satanic Era. Initial growth came from coverage in the mass media. Articles included coverage of LaVey holding a funeral for a member of the U.S. Navy killed in San Francisco. My father was a member in 1972 and a LTC in the Army. It certainly does not believe in separation of church and state. It believe in separation of God from this world government run by Satan.
Anton LaVey is famous for having started the Church of Satan. He chose Walpurgisnacht, April 30, 1966 to start the Church of Satan in San Francisco. Previously he had began holding midnight magic seminars in 1960. He and his occult friends held Magic Circle meetings until he founded the Church. His Church of Satan is officially recognized by the U.S. government and the military.http://www.jesus-is-savior.com/False%20Religions/Wicca%20&%20Witchcraft/anton_lavey.htm

I thought christian gargoyles were placed on cathedrals

not statehouses...

Yeah, sure, everyone knows

the United States was founded by Satanists, in large part in order to promote Satanism, and that Satan is mentioned in all 50 state constitutions.

I think the proposal is a disgrace. To begin with, there is no requirement of "separation of church and state" in the Constitution. It says only, "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof..." It's a stretch to equate acknowledgements of God even throughout our society with "an establishment of religion" such as existed in England and motivated the Pilgrims to leave - where people were forced to attend services in the established Church of England or be fined, where they were not allowed to worship otherwise (and were reported to a magistrate if caught), and where the leader of the country was the head of the church.

Obviously the founders did not intend for the establishment clause to banish religion from society, in general, or even from government. God is acknowledged in all the state constitutions including Pennsylvania's, of which Benjamin Franklin was among the drafters. In that original 1776 constitution, aside from acknowledgement of God in the preamble, check out this section:

"SECT. 10. A quorum of the house of representatives shall consist of two-thirds of the whole number of members elected; and having met and chosen their speaker, shall each of them before they proceed to business take and subscribe, as well the oath or affirmation of fidelity and allegiance hereinafter directed, as the following oath or affirmation, viz:

I do swear (or affirm) that as a member of this assembly, I will not propose or assent to any bill, vote, or resolution, which stall appear to free injurious to the people; nor do or consent to any act or thing whatever, that shall have a tendency to lessen or abridge their rights and privileges, as declared in the constitution of this state; but will in all things conduct myself as a faithful honest representative and guardian of the people, according to the best of only judgment and abilities.

And each member, before he takes his seat, shall make and subscribe the following declaration, viz:

I do believe in one God, the creator and governor of the universe, the rewarder of the good and the punisher of the wicked. And I do acknowledge the Scriptures of the Old and New Testament to be given by Divine inspiration.

And no further or other religious test shall ever hereafter be required of any civil officer or magistrate in this State."

---------------

Here's the preamble to the Oklahoma Constitution:

"Invoking the guidance of Almighty God, in order to secure and perpetuate the blessing of liberty; to secure just and rightful government; to promote our mutual welfare and happiness, we, the people of the State of Oklahoma, do ordain and establish this Constitution."

It would seem to me that a statue such as that proposed would be antithetical to the spirit of Oklahoma's constitution.

The statue isn't going up, and that's not even the goal but to get anything else of religious significance to be removed - an attempt to force a case of "all or nothing." I see no basis in either the U.S. Constitution or Oklahoma's to remove a statue with the Ten Commandments. And what next? Renovate the U.S. Supreme Court and the Capitol because of all the religious and spiritually-oriented references, symbols, quotes, paintings, and statues there?

I think the issue of what to have at their state capitol should be left up to a vote of the people in Oklahoma, especially after everyone understands how making the state a less desirable place to live and to do business (currently or as a relocation destination) will affect property values, jobs, and tax revenues.

When we try to pick out anything by itself, we find it hitched to everything else in the Universe.
~ John Muir

Was this downvoted for my

personal opinion that it's a disgrace or for pointing out certain facts?

When we try to pick out anything by itself, we find it hitched to everything else in the Universe.
~ John Muir

yes and no.

You are down voted because people do not want to be judged by God. They want to do their own thing and when they die get rewarded instead of being tossed into a lake of fire.
That is why Christians are so despised by many non Christians.
Our mere existence reminds them that in the end they will pay their debt why we have ours already payed.

Now they can down vote me too :D

"You only live free if your willing to die free."

wow...

"Our mere existence reminds them that in the end they will pay their debt why we have ours already payed."

That statement is just oozing and dripping with arrogance and conceit..."meek" to be sure.

Downvote you?

Not me brother/sister! :-)

You keep on sharing that precious Truth!

" In Thee O Lord do I put my trust " ~ Psalm 31:1~

I suspect a monument of the

I suspect a monument of the Ten Commandments might be a better idea since it allegedly is the foundation of common law. I think Oklahomans would rather have their government strive for virtue instead of perversion as it'll affect them personally. ;)

If I were governor, I'd tell the meddlers from outside and inside Oklahoma to stick it, arm the population, and start secessionist proceedings if provoked or the Ten Commandments were attacked from twits carrying Lucifer's water. :)

I allege rainbow bright was

I allege rainbow bright was the creator common law.. and thus we should all dress like her.

And....your first mistake

"I suspect a monument of the Ten Commandments might be a better idea since it allegedly is the foundation of common law." --- You can suspect and allege all you like, but no, they are not the foundation of common law. Several violate the principles of the Constitution, a couple more go against libertarian philosophy, and one is in opposition to capitalism. And, there are many versions. The original "do not kill" actually instructed Israelites not to kill another Israelite - all others are fair game. There are other commandments (although just called "laws") telling them to kill infidels that don't believe in Yawheh. The original tablets had 17 commandments, and then after Moses' temper tantrum an additional 12 were added.

And then you condone an armed Christian army killing other people simply for having different beliefs. Nice.... That's the way it always happens.

"In the beginning of a change the patriot is a scarce man, and brave, and hated and scorned. When his cause succeeds, the timid join him, for then it costs nothing to be a patriot."--Mark Twain

Opposition to capitalism?

Was that "Thou shalt not steal?"

Nope

Coveting a neighbors goods is one of the driving forces of commerce.

"In the beginning of a change the patriot is a scarce man, and brave, and hated and scorned. When his cause succeeds, the timid join him, for then it costs nothing to be a patriot."--Mark Twain

good freaking point!

The root of capitalism is trade, which is exactly what happens when two parties get together and say "I like your stuff better than mine".

The desire of another man's property is not just one of the driving forces of commerce, it's THE driving force.

It's funny that it's forbidden by the 10 commandments, considering how much free commerce has done to promote peace, harmony, and cooperation among people (and of course prosperity)... certainly more than any religion, in my opinion.

Oh good gosh.

Way to stretch the meaning of "covet."

Going, "Hey dude, I like your X, is it for sale?" and variations thereof are not coveting. Covetousness is comparable to envy, an unhealthy extreme.

Coveting something basically means people going to insane lengths to get whatever they want; essentially idolatry of a desired item.

Here's what Webster says:

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/covet

I don't think I'm stretching the definition much. At the very least, the line between "covet" and "desire" and "want" is extremely gray and blurry.

Moreover, even taking your definition...I don't see the harm in coveting. If it causes harmful action against people, then that harmful action is wrong. "Potentially harmful" can describe a whole host of activities and attitudes, until it leads to "harmful", I have no problem with it.

That's my understanding too.

Coveting is desiring something so much that we are willing to break one of the other commandments to get it. Stealing, killing, etc. God never forbade buying and selling.

The commandment against stealing is an acknowledgement and protection of private property: the basis of all trade.