pesco at January 7th, 2014 12:48 — #1
brainspore at January 7th, 2014 12:51 — #2
This is an outrage! Seven feet tall is much too small. They should go "Lincoln Memorial" scale on this.
danegeld at January 7th, 2014 13:08 — #3
In a similar vein, I'm working on plans to erect a statue of Richard Dawkins in Rio de Janeiro to glare back at Christ the Redeemer. Kickstarter to follow...
myopichumanist at January 7th, 2014 13:17 — #4
Please! It's a religion, not a political statement. It only needs to be the same exact size as the other religious shrine on the front lawn.
ben_ehlers at January 7th, 2014 13:24 — #5
I like how both groups are essentially celebrating the same religion.
chellberty at January 7th, 2014 13:25 — #6
You better not be joking about this. Make this happen.
allengarvin at January 7th, 2014 13:26 — #7
Can you really get a 7 foot statue with features like upraised hands and long horns (not to mention the two kids) for only $20k? I figured evil was a lot more costly.
bart at January 7th, 2014 13:38 — #8
The comments section under that article is pure gold. Person after person claiming a war on christianity while saying that other item should not go up. They just don't understand how America works, if one group gets to post their symbol then all groups get to post a symbol.
Personally, I don't want to see any of it, but fair is fair.
boundegar at January 7th, 2014 13:42 — #9
They understand exactly how America works. It's the Constitution they don't understand.
innerpartisan at January 7th, 2014 13:46 — #10
Man. This story just keeps on giving
dioptase1 at January 7th, 2014 14:06 — #11
"Amazing Kreskin, do you have any predictions for us?"
"Yes. Vandalism. In Oklahoma. Arms and heads snapped off"
"Wow folks, how does he do it?"
embryoconcepts at January 7th, 2014 14:06 — #12
Quite tasteful, really. I like the drapery.
On a side note, whenever I try posting BB articles on social media, the accompanying pictures have nothing to do with the article - and no seeming consistency between what does show.
scrub at January 7th, 2014 14:10 — #13
You need to select the proper image. Usually there are arrows pointing left and right below the image you're about to post, scroll until you get the one you want.
perry_ellis at January 7th, 2014 14:12 — #14
My understanding is that Baphomet is a crusader-era satire of Mohammed.
I don't see this ending well.
Are there not more generic symbols of satanism, like say a 5 or 6 pointed star?
euansmith at January 7th, 2014 14:16 — #15
I have the same issue and the selection normally has nothing to do with the story. It appears that the code doesn't pick up the main image for some reason.
euansmith at January 7th, 2014 14:17 — #16
5 points... 6 points is the other guys... you know... the ones who killed the Messiah...
chuckv at January 7th, 2014 14:17 — #17
I've had the same problem as embryoconcepts and sometimes even when I use the arrows an appropriate image won't turn up.
embryoconcepts at January 7th, 2014 14:27 — #18
Correct, and there isn't consistency with the image tags that make sense of the images that are available to select. It's an HTML issue, but I brought it up in the forum to see if others had thoughts on a fix.
zakbos at January 7th, 2014 15:28 — #19
The civic space should be equally accessible to all members of the community, since it is owned collectively by that community.
Philosophy and ethics are determinedly private matters, and cannot be readily translated into public language that we can all partake in. It isn't about removing contentious symbols that might offend some people; it is about making sure our government does its work in a language we can all speak. (See John Rawls for more about the distinction between private and public language.)
Here's an interesting thought: Why don't we think of the concrete absence in the public space of symbols that are religious or similarly "private" in nature, as a monument in itself? A monument that says something in its silence about our solemn shared commitment to a form of government in which persons of all and any creed can all participate equally.
(That said... if any viewpoint is given space to advertise, then all of them should. Let the reductio ad adsurdum show policy-makers that there is a practical reason for SOCAS.)
glitch at January 7th, 2014 15:31 — #20
I think the Satanists are weakening their position by using a full carved figure rather than mere engravings. The Ten Commandments are certainly a religious symbol, but they're not on the same league as a full blown depiction of a religious figure itself, be it Baphomet or Yahweh or Kālī or The Buddha or whomever else.
More direct comparisons to the Ten Commandments monument in Oklahoma City would be engravings of things such as Hindu or Buddhist sūtras. In the case of Satanism, I'm not sure what would be appropriate, as I'm not at all versed in the structure of their beliefs and texts and whatnot, but being that The Satanic Temple (not to be confused with The Church of Satan, First Satanic Church, Temple of Set, Order of Nine Angles, or any of the other major branches) is primarily a literary tradition, perhaps excerpts from Paradise Lost would be apropriate?
next page →