The hypocrisy is the state allowing christian displays on government property, but not displays from other religions.
So use a display from a “religion” they hate will either make them remove the christian imagery and preserve the separation of church and state, or make the government allow symbols form all religions and beliefs, and thus being inclusive to the population.
But… the state allowed it, didn’t it? They were also allowing any other religion to participate. I’m still not seeing it.
Plus, I’m also not seeing how this is pushing the division between state and religion. They’ll obviously include the Satanists before they stop having affairs with Christianity. So this is just annoying Christians, there’s no grand scheme.
You could refute this by showing me evidence of an instance in which the Satanisc church succeeded in dividing church and state. The instance from the post isn’t one of them.
You could look it up on wikipedia if you want. It’s pretty easy to stop saying wrong things on the internet, if you’re interested enough to fact check your statements. Personally I really like knowing facts instead of just making guesses.
the principle of church/state separation didn’t apply to this display because the state was inherently Christian. After all, he claimed, the Iowa Constitution refers to a “Supreme Being.”
But they weren’t being inclusive this time.
And it was used successfully in Oklahoma, and is ongoing in Arkansas:
The hypocrisy is the state allowing christian displays on government property, but not displays from other religions.
So use a display from a “religion” they hate will either make them remove the christian imagery and preserve the separation of church and state, or make the government allow symbols form all religions and beliefs, and thus being inclusive to the population.
But… the state allowed it, didn’t it? They were also allowing any other religion to participate. I’m still not seeing it.
Plus, I’m also not seeing how this is pushing the division between state and religion. They’ll obviously include the Satanists before they stop having affairs with Christianity. So this is just annoying Christians, there’s no grand scheme.
You could refute this by showing me evidence of an instance in which the Satanisc church succeeded in dividing church and state. The instance from the post isn’t one of them.
You could look it up on wikipedia if you want. It’s pretty easy to stop saying wrong things on the internet, if you’re interested enough to fact check your statements. Personally I really like knowing facts instead of just making guesses.
Didn’t find any accomplishment in their wiki page. Did you read it?
Do you have evidence of their accomplishments in regards to the separation of state and church?
If I asked for the evidence is because I couldn’t find it, but you just went straight to assuming I didn’t look for it, for some reason.
You read the campaigns and initiatives section of the satanic temple page on Wikipedia and didn’t find any accomplishments?
I was talking about the Church of Satan, I think we got mixed up.
The satanic temple is the name of the organization this post is about. It says it in the post title, and in the article.
Yeha, I got confused by another comment talking about the church of satan, you’re right.
But they weren’t being inclusive this time.
And it was used successfully in Oklahoma, and is ongoing in Arkansas:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Statue_of_Baphomet