Statue paying homage to Satan to be unveiled in Detroit

[BULLDOG]

Let me just say that I am a Christian and I have no knowledge of what biblical symbols are in the government buildings in my city. It wouldn't change my resolve if any that are there are removed/ Goodbye to 100%.

Huh... then you're probably not building statues which represent the pure embodiment of Evil...

So, the problem is therefore NOT the people who recognize God and God's authority as the OBJECTIVE BASIS of Juris Prudence. Thus YOU and the people who RECOGNIZE GOD are clearly NOT the problem then... .

YET THE PROBLEM EXISTS... .

Therefore we can readily see that the purpose of the symbolism is to set to inform: THE PROBLEM that God and God's authority is the basis of the authority of GOVERNMENT. Thus that God's principles will be the principles imparted by Government.

THAT way, the government will adhere to sound economic stewardship, the ethics common to God's principles and the standards that stem precisely from those principles.

OTHERWISE you WILL END UP WITH GODLESSNESS in government and as reality has now fully demonstrated: THAT'S BAD!

I am just saying that we don't need the Ten Commandments in the DMV, that's all. God fearing people don't rely on symbols in the government buildings.

Yes... well sure. Because we don't really have a problem with people behaving poorly and abusing each other on the highways.

Suffice it to say that there's no place, where reminding people of the 10 commandments is inappropriate.

And that is because, the 10 Commandments enjoy 100% efficacy.

Meaning that where the 10 Commandments are adhered to, life is better... 100% of the time.

I personally do not mind these symbols in government buildings, but since we have freedon of religion, is it right for government to choose Christianity for the buildings? I know what comes next, atheism and Muslims. They will want representation in the buildings, too. Then personally, I am offended. To thwart that from happening, let's don't have any religious symbols in the government buildings and save it for our churches, mosques and homes.

If the bible thumpers had not become so overbearing and obnoxious over the last several years, none of this would be happening.

 

[Papageorgio]

So you believe that we should let people praise satan?

In this country the most despicable are given their right to pursue what they want. The Constitution protects free practice of religion and speech. We are the only country with real free speech, but we are losing that.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

You notice that no sections of your statement was edited or censored...

Never said they were did I.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

It is freedom of expression which is what the Constitution is about.

It's actually a standard which represents the principles declared in the Charter of American Principles... and has virtually nothing to do with the Charter of Laws, which were written to sustain the recognition of respect for and adherence to those principles.

You'll recall those self-evident truths were observed as a function of Nature's God... . Which is the antithesis of that which OPPOSES NATURE'S GOD... .

 

[Jackson]

There ought to be no god in government. We've been too accommodating to religions already. Get god off of our currency, out of our courtrooms and out of our national pledge.

Thanks.

You wouldn't be happy with just that. Your zealousness would include getting rid of the pledge and US flags around the country. Liberals just do not put a priority on pride and patriotism.

Again.....The flag is not a religious symbol.

I know, lol. Did you ever hear if the school in Arizona or New Mexico that officials would not allow the American flag to be brought to school grounds and certainly not worn! But there were Mexican flags everywhere and worn on clothing for their holiday. Liberals go too far.

 

[sealybobo]

You know the State could easily do away with this by declaring that no religious themed monuments will be put on public property.

OR... We, the People... could just draw a line and tell the Satanist to shut up or pack light for a trip to Gitmo, to serve as goats for our Muslim guests.

why not? That what freedom is all about to a teaper...

That literally IS what Freedom is all about.

Ya see demon, that is what is known is recognizing the distinction between good, sustainable behavior and that which is not; which is to DISCRIMINATE between that which serves the principles that define US and that which injures the adherence to those principles.

Which is very important, because those principles are what SUSTAIN: F R E E D O M . . .

As an atheist who doesn't believe in God or Satan I think it is hilarious they are doing this. They're joking right? Or trying to make a point? I think it shows why we separate church and state. Religion is a personal and irrational belief. It's a local and cultural phenomenon. If you and the other people in your town can continue convincing your kids that your gods are real then who are you to tell me what to do in my town? If we want a statue of Zeus would that offend you? Wouldn't it be blasphemy in your little world?

 

[BULLDOG]

You know the State could easily do away with this by declaring that no religious themed monuments will be put on public property.

OR... We, the People... could just draw a line and tell the Satanist to shut up or pack light for a trip to Gitmo, to serve as goats for our Muslim guests.

You would have to rewrite the constitution to do that. Why do you hate the constitution?

No... ya wouldn't. Satanism is not a religion. There is no potential for a RIGHT to perpetuate that which injures people; thus there is no means to perpetuate EVIL!

All that would be required to do that, is to recognize the Self Evident truths declared in the Charter of American Principles.

Satanism is a religion. Not mine, but it is a religion, and they are entitled to all the rights of any other religion..

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

As an atheist who doesn't believe in God or Satan...

you're prone to being animated by evil.

Yes... that goes without saying, due to your having rejected the God.

 

[BULLDOG]

You know the State could easily do away with this by declaring that no religious themed monuments will be put on public property.

But that means 'no religious monuments' not just the ones Christians don't approve of.

True. And I wouldn't be against that. But don't do the same with the American flag.

The flag is not a religious symbol.

It is freedom of expression which is what the Constitution is about.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

This thread is about religion.

 

[sealybobo]

As an atheist who doesn't believe in God or Satan...

you're prone to being animated by evil.

Yes... that goes without saying, due to your having rejected the God.

How is someone animated by evil? What does that mean?

 

[BULLDOG]

There ought to be no god in government. We've been too accommodating to religions already. Get god off of our currency, out of our courtrooms and out of our national pledge.

Thanks.

You wouldn't be happy with just that. Your zealousness would include getting rid of the pledge and US flags around the country. Liberals just do not put a priority on pride and patriotism.

Again.....The flag is not a religious symbol.

I know, lol. Did you ever hear if the school in Arizona or New Mexico that officials would not allow the American flag to be brought to school grounds and certainly not worn! But there were Mexican flags everywhere and worn on clothing for their holiday. Liberals go too far.

Nope....Didn't hear about that. Link?

 

[BULLDOG]

As an atheist who doesn't believe in God or Satan...

you're prone to being animated by evil.

Yes... that goes without saying, due to your having rejected the God.

God you're stupid/

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

God you're stupid/

Oh! A lovely concession.

Your concession is duly noted and summarily accepted.

 

[Jackson]

There ought to be no god in government. We've been too accommodating to religions already. Get god off of our currency, out of our courtrooms and out of our national pledge.

Thanks.

You wouldn't be happy with just that. Your zealousness would include getting rid of the pledge and US flags around the country. Liberals just do not put a priority on pride and patriotism.

Again.....The flag is not a religious symbol.

I know, lol. Did you ever hear if the school in Arizona or New Mexico that officials would not allow the American flag to be brought to school grounds and certainly not worn! But there were Mexican flags everywhere and worn on clothing for their holiday. Liberals go too far.

Nope....Didn't hear about that. Link?

Ninth Circuit Upholds Ban on American Flag Shirts in a California High School


On May 5, 2010, school officials from Live Oak High School in the Morgan Hill Unified School District, California, prevented five students from wearing American flag t-shirts because the officials did not want to offend “Mexican” students on “their day.” That day, some students at the school were celebrating the Mexican holiday known as Cinco de Mayo. School officials approved the Cinco de Mayo celebration, which was co-sponsored by M.E.Ch.A, a school-sanctioned student group. While school officials claimed that they were concerned about racial tension and potential threats of violence in light of an altercation that occurred between Mexican and American students on campus during a 2009 Cinco de Mayo celebration, the officials nonetheless approved the 2010 Mexican celebration, demonstrating that their fear of violence was nothing short of a pretext.

Moreover, despite banning the American flag, school officials permitted the Mexican students participating in the Cinco de Mayo celebration to wear clothing that had the colors of the Mexican flag. The Ninth Circuit held that this was permissible because school officials were not concerned about any of the American students engaging in violence against the Mexican-flag wearing students.

Ninth Circuit Upholds Ban on American Flag Shirts in a California High School American Freedom Law Center


Today’s Dariano v. Morgan Hill Unified School Dist. (9th Cir. Feb. 27, 2014)upholds a California high school’s decision to forbid students from wearing American flag T-shirts on Cinco de Mayo. (See here and here for more on this case.)

The court points out that the rights of students in public high schools are limited — under the Supreme Court’s decision in Tinker v. Des Moines Indep. Comm. School Dist. (1969), student speech could be restricted if “school authorities [can reasonably] forecast substantial disruption of or material interference with school activities” stemming from the speech. And on the facts of this case, the court concludes, there was reason to think that the wearing of the T-shirts would lead to disruption. There had been threats of racial violence aimed at students who wore such shirts the year before:

Some students hung a makeshift American flag on one of the trees on campus, and as they did, the group of Caucasian students began clapping and chanting “USA.” A group of Mexican students had been walking around with the Mexican flag, and in response to the white students’ flag-raising, one Mexican student shouted “f*** them white boys, f*** them white boys.” When Assistant Principal Miguel Rodriguez told the student to stop using profane language, the student said, “But Rodriguez, they are racist. They are being racist. F*** them white boys. Let’s f*** them up.” Rodriguez removed the student from the area….

Not safe to display American flag in American high school - The Washington Post

So, who where the violent students? Which ones wanted to have a fight?

 

[sealybobo]

As an atheist who doesn't believe in God or Satan...

you're prone to being animated by evil.

Yes... that goes without saying, due to your having rejected the God.

God you're stupid/

I try and explain it to them like this. I don't reject God. If I told you I had a woman here for you right now and she had 10 million dollars to give you would you drop everything and fly out here to meet her? If not why are you rejecting her? If you realize you don't believe she is here even though I'm telling you she is then you can see now why we don't believe just because you tell us it's true. We think you're an idiot. Lol

 

[Jarlaxle]

Let me just say that I am a Christian and I have no knowledge of what biblical symbols are in the government buildings in my city. It wouldn't change my resolve if any that are there are removed/ Goodbye to 100%.

Huh... then you're probably not building statues which represent the pure embodiment of Evil...

So, the problem is therefore NOT the people who recognize God and God's authority as the OBJECTIVE BASIS of Juris Prudence. Thus YOU and the people who RECOGNIZE GOD are clearly NOT the problem then... .

YET THE PROBLEM EXISTS... .

Therefore we can readily see that the purpose of the symbolism is to set to inform: THE PROBLEM that God and God's authority is the basis of the authority of GOVERNMENT. Thus that God's principles will be the principles imparted by Government.

THAT way, the government will adhere to sound economic stewardship, the ethics common to God's principles and the standards that stem precisely from those principles.

OTHERWISE you WILL END UP WITH GODLESSNESS in government and as reality has now fully demonstrated: THAT'S BAD!

I am just saying that we don't need the Ten Commandments in the DMV, that's all. God fearing people don't rely on symbols in the government buildings.

Yes... well sure. Because we don't really have a problem with people behaving poorly and abusing each other on the highways.

Suffice it to say that there's no place, where reminding people of the 10 commandments is inappropriate.

Bullshit.

And that is because, the 10 Commandments enjoy 100% efficacy.

Says you, citing you.

Meaning that where the 10 Commandments are adhered to, life is better... 100% of the time.

Says you, citing you.

Note that exactly THREE of the ten are actually crimes. The other seven are entirely irrelevant.

Well, how nice of you to stop in and concede on so many distinct levels, and to do so upon such profound evil... .

Your concession are duly noted and summarily accepted.

As usual...when defeated, you post your tell. You are as predictable-and as useful-as a broken clock.

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

As an atheist who doesn't believe in God or Satan...

you're prone to being animated by evil.

Yes... that goes without saying, due to your having rejected the God.

How is someone animated by evil? What does that mean?

Go find your big book of words and look up the meaning of the words individually... Then combine those respective meanings to discern the meaning of the sentence.

You will be amazed once you break the code!

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

Huh... then you're probably not building statues which represent the pure embodiment of Evil...

So, the problem is therefore NOT the people who recognize God and God's authority as the OBJECTIVE BASIS of Juris Prudence. Thus YOU and the people who RECOGNIZE GOD are clearly NOT the problem then... .

YET THE PROBLEM EXISTS... .

Therefore we can readily see that the purpose of the symbolism is to set to inform: THE PROBLEM that God and God's authority is the basis of the authority of GOVERNMENT. Thus that God's principles will be the principles imparted by Government.

THAT way, the government will adhere to sound economic stewardship, the ethics common to God's principles and the standards that stem precisely from those principles.

OTHERWISE you WILL END UP WITH GODLESSNESS in government and as reality has now fully demonstrated: THAT'S BAD!

I am just saying that we don't need the Ten Commandments in the DMV, that's all. God fearing people don't rely on symbols in the government buildings.

Yes... well sure. Because we don't really have a problem with people behaving poorly and abusing each other on the highways.

Suffice it to say that there's no place, where reminding people of the 10 commandments is inappropriate.

Bullshit.

And that is because, the 10 Commandments enjoy 100% efficacy.

Says you, citing you.

Meaning that where the 10 Commandments are adhered to, life is better... 100% of the time.

Says you, citing you.

Note that exactly THREE of the ten are actually crimes. The other seven are entirely irrelevant.

Well, how nice of you to stop in and concede on so many distinct levels, and to do so upon such profound evil... .

Your concession are duly noted and summarily accepted.

As usual...when defeated, you post your tell. You are as predictable-and as useful-as a broken clock.

Oh my... A Re-concession! How sweet.

Your Re-concessio. Is duly noted and sulu mariou accepted

 

[BULLDOG]

God you're stupid/

Oh! A lovely concession.

Your concession is duly noted and summarily accepted.

You think my telling you that you are stupid is a concession? It's worse than I thought.

 

[BULLDOG]

There ought to be no god in government. We've been too accommodating to religions already. Get god off of our currency, out of our courtrooms and out of our national pledge.

Thanks.

You wouldn't be happy with just that. Your zealousness would include getting rid of the pledge and US flags around the country. Liberals just do not put a priority on pride and patriotism.

Again.....The flag is not a religious symbol.

I know, lol. Did you ever hear if the school in Arizona or New Mexico that officials would not allow the American flag to be brought to school grounds and certainly not worn! But there were Mexican flags everywhere and worn on clothing for their holiday. Liberals go too far.

Nope....Didn't hear about that. Link?

Ninth Circuit Upholds Ban on American Flag Shirts in a California High School


On May 5, 2010, school officials from Live Oak High School in the Morgan Hill Unified School District, California, prevented five students from wearing American flag t-shirts because the officials did not want to offend “Mexican” students on “their day.” That day, some students at the school were celebrating the Mexican holiday known as Cinco de Mayo. School officials approved the Cinco de Mayo celebration, which was co-sponsored by M.E.Ch.A, a school-sanctioned student group. While school officials claimed that they were concerned about racial tension and potential threats of violence in light of an altercation that occurred between Mexican and American students on campus during a 2009 Cinco de Mayo celebration, the officials nonetheless approved the 2010 Mexican celebration, demonstrating that their fear of violence was nothing short of a pretext.

Moreover, despite banning the American flag, school officials permitted the Mexican students participating in the Cinco de Mayo celebration to wear clothing that had the colors of the Mexican flag. The Ninth Circuit held that this was permissible because school officials were not concerned about any of the American students engaging in violence against the Mexican-flag wearing students.

Ninth Circuit Upholds Ban on American Flag Shirts in a California High School American Freedom Law Center


Today’s Dariano v. Morgan Hill Unified School Dist. (9th Cir. Feb. 27, 2014)upholds a California high school’s decision to forbid students from wearing American flag T-shirts on Cinco de Mayo. (See here and here for more on this case.)

The court points out that the rights of students in public high schools are limited — under the Supreme Court’s decision in Tinker v. Des Moines Indep. Comm. School Dist. (1969), student speech could be restricted if “school authorities [can reasonably] forecast substantial disruption of or material interference with school activities” stemming from the speech. And on the facts of this case, the court concludes, there was reason to think that the wearing of the T-shirts would lead to disruption. There had been threats of racial violence aimed at students who wore such shirts the year before:

Some students hung a makeshift American flag on one of the trees on campus, and as they did, the group of Caucasian students began clapping and chanting “USA.” A group of Mexican students had been walking around with the Mexican flag, and in response to the white students’ flag-raising, one Mexican student shouted “f*** them white boys, f*** them white boys.” When Assistant Principal Miguel Rodriguez told the student to stop using profane language, the student said, “But Rodriguez, they are racist. They are being racist. F*** them white boys. Let’s f*** them up.” Rodriguez removed the student from the area….

Not safe to display American flag in American high school - The Washington Post

So, who where the violent students? Which ones wanted to have a fight?

The judge ruled for the school, the appeals court threw the student's case out, and the Supreme Court refused to hear it. Sounds like this particular case was perfectly fine according to law. I realize it sounds pretty bad until you get the facts, but everything isn't black or white. Get over it.

 

[Jackson]

You wouldn't be happy with just that. Your zealousness would include getting rid of the pledge and US flags around the country. Liberals just do not put a priority on pride and patriotism.

Again.....The flag is not a religious symbol.

I know, lol. Did you ever hear if the school in Arizona or New Mexico that officials would not allow the American flag to be brought to school grounds and certainly not worn! But there were Mexican flags everywhere and worn on clothing for their holiday. Liberals go too far.

Nope....Didn't hear about that. Link?

Ninth Circuit Upholds Ban on American Flag Shirts in a California High School


On May 5, 2010, school officials from Live Oak High School in the Morgan Hill Unified School District, California, prevented five students from wearing American flag t-shirts because the officials did not want to offend “Mexican” students on “their day.” That day, some students at the school were celebrating the Mexican holiday known as Cinco de Mayo. School officials approved the Cinco de Mayo celebration, which was co-sponsored by M.E.Ch.A, a school-sanctioned student group. While school officials claimed that they were concerned about racial tension and potential threats of violence in light of an altercation that occurred between Mexican and American students on campus during a 2009 Cinco de Mayo celebration, the officials nonetheless approved the 2010 Mexican celebration, demonstrating that their fear of violence was nothing short of a pretext.

Moreover, despite banning the American flag, school officials permitted the Mexican students participating in the Cinco de Mayo celebration to wear clothing that had the colors of the Mexican flag. The Ninth Circuit held that this was permissible because school officials were not concerned about any of the American students engaging in violence against the Mexican-flag wearing students.

Ninth Circuit Upholds Ban on American Flag Shirts in a California High School American Freedom Law Center


Today’s Dariano v. Morgan Hill Unified School Dist. (9th Cir. Feb. 27, 2014)upholds a California high school’s decision to forbid students from wearing American flag T-shirts on Cinco de Mayo. (See here and here for more on this case.)

The court points out that the rights of students in public high schools are limited — under the Supreme Court’s decision in Tinker v. Des Moines Indep. Comm. School Dist. (1969), student speech could be restricted if “school authorities [can reasonably] forecast substantial disruption of or material interference with school activities” stemming from the speech. And on the facts of this case, the court concludes, there was reason to think that the wearing of the T-shirts would lead to disruption. There had been threats of racial violence aimed at students who wore such shirts the year before:

Some students hung a makeshift American flag on one of the trees on campus, and as they did, the group of Caucasian students began clapping and chanting “USA.” A group of Mexican students had been walking around with the Mexican flag, and in response to the white students’ flag-raising, one Mexican student shouted “f*** them white boys, f*** them white boys.” When Assistant Principal Miguel Rodriguez told the student to stop using profane language, the student said, “But Rodriguez, they are racist. They are being racist. F*** them white boys. Let’s f*** them up.” Rodriguez removed the student from the area….

Not safe to display American flag in American high school - The Washington Post

So, who where the violent students? Which ones wanted to have a fight?

The judge ruled for the school, the appeals court threw the student's case out, and the Supreme Court refused to hear it. Sounds like this particular case was perfectly fine according to law. I realize it sounds pretty bad until you get the facts, but everything isn't black or white. Get over it.

Lol, I am over it. But it is wrong. Who were the instigators of violence? Hispanics! Lord, don't hurt their illegal feelings! No one should have been able to wear the flag or its colors instead of just one side.

"A group of Mexican students had been walking around with the Mexican flag, and in response to the white students’ flag-raising, one Mexican student shouted “f*** them white boys, f*** them white boys.” When Assistant Principal Miguel Rodriguez told the student to stop using profane language, the student said, “But Rodriguez, they are racist. They are being racist. F*** them white boys. Let’s f*** them up.” Rodriguez removed the student from the area…."