Re: Satanic Statue at Iowa Capitol Beheaded - Is Anti-Satanism = AntiSemitism ?

[David Dalton]

On Dec 16, 2023, 56g.1173 wrote
(in article<-AqdnVKXh_SmvuD4...@earthlink.com>):

> https://www.dailywire.com/news/man-charged-for-beheading-satanic-display-in-io
> wa-state-capitol
>
> The man who destroyed a Satanic holiday display in the
> Iowa State Capitol on Thursday has been arrested and
> charged, police said.
>
> Michael Cassidy, 35, was arrested after allegedly beheading
> a Baphomet statue put up last week by the Satanic Temple
> of Iowa, the Iowa State Police confirmed to Fox News.
>
> He has been charged with 4th-degree criminal mischief.
>
> Cassidy, a former Navy pilot who now works as a flight
> instructor and was previously a Mississippi congressional
> candidate, explained to The Republic Sentinel why he
> decided to destroy the Satanic display.
>
> “I saw this blasphemous statue and was outraged,” Cassidy
> told the outlet. “My conscience is held captive to the word
> of God, not to bureaucratic decree. And so I acted.”
>
> . . .
>
> Hmmmmmmm .... it was common for Xians to think of Jews
> as "blasphemers". This could justify any degree of
> revenge/discrimination/violence.
>
> Anti-"Satanism" is hostility towards a religion, just
> as antisemitism.
>
> Anyone who wants to argue that "Satanism" isn't a religion
> should first check history - and how often it was TREATED
> as a religion by Church/State. Secondly, look at how MANY
> sects/sub-sects/denominations/etc of Christianity ... all
> of which are convinced THEY have it right. While "Satanists"
> are of a relatively scattered theology, so are Christians,
> so that's no argument that 'Satanism' is not a religion.
>
> So ... I'd say that this guy, who admits that he destroyed
> the image for religions reasons/prejudices, is really no
> different from the common WokieNAZI antisemite fanatics.
> He should be handled as such. Fortunately his righteous
> wrath was directed at an inanimate object ... THIS time
> anyhow.
>
> The governor commented that 'speech' considered in error
> is properly countered by 'better' speech rather than by
> physical assaults. This is an enlightened, libertarian,
> viewpoint. Expect those who crave BLOOD to be all upset.
>
> Not all religions HAVE a "devil". The old Greek religion
> did not have one - 'Hades' ruled the underworld, but he
> was not a 'devil'. The Christians borrowed the standard
> image of 'satyrs/fauns' - horned half-men - as their
> vision of the 'Devil', but frankly those beings were
> not malicious/hateful/evil, just hearty partiers.

I don’t believe there is a fallen angel Satan, but that there
have been past avatar types Set and Lucifer, who some
Satanists may follow. Also I define EVIL2 as the
lowest in goodness measure as defined by Goddess
(who I define as the ruler of the region all/everything)
someone, and that may meet some people’s definition
of Satan, but is almost definitely not local, luckily.

--
David Dalton dal...@nfld.com https://www.nfld.com/~dalton (home page)
https://www.nfld.com/~dalton/dtales.html Salmon on the Thorns (mystic page)
"And if I shed a tear I won’t cage it; I won't fear love;
And if I feel a rage I won’t deny it; I won't fear love" (Sarah McLachlan)