How can laws, justice or morality exist then?

Shhhhh, adults are talking.

It’s not just the body count - Yahweh literally tortures innocent people - the Book of Job is the most notable (though there’s many examples of this).

For those that don’t know it or who want a recap:

Satan said to Yahweh that his followers just loved him because they were rewarded for it, and if they weren’t, they’d turn on him.

So Yahweh…proves it? He destroys Job’s livelihood, kills his family, gives him all kinds of diseases and pains, and Job spends the rest of his life homeless and alone, completely ruined, but Job still praises Yahweh. So, hooray, Yahweh wins the bet.

The thing you really have to remember about this story is that–as it was written–it isn’t real. Maybe there are some factual elements to it, but for the most part, we have this story, not because it’s factual, but because generations and generations of people believed it was a good story to help us understand the nature of God and our relationship to Him.

The cruelty Yahweh shows to Job is not an exception - it’s literally exemplary. It’s an example.

Glad to see I’m not the only one thinking this.

Same.

I really appreciate your comment, so wanted to say so outright, but real talk… this is a fantastic story idea.

Yeah but that was by inbred, ignorant shit heads with a slightly darker skin tone than this inbred ignorant shit head.

And there was a golden statue of trump at cpac.

It’s the quiet part that’s (usually) not said aloud.

Just take a look at the statistics of how i.e. criminal law is applied much more aggressively to conservative out-groups (PoC, poor, etc.) than conservative in-groups (white, wealthy, etc.). Then have a look at who is proposing politics intended to fix that imbalance an who’s talking about “taking a hard(er) stance on crime”.

Another, rather specific example: https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-8769269/Former-abortion-clinic-worker-recalls-pro-life-women-justify-procedures.html

Once you look our for the pattern, you’ll see it everywhere.

I can’t imagine any would, that is an abstraction developed by not-conservatives trying to wrap head around conservative actions. To have a conservative in power say so overtly would fuel the people being oppressed into coordinated resistance and disgust fence sitters into voting against conservatism

There is a long history of right wing politicians cloaking themselves in the rhetoric of the left. You can watch it evolve over it’s history as the leftist talking points have… but the one thing that hasn’t changed since the beginning is the way they behave shows a belief in the aggregation of power. Conservatives support a hierarchy with a lot of executive power at the top and a failure state at the bottom. The left looks to broaden and scatter power horizontally…

It’s part of why complaining that social services and welfare programs are artificially disruptive to a “natural” order and determining and expelling non-citizen underclasses and narrowing the rights to fully participate has existed since the beginning of right wing rhetoric but they never sell it outright as “some people deserve to die poor or to serve in a perpetually subordinate position”. It has always required a grift to get the masses to sign on. It’s also why they tend to pair themselves with the church going crowd. Their base has to believe at some level that inequality is not just natural but justified and that helps when you already have people you veiw as fundamentally inferior.

the lord intended for us to go after them young

Oh, I know it could happen. I also recognize that that sort of sentence would almost require the judge to be either A. Sympathetic to TST, B. A fan of ironic punishments, C. A proponent of putting self-righteous assbags in their place, or D. Not a neo-Christian conservative, or some mix of the above. I don’t exactly hold out hope for that being the case in Iowa, but a man can dream.

Are you completely ignorant about TST’s court cases? Read their legal arguments, you can find them at whatever court they’re filed with. They are completely insane, it’s literally a fundraising grift.

Didn’t they recently try to argue that abortion was a sacred ritual? Completely ignoring that SCOTUS has already ruled that criminal laws are not a violation of religious freedom. (A decision they had to make or else you could found the Church of Posada and legally engage in nuclear terrorism). Literally nobody with a brain would have made that argument, and yet they lied to the public about it’s soundness to fundraise.

What is the precedent? “Unlike crimes against any other religion, hate crimes against satanism is not a hate crime”?

And yet here you are attacking their tone instead of the people defacing their shit.

Satanism isn’t just about TrOlLiNg. The fact that you’re more worried about tone than the vandalism shows how other religions are allowed to be the butt of the joke, or in this case the violence. Just like how the guy got a slap on the wrist charge instead of the hate crime you’d 1000% get for tearing up a Jesus statue.

“The vandalism is expected.”

Welcome to the point - IT FUCKING SHOULDN’T BE.

Yes. That’s the point.

The Baphomet display is essentially a protest of those displays being allowed. Christians want their display at the capital, so they allow religious displays. But now a Satanic display is put up next to theirs, which is also allowed by the exact same rules.

So they either have to put up with it, just like non-Christians have to put up with theirs, disallow all of them, or just go mask-off Christian state and start getting specific about which religions are acceptable in their laws.

It’s equality. If the people in charge say, “We’re playing chess”, you can’t just sit in the corner and sulk and say “I want to play checkers!” You’ll be left out of the chess game then.

So, you go play chess, and you see that one side has all of their pieces, but you only have pawns. You can point that out and show how the system is being rigged against you. It’s obvious to outsiders how it’s unfair and needs to change.

The whole point. To avoid violating 1A, they can’t discriminate regarding religion, so if they permit religious displays they have to permit them for any religion that wants one, and grant them equal treatment.

So if some Jews and a Wiccan group wanted to join in and have a Chanukah display and a Yule display those would have to be permitted as well. Given choice I’d rather instead of TST showing up ot piss off Christians that every minority religious group in the state demand a display because that would make it easier to kill the whole program when instead of two displays it becomes an unreasonable number to deal with.

Ah you’re right! I got them confused. Thanks!