Fred Phelps | News | Oklahoma | Religion | Westboro Baptist Church

BigGayDeal.com

Group Responsible For Westboro 'Pink Mass' Raises Funds For Satanic Monument at Oklahoma Capitol

The New York-based Satanic Temple that held a "pink mass" over the grave of Westboro Baptist Church leader Fred Phelp's mother to turn her "gay for all eternity" has started a $20,000 IndieGogo campaign to place a Satanic Monument near the Oklahoma capitol to compliment the Ten Commandments monument currently on the north lawn.

CapsatAccording to the campaign page:

The existing Ten Commandments monument, donated to the Capitol Preservation Commission in 2009 by Mike Ritze, a representative of the Oklahoma State Legislature and ordained Southern Baptist Deacon, has raised the ire of the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) who filed suit in August of 2013, noting that, “the monument stands alone, with no other monuments or memorials in the immediate vicinity.” Also of concern to the ACLU is the “self-evidently exclusive” religious message “that supports and endorses the faiths and creeds of some churches and sects.” We believe that in being allowed to place our monument within the proximity of the Ten Commandments monument, we can appease the ACLU’s concerns.

By accepting our offer, the good people of Oklahoma City will have the opportunity to show that they espouse the basic freedoms spelled out in the Constitution. We imagine that the ACLU will also embrace such a response. Allowing us to donate a monument would show that the Oklahoma City Council does not discriminate, and both the religious and non-religious should be happy with such an outcome. Our mission is to bring people together by finding common sentiments that create solutions that everyone can appreciate and enjoy.

Donors to the Indiegogo campaign will receive official Satanic Temple t-shirts, mugs, bumper stickers, buttons, membership cards and framed certificates of membership with a wax seal.

(image via the Satanic Temple Indiegogo page)

Feed This post's comment feed

Comments

  1. Good for them

    Posted by: MaryM | Dec 10, 2013 10:01:39 AM


  2. Maybe I should start a similar campaign: it would be lovely to see one of those phallic statutes of Freyr in Oklahoma. And I'm sure a Celtic Catholic group would be happy to help finance a monument of the Sheela-na-Gig.

    See, if they allow one religion, they must allow all. If they don't like it, they can remove all religious endorsements from government property.

    Posted by: Gregory In Seattle | Dec 10, 2013 10:04:06 AM


  3. This is getting to be downright silly. First of all, the atheists want their monuments beside religious monuments, and now the Satanists. All of these larger-than-life monuments are over-the-top and not needed in the first place. Less is more.

    Posted by: David From Canada | Dec 10, 2013 10:26:10 AM


  4. @David From Canada,

    Several months ago a local theater added a mural at the top of their staircase depicting Shiva holding the comedy/drama masks, framed with neon lights. Shiva was there only as an artistic motif, not as a shrine to Hinduism, "political correctness," or religion in any form. There is no other religious iconography in the building.

    However, because the theater receives tax funds a minister pitched a fit and essentially used it to blackmail the local government into letting him put a copy of the 10 Commandments at the court house.

    I' not a big fan of this tit-for-tat gamesmanship either but if this is what it takes to have ALL religious symbols removed from government buildings, so be it.

    Posted by: Caliban | Dec 10, 2013 10:48:14 AM


  5. @David From Canada - "All of these larger-than-life monuments are over-the-top and not needed in the first place."

    In the US there is a substantial minority of fanatical Talibangelicals who demand that their religion be given official government approval. Our Supreme Court has interpreted the US Constitution to say that government cannot favor only one religion or group of religions and that, therefore, religious displays that have the appearance of government approval must be open to ALL religions. So if a church is given approval by a city council to set up a manger scene in the town square, the city council must give similar access to the town square to ALL religious groups that wish to set up some kind of display. Likewise, if a religious group sets up a religion monument on the grounds of a court house, city hall or other civic building, then ALL religious groups must be given similar access.

    The point of the Satanist monument is to underscore just how ridiculous it is for government to give any religious access at all. If they allow Christian displays, then they must also allow Satanist displays, and Muslim displays, and Buddhist and Asatruan and Wiccan and Hindu displays as well. Sometimes in this country, you have to slap people across the face with a dead fish multiple times before the lesson can sink in.

    Posted by: Gregory In Seattle | Dec 10, 2013 10:52:21 AM


  6. I'd rather have a culture of mutual respect and equal treatment under the law than put energy into caring about a bunch of religious symbolism. A big part of what will kill the influence of conservative religious fundamentalists is their overstepping zealotry. But even if they're no more than a vocal minority, a majority of people in this country--people who vote, and people who become lawmakers and judges--will be Christian of some stripe, or be part of an Abrahamic religion. The U.S. is not going to become a secular humanist utopia anytime soon.

    The strategy described above is the kind of pointless activism that will never win any cultural battles, and winning those battles is what leads to the legal victories that matter.

    Posted by: Daniel | Dec 10, 2013 10:59:24 AM


  7. Well, it's about damned time that the good guy of the book finally got some recognition on the public grounds.

    Posted by: Randy | Dec 10, 2013 11:16:02 AM


  8. I'm of two minds on this-- a bit silly and trollish, but if it puts pressure on the Oklahoma Capitol to remove the 10 Commandments monument then good for them!

    Posted by: leprechaunvict | Dec 10, 2013 11:50:24 AM


  9. Although worshiping nonexistent Satan isn't much less dippy than worshiping a nonexistent god, you've got to hand it to them. From what I've read about the church LaVey started, the two basic tenants are essentially "Live life to the fullest" and "Don't pull any punches when you have a beef with somebody." It's actually kinda awesome.

    And it cracks my ass up that they have merch! lol

    Posted by: FFS | Dec 10, 2013 12:15:13 PM


  10. @FFS - While they have similarities, the Satanic Temple (the group behind the monument) and the Church of Satan (the group founded by LaVey) are different organizations with different theologies.

    Posted by: Gregory In Seattle | Dec 10, 2013 12:25:28 PM


  11. they want to turn fred phelps dead mother gay? what? really? the mormon church tried to convert anne frank posthumously and that was weird. but turning fred phelps mother gay that would get his attention.

    Posted by: m | Dec 10, 2013 12:46:17 PM


  12. Legally, the challenge to the Ten Commandments monument by erecting a satanic monument probably won't fly since the court will simply say that there's no "sincerely held beliefs" at stake. The sincerity requirement generally blocks these types of frivolous stunts. However, they will get their day in both the media and the courts.

    Posted by: anon | Dec 10, 2013 3:20:18 PM


  13. The group seeking to put up the Satan monument are NOT doing it to represent all religions. They are doing it as a mockery of the one on display as it is the antithesis of what is displayed. It is done not to show equality, but to spite, nothing more, nothing less.

    They only want to choose the single most offensive thing to place there, a thing the community has no desire to represent themselves by, and that community will be ATTACKED for it. It will only be used as the nail in the coffin of that community's rights to free expression...

    But that's what this is all about. Communities are not permitted to express themselves religiously, because someone else doesn't like ANY manner of religious expression. These people use government sponsorship as the excuse, when it is the PEOPLE of the community that vote and elect how best to represent themselves.

    Posted by: richfiles | Jan 21, 2014 5:52:17 PM


Post a comment







Trending


« «Young Men are Pioneering a New Futurism in Fashion, Says Bill Cunningham: VIDEO« «