Why do Christians have a problem with Detroit's new Satan statue?

That's what I was getting at, and I actually agree. But even if they had planned out a bit better, it's still a one industry city and the city of Detroit fucked itself for not planning ahead.

I dunno what could bring in money to the remaining 750 thousand folks that can't muster up the money to move...maybe Hollywood can start filming more apocalypse and zombie films among the abandoned houses.

Religion = cult + time.

So 100 years is reasonable?

Of course not, because that would require you to put some thought into what you claim.

Not really. I don't think that time has anything to do with it, and I'm not certain that you can give an objective measure as to what the differences might be between the two.

By your definition, Christianity could not have been seen as a religion until 133 AD.

Let me get this straight. Satan statue is perfectly fine and liberals will defend the hell out of it, but confederate battle flag comemorating fallen soldiers, no fucking way, that's racist. Got it.

IIRC in Acts when Paul was brought before Felix, Festus, and then Agrippa, Christianity was referred to by one as 'this sect of the Nazarenes" which sounds like a cult to me.

At any rate, what I define in 2011 has no bearing on what things transpired in 133.

Further, you could make the argument that Christianity was an extension of Judahism which makes it several thousand years old in 133.

1) I am not a liberal by British standards
2)I have made no comment on the confederate flag issue.
3)Why doesn't religious freedom apply to all?

Which is meaningless, since you're dealing with a description created by people who didn't have a modern understanding of religion. Or even much of a concept of the world they were living in. They hadn't even explored the entirety of their own continent, let alone any of the others which exist. You wouldn't let a doctor from ancient Rome treat your diabetes, would you? Why should you accept their definition of what Christianity was at that time?

Yet you allow those things to influence what you do in 2015.

Which goes back to my question about Gnostics and Cathars. Are modern practitioners of those beliefs following a religion or are they cult members by your definition?

Do you have any evidence that the Satan statue is erected by the government with tax money?

But you're still a gay, cheese-eating surrender monkey, by American Republican standards! (Yes, I know, you're not French, but by American Republican standards, there's no difference.)

Ha! I never had @Anna down as a religious fundie!

I don't know.

What would be the tipping point? After all, Hell IS in Michigan...

No.

Likewise, one could just as easily make the very same argument about the Church of Satan, because Satan is an extension of Judaism and Christianity, both of which were thousands of years old when LaVey (Uncle Anton to those of us who knew him) established his Church in 1966.

The Church of Scientology claims a history of billions of years.

The Detroit Satan statue will soon be obsolete because Japanese Satan statue makers can make them cheaper and more dependable. Just sayin'

Well, she either failed or is a liar, because the unveiling did happen. My room mate went to it and everything. I was thinking about going too, but I decided I didn't want to pay $20 to see a statue and meet a bunch of Satanists. I should have gone and tried to convince the protesters to convert to Satanism.

Satan statues are ugly and Ten Commandment monuments are boring. This is why I prefer courthouses to be adorned with ancient pagan deities.

Well, yeah
The point is though this is getting Christian panties in bunches and that's not a bad thing

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...-isnt-going-anywhere-governor-says/?tid=sm_fb

In a criminal turn of events the wacky job lunatic Republican Governor of Okiehomo has declared she will ignore the state supreme court's order to remove the ten commandments statue which violates the state constitution which has even more strict seporation of church and state rules than the Federal one. She is farcically claiming "I am the Lord, they God, and you shall have no god but me." is some how not a specific endorsement of religion as rules by the state supreme court.

This bitch needs to go to jail.

Not quite.

Satan of the OT: Of course that dude likes you. You give him shit.
God: Wanna bet?

Uh...that article's from three months ago. The Ten Commandments have been removed.

Carry on then.

I saw this on another website.

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/...e-ten-commandments-oklahoma-capitol/73435336/

Ahh, the statue was finally removed today.

You're always whining "this bitch needs to go to jail".

And the Ten Commandments are technically not an endorsement of a single religion. They are meaningful to both Judaism and Christianity and have close analogues in a number of faiths.

By the way El Chup.

You aren't an American citizen or taxpayer.

Why is it any of your business one way or the other?

We're all free to advocate on behalf of others. Most of us aren't like you Dayton -- when we see an injustice, we speak up whether or not it affects us directly.

Why is it your business to talk about sending Christian militias to the Middle East like you have in the past?

Simply because I am not American it doesn't mean that I cannot ask questions about what happens in America, just as you are free to ask questions about anything outside of American borders. What's more, I have traveled to the US many times and while I may not be an American tax payer, I have contributed to your economy on numerous occasions, so one would think a little gratitude were in order.

What difference does it make?