Satanist Statue Destined for Oklahoma City Smacks of Sour Grapes

Satanist Statue Destined for Oklahoma City Smacks of Sour Grapes

We’ve all seen movies or read books where the storyline is about a spurned man or woman who, in the face of rejection or seeming mistreatment resorts to the mantra, “If I can’t have her/him, then nobody can.” Sadly, we are seeing that same idea play out in our culture when it comes to religion. The two most prominent examples of this in recent days are in the areas of same sex marriage and religious displays on public property.

Marriage has, throughout thousands of years of history, been limited primarily to one man and one woman. Certainly there have been times and places where polygamy has been been acceptable, but even then there was always at least one man and one woman, with the recognition that the opposite sexes have the ability to procreate and form a natural family. Laws and societies have always regarded this special relationship as worth protecting and nurturing.

In recent years, however, same-sex couples have articulated that they are missing out. At first they asserted that marriage laws were discriminatory because the laws treated gay couples differently than opposite sex couples, mostly in employment benefits and medical insurance situations. As a result, many states adapted their laws to grant same sex couples the same benefits as married couples under the law without changing the definition of marriage. But that was not enough. Sane sex couples asserted that they were still being treated differently than opposite sex couples because they were being denied “marriage” under the law. Even though they could have all the rights and benefits that the law affords to married couples, the fact that gay couples could not call themselves married was hurtful to them.

So, now they have succeeded in many states in getting the entire concept of marriage altered to include relationships that are utterly different in their very essence from what marriage has always been. Essentially, same sex couples issued an ultimatum: if we can’t have it, nobody can. In their minds, if the law does not allow them to walk down the aisle and call themselves “married,” then everyone has to give up that act, even though it is an historically religious act between one man and one woman and is sacred as such to most God-fearing people.

In a similar way, this week liberal haters of religion once again issued an ultimatum. This time the stage was Oklahoma City. It seems a politician gifted the city with a sculpture of the Ten Commandments a few years ago, and the sculpture has been displayed on the state capitol’s grounds. A hate group from New York challenged the display, but the display was allowed to remain since it was a gift to the city and was not initiated by city personnel. The haters from New York then went about raising money from other haters to hire a sculptor to make a statute of Satan that it plans to gift to the city.

The statue of the Baphomet, or Sabbatic Goat. (Fox News image)

Lawmakers in Oklahoma City have said that they will not allow the sculpture to be displayed. Sadly, however, the haters are playing the all-too-familiar trump card: if we can’t have what we want, you cannot have what you want. Just as states have given in on the same sex marriage issue, Oklahoma City will find itself facing a tough decision: Do we give in and allow the statue to be displayed or do we take down the Ten Commandments sculpture? Sadly, I predict the latter will be the ultimate outcome.

Eventually, the same question is going to be asked with regard to same-sex marriage: Should a state in which an overwhelming majority opposes same sex marriage give in and allow it or should the state stop recognizing “marriage” all together? Sadly, the old sour-grapes adage is going to force that decision to have to be made. It is quite possible that, in our lifetime, “marriage” as we have known it will no longer exist under the secular law. I for one am not sure that is such a bad thing. After all, if we can’t have what we want, they shouldn’t either.

Written by

  • Johnny says:

    I myself am a Pagan, and for the record I know of no Pagan who would object either to the content or the concept of having the Ten Commandments displayed as they are. We Pagans live pretty much by them anyway, as does anyone interested in leading a good life, regardless of what faith they follow.

    Satanists in my experience are for the most part a bunch of contrary, attention-seeking excrement-disturbers. What I object to most is their insistence on co-opting the symbols of other faiths. Of course the elephant in the room there is their deity itself, Satan. Satan’s not a god, he’s a Christian conception. Last I heard at best Satan was a fallen angel. Choosing to follow a religious path like that simply sounds contrary and confrontational.
    By the way, that symbol in the background of one of the photos is -my- religion’s symbol, turned upside down. The Pentacle is not a Satanic symbol, any more than the Cross or the Crucifix is, but these Satanists take these symbols and turn them upside down, again in order to be contrary and confrontational. Satanists – get your own symbols – leave ours alone!

    • Donna Miller says:

      Thanks, Johnny. I respect your choice of beliefs. You hit the nail on the head with regard to what bothers me in ANY situation like this –when someone creates controversy just for the sake of controversy. I have known Agnostics and Pagans and even non-Christian believers like Hindus and Buddhists who say that Christian symbols and prayers are not troubling for them whatsoever. I appreciate knowing that there are differences in beliefs but that we can all co-exist if we just show tolerance and respect for each others’ beliefs.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Become a Victory Girl!

Are you interested in writing for Victory Girls? If you’d like to blog about politics and current events from a conservative POV, send us a writing sample here.
Ava Gardner