ADVERTISEMENT

Suspect charged with hate crime for destroying Satanic Temple display at Iowa Capitol

But what he's doing is still stifling someone's free speech.
He did exactly what the Satanic Temple hoped someone would do. He didn't stifle their right to free speech, he made their point for them. They would have been disappointed if their statue had gone largely ignored for a few weeks until they quietly took it down after the holidays were over.

If a group of practicing Jews or a group of practicing Muslims set up a display in the capitol to honor their faith and some redneck Christian from Mississippi kicked it over then that would be a case of stifling free speech. But I'd be willing to bet the fellas from the Satanic Temple high-fived each other when they found out somebody roughed up Baphomet.
 
He did exactly what the Satanic Temple hoped someone would do. He didn't stifle their right to free speech, he made their point for them. They would have been disappointed if their statue had gone largely ignored for a few weeks until they quietly took it down after the holidays were over.

If a group of practicing Jews or a group of practicing Muslims set up a display in the capitol to honor their faith and some redneck Christian from Mississippi kicked it over then that would be a case of stifling free speech. But I'd be willing to bet the fellas from the Satanic Temple high-fived each other when they found out somebody roughed up Baphomet.
There is no discernible difference in the scenarios you presented. Jews, Muslims, Christians, Satanists, Buddhists, yadda yadda yadda. You can't pick and choose from those various religious groups as to which should enjoy the protection of the laws and their constitutional rights. You can opine as to whether you believe they are legitimate "religions" in your eyes, but the law encompasses all of them, there is no picking of winners and losers in this situation.

I applaud the charge as it may cause certain unhinged individuals to pause and consider the ramifications of carrying out actions that they invent in their head under the guise of a supernatural deity's will and commandments. Far too much irrational banter of this nature going on in our current society. There's no excuse for this delusional behavior and this is certainly a way to address it.
 
A Mississippi man who admitted to destroying a statue of the pagan idol Baphomet at the Iowa Capitol has been charged with a hate crime.

The statue was part of a display organized by the Satanic Temple of Iowa under state rules allowing religious displays in the Iowa Capitol during the holidays. The installation drew strong criticism from state and national leaders, including Gov. Kim Reynolds and Republican presidential candidate Ron DeSantis. On Dec. 14, the centerpiece of the display, a figure depicting the horned deity Baphomet, was "destroyed beyond repair," according to the Satanic Temple of Iowa.

Michael Cassidy


Michael Cassidy, a former congressional candidate from Mississippi, was charged the following day with fourth-degree criminal mischief, a misdemeanor. The Lauderdale, Mississippi, man told the conservative website The Sentinel that “My conscience is held captive to the word of God, not to bureaucratic decree. And so I acted.”

Now, Polk County prosecutors have accused Cassidy of a more serious offense. A charging document made public Tuesday charges him with felony third-degree criminal mischief and notes that the act was committed "in violation of individual rights" under Iowa's hate crime statute.

The satanic display at the Iowa State Capitol, after being vandalized.


"Evidence shows the defendant made statements to law enforcement and the public indicating he destroyed the property because of the victim’s religion," triggering the violation of individual rights enhancement, said Lynn Hicks, a spokesman for the Polk County Attorney's Office.

Cassidy's attorney, Sara Pasquale, declined to comment Tuesday on the new charge. In previous court filings, she has accused the Satanic Temple of making premature filings that, "like the timing and substance of the Satanic Temple of Iowa’s installation of a demonic statue in the capitol building... are only meant to evoke strong emotions and incite others."

Hicks said in a statement that based on information from the Satanic Temple, the cost to replace or repair the statue would be between $750 and $1,500, making its destruction an aggravated misdemeanor. (In fact, the Temple has filed a damage estimate putting the cost to replace the statute at $3,000.) What makes the charge a felony, Hicks said, is the hate crime statute.
You should do some of your evil to this dope as retribution
 
He did exactly what the Satanic Temple hoped someone would do. He didn't stifle their right to free speech, he made their point for them. They would have been disappointed if their statue had gone largely ignored for a few weeks until they quietly took it down after the holidays were over.

If a group of practicing Jews or a group of practicing Muslims set up a display in the capitol to honor their faith and some redneck Christian from Mississippi kicked it over then that would be a case of stifling free speech. But I'd be willing to bet the fellas from the Satanic Temple high-fived each other when they found out somebody roughed up Baphomet.

Maybe. . . it wasn't like it was getting ignored, it got news attention.

But regardless of if they wanted this result or not it points to the perp's willingness to stifle other people's free speech.
 
You guys do know that they don't actually worship Satan, right?
Satanism, the worship or veneration of Satan, a figure from Christian belief who is also commonly known as the Devil or Lucifer. For most of Christian history, accusations that groups have been deliberately worshipping the Devil have been spurious, with little or no basis in reality. However, from at least the 20th century, various new religions have emerged whose followers openly identify as Satanists or Luciferians. Their reasons for doing so, along with the nature of their beliefs and practices, vary considerably.

 
  • Haha
Reactions: fivecardstud14
He did exactly what the Satanic Temple hoped someone would do. He didn't stifle their right to free speech, he made their point for them. They would have been disappointed if their statue had gone largely ignored for a few weeks until they quietly took it down after the holidays were over.

If a group of practicing Jews or a group of practicing Muslims set up a display in the capitol to honor their faith and some redneck Christian from Mississippi kicked it over then that would be a case of stifling free speech. But I'd be willing to bet the fellas from the Satanic Temple high-fived each other when they found out somebody roughed up Baphomet.
so you think there's some kind of "good faith" qualifier to free speech?

that's not how it works
 
Satanism, the worship or veneration of Satan, a figure from Christian belief who is also commonly known as the Devil or Lucifer. For most of Christian history, accusations that groups have been deliberately worshipping the Devil have been spurious, with little or no basis in reality. However, from at least the 20th century, various new religions have emerged whose followers openly identify as Satanists or Luciferians. Their reasons for doing so, along with the nature of their beliefs and practices, vary considerably.

doesn't matter who they pray to or worship

as long as they aren't hurting or infringing on the rights of others, they get the same treatment as other religions
 
Satanism, the worship or veneration of Satan, a figure from Christian belief who is also commonly known as the Devil or Lucifer. For most of Christian history, accusations that groups have been deliberately worshipping the Devil have been spurious, with little or no basis in reality. However, from at least the 20th century, various new religions have emerged whose followers openly identify as Satanists or Luciferians. Their reasons for doing so, along with the nature of their beliefs and practices, vary considerably.

Yes, I know what "Satanism" is but that is not what the Satanic Temple is about.
 
I guess I'm not up on the nuances of the Satanic Temple.
I wasn't either until I read about it on here. It's been discussed a lot.

According to the organization's website the mission of the Satanic Temple is to:

...encourage benevolence and empathy among all people, reject tyrannical authority, advocate practical common sense, oppose injustice, and undertake noble pursuits. The Satanic Temple has publicly confronted hate groups, fought for the abolition of corporal punishment in public schools, applied for equal representation when religious installations are placed on public property, provided religious exemption and legal protection against laws that unscientifically restrict women's reproductive autonomy, exposed harmful pseudo-scientific practitioners in mental health care, organized clubs alongside other religious after-school clubs in schools besieged by proselytizing organizations, and engaged in other advocacy in accordance with our tenets.

They also enjoy showing how hypocritical many of those of the Christian faith are.
 
I wasn't either until I read about it on here. It's been discussed a lot.

According to the organization's website the mission of the Satanic Temple is to:



They also enjoy showing how hypocritical many of those of the Christian faith are.
So basically a religion created to annoy and say F you to another religion?
 
I guess I'm not up on the nuances of the Satanic Temple.
They're not actually Satanists. They don't believe in Satan at all and they are very clear about that fact. They're trolling Christians by using Satanic imagery because they know that evokes a response.

I'm not sure how it can be argued that Cassidy was targeting them based on their religion when they don't have a religion. He destroyed their property and he should compensate them for it and he deserves to be punished for destroying their property. But I don't see how it can be argued that this qualifies as a hate crime.
 
They're not actually Satanists. They don't believe in Satan at all and they are very clear about that fact. They're trolling Christians by using Satanic imagery because they know that evokes a response.

I'm not sure how it can be argued that Cassidy was targeting them based on their religion when they don't have a religion. He destroyed their property and he should compensate them for it and he deserves to be punished for destroying their property. But I don't see how it can be argued that this qualifies as a hate crime.
They're religiously devoted to the principles of the 1st amendment, therefore a religion for all practical purposes.

I LOVE this organization and not much flies under their radar. They have already indicated they have chaplains ready to serve in Iowa schools if the new proposed legislation is enacted.
 
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest posts

ADVERTISEMENT