1) There is a difference between portraying an event that happened two thousand years ago, and one that may still be practised and is against current law. Chaining someone up against their will is illegal. Displaying chains and telling about how they were used in the past is not, nor should it be. The difference between Easter displays and any potential Satanist display is one of history versus the present.
2) The Christian displays at Christmas do not have anything in them that is specifically geared towards denegrating another faith; the Satanists' display, since their faith is designed primarily as an evil parody of Christianity, would be designed to denegrate Christianity and would probably be insulting to monotheists in general. It's the public-display version of "Your right to swing your arm ends at my nose."
If they could meet basic standards for tolerance of other faiths and abidance by the laws of the jurisdiction in question, it would be wrong to deny them that space. However, I doubt they could meet those standards. I also doubt that they'd bother - from what I know of Satanism, it is a very secretive faith.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Re: And now, the test case:
Date: 2005-12-10 08:05 pm (UTC)2) The Christian displays at Christmas do not have anything in them that is specifically geared towards denegrating another faith; the Satanists' display, since their faith is designed primarily as an evil parody of Christianity, would be designed to denegrate Christianity and would probably be insulting to monotheists in general. It's the public-display version of "Your right to swing your arm ends at my nose."
If they could meet basic standards for tolerance of other faiths and abidance by the laws of the jurisdiction in question, it would be wrong to deny them that space. However, I doubt they could meet those standards. I also doubt that they'd bother - from what I know of Satanism, it is a very secretive faith.