PHOENIX β Calling Satan βan explicit enemy of God,ββ a state senator is pushing to keep displays of him, by any name, off of public property.
Just Satan. Christmas trees and menorahs would still be allowed.
βIt is a desecration of our public property in the United States of America and in the state of Arizona for a satanic display, memorial, altar, etc., to be on public property,ββ said Sen. Jake Hoffman, a Queen Creek Republican.
He pushed the measure through the Senate Government Committee Wednesday on a 5-1 party-line vote.
All that drew questions.
βIt is because itβs insulting to your religion?ββ asked Sen. Juan Mendez, D-Tempe.
Hoffman said thatβs not his motive.
The legal issue goes beyond that.
The Satanic Temple has been recognized by the Internal Revenue Service as a religion and entitled to the same charitable status as any other.
βI am genuinely impressed that in only 25 words this bill seems to violate three separate clauses of the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution,ββ testified Micah Mangione, an individual who showed up to testify against the bill.
These, he said, are prohibiting the government from establishing a religion, barring government interference with the free exercise of religion, and guaranteeing the right to free speech. He warned the Republicans there are implications for their support of SB 1279.
βIf you can go after the Satanic Temple, which is a religion, what about paganism next?ββ Mangione asked. βWhat about Judaism next? How about Islam? How about LDS?ββ
What the legislation does is declare that only Christian values matter, he said.
Hoffman said he doesnβt see it that way.
βIt is legally and constitutionally suspect to argue that Satan, someone who is universally known to be an explicit enemy of God, is somehow a religion,ββ he said. βThat is an absolutely ludicrous statement to make.ββ
Another individual testifying against the bill, Tonia Francis, told Hoffman what he is proposing interferes with her First Amendment rights.
Hoffman disagreed, saying she remains free to practice whatever she wants β just as long as nothing is erected on public property. Any arguments beyond that are off base, he said.
βSo you think that itβs both legally and constitutionally OK to argue that Satan β¦ who is universally known to be explicitly the enemy of God, antithetical to God, you think thatβs targeting your religion?ββ Hoffman asked.
βUniversally known to you?ββ Francis asked.
βTo, literally, everyone,ββ Hoffman responded. βThatβs not a point thatβs debatable. Would you not say that Satan is the enemy of God?
βNo,ββ Francis said.
Hoffman called her testimony βdisingenuous.ββ
Mendez called the legislation βa straight-up attack on the rights of people and religion.ββ
βAny religion that could be viewed by the sponsor or this committee, if they view it to be a desecration to Christianity, theyβre no longer safe in Arizona,ββ he said. βThis proposal is literally trying to erase any religious group that does not agree with your view of Christianity.ββ
That drew an angry reaction from Hoffman.
βNobody said it was a desecration of Christianity,ββ he said. βItβs a desecration of public property.ββ
Mendez refused to back down, repeating his argument that this was about Hoffman trying to erase beliefs that that do not align with his.
βI donβt understand how we all donβt see this as an attack on the Constitution,ββ Mendez said.
And not just the U.S. Constitution. Mendez noted the Arizona Constitution has its own provision saying βperfect toleration of religious sentiment shall be secured to every inhabitant of this state.ββ
βThis proposal is up here, literally trying to molest people in their religion,ββ Mendez said.
Sen. Janae Shamp, R-Surprise, said whatβs in the legislation is no different than things already happening.
βWeβve had plenty of situations where the Commandments have been removed from courthouses across the country,ββ she said.
βThereβs been plenty of attacks on Christians, on Muslims,ββ Shamp said. βThis is simply to say there will not be a display in a government building.ββ
What Shamp did not say is that the legislation also would cover outdoor displays β and that there is a Ten Commandments display in state-owned Wesley Bolin Plaza, across from the Capitol in Phoenix. There also are Christmas displays set up at the Capitol as well as a menorah.
Hoffman said a restriction on public property is justified and does not infringe on individual rights.
βI find it ironic that in Iowa you can knock over a satanic display and you go to jail for that,ββ he said, referring to the arrest of a man who attacked and beheaded a permitted statue put up by the Satanic Temple at Iowaβs Capitol in December.
βBut, yet, at the U.S. Capitol, you could have a gay sex orgy in a government building and there is zero consequence,ββ Hoffman said.
That refers to a congressional staffer who allegedly taped himself having sex in a Senate hearing room. While he was fired for violating policy, there was no evidence any law was broken.
Hoffman called that disparity βabhorrent and disgusting.ββ
The measure now needs Senate approval.(tncms-asset)17e8b642-f427-5626-a732-ed4f680e60e5[0](/tncms-asset)
