It's that time again!

"Mithras is the Reason for the Season" Bumpersticker



Get 'em while they're hot! Perfect for friends, family, and to stick on cars with plentiful other religious stickers (not that I advocate vandalism!)

-pb

My beliefs have changed drastically throughout the course of my life. I’ve been the average Christian bystander, bordered on raving fundamentalist, quasi-fluffy Wiccan, non-fluffy Pagan, and pretty much every shade in between and then some. Don’t get me wrong, I’m not a “religion of the week” kind of person. These changes have been gradual, a spiritual journey, without a road map, and, I admit, at times beset with the metaphysical version of ADHD.

I have recently come to a new point in this journey. As I’ve done with a number of things in my life, I’ve decided to quantify exactly what it is I believe. This hasn’t been easy, and I’ve had to ask myself a lot of uncomfortable questions and justify a number of things to myself.

In this quantification, I realized that there were two options: Reason and Faith. I could either attempt to explain my entire spirituality rationally, or I could do it on faith. You’d think that quantifying one’s spirituality on faith would be the logical path… right? But, wouldn’t doing that imply reason? So, I abandoned the notion of saying “I believe this because I believe it”, and decided to go with “I believe in Y because X”. Now, I just had to come up with X.

This internal conversation wasn’t nearly this structured.

So, we have Y, that is, what I believe, and X, that is, why I believe Y. Let’s cover the Y. It’s pretty straightforward.

I don’t believe in the supernatural. At all. Nothing supernatural exists.

Yes, I know I just explained a positive with a negative, but it’s far easier to concisely define what I don’t believe in, because the converse to that explains what I do believe in. So, here’s X:

I believe in the natural. Everything is natural. Science can explain everything. Scientists just haven’t gotten around to it yet.

This is my grand indictment of all religions: Science and Reason can explain anything. Miracles? Science and Reason can explain them (either they’re hearsay and fabrications, or there’s a scientific explanation for them). Ghosts? Science and Reason can explain them.

Here’s where I’m going to cop out of a complete explanation: Dark Energy. Physical cosmology posits that 22% of the universe is comprised of dark matter, 74% is dark energy, and only 4% is ordinary matter. Scientists admit that 96% of the universe exists in a state that they simply don’t understand. I don’t need to believe in an all-powerful deity, because Science tells me that I still don’t understand practically anything. I don’t see that as a reason to fill that void with a god.

Let’s take Arthur C. Clarke’s three laws:

1. When a distinguished but elderly scientist states that something is possible, he is almost certainly right. When he states that something is impossible, he is very probably wrong.
2. The only way of discovering the limits of the possible is to venture a little way past them into the impossible.
3. Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic.

That last one is the driving force in my personal spirituality.

Let’s say, for instance, that you’re in the basement, changing a blown fuse, and suddenly you and your flashlight are whisked off to the year 1387. You meet a villager, who marvels over your flashlight. You explain to them that it’s simply two batteries and a light bulb. Do they, even after years of explanation, accept your simple explanation?

Nope, they burn you at the stake for harnessing demons in little metal cylinders.

We stopped burning people at the stake in the early 1800’s, but the concept is still there. Claiming to be able to explain the afterlife? Don’t try getting that paper published. But why can’t science explain the afterlife? Like I said, 96% of the Universe is a mystery.

So, does your god exist? Maybe, but at some point, science will be able to measure, quantify and categorize it to the point that while it’ll be powerful, it won’t be, well… godly. Not any more than a man is to an ant.

So where does all that other stuff from the title fit in? Let’s tackle prayer. People have posited that prayer has power. That their deity answers prayers. There’s scientific evidence that people in surgery that are prayed for fare better than those that aren’t.

Science can explain it, and it doesn’t need to use E=MC^God to do it. It’s a basic matter of energy transference. It is the same thing as magic: the willful manipulation of reality. “God” just becomes the focus, the conduit. Prayer, in my mind, is the biggest argument against an all-powerful deity. Why would an all-powerful deity even need lowly humans to pray for anything? Wouldn’t he/she/it just do it? “Please save my dog, God!” “Well, I wasn’t going to, but now that you’ve asked!”

Prayer is a self-fulfilling prophecy. “I prayed, nothing happened, God has a plan”. “I prayed, it was answered, God is looking out for me”. I reject that. Prayer is magic. It’s the willful manipulation of reality. Sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn’t. Eventually, I am confident that science will be able to explain it. When that happens, prayer will become more powerful, because then we’ll know exactly how to do it right.

And finally, the Druidism. That’s the path I’m on right now. How, exactly, do I reconcile a pagan religion with everything I’ve just said? Simple: I don’t have to believe in my deity’s actual existence to use them as I’ve already described. I believe that every deity is simply a manifestation of the universe, an aspect of something we desire. A creation, if you will, of the human subconscious that acts as a conduit to the greater untapped power that surrounds us. Do I need to call the Great Bear of the North to watch over my rites? No, but it certainly doesn’t hurt. The Great Bear of the North only exists due to the will that is put into its existence. Is it going to watch over my rites? Who knows. Who cares? It’s a personal choice that adds to what I get out of my particular religion.

And that is the core, the argument in favor of religion: Regardless of what form it takes, if it refreshes the spirit, lifts the mind and energizes the soul, it’s serving its purpose. It’s the point that it turns from that to demanding exclusivity and claiming a monopoly on truth that it becomes malevolent. It ceases to serve the purpose that faith and spirituality are there to serve. The Universe, as a whole, is divine, at least to us, just as an individual cell would see the whole of our bodies as divine. It doesn’t really care about us or watch over us, but it provides for us and contains a vast well of power that we can tap. We just don’t understand nearly all of it. The closer we come to explaining it all, the more powerful we’ll become. The closer we’ll come to the divine.

That’s where science and reason have lead me.

-pb

So, Al Gore Punxsutawney Phil didn't see his shadow, so we get an early spring! I never quite understood that. If he sees his shadow, doesn't it mean it's bright and sunny already? Eh well. Global Warming to the rescue!

Happy Imbolc, everyone!

Who's doing what for the SuperBowl?

-pb

You asked for it, now go buy it.

Mithras is the Reason Bumper Sticker



Only $3.99, and it's like a giant middle finger to Bill O'Lielly.

-pb

Whoa, I may have seriously underestimated my figures:

Numbers of [Neopagan] adherents went from 8,000 in 1990 to 134,000 in 2001

That's a 1600% increase, not the 400% I had calculated earlier. People who call Christianity and Islam the 'fastest growing' by dint of sheer numbers are wrong. You can't measure that way. Percentages are all that count when you're talking about exponential increase.

-js?!

German Churches Grub For Money, Disguise It By Attacking Paganism

[C]oncerns refer to the increasing changes to burial traditions that have taken place across Germany in recent years, and specifically the trend towards anonymous burial -- burying urns containing ashes in unmarked parts of cemeteries without headstones -- as well as "green burial," the increasingly popular new-age way of laying the dead to rest often described as a more ecological choice.

According to the church, the practice is a throwback to a pagan, pre-Christian age -- and therefore firmly frowned upon.

This is, of course, in Germany, where the CHURCH rents out BURIAL PLOTS for 25 years, and if somone doesn't pony up, they KICK YOUR CORPSE OUT.

So, I think I see what the issue is here. It's not about dirty evil pagan devil heathens influencing people to scatter the ashes of loved ones in forests, it's about the Church getting pissed that people aren't giving them thousands of dollars to BURY A USED LUMP OF DEAD FLESH. Because, that's all it is. Someday, humanity will wake up and realized that organized religion has not a damned thing to do with salvation or spirituality. It's about control and money. The Church is nothing more than a huge mafia, except instead of guys who break your leg for money, they threaten to damn your soul. Same principle, though, and it's absolutely disgusting and repulsive.

It's a scam, and every time someone drops money into an offering pot, they're perpetuating it.

-pb

They're baaack...readers sound off on Thomas and "Mother Earth"

Third one down is mine. Printed twice, and in a conservative publication! Honestly, though, I'm not sure if I want this guy to retort or not. He's really not raising the level of debate. I'd love to go a few rounds with him one-on-one, though =)

-pb

That's right! On December 29th, I posted an article where an Illinois columnist was screetching about how people who worship the Earth are stupid, because they worship something that killed 150,000 people with one fell swoop. I wrote a letter to the editor, which they printed, just to remind this guy that God killed every living thing with a few exceptions, yet 50% of the population of the planet still worships him.

What do you know, this guy wrote a response, and quoted me. infortunately, he missed the point.

Would someone please inform Julian that in Genesis 1:1 God created the earth? It’s His to do what He wants with it.

Well, duh, if that's what you believe. My response:

-------
I hate to contine to make an issue out of Mr. Thomas' continued bigotry, but when he quoted me as saying

"Would someone please inform Mr. Thomas that in Genesis 7:12, God indiscriminately kills every living being of the Earth and Sky, save for Noah's family, seven of every clean animal and two of every unclean animal?"

and responded with

"Would someone please inform Julian that in Genesis 1:1 God created the earth? It’s His to do what He wants with it."

I get the impression that he either missed the point of my statement, or was doing is best to show his hypocrisy. He attacks the sanity of people who worship the Earth as a sentient being in the face of a natural disaster that killed over a hundred thousand. Nature worshippers believe that nature created the Earth. His retort to me is that since God created the Earth, he's free to kill every living being on it if he wants.

So, when a Wiccan worships the Earth, and it kills 150,000 people in one shot, it's stupid, but when a Christian worships God, and he kills all but 7 people, it's faith?

So, does that mean that people who followed Pol Pot were stupid, but Nazis had faith?

Mr. Thomas would do well to take the plank from his own eye before writing about how certain people need to wash the speck from theirs.
-------

-pb

Reader responses flow in to Thomas' column on the Tsunami

My letter is the one at the bottom. The other ones are worth reading, too!

-pb

Fundamentalist points to Tsunami as proof that Mother Earth is not something to be worshipped

Stupid, stupid man.

"What kind of Goddess would, by her very own hand, cause tens of thousands of people to die?"

Uhm, hello? Has this guy even read the Bible? Let me guess... every last man, woman, and child, deer, cat, goat, chickadee and gazelle that died in the flood DESERVED IT BECAUSE THEY WERE EVIL.

Uhm, yeah. Right.

-pb

-[edit]-

I whisked off a letter to the editor:

Would someone please inform Mr. Thomas that in Genesis 7:12, God indiscriminately kills every living being of the Earth and Sky, save for Noah's family, seven of every clean animal and two of every unclean animal?

Were some of the babies that God killed murderers? If he was upset with all the sin that was going on, why didn't he simply strike down the sinners themselves (as he did on a number of other occasions)?

I think it's rather crass of Mr. Thomas to call peaceful practitioners of nature-based religion crazy because a naturally occurring event happened to annihilate tens of thousands of people. I don't recall seeing the hand of God come down to stop that tidal wave.

Paul Bagosy
Norristown, PA

Suit: LCCC infringed on religious freedom. Coaldale woman says she was denied job because of nature-based faith.

This is way too close to home for me. You know, you hear cases of religious intolerance from other states, from far away, but this is right in my back yard.

-pb

You scored as The Moon. Divinatory Meaning : Completion, Fulfillment. The end of a major cycle. The world of dreams. Reverse Meaning : Holding back reality by living in a dream world.

Which of the Major Arcana are you?
created with QuizFarm.com


I love this deck! This says I'm the Moon...

-pb

Here's a scathing review of Estes Park, Colorado Town Trustee David Habecker, who has become embattled after protesting "Under God" in the Pledge of Allegience by remaining seated.

Town leader finds it hard to keep seat

The columnist implied that protesting the Pledge made you Wiccan, and he tried to conjure Thomas Jefferson. It's as if he was writing it just to see if I'd respond.

I did, with a letter to him and his editor:

In response to Mr. Harsanyi’s column, "Town leader finds it hard to keep seat", dated 13 December 2004, I'd like to point out a few things that his research may not have turned up.

First, the correct way to say "see ya" in Wiccan is approximately the same way one says "see ya" in Christian. It goes "see ya". See? Pretty similar.

Second, Mr. Harsanyi’s reference to Thomas Jefferson is a bit off. When he says "And we'll ignore the fact that Thomas Jefferson had the temerity to cite the Almighty Lord him/her/itself in the Declaration of Independence", he should know that our esteemed Third President was not only not a Christian, but was a strict believer in the separation of Church and State.

When Mr. Harsanyi says "We won't even mention that freedom of religion does not mean freedom from religion", I must ask what the difference is? Christians worship one god, others worship two, three, ten, one hundred, or even millions. Atheists worship none. Is their lack of religion to be less protected than someone's prevalence of religion?

Interestingly enough, when asked by Richard Price in 1787:

"Would not Society be better without Such religions? Is Atheism less pernicious than Demonism?"

Thomas Jefferson responded with:

"I concur with you strictly in your opinion of the comparative merits of atheism and demonism, and really see nothing but the latter in the being worshipped by many who think themselves Christians."

Jefferson, by his own words, saw more merit in no religion than in Christianity. He even re-wrote the gospels, stripping out the nonsense and keeping the morality, basically cleansing it of divinity, which he felt that man did not need.

Mr. Harsanyi should also know that "Wiccan" does not automatically imply "Anti-Christian", as he seemed to imply by stating that even in the face of his protest, Mr. Habecker had not declared himself a Wiccan. I believe it to be very naive of Mr. Harsanyi to assume that because someone is opposed to the line "Under God" in the Pledge of Allegiance, that they automatically represent one religion in particular. In fact, Francis Bellamy, the man who authored the pledge in 1892, was a Baptist minister. He surely could have added the words "Under God" had he seen fit, but didn't, because he was known to support the separation of church and state.

Of course, the true origins of things are rarely of any value to people who don't see a need to keep God and Government separate. I just thought Mr. Harsanyi would find some of the facts interesting. Not that they would change his tone. He doesn't actually deal with facts, just opinions.

Paul Bagosy
Norristown, PA

-pb

http://pennlive.com/newsflash/pa/index.ssf?/base/news-21/1099656249235030.xml&storylist=penn

Episcopal priests running druid circles in Downingtown and Malvern?!

-pb

I've already reconciled my standing on moving to Canada, if it comes to that.

I'm beyond draft age, so it's not because of that.

I am, however, very liberal, and very Pagan. I've seen a religious shift in the country over the last four years, and, quite honestly, I'm scared. Bush now has a firmly Republican House and Senate, and with that, a mandate. He has no re-election concerns. He likely has two-four Supreme Court Justices to appoint.

I believe that I have a right to not live in fear, and right now, I'm scared that my rights will erode to the point that I have to watch what I say in my own home, that I will be unable to practice my religion, that I will be deemed a political insurgent and jailed for my views.

People say that 'it can't happen here'. It's already started. I love my country, but when my country doesn't love me, it's time to put things in priority. It's like a bad relationship. Just because you love someone is no reason to stay in an abuseive relationship.

America, I might soon decide to just be friends.

-pb

Hallowe'en is being attacked because it's on a Sunday. The arguement is that it's the devil's holiday, and shouldn't be celebrated on the Sabbath. [ link ]


BUT IT'S OK TO CELEBRATE IT ON ANY OTHER DAY OF THE WEEK.

Hallowe'en is being banned in some schools, and people are upset. They say it's offensive to pagans students to have other kids come in dressed up like witches. [ link ]


BUT IT'S OK TO FORCE THOSE SAME PAGAN STUDENTS TO CELEBRATE CHRISTMAS IN SCHOOL.

A local Wiccan temple in Michigan has come under fire, because even though they've got the proper permits, are law-abiding citizens, and haven't broken a single law (except that their sign is about an inch too long), they might be Satanists who sacrifice animals. [ link ]

BECAUSE EVEN THOUGH IT WAS OK TO SACRIFICE ANIMALS IN THE OLD TESTAMENT, THAT SHIT CAN'T POSSIBLY BE GOOD NOW, BECAUSE THEIR SATANIST VIBE MIGHT MAKE YOU LESS OF A GOOD CHRISTIAN.

Nevermind that they're not actually sacrificing animals. THESE FUCKERS HAVE GOT TO BE STOPPED BEFORE THEY ABORT ANY MORE BABIES OR MARRY ANY MORE GAY PEOPLE.

Truly, these pagans are the ones that brought 9/11 down on our heads. Fuck the peace-mongers. They got us into a holy war.

-pb

An 11-year old was pelted with apples and called a 'Jesus-hater' because his mother is a practicing Wiccan. At least it's being investigated as a hate crime (as it should be).

I just can't get enough of that loving, accepting Christianity.

http://www.kirotv.com/news/3768476/detail.html

-pb

From The Star, a South African paper:

"Gays, lesbians should be free to tie knot in Rainbow Nation", by Kirsten Bernard (Letters, September 9) refers.

Contrary to Bernard's claim, all major religions consider homosexuality to be gravely immoral. Wicca - to which Bernard belongs - may sanction homosexual perversions, but Wicca is not so much a religion as it is a cult.

A cult? Let's analyze! (With help from our friends Merriam & Webster.)

Cult (n).
Etymology: French & Latin; French culte, from Latin cultus care, adoration, from colere to cultivate
1 : formal religious veneration : WORSHIP
2 : a system of religious beliefs and ritual; also : its body of adherents
3 : a religion regarded as unorthodox or spurious; also : its body of adherents
4 : a system for the cure of disease based on dogma set forth by its promulgator
5 a : great devotion to a person, idea, object, movement, or work (as a film or book); especially : such devotion regarded as a literary or intellectual fad b : a usually small group of people characterized by such devotion

So, aside from #1 and #2, I can understand Wicca falling under #3, because this guy obviously regards it as unorthodox. However, I can therefore label the whole of Christianity as a cult, because it fits both #1 and #2. I can lump faith healers under #4, and I can make a case regarding the Bible and #5.

Back to it, then.

In fact, Wicca is an old English term for witches that has been given to a neo-pagan revival of some elements of ritual magic. It was invented in 1939 by Gerald Gardner, who based it on the notion that medieval European witchcraft was an ancient nature religion persecuted by Christians.

Ok, almost true. Wicca is a word with a lot of etymology that can be traced from Greek, Latin, German, English, and Norse, with a lot of different meanings. But the stuff about Odd Uncle Gerald is true.

Called "the Craft", it grew rapidly in the 1960s in the United States, where it encountered "women's spirituality". Presently, Wicca is devoted to women's emancipation and carries on a struggle against "patriarchal" Christianity. Herein lies the real bias and bigotry.

This guy doesn't read a lot of Buckland, apparently. Wicca has nothing against Christianity, except in defense of itself. Granted, many denominations of Wicca tend to hold women in higher regard (although, many, if not more, consider women equal to men). Christianity, Catholicism in particular, is patriarchal and tends to be anti-woman. Just because Wiccans are pro-woman does not make them anti-Christian.

Regarding Bernard's argument about children, it may be true that half of today's marriages end in divorce, but this is no reason to force children to live with and be raised by homosexuals, where they will be denied further the opportunity for full human development.

"force children to live with and be raised by homosexuals, where they will be denied further the opportunity for full human development."

Let's look at this from another perspective:

"force children to live with and be raised by [their mother's abusive boyfriend], where they will be denied further the opportunity for full human development."

"force children to live with and be raised by [a single mother that works three jobs to support her child], where they will be denied further the opportunity for full human development."

"force children to live with and be raised by [alcoholics], where they will be denied further the opportunity for full human development."

Because, all of these things are better than having two fathers who live, love, and parent as good as Mom and Dad Perfect.

Finally, Bernard's argument regarding animals is like comparing apples and oranges.

Animals may "eat, breathe, sleep and procreate" like humans, but they do not have a free will or the rational capacity for good and evil.

Tell that to my cats and dogs. And as for rational capacity, I've known a great deal of humans who don't have rational capacity. Free will only goes so far. We are, in fact, animals, ruled by instincts, and driven by inner motivations that we simply don't comprehend.

It is precisely because humans have these qualities that they are expected by God to behave in a manner befitting an intelligent being.

There's the God talk again. Can't have any discussion regarding homosexuality without bringing in the G-man, can we?

With this in mind I must reiterate that men and women with homosexual tendencies must be accepted with respect, compassion and sensitivity.

Nonetheless, homosexual acts must be considered wrong and intrinsically disordered. They are contrary to the natural law. They close the sexual act to the gift of life.

What I'm getting from this is "Homosexuals are people, too, so treat them with respect when you burn them at the stake."

Let me put it this way: Men don't suddenly wake up one day and think, "You know, I'm done with women. I could care less if I ever sleep with another woman ever again. I'm off to tap me some cute boy-butt." It's a naturally occurring phenomonon. Just because two men aren't adding another child to this already overcrowded planet doesn't mean that they should be persecuted.

-pb

A pagan supply store in Tuscon was vandalized, in what was obviously a hate crime. Article here.

Send 'em some good energy!

-pb

One of my pet peeves is negative stereotypes and slurs that exist within the bounds of acceptance. Things that you see every day, and automatically associate when they're brought up. We've come far as a culture in making a lot of negative stereotypes taboo subjects. This goes right along with verbal insults. People who use 'nigger' in everyday speech, regardless of intent, are viewed as crass and hateful people for using such a word. If someone dresses up in blackface, it's easily identified as a racist gesture. These are obvious stereotypes and slurs that are easily recognized. However, there are a number of stereotypes and slurs that are part of our common parlance and culture that are often used and rarely recognized. However, just because a word or image isn't intended to be used in the pejorative doesn't make it any less hurtful or hateful. The origin of the word conjures up memories of a hateful past, regardless of its intent.

I make an active effort to avoid these when I learn of them. To continue their use, especially with my knowledge of their origin, is racist in and of itself. Take for instance, the term 'gyp'. It's a common phrase, indicating petty fraud. The term itself comes from the word Gypsy, the commonly used term for nomadic Romani tribes that have wandered the world for ages. The Romani have a strange view of the world outside themselves, and consider any non-Romani to be targets of theft, fraud, or other schemes. They typically take what they need to survive, and the trickster way serves them well enough. Our society finds such actions to be deplorable, and more importantly, illegal. However, through the course of European history, the Romani have been considered less than human. Even now, Romani in Hungary are considered sub-human. They are considered lower than we would consider the average homeless, strung out heroin addict. Murdering them is often uninvestigated and unpunished.

During the holocaust, 200,000 to 600,000 Romani were slaughtered, being considered ‘non-persons’ by the Nazi government.

While use of the word ‘jew’ to mean ‘bargain lower than the product’s worth’ (‘I jewed the car salesman down to $200 below invoice!’) is no longer acceptable speech, the term ‘gyp’ is still a part of our common parlance. It’s a hateful term, and it has a hateful history that’s still playing itself out.

A stereotype that I take personal offense to is the image of a pointy-hatted, wart-covered, hag-like figure that everyone associates with witches. Being a Wiccan (or Witch) myself, I’m highly offended by this. While witches are firmly entrenched in fiction and fantasy, this stereotype helped fuel one of the bloodiest purges in human history, the Inquisition. Stretching from the early 1200’s to 1834, the Inquisition targeted heretics and those who were accused of practicing witchcraft. People, particularly older women, were searched for warts (a Witch’s Tit), a sure sign that the Devil had pulled their soul out in exchange for temporal power. While the Inquisition rarely killed an actual witch, the stereotype sent a large number of old, wise, but devoutly Christian women to the burning stake. Even today, the stereotype does not foster good will towards witches.

A closely related (and widely used) slur is the word ‘bitch’. The common term for a female dog, it is also used to refer to women in a highly negative sense. The term itself actually was used in the negative first as ‘Son of a bitch’. ‘Bitch’, in early pagan cultures, was an honorific, even a term of respect for a goddess. A female dog was often the symbol of fertility, accompanying hunting goddesses such as Athena and Diana. Therefore, to be known as a ‘Son of a bitch’ was a term of respect. However, once pagan religions were converted and subsumed into Christianity, and goddess worship was stamped out, the term took on a negative meaning. Pagan deities were co-opted as saints or demons, depending on their aspects. Often, horned gods such as the Celtic god Herne, were turned into depictions of Satan. Conversely, beautiful fertility goddesses were often made into demonesses, out to seduce the good men of the world. To be known as a ‘Son of a bitch’ was to be referred to as the son of a demon, and the term went from an honorific to an insult quickly.

We use this term on a daily basis, though it is considered profane. It is often ‘toned down’ to ‘witch’, which in turn conjures up the negative image from mythology.

Our common speech is littered with these terms. It’s up to us to remove these prejudicial and hateful words and stereotypes from our vocabulary and cultural thought, just as we have to others in the past.

-pb

Found this as a comment to an article on WitchVox by Cian CuAlltha (Portland, OR), and it's just too damn funny.

Wiccan Army Drill Sargeant: OK, Fall in!
Wiccan Private #1: I think that tone you're using is an example of patriarchal "power over" mentality, and I feel threatened and oppressed by it.
WADS: Fine, could everyone please form ranks? Do we have consensus to stand in lines and march? OK, then....
WP#2: Wait a minute, we're standing in a square formation. It really should be a circle, don't you think?
WP#3: Why does it have to be any shape at all? And come to think of it, why do we all have to march in the same direction? My personal path emphasizes personal choice and freedom. I'm not sure I can effectively commune with nature in this kind of rigid structured environment.
WP#4: We do it this way because it's our tradition, and anybody who thinks our tradition should change isn't a real Wiccan Private. When I was inducted by Stonewolf Brasstopiary, who was inducted by Tinweasel Johnsongrass, who was the third cousin twice-removed of Gerald Gardner's auto mechanic....
WADS: Ok, fine. Everybody stand where you want, and march wherever the Goddess moves you. Ready? Left... Left... Left Right Left!!!
WP#5 Hold on! Why do you want us to start on the left foot? Are we working destructive magick? The Rede clearly states.....

Yeah, that pretty much sums it up.

-pb

http://www.politicalusa.com/columnists/seese/seese_101.htm

The heathen, the pagans, have always had a culture of death and human sacrifice. We have a culture of death by abortion of the unborn and euthanasia for the elderly who dwell helplessly in so-called 'care centers' and the disappearing children who vanish from sight and whose photos wind up on "have you seen me" posters. This is human sacrifice, a perfect example of paganism.

Yeah, because that's all Pagans are about. Human sacrifice. Now, if you'll excuse me, I've got some entrails to read.

-pb

To HELL with your religious freedom! You damn pagans (with a small "p", because you don't deserve anything capital except punishment!) are NOT GOING TO TAKE OVER THIS COUNTRY SO HELP ME REAGAN!

http://www.newsmax.com/articles/?a=1999/7/6/32958

I love these people. They make me want to have 15 kids, live in a trailer park, and vote Republican.

A few points I'd like to dissect, most of which I will respond to utilizing the word GENOCIDE:

They invoke pagan 'gods' to support their causes.

Yeah? You drink the 'blood' of your 'god' who commanded people to 'kill' and commit 'GENOCIDE' even though he told you that 'killing' was a 'sin'. And then he 'killed' some of you who refused to 'kill' on his command. My 'gods' haven't told me to 'kill' anyone.

Do Christian or religious Jewish parents want to send their kids off to the military only to have them proselytized by a pagan religion?

No, of course not. Not any more than I like BAPTISTS COMING TO MY DOOR AT 9 AM ON A SATURDAY ASKING IF I BELIEVE IN JESUS.

Pagans don't proselytize. I don't have a fucking quota of pamphlets I have to distribute that extoll the virtues of Freya and Thor.

If the Army permits prayers to pagan 'gods' how long will it be that God's blessing will continue to be upon His people?

Hopefully not much longer now! We haven't been doing to well so far. Maybe if we didn't have the blessing of a bloodthirsty murderous GENOCIDAL psychopath, we wouldn't have planes flying hilly-nilly into buildings.

Christians should be tolerant of what historically has been considered evil.

This from a practitioner of a religion that has committed GENOCIDE since its very inception. Ooooh. You've got me there. I'm evil. I'M NOT MURDERING ARABS FOR OIL, JACKASS.

When we go to war, even a war we dislike, such as the war in Kosovo...

Oh, because we (and by 'we', I mean poor people that aren't a part of 'we') liked Bush Crusade '91 and Bush 2 Crusade '01 and '03, and we were all about the Southeast Asia War Games in the 60's and '70s, and The Great Grenada Gun Vacation, and the Panamanian Pop-Gun Party. Yeah. Fuckin' loved 'em. But not that blowjob-getting liberal commie whoremonger's little move to STOP SOME GENOCIDE. Because WE CAN'T GET ENOUGH GENOCIDE.


Hrm. I feel better now.

-pb