en-us https://www.intensedebate.com/users/815020 Comments by Khryseis_Astra http://kallisti.writingkaye.com/2011/11/olympias-vs-myrtis.html#IDComment221039778 Glad to hear you got a new laptop. I would be freaking out too if mine died, given that my entire *life* seems to be on this thing now: art, writing, photos, magazines, books, etc. My vote is for Olympiás. :) Sat, 12 Nov 2011 20:36:10 +0000 http://kallisti.writingkaye.com/2011/11/olympias-vs-myrtis.html#IDComment221039778 http://wildhunt.org/blog/2011/06/pagan-community-reacts-to-mccollum-decision.html#IDComment158738078 Fortunately for the rest of America, you - whoever you are - do not get to decide what constitutes a "religion." At any rate, the point very much IS a matter of religious freedom, and specifically the right to be treated equally by a government that is supposed to represent all of us. I'm personally against the idea of any government money being given to any religion, but if you're going to do it for one, you have to do it for all. Favoring certain faiths over others - regardless of number of adherents - is the very definition of un-Constitutional. What the majority wants doesn't mean a thing if the equal rights of the minority are being infringed upon. Or at least that's the way the Constitution says it should be. Sadly as a nation, we don't always live up to our own high ideals. Fri, 3 Jun 2011 04:40:02 +0000 http://wildhunt.org/blog/2011/06/pagan-community-reacts-to-mccollum-decision.html#IDComment158738078 http://wildhunt.org/blog/2011/06/breaking-9th-circuit-upholds-lower-court-ruling-in-mccollum-v-california.html#IDComment158412719 "What recent SCOTUS decision would possibly make you think that's some kind of legal trend?" How about the one that made corporations "persons" under the law? That was something a lot of liberals saw coming a mile away, and were called delusional conspiracy theorists by conservatives for... and then it happened. At any rate, I'm just glad this ruling didn't include any mention of the Barton/Wallbuilders brief... for now, at least, their ridiculous notion of preferred tiers of faith hasn't been given any legal footnotes to back it up. Thu, 2 Jun 2011 04:15:14 +0000 http://wildhunt.org/blog/2011/06/breaking-9th-circuit-upholds-lower-court-ruling-in-mccollum-v-california.html#IDComment158412719 http://wildhunt.org/blog/2011/06/why-our-fight-matters.html#IDComment158260928 Ouch indeed. On the bright side of things, the ruling makes no reference to (and thus gives no support to) the Wallbuilders/Barton concept of "preferred faiths" or tiers of religious freedoms, at least not that I could see. Not that they won't try to twist this into a victory for themselves, I'm sure... *rolls eyes* Wed, 1 Jun 2011 17:43:42 +0000 http://wildhunt.org/blog/2011/06/why-our-fight-matters.html#IDComment158260928 http://wildhunt.org/blog/2011/05/the-pagan-terminology-discussion-continues.html#IDComment157570395 While I'm a Hellenic Polytheist who still considers herself under the larger Pagan umbrella, the "nature worship" and/or "earth-centered" classifications tend to bug me. Not because I don't see the Earth as sacred (I do), but because I'm not worshipping the Earth itself or nature itself: I'm worshipping gods and other divinities, some of whom may be connected to nature. Nature itself is not my focus; the gods are my focus. I think maybe the irritant comes from the idea that everyone seems to be taught in their mythology classes that our gods were merely "made up to explain natural phenomena," disregarding the gross oversimplification of our deities that implies. Zeus is about more than lightning, Poseidon is about more than the oceans, etc., etc. Not to mention, that to date, no one claiming this theory has been able to come up with a "natural phenomena" explained by Hermes. LOL Mon, 30 May 2011 16:45:22 +0000 http://wildhunt.org/blog/2011/05/the-pagan-terminology-discussion-continues.html#IDComment157570395 http://wildhunt.org/blog/2011/05/quick-notes-michele-bachmann-eilish-deavalon-and-a-catholic-fertility-ritual.html#IDComment154405602 That's a shame... :( I live about an hour from Pittsburgh, and that's far enough to put me in "Alabama." LOL Fri, 20 May 2011 17:21:57 +0000 http://wildhunt.org/blog/2011/05/quick-notes-michele-bachmann-eilish-deavalon-and-a-catholic-fertility-ritual.html#IDComment154405602 http://wildhunt.org/blog/2011/05/quick-notes-michele-bachmann-eilish-deavalon-and-a-catholic-fertility-ritual.html#IDComment154246219 *Nods* I hear you. "We've also allowed policies which have virtually eliminated taxes for corporations and the wealthiest individuals." And IMO, those are the *first* "entitlements" that should go. They had a decade of tax cuts, which they claimed were necessary to "create jobs" and yet resulted in the disastrous unemployment and economy we have today. Another good point to make: unemployment numbers can be misleading... they stop counting you when you run out of benefits. They don't count the unemployed who still haven't found work but can't collect unemployment anymore. Not to mention those who lost full-time jobs but are trying to scrape by with part-time work. And don't get me started on how wages have stagnated for the average worker who's lucky enough to even find a job at all. The politicians all want to talk about cuts, but only when it comes to those who can least afford it. Fri, 20 May 2011 04:46:04 +0000 http://wildhunt.org/blog/2011/05/quick-notes-michele-bachmann-eilish-deavalon-and-a-catholic-fertility-ritual.html#IDComment154246219 http://wildhunt.org/blog/2011/05/quick-notes-michele-bachmann-eilish-deavalon-and-a-catholic-fertility-ritual.html#IDComment154065786 See that all depends on what you classify as an "entitlement." :) For instance, Social Security often gets put under that heading. But I pay into Social Security every paycheck. So yes I am "entitled" to get that money I paid back! Thu, 19 May 2011 18:25:25 +0000 http://wildhunt.org/blog/2011/05/quick-notes-michele-bachmann-eilish-deavalon-and-a-catholic-fertility-ritual.html#IDComment154065786 http://wildhunt.org/blog/2011/05/quick-notes-michele-bachmann-eilish-deavalon-and-a-catholic-fertility-ritual.html#IDComment154064636 Not many that I can see... Thu, 19 May 2011 18:21:26 +0000 http://wildhunt.org/blog/2011/05/quick-notes-michele-bachmann-eilish-deavalon-and-a-catholic-fertility-ritual.html#IDComment154064636 http://wildhunt.org/blog/2011/05/quick-notes-michele-bachmann-eilish-deavalon-and-a-catholic-fertility-ritual.html#IDComment154064403 Funny, when I lived in Massachusetts, arguably the most "Blue State" in the nation, I received a ticket for that very thing: not wearing my seatbelt. LOL Having grown up in PA, where you didn't have to wear a seatbelt if you were in the backseat, I had no idea I could even be ticketed for such a thing! As a liberal myself, I don't consider PA all that liberal, at least not my area of it. Thu, 19 May 2011 18:20:38 +0000 http://wildhunt.org/blog/2011/05/quick-notes-michele-bachmann-eilish-deavalon-and-a-catholic-fertility-ritual.html#IDComment154064403 http://wildhunt.org/blog/2011/05/crisis-and-the-rise-of-exorcisms.html#IDComment154061962 Perhaps I'm being unclear. :) I accept the original definition of the word daimon. I do not accept the modern definition of "demon," which more often than not is used exactly as I have described it: evil beings led by a big baddy evil being called Satan, or as an insulting reclassification of my deities and daimons. You can protest my definition if you like (and no, it is not only *my* definition), and I will accept that you yourself do not share it, but I can find you numerous examples of Christians who do believe exactly that, and more than a few of those can probably be found in the archives of this blog. As for the rest, it is a point of historical fact that the conversion of ancient cultures to Christianity was not generally a peaceful thing. Modern Christians are only responsible for the actions of their predecessors to the extent that they continue their atrocities and the teachings that encourage them. In many cases, exorcisms could be put on the level of spiritual, mental and physical abuse, and as such I oppose them. Thu, 19 May 2011 18:12:19 +0000 http://wildhunt.org/blog/2011/05/crisis-and-the-rise-of-exorcisms.html#IDComment154061962 http://wildhunt.org/blog/2011/05/crisis-and-the-rise-of-exorcisms.html#IDComment153749639 Actually I think there's a world of difference between my gods, goddesses and other divinities & spirits and the twisted perversion of them that the Christians sell as "demons." Their definition of "demon" (the word itself coming from the Greek daimon) as anti-divine, inherently evil entities that go about randomly possessing good, morally upstanding (usually Christian, go figure) folk has nothing to do with the beings I honor and worship. As far as I'm concerned, it's nothing more than a scary tale to frighten children and anyone else who might dare return to the gods the Christians thought their violent conquest extinguished. Thu, 19 May 2011 05:01:11 +0000 http://wildhunt.org/blog/2011/05/crisis-and-the-rise-of-exorcisms.html#IDComment153749639 http://wildhunt.org/blog/2011/05/crisis-and-the-rise-of-exorcisms.html#IDComment152877943 I personally don't believe in their "demons." What Christians call "demons" are more often than not the gods, goddesses and other divinities & spirits of the religions that came before them, as are many of their early "saints" and "angels." Such beings are not subject to the authority of their god or their priests, so IMO exorcism is an exercise in futility, and just a further act of disrespect. The part that concerns me about it though is the extremes that are gone to in their quest to drive out the "other," read: anyone who doesn't believe as they do. I'm sure that for just about any phony SRA tale out there, you could find a legitimate story of abuse (mental, spiritual and/or physical) at the hands of a so-called exorcist. Nevermind how such extreme views lead to other forms of discrimination, harassment, abuse, etc. towards people of other religions in the first place. Tue, 17 May 2011 04:50:53 +0000 http://wildhunt.org/blog/2011/05/crisis-and-the-rise-of-exorcisms.html#IDComment152877943 http://wildhunt.org/blog/2011/05/the-question-no-one-asks-about-david-barton.html#IDComment150722862 The first comes from Jefferson's Autobiography. The second comes from the Virginia Statue for Religious Freedom. The third comes from Jefferson's Notes on Virginia. Tue, 10 May 2011 17:32:35 +0000 http://wildhunt.org/blog/2011/05/the-question-no-one-asks-about-david-barton.html#IDComment150722862 http://wildhunt.org/blog/2011/05/the-question-no-one-asks-about-david-barton.html#IDComment150520149 I think there's plenty of evidence that the Founders meant religious freedom to be applied across the board, to believer and non-believers alike. Just a sampling: "...an amendment was proposed by inserting the words, 'Jesus Christ...the holy author of our religion,' which was rejected 'By a great majority in proof that they meant to comprehend, within the mantle of its protection, the Jew and the Gentile, the Christian and the Mohammedan, the Hindoo and the Infidel of every denomination.'" "No man [should] be compelled to frequent or support any religious worship, place, or ministry whatsoever, nor [should he] be enforced, restrained, molested, or burthened in his body or goods, nor ... otherwise suffer on account of his religious opinions or belief ... All men [should] be free to profess and by argument to maintain their opinions in matters of religion, and ... the same [should] in no wise diminish, enlarge, or affect their civil capacities." "The legitimate powers of government extend to such acts only as are injurious to others. But it does me no injury for my neighbor to say there are twenty gods or no god. It neither picks my pocket, nor breaks my leg." Of course, such words are why so many of the Far Right want all mention of Thomas Jefferson stricken from public school textbooks. *sigh* Tue, 10 May 2011 04:37:41 +0000 http://wildhunt.org/blog/2011/05/the-question-no-one-asks-about-david-barton.html#IDComment150520149 http://wildhunt.org/blog/2011/05/the-question-no-one-asks-about-david-barton.html#IDComment150518863 I believe the questions that many of us would have liked to have been asked were "Do you truly believe the religious freedom of the First Amendment applies to only a handful out of the thousands of faiths practiced in this country? Do you truly think some faiths are 'more equal' than others?" I really expected Jon Stewart to pounce on this one, but it's possible he's unaware of just how deep this particular rabbit hole goes... Tue, 10 May 2011 04:34:46 +0000 http://wildhunt.org/blog/2011/05/the-question-no-one-asks-about-david-barton.html#IDComment150518863 http://kallisti.writingkaye.com/2011/03/happy-elaphebolia.html#IDComment134054552 That cake is absolutely adorable! :) Fri, 11 Mar 2011 05:29:01 +0000 http://kallisti.writingkaye.com/2011/03/happy-elaphebolia.html#IDComment134054552 http://wildhunt.org/blog/2011/03/updates-uk-census-romanian-witch-tax-james-arthur-ray-colin-batley-and-father-gary-thomas.html#IDComment133774930 Actually that's not exactly true anymore... "Faith-based initiatives" and all that... Thu, 10 Mar 2011 05:21:31 +0000 http://wildhunt.org/blog/2011/03/updates-uk-census-romanian-witch-tax-james-arthur-ray-colin-batley-and-father-gary-thomas.html#IDComment133774930 http://wildhunt.org/blog/2011/02/on-faith-gops-islam-debate.html#IDComment130662178 "How wonderful would it be if inherently pluralistic faith groupings like Hinduism, Buddhism, or modern Paganism were also allowed to ask questions on the same national podium that Christians now claim as their own?" *Nods* Oh how I wish! Our Constitution might say that there is to be "no religious test" for office, but every election cycle we see the dominant religions blatantly ignoring that. I can barely stand to watch some of these debates, knowing that as a Pagan, most of my elected officials don't even realize I exist, much less care whether or not they might be offending me by pandering to the more popular faiths. Elected officials are supposed to represent all of us. Monotheists, polytheists, atheists and every variation in between. You either treat all religions equally, or you leave religion out of it, if you actually care about the 1st Amendment, anyways. Personally I prefer the latter, but if you're going to include one, you have to open it up to everyone. I think if we were to actually take a closer look, we'd realize that those extremist Christians are just a rather loud minority. But the squeaky wheel gets the grease, or so the saying goes, and so most politicians are easily led into thinking that they are a majority that must be appeased. In reality though, if the numbers are correct (referring to ARIS, etc.) Pagans as a group are growing just as fast (if not faster) than Islam. Fri, 25 Feb 2011 19:25:59 +0000 http://wildhunt.org/blog/2011/02/on-faith-gops-islam-debate.html#IDComment130662178 http://wildhunt.org/blog/2011/02/quick-notes-gay-paganism-project-conversion-and-the-tea-party.html#IDComment130660243 *Nods* The language has since been taken out of the bill, but the gist of it is that federal funding for abortion is only allowed in the case of rape, incest or in cases where the life of the woman is in jeopardy. They were trying to limit which kinds of rape would be eligible, pretty much only those that could be proved to involve force. After all, as one of the Tea Party darlings said, if you're raped, you're supposed to take that lemon of a situation and make some lemonade. *shudders* Fri, 25 Feb 2011 19:15:07 +0000 http://wildhunt.org/blog/2011/02/quick-notes-gay-paganism-project-conversion-and-the-tea-party.html#IDComment130660243