Vote for Cicero

http://index1.biolop.com >brunswick bowling online
http://index1.rfrltk.com >maestro clarinet

http://index1.niopil.com >i ve got it all most mp3
http://index1.oiloin.com >home inspection franchises

http://index1.weewra.com >actenol
http://index1.erojin.com >circle k convenience stores in usa

http://index1.weewra.com >actenol
http://index1.erojin.com >circle k convenience stores in usa

http://index1.8shtuk.com >kama sutra book
http://index1.eroint.com >austin and tourism

http://index1.8shtuk.com >kama sutra book
http://index1.eroint.com >austin and tourism

http://index1.9poilo.com >schubas
http://index1.stityg.com >baby rabbits how many does a rabbit have at one liter

aewdsa saf wefrasf adsf sdaf

aewdsa saf wefrasf adsf sdaf

Contrary to popular belief, the end of the year is one of the best times to look for, awesome descion

Contrary to popular belief, the end of the year is one of the best times to look for, awesome descion

Taylor has a home in the Miami suburb of Palmetto Bay that he bought two years ago. The 24-year-old player is in HjJrFiZwfKpezK his fourth season with the Redskins after playing at the University of Miami, where he was an All-American in 2003

Taylor has a home in the Miami suburb of Palmetto Bay that he bought two years ago. The 24-year-old player is in HjJrFiZwfKpezK his fourth season with the Redskins after playing at the University of Miami, where he was an All-American in 2003

Taylor has a home in the Miami suburb of Palmetto Bay that he bought two years ago. The 24-year-old player is in HjJrFiZwfKpezK his fourth season with the Redskins after playing at the University of Miami, where he was an All-American in 2003

Taylor has a home in the Miami suburb of Palmetto Bay that he bought two years ago. The 24-year-old player is in HjJrFiZwfKpezK his fourth season with the Redskins after playing at the University of Miami, where he was an All-American in 2003

The comic visited the land for the first time in decades to promote his anRrpWTYnkmcou new animated movie about bees, and he was treated like royalty literally

The comic visited the land for the first time in decades to promote his anRrpWTYnkmcou new animated movie about bees, and he was treated like royalty literally

Gear up for grub with a tripleheader of pigskin, including a meeting of brothers in Dallas. Everybody knows it's been a rough year for her, but find out who else had issues

Gear up for grub with a tripleheader of pigskin, including a meeting of brothers in Dallas. Everybody knows it's been a rough year for her, but find out who else had issues

Gear up for grub with a tripleheader of pigskin, including a meeting of brothers in Dallas. Everybody knows it's been a rough year for her, but find out who else had issues

Gear up for grub with a tripleheader of pigskin, including a meeting of brothers in Dallas. Everybody knows it's been a rough year for her, but find out who else had issues

Gear up for grub with a tripleheader of pigskin, including a meeting of brothers in Dallas. Everybody knows it's been a rough year for her, but find out who else had issues

Gear up for grub with a tripleheader of pigskin, including a meeting of brothers in Dallas. Everybody knows it's been a rough year for her, but find out who else had issues

Gear up for grub with a tripleheader of pigskin, including a meeting of brothers in Dallas. Everybody knows it's been a rough year for her, but find out who else had issues

Gear up for grub with a tripleheader of pigskin, including a meeting of brothers in Dallas. Everybody knows it's been a rough year for her, but find out who else had issues

Gear up for grub with a tripleheader of pigskin, including a meeting of brothers in Dallas. Everybody knows it's been a rough year for her, but find out who else had issues

Gear up for grub with a tripleheader of pigskin, including a meeting of brothers in Dallas. Everybody knows it's been a rough year for her, but find out who else had issues

Gear up for grub with a tripleheader of pigskin, including a meeting of brothers in Dallas. Everybody knows it's been a rough year for her, but find out who else had issues

Gear up for grub with a tripleheader of pigskin, including a meeting of brothers in Dallas. Everybody knows it's been a rough year for her, but find out who else had issues

Gear up for grub with a tripleheader of pigskin, including a meeting of brothers in Dallas. Everybody knows it's been a rough year for her, but find out who else had issues

Gear up for grub with a tripleheader of pigskin, including a meeting of brothers in Dallas. Everybody knows it's been a rough year for her, but find out who else had issues

Hi everybody! Wanna see my cool pages? Would you please also visit my homepage? http://amateurhomevideo.tripod.com/sex/amateur-home-video.html >amateur home video
B2AVig8v4S

I am very impressed how you can build webpages! Visit my sites, please: http://idisk.mac.com/asiangirlsinthongs/Public/xxx/asian-girls-in-thongs.html >asian girls in thongs
Yeyo36p9v3

I am very impressed how you can build webpages! Visit my sites, please: http://idisk.mac.com/asiangirlsinthongs/Public/xxx/asian-girls-in-thongs.html >asian girls in thongs
Yeyo36p9v3

Hi, you have awesome site. Let's help each other, please visit my homepage too: http://idisk.mac.com/asianbabecams/Public/babe/asian-babe-cams.html >asian babe cams
VZ4H4Hx8E4

Thanks for the good site and usefulinfo. I found http://amateurstraightguys.tripod.com/photo/amateur-straight-guys.html >amateur straight guys
cA62n6YW8B

Thanks for the good site and usefulinfo. I found http://amateurstraightguys.tripod.com/photo/amateur-straight-guys.html >amateur straight guys
cA62n6YW8B

Hi, you have awesome site. Let's help each other, please visit my homepage too: http://amateurnakedwomen.tripod.com/bbw/amateur-naked-women.html >amateur naked women
sE3si5W3i9

Hi, you have awesome site. Let's help each other, please visit my homepage too: http://amateurnakedwomen.tripod.com/bbw/amateur-naked-women.html >amateur naked women
sE3si5W3i9

Nice design. Please add more smiles to your guestbook http://www.geocities.com/adultamateurvideos/free/adult-amateur-videos.html >adult amateur videos
C5pg339Kj6

Fascinating site and well worth the visit again. I will be back soon http://www.geocities.com/tommyurbanskiwrestler/pictures/tommy-urbanski.html >tommy urbanski
t82xtyY5wN

Your site is great! It is very impressive. I've enjoyed the visit! http://www.geocities.com/weddingspeech/free/wedding-speech.html >weeding speech
92fFW9Nsav

Nice page greetings to all in this guestbook! http://www.geocities.com/al4alinks/adult/al4a.html >al4a
WA6jCD66gQ

I'm glad I found your site! It's nice! Thank you!!! Visit my sites, please:
cA62n6YW8B

Thanks for the good site and usefulinfo. I found http://www.geocities.com/thedrudgereportarchives/matt/drudge-report.html >drudge report
cA62n6YW8B

Thanks for the good site and usefulinfo. I found http://www.geocities.com/thedrudgereportarchives/matt/drudge-report.html >drudge report
cA62n6YW8B

Awesome site! Design is great! Please visit my homepage: http://www.geocities.com/taylorrainpics/info/taylor-rain.html >taylor rain
n483jPmLjc

I'm glad I found your site! It's nice! Thank you!!! Visit my sites, please: http://www.geocities.com/worlddesertmap/wallmap/compass-banking.html >compass banking
E93Gunu7R2

I'm glad I found your site! It's nice! Thank you!!! Visit my sites, please: http://www.geocities.com/worlddesertmap/wallmap/compass-banking.html >compass banking
E93Gunu7R2

Great job. May I ask you to visit my pages and tell me your opinion? http://www.geocities.com/worldwallmaps/map/be-expert-with-map-and-compass.html >be expert with map and compass
E93Gunu7R2

Great job. May I ask you to visit my pages and tell me your opinion? http://www.geocities.com/worldwallmaps/map/be-expert-with-map-and-compass.html >be expert with map and compass
E93Gunu7R2

"Her statement, actually, btw."

Sorry, m'lady. I'm usually better with using genderless pronouns when uncertain of the person to whom I am referring. :-)

And I think I'll just reiterate:

Can I have my civil rights, now?

If fairness, justice, and equality aren't how you would 'want to be treated,' I assure you, it's how Pagans do.

"Paganplace: My last sentence should read:

If you don't, how could we evaluate your condemnation of catholics, EXCEPT, at best, as lazy thinking, blindness, nonsense."

Cause it comes from the personal experience of eighteen years under enforced Catholicism and twenty more of having to deal with the prejudices and human wreckage that keep coming out of it? :)

I don't 'condemn Catholics.' The theology and institutions used to keep claiming dominion over me, though, you bet I got something to say about em. :)

Quoting at length when you accuse me of trying to squelch your expression: (which usually involves screaming oppression when you're not allowed to be the only voice in public dialogue, or when you want the government to put up *Commandments* to worship only your God, for instance.)

"Here's the deal.

"Christians have this belief that they have been given the absolute truth. No need to expand on that, just bear with me."

Trust me, I've been bearing with that a long time.

"Many Christians (can I say all?) put sharing that truth with others under the heading of "love your neighbors". Again, bear with me."

Which was my original point: what you construe as 'loving your neighbor as yourself' is not seen as 'love' by your neighbors that way.

To wit, in the common world, it'd be, and is, considered obnoxious if anyone else did it.

You just seem to think you're above that.

"I believe I am not stretching in asserting that the number of Pagans in the US who have not seen and/or heard this logic progression at least one time could fit into a small conference room."

Yeees...

"So, I conclude that I am safe in asserting that the "us" that PaganPlace refers to is just about every Pagan you might encounter. And, his statement is accurate in the general sense, meaning that there will be a significant number who will not like the way he put it, but agree to the principle behind it."

Her statement, actually, btw.

"The principle: your belief is not our belief. Your value in your belief is not our value in your belief. Your assertion concerning absolute truth (and its sharing) holds no water with us. "

Sharing is one thing. Never leaving people alone, or invading their lives with your edicts or even insults, (even by talking patronizingly about 'absolute truth,' which is neither by any common standard,) ...trying to exclude *others* from public life, or, in fact, defaming them as doing things they don't, to serve this 'truth' of yours, well, that's another.

In fact, claiming that *your* belief in your supremacy overrides other people's boundaries about how *they* want to be treated in their own lives, that's not me failing to understand anything.

It's the same as my original point. You don't actually treat others (or yourselves) very well.

You just claim the ill-treatment is justified. By things that are not evident.

Franklin,

Thank you for your candid reply. There is not much that I can add to what I have already manifested.

Statistical proyections do not mean much to me, let alone, projections made on 1 person's anecdotal evidence. The Christian gospel somewhere states that there will be more happiness in heaven over 1 conversion, then over 100 who just men who need no conversion. Accordingly, no matter what the statistical projections may or may not say, I'm sure you will agree there will likely exist that 1 person out there, and it is for that 1 person that I write.

Thanks again for your response. Peace of Christ be with you.

Anonymous,

You make a reasonable mistake: that I even imply a desire to muzzle anyone, let alone someone wishing to share their faith in any context, even a proselytizing one.

I would be breaking a personal ethic if I failed to disclose that I was not always so tolerant or supportive of the freedom of speech. I am a lifelong Pagan, never raised a Christian, though never removed from it either.

Also, as one who upholds the principles of the scientific method, I must confirm that there are no reliable statistics on even the number of Pagans in the US. There are estimates that insist on a wide margin of error. A very large problem is that so many of us refuse to be publicly identified as Pagan.

I do have copious anecdotal evidence. I am a social activist. My organization is called Delaware Valley Pagan Network. Our estimated regional constituency is somewhere between 2,000 and 10,000.

In that evidence, I find that a majority (personal estimate: two-thirds) of Pagans are ex-Christians. The ones who were the most hurt are also usually the most vocal about it; most, though, left because they found it lacking in some fashion. This same description is applicable to other groups, notably Unitarian Universalists, but also Buddhists.

You are correct. I can offer no proofs. I am also guilty of (attempted) clever language in my previous post, which is why I'm taking a straight tone in this one. My assertion is shaky; I also see that my anecdotes are corroborated everywhere I go. At some point, I will have traveled enough and have collected a sufficiently large sample, but I assure you that my assertion is either correct, or very nearly correct. You can take that on faith (ahem, punning is addictive), or not, as you wish. For the purpose of this discussion, though, two points are very clear:

Over 75% of the US population identifies with Christianity. It dominates our culture. Just as I cannot prove my assertion, it is also disingenuous to assume that the vast majority of the other 25% have not been exposed to the primary messages of Christianity. Apply that to Pagans. I believe the logic is compelling.

As for understanding... another group of anecdotal evidence for you here: I understand the tenets of Christianity better than the majority of Christians I have met. I've read the Bible extensively, with intellectual vigor, while most Christians I've met (most of them RC) have not read as much, and at that under duress. While still a minority, I know a large proportion of Pagans who can say the same for themselves as I have for myself. I caution you to avoid the "true Christian" argument. Respectfully, it will get us nowhere. [But then, that doesn't mean I don't want you to try. You seem very intelligent. You may offer something new for me to consider.]

Franklin Evans:

Our exchange has now centered on the right of Catholics to publicly express our beliefs given that Pagans do not accept it, consider it, as PaganPlace expresses, "non-information".

You argue "...the number of Pagans in the US who have not seen and/or heard this logic progression at least one time could fit into a small conference room....So, I conclude that I am safe in asserting that the "us" that PaganPlace refers to is just about every Pagan you might encounter."

First of all, not all who read this forum are pagans or Christians. Accordingly, what is 'non-information' to Paganplace may be a revelation for these others.

Secondly, you cannot prove your assertion that almost all pagans have heard, let alone understood, the revelation of Christ. Accordingly, there are an indefinite number of pagans for whom this revelation is news, or not adequately understood.

Thirdly, not all pagans are equal. Some are undoubtedly on the fence and history has evidenced this repeatedly as we see with the phenomenon of conversion to Christ.

Any pagan who does not want to read about Christ can just skip to the next message. That's a better solution than having Catholics or christians give up their right to publicly express their beliefs, a right which, incidentally, PaganPlace claims for himself.

Anonymous,

Just to set the context:

"Does that mean, for example, that if someone knew something of infinite value and I did not, I would hope to be informed? Yes. "

[PaganPlace] Yet you refuse to accept it's *non-information to us.*

Here's the deal.

Christians have this belief that they have been given the absolute truth. No need to expand on that, just bear with me.

Many Christians (can I say all?) put sharing that truth with others under the heading of "love your neighbors". Again, bear with me.

I believe I am not stretching in asserting that the number of Pagans in the US who have not seen and/or heard this logic progression at least one time could fit into a small conference room.

So, I conclude that I am safe in asserting that the "us" that PaganPlace refers to is just about every Pagan you might encounter. And, his statement is accurate in the general sense, meaning that there will be a significant number who will not like the way he put it, but agree to the principle behind it.

The principle: your belief is not our belief. Your value in your belief is not our value in your belief. Your assertion concerning absolute truth (and its sharing) holds no water with us.

Paganplace: My last sentence should read:

If you don't, how could we evaluate your condemnation of catholics, EXCEPT, at best, as lazy thinking, blindness, nonsense.

Paganplace --You seem to be rather ambitious with the term 'us' when you write: "Yet you refuse to accept it's *non-information to us.*"

Who do you mean to include with YOUR 'us'? Surely yopu don't mean everyone who may read this forum.

You are also rather subjective in your use of the terms 'love' and 'abuse', for you write: "I think I mentioned you guys don't seem to actually love yourselves very much, and assume everyone wants the kind of abuse you therefore think is needed to be heaped on everyone."

Catholics believe the body is the temple of the Holy Spirit, the recipient of the body and blood of Jesus Christ, our saviour. When one thinks or acts or fails to act in ways that deny this, with one's self or others, one is guilty of abuse. Yet this does not seem to be what you seem to mean by abuse.

For example, catholics consider abortion to be a grave crime. Do you consider abortion abuse? Would you abort a child born of 2 uncommited adults who had sex with condoms? Would you claim that doing so is not abuse?

Would you not consider 'poverty' in a world full of riches 'abuse' by those who fail to share the wealth?

Perhaps you will care to carefully explain what you consider abuse to be and not to be? If you don't, how could we evaluate your condemnation of catholics at best as lazy thinking, blindness, nonsense.

Actually, anonymous poster, when you said this, I'd actually addressed the very thing just a couple posts above:

"Replace "One cannot treat pagans as one would not want to be treated" with "Love your neighbour as yourself".

I think I mentioned you guys don't seem to actually love yourselves very much, and assume everyone wants the kind of abuse you therefore think is needed to be heaped on everyone.

Especially 'nonbelievers.'

"Hopefully that will satisfy pagans in the forum, for I don't think you can ask more of a Catholic or of anyone else."

I can ask more of an American, though.

"Does that mean, for example, that if someone knew something of infinite value and I did not, I would hope to be informed? Yes. "

Yet you refuse to accept it's *non-information to us.*

"The Moderate:
Dear Anonymous:
Seems that you have multiple personality disorder."

On a technical note, The Moderate, 'Anonymous' may seem to be different people because it probably *is.*

'Anonymous' is the screen name your post gets when you don't pick or fill in a screen name, which is a practice I highly recommend. :)

Just pick a name, folks.

Someone might think "you're all insane." :)

nmyrvdiph lcmthbny olghjt wlnsiz fmjgwnlxe itzsvgk coxl

nmyrvdiph lcmthbny olghjt wlnsiz fmjgwnlxe itzsvgk coxl

nmyrvdiph lcmthbny olghjt wlnsiz fmjgwnlxe itzsvgk coxl

Dear Franklin:

Not trying to put you off. Just trying to keep up too much sometimes.

I am sure we will catch up on different topics as they unfold.

Replace "One cannot treat pagans as one would not want to be treated" with "Love your neighbour as yourself".

Hopefully that will satisfy pagans in the forum, for I don't think you can ask more of a Catholic or of anyone else.

Does that mean, for example, that if someone knew something of infinite value and I did not, I would hope to be informed? Yes.

Does it mean that I would want it imposed on me? No.

Does it mean that such someone would have to stop trying to reason with others in an open forum given that I have already rejected what such someone considers of value? No, because it's an open forum and there are an indefinite quantity others reading.

Moderate,

Good answer. I'll get back to you.

Hey, Franklin,

It seems to me that the responses I have to PAGANPLACE, and TARRA GAZELLE are pretty much duplicative of what I would have said to you. No offense, but I don't think there are two fully independent sets of questions running around.

Look up my posts on the Free Exercise Clause, the Establishment Clause, and the basic questions of the theology involved in modern Paganism, and its realtionship to deductive religion. If you still want to have a further discussion please differentiate your particular questions and comments, I will try to get to it as I get the time.

Hey, Moderate, the polite assumption is that you missed my thoughts of substance posted July 6, 2007 12:08 PM.

If you did read the post, and declined to respond, where does that leave the reader of your last post above?

Just wonderin'...

Hey Tito Jackson:

Who is name calling? Why that would be you, Child.

Do you have any thoughts of substance? If so, lets hear them.

Hey Moderate and Paganplace...get a room already!

You both sound like children in need of a nap.

Dear Anonymous:

Seems that you have multiple personality disorder.

One minute its:

"These threads are an embarrassment to all thinking people in the 21st century. These dumb issues have been fought over for centuries,and during the Enlightenment rationalism won; except in Islamic countries,and the USA.
Lets stop quibbling over fairy tales.
Lets get real.We are all we got.This is all she wrote."

The next minute it is:

"I do not follow Christ because I am forbidden to be a pagan but because I experience his living peace."

If I recall rightly you have expressed other widely variant and contradictory stuff as well.

Perhaps your name is "Legion"?

Perhaps you worship the Golden Troll? :-))

I mean, hey. You say you 'Love your neighbor as yourselves.'

You don't seem to love yourselves, very much. You say everyone's horrible, horrible, damned creatures with no redeeming value except blind obedience. You've apparently got 'loving yourself' confused with 'being selfish' and then flagellate yourselves over it in one way or another.

I mean, yikes! Don't treat me like *that!* :)

"One cannot treat pagans as one would not want to be treated. Isn't that the golden rule?

Therefore, I agree with Father Reese, and would only add that sincere pagans are invited to get to know Jesus Christ, who we are certain is a person of the only one triune God."

This is why I think the 'Golden Rule' guarantees no fairness, all you have to do is say to yourself, 'Well, if I were me, but not Christian, I'd want someone to make me Christian, whatever it took.'

I mean, they call *us* 'moral relativists.'

Like it's a bad thing compared to assuming you're superior to others cause how 'you would want to be treated' can be construed to mean, 'I'd want to be like me at any cost, so it's ok to be unjust.'

"Therefore, I agree with Father Reese, and would only add that sincere pagans are invited to get to know Jesus Christ, who we are certain is a person of the only one triune God."

Send my regrets. Commitments elsewhere. Sales calls have already come. To home, office, and entertainment venues on a constant basis.

Can I have my civil rights, now?

If fairness, justice, and equality aren't how you would 'want to be treated,' I assure you, it's how Pagans do.

I am a catholic but if I was a pagan, or subscribed to any other faith, religion, tradition or set of beliefs or disbeliefs, I would not convert because they suppressed them.

I do not follow Christ because I am forbidden to be a pagan but because I experience his living peace.

One cannot treat pagans as one would not want to be treated. Isn't that the golden rule?

Therefore, I agree with Father Reese, and would only add that sincere pagans are invited to get to know Jesus Christ, who we are certain is a person of the only one triune God.

Dear Tarra,

I must apologize for the Molek question. I should have at least put a :-))) kind of thing to indicate that it was a flip comment. I did not actually expect to hear that you are at work on a reprise of Molek. These blogs are very rough and tumble. I get a lot of rocks thrown at me, and I throw some back sometimes. That can lead to misunderstandings. I didn't actually do a very good job on that post.

Subsequently I had some productive and interesting discussions with PAGANPLACE. Hopefully we will also.

http://www.milpagan.org/media/statistics.html is the cited source of the # of Pagans in the US military. A Defense Department reference would be the only real source of accurate information.

But let us do the math anyway: 4300 Pagans/6702 military bases (http://www.globalpolicy.org/empire/intervention/2004/01bases.htm) or less than one Pagan per base on average.

There are probably more Pagans working for Wallmart. Maybe they should add a few Pagan chaplins to the "welcomers".

And there are probably a heck of a lot more atheists in the military. Another positive for atheism. No chaplins required!!

And with so few Pagans in the military, why are we discussing this issue?????

And Moderate,

How exactly should we deal with those who think we are good enough to be cannon fodder for the illegal war of a God ridden Christian...but suspect of being baby killing monsters when it comes to having equal rights?

We are of a different religion...no better ( I suppose) then any other. I think though we respect others more then the reverse.

Moleck came from a part of the world where civilization got it's start...where they figure the Garden of Eden might have been...so whose God was he? Not ours..we are of the Other People:
http://www.caw.org/articles/otherpeople.html

The Moderate,
Moleck was a babylonian God...not one of ours. It is said that the Babylonians sacrificed their children to him..I only have Christian's word for that. One thing I have learned, never allow an enemy to define you. The victors writes the histories.

But either way, Moleck is not a Wiccan god.

seems to me against common sence to give up your future to the fires. Babylonia was a cultured civilization...I have a feeling the real truth was that the children passed between the fires.

terra

The early Christians were persecuted because they didn't follow a mainstream religion. The religious hierarchy of their time spread disinformation about their rituals: for instance, that the eucharist (the body and blood of Christ) was literal blood and flesh from human sacrifice.
Later, during the middle ages, the official church spread the "blood libel" that Jews were sacrificing Catholic babies in their synagogues.

Sound familiar?

The 'moderate,' ...If I get short with you after dealing all day with people like you expecting to sit in judgement over my civil rights as though it were *necessary* for me to construct some 'airtight reason' I don't follow some 'Molek' character you brought in from Gods-know-where, well, do beg pardon.

You wanna understand, work with us, here, a bit. Step outside the adversarial literalism for half a minute.

This is, at the very least, a different worldview than you presume: The Christian presumption seems to be that the world owes you a heck of an explanation if it deviates from what you believe your Bible tells you about it.

We believe that if your book can't get along with the world, then it owes the *world* a heck of an explanation.

None has been forthcoming.

We are not characters out of your book, worshipping some Molek, or money, or being 'selfish,' or any of the other things you Christians accuse us of without ever bothering to factcheck.

Darn right we get testy after a lot of that, particularly when you *whine* about us not spending enough hours and hours laboriously dealing with your wilfull-incomprehensions and disinformation.

Our religion. Not yours.

Is there somehow not enough *text* we've written here for you to read... to acknowledge at least that, a) No, you *don't* get it, and b) It's not up to you?

Get it?

Dear Anonymous:

It is fun watching pseudo scientific postmoderns to lost in the woods to do anything but repeat themselves, too.

KT, just one more "yes" and you're there.

Now about that God? http://www.hoax-buster.org/sellyoursoul - directly from the sacred scriptures, all of them and not just selected pieces comes the truth. Yes it's the same God, however, the evidence says that particular God is actually Devil.

Awaiting your sound logic showing that it's God.

Remember: calling Devil God does not make Devil God but does make Devil happy. Devil has a huge bank account which explains how the big money goes to those who imitate Moses by leading the multitudes to hell.

Crapolla! Devil gets all His money from people worshiping God at their "churches, temples, synagogues and mosques" and a few bucks from Bush himself. Actually it was Chaney who coughed up the doe-re-me for America's pastor, Billy Graham.

The topic is about letting the ministry of the "gullibles" in on the big money. Shall witch doctors be paid by the government too? You do believe in faith?

The Moderate asked:

"Who are they [assumption from context: modern Pagans]? Do you have a Canon? If so, what is it? That is an honest question, not an attack."

I honor your honesty, and offer you an honest answer, in two parts.

1) It is instructive but short of providing accurate conclusions to study ancient religions on the way to understanding modern paganism. Except for a small (but substantial) subset who use the label "reconstructionists", modern pagans are embedded in modern culture and philosophy. We have not rejected modernity; we simply seek for our spiritual answers outside the institutionalized religions.

2) "Institutionalized" is implied behind your Canon question. I submit that you are phrasing it poorly, and hasten to add that I don't blame you for it. Modern, mainstream religions are to republicanism as modern paganisms are to democracy, in their strictest senses. Another metaphor, one I prefer actually, is that mainstream religions are revealed (the Canon you ask about) and modern paganism is acquired. Some do have Canons in development (take a close look at Wicca in about 100 years), while the rest of us cling to our solitary spirituality, happily reinventing the wheel as we go.

The point is simple. Ask not for our conformity to a single standard. Ask instead for our demonstration of our faith. Do not force us to prove what we are not -- worshippers of a Christian Devil, practitioners of evil acts (as a student of history, perhaps you are aware of the Roman propaganda against the early Christians) -- but ask us what we are. Our Jesuit host, if he is only half as learned as a Jesuit I once knew, will find much to recognize in the simplest of beliefs of the average pagan.

Ask us what we believe. Meet us half way by looking beyond the personally inspired symbols or the direct borrowings from the symbols and images of the ancients.

And be assured that we will join you in the frustration of needing to start from scratch much more often with the average pagan than with the average adherent to one of the Abrahamic Three. Adherents to conformity, we are not. :-)

These threads are an embarrassment to all thinking people in the 21st century. These dumb issues have been fought over for centuries,and during the Enlightenment rationalism won; except in Islamic
countries,and the USA.
Lets stop quibbling over fairy tales.
Lets get real.We are all we got.This is all she wrote.

Its fun watching the desperate supernaturalists squabbling over which make believe stories are the
true make believe stories.

PAGANPLACE

“Umm, 'the moderate,' ...what you see as 'throwing stones' may just be 'asking questions' to me.”

Actually, your manners, as distinct from your faith, do need some polish. I could rake the earlier blogs for numerous examples if you wish. Something for you to bear in mind meanwhile, is that the Army Chaplains I know are respectful of other faiths.

But to take just one example from yesterday: “You know all those like dinosaur bones and carbon dates and simian instincts that freak you out?”

Doesn't that imply that I am a non-scientific fundamentalist? Nothing could be further from the truth. A reasonable person would take that as rock throwing. BTW, no serious Catholic theologians even in the middle ages believed that malarkey from Bishop Ussher. Father Reese could point you to the towering scientific achievements of the Society of Jesus. This strawman nonsense of hanging fundamentalism of all Christians is really beyond the bounds of the reasonable.

“Like, who is this Molek you demand I advance beyond?”

I demand nothing. The “Pagan” (actually a Latin word meaning countryman) religions of the Ancient World comprise a VERY diverse collection of Gods, practices, and customs. Asking you where your religious roots are is NOT making a demand. “Pagan” covers vast territories. It is no different from asking a Catholic what is in his Canon. (No, I am not a Catholic, even though I have the deepest respect for the Pope Benedict XVI, and Pope John Paul II, and for the Society of Jesus. I also have the greatest respect for some “Pagan” philosophers from the Ancient World)

“Seems like I ought to know if it's a reason you question my civil rights.”

When and how did I question your Civil Rights? That is why I advised you to take a breath. I am not your enemy. I do not attack your Civil Rights.

“This is actually important.
Pagan people are not characters out of your Bible.”

Who are they? Do you have a Canon? If so, what is it? That is an honest question, not an attack.

“We're real Americans. Right here, right now.”

I did not say, or imply you were not "real Americans". Perhaps you are confusing me with extremists that you may know. Depending on how you define the term, there are between 1 billion and about 1.8 billion Christians in the world. You are bound to get some nut cases in any collection of that size, but it is folly to assume the extremes are representative of the mean.

“Claiming we believe other than we do is no excuse for... whatever this nonsense is”

I have made no claims with respect to your beliefs. I have only asked questions. I have noted that you personally seem to have poor manners and be prone to thowing rocks, but that is a separate issue.

Two cautionary tales about new religious sects are the disastrous Jim Jones, and David Koresh. Poorly considered religion can be dangerous to ones health. That is why I am asking you about the deliberative processes that your sect may be undertaking. Please take a breath and note that I am asking a question here, not making an assertion or attack.

Whozit Posted July 5, 2007 2:39 PM "Is their Christ the Christ of the Lutherern? Is their interplanetary God the God of the United Methodists? Is their Heaven that aspired to by the Church of the Brethren?"

Yes, yes, and yes. By the way, how does the military handle Buddhists, Hindus, or Shinto people?

Umm, 'the moderate,' ...what you see as 'throwing stones' may just be 'asking questions' to me.

We don't have this particular tradition outside battle in my country.

Like, who is this Molek you demand I advance beyond?

Seems like I ought to know if it's a reason you question my civil rights.

This is actually important.

Pagan people are not characters out of your Bible.

We're real Americans. Right here, right now.

Claiming we believe other than we do is no excuse for... whatever this nonsense is.

Paganplace:

As I read your posts, I think they have nothing to do with what I am saying. You clearly imagine a very different viewpoint than I actually have. If you want to discuss faith, I would be the last to mock you.

I myself have been many places on the spectrum of faiths and no faith. My faith is a work in progress and knows no superiority to yours. As you know, I am quite forthright when faced with rock throwers, and I do bat rocks back. That is my right, and it is reasonable on a rough and tumble blog like this.

I would suggest that you take a breath and relax. I am not your enemy.

" BGone:

PAGANPLACE, do your ?priests? receive "gifts"? Is there a collection, an organization to be supported? How does your faith work financially? Where there's money there's crime possible."

What would you like? A guarantee against crime, say, by, religious folk receiving a stipend?

Christian religion isn't free of money, it's just rich enough to pretend it is.

We pay our own way. Pagan clergy have day jobs or else in a few cases stretch a disability check they bought into in case, say, you become terminally ill or something.

"Murphy's Law: If anything can happen it will."

Then you'd best not stress about it, I suppose.

How bout you look at people?

"I have no way of knowing if the pope believes in God. All I can say he believes in for sure is money. He has a gigantic organization to support, with gifts to God. Only problem is that God doesn't get the money."

Does he need some?

Never thought much of it, myself, but it's not my religion, neither.

Here. Have a gun. If I tell you your soul depends on paying me something, you know what to do.

I will say, though, your soul might be a little happier if you stopped freaking out and did something helpful. It doesn't have to be big. Just honest.

"Pagans are different?"

Yes, in many ways. We do gotta eat, but we'll tell you bout that too.

" I can't tell if those in charge believe in anything. There are people in charge of something, like priest, bishops, maybe a pope? How about organization, position, power, money? Any of that or are you true followers of Jesus, "sell all your earthly possessions and give to the poor""

Through the Big Christian Gilt, usually, yes.

That's clearly a mess.

What I can say for Pagan clergy is, we'll neither say you owe us anything, nor pretend we live off pleasant smells. I don't get paid jack.

What else you think of it is really just you.

Paganplace:

You throw rocks at Christians all the time.

For you I offer the advice I have been given:

Judge not, lest ye be judged with the same measure.

If you don't know who Molek was you should put the word in to the fabled Oracle called "Google". Have you heard of it? It leads to great riches of the mind (and a lot of junk. :-)))

I studied the "Pagan" religions of the ancient world extensively as I was coming out of my Atheist period.

I suggest you start with "The Greek Myths" by Robert Graves. I read it from cover to cover. Next read "The Library" by Apollodorus. After that go on to "Theurgy and the Soul - The Neoplatonism of Iamblichus" By Gregory Shaw. I can dig some more off my shelf if you want a larger reading list.

Then you might have a clue as to what I am talking about. Until then, you should hold your fire.

I'm going to put this to you gently...

You know all those like dinosaur bones and carbon dates and simian instincts that freak you out?

Whsssht.

(stagewhisper) Earth and human beings like myself were not put on Earth to be foils for your book.*

*Gasp!*

Like, for instance, I have absolutely no clue who 'Molek' is supposed to be.

You're demanding I prove we've 'advanced beyond' (with such sterling examples of total xenophobic hysteria as St Paul) ...umm.. someone we never fricking heard of.

Do you mean 'Moloch?'

Not our bag. Not a character from our theology.

Sorry. Maybe go burn someone else.

Or take a wild stab at novelty and do something nice instead of insisting someone somewhere 'must be worse.'

How bout it?

OK, really, I hate to break up the speculation, here, but.

Ahem.

Excuse us.

It's *our Mother-loving religion.*

If you want to find out more about it, you could, like, talk to us?

Or shut up?

You *don't have to get it.*

If you'd like to try, I'll see what I can do, but, really.

*You don't get to judge.*

Sorry.

Look at me.

I'm an American.

Get it?

No.

Look at me.

I'm an American.

Get it?

You don't *get to judge.*

Get it?

Dear lepidopteryx:

“There are already more Pagans than Muslims in the military, yet there are Muslim chaplains, but no Pagan ones.”

Interesting point. Is it based on sound survey research? If so, I would conclude that there should be Chaplains for Pagans.

“Meaning what? Pay taxes? We do that.”

Yes, and all the rest. Good.

“Neither would the stoning of adulterers. What's your point?”

You make my point exactly. Thousands of years ago Jews believed that lots of things including adultery should be capital offenses. During the intervening time they refined their understanding of the real meaning of their God's words.

The Pagan religion has largely been in a deep freeze for maybe sixteen hundred years. The work to update it to the current understanding of humane behavior in relation to the God's will may well remain in large part to be done.

For example, Zeus, came to forbid human sacrifice by Classical Greek times in the Olympian scriptures (which Moderns call myths), but the followers of Molek never got the message. The ethics of your religion need to be as carefully developed as were, say, those set forth by, St. Paul, St. Augustine, and Gospels of St. Mathew, St. Mark, St. Luke, and St. John.

PAGANPLACE, do your ?priests? receive "gifts"? Is there a collection, an organization to be supported? How does your faith work financially? Where there's money there's crime possible.

Murphy's Law: If anything can happen it will.

I have no way of knowing if the pope believes in God. All I can say he believes in for sure is money. He has a gigantic organization to support, with gifts to God. Only problem is that God doesn't get the money.

Pagans are different? I can't tell if those in charge believe in anything. There are people in charge of something, like priest, bishops, maybe a pope? How about organization, position, power, money? Any of that or are you true followers of Jesus, "sell all your earthly possessions and give to the poor"

Whozit: **Who decides who is qualified to be a chaplain? If you follow Odin, would you feel well served by a Chaplain who follows Gaia? In another of these 'expert' opinion bits, there is a professor of Christian History is attempts to teach about the polytheists whose belief systems lead to practices within early Christianity and some child claims that such practices are not Pagan, that she knows what Pagan is because she is a Pagan and those are not her beliefs.**

While Pagan is a rather broad umbrella term, there are enough similarities and commonalities among various paths that I don't think a follower of a Bast path would object to a chaplain who was a follower of an Odin path. I have been to gatherings where people of many paths are able to harmonize quite well together despite the differing details.

**This would, I think, be pretty much the response of any one Pagan to finding their base Chaplain was not of their brand of "paganism", just as a Unitarian might find having a Southern Baptist Chaplain might not meet his/ her spiritual needs.**

Actually, there's probably more commonality among various Pagan paths than there is between UU's and Southern Baptists. How do I know this? I'm a Pagan who also belongs to a UU church, and was raised Southern Baptist.

Frank Collins asked: so where is this pagan church? what is the common document for pagans? are all pagans alike? come on - was being a hippy a religion even thought they got hi and "saw god?"

There are Pagan churches all over the country. You might look up Circle Sanctuary, Covenant of the Goddess, the First Church of Wicca, the Aquarian Tabernacle Church...I could go on if you need me to. The common document is the 501c3 from the government. Are all Pagans alike? No more than all Jews or Christians. Your last question doesn't deserve an answer.

By the way, Bgone:

"Terrorized by threats of hell applies to the three great faiths. Gullible applies to Pagans if I read the fine print correctly. It's my opinion that gullible is a more curable mental illness that terrorized. I could be wrong you know. Do you make sacrifices to the gods or receive them? Is it really better to give than receive?"

Would you actually like to see a Pagan service sometime? I think you're the one terrorized by 'Angels' and the like.

Wouldn't want to disappoint you, but, it's really just not like that.

"FYIGURL, I was actually funning, however. Pagans are on the same page as all others in my opinion, tax free, tax deductible from tax exempt facilities says it all for all "faiths" no matter."

Rarely, in practice, though. This is all about some folks not considering us a 'real' faith, remember?

We need weekly services just to get 501c3 exemptions for our temples in many cases, even if our actual religion says quarter and cross quarter days, and maybe something monthly on the lunar cycle.

Well said, Father Reese. The security of your faith is evident in the tolerance you show people of other faiths. And while we do not share the same religion, I am proud to share a country with you.

FYIGURL, I was actually funning, however. Pagans are on the same page as all others in my opinion, tax free, tax deductible from tax exempt facilities says it all for all "faiths" no matter. Then there's the Reformation to guide me, and you too if you can take it.

Tony Soprano called that "going into business for ones self." So with that thought in mind just exactly what are Pagans up to anyhow? In other words, where do I send the gods money and who spends it for the gods on what? The mafia is a honest, straight forward pack of crooks.

Terrorized by threats of hell applies to the three great faiths. Gullible applies to Pagans if I read the fine print correctly. It's my opinion that gullible is a more curable mental illness that terrorized. I could be wrong you know. Do you make sacrifices to the gods or receive them? Is it really better to give than receive?

Replace the Chaplain with an Ethicist if the serviceperson requests. Ethics should be comforting to atheists and other non monotheists.
There are too many variants in practice among pagans imho for one to satisfy another.
I like the Unitarian Universalist model of having 7 "principles"
we aspire to. I should think some form of universal agreement on basic principles like that would be helpful to the services, giving a transferable core of values to base counselling on regardless of religion.

It is all very well talking about voting for Cicero. But we know very well the narrow-minded Loyal Bushies and their sanctimonious allies on the fundamentalist Right would have opted for Octavian and Caesarism every time.

Who, they say, is better fitted to protect us? They will trade for imagined security against real constitutional liberties every time. Their only cavil with George W. Bush is that he won't act fast enough to set up the GOP's totalitarian project and "unitary executive" so that Scalia & Co. can bless it. He's too lazy, inarticulate and incompetent to be the kind of Mussolini the GOP really lusts after and hungers for.

Cicero? These days, he'd be written off by right-wing talk radio as a sissy liberal elitist who doubts the righteousness of empire and praises the virtues of a representative republic and an uncorrupted Senate.

The armed Roman thugs who chopped off Cicero's head and put it on a stick in the Forum are analogous to the right-wing neocon hawks of today who can't wait until the nukes start winging their way toward Tehran and we really take off the gloves in Iraq.

Jesuit Reese risks angry blowback from superstitious elements and Christian Dominionist fanatics. Reese's relaxed and tempered theology, however, would have found favor among the Framers, mostly deists, who had no truck with the Pat Robertsons of their day. The Founders would be appalled by those on the Christian Right who try to foment a "war of civilizations" with the Muslim world or claim "We are fighting Satan" in the Mideast.

Jefferson said, "History, I believe, furnishes no example of a priest-ridden people maintaining a free civil government. This marks the lowest grade of ignorance of which their civil as well as religious leaders will always avail themselves for their own purposes" (Letter to von Humboldt, 1813). "In every country and in every age, the priest has been hostile to liberty. He is always in alliance with the despot, abetting his abuses in return for protection to his own" (Letter to H. Spafford, 1814).

The Treaty of Tripoli, unanimously ratified by the Senate and signed by President John Adams, said (Art. 11): "As the Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion; as it has in itself no character of enmity against the laws, religion, or tranquillity, of Mussulmen; and, as the said States never entered into any war, or act of hostility against any Mahometan nation, it is declared by the parties, that no pretext arising from religious opinions, shall ever produce an interruption of the harmony existing between the two countries".

Jefferson concluded, "And the day will come, when the mystical generation of Jesus, by the Supreme Being as His Father, in the womb of a virgin, will be classed with the fable of the generation of Minerva, in the brain of Jupiter."

The Enlightenment views of men like the Framers would be savaged by right-wing GOP talk radio if they ever appeared in our day. Maybe today's Jefferson or Madison could seek refuge within scattered covens of Pagans here and there, but there is little doubt the general populace would be aggressively hostile to their kind of civilized arguments and propositions.

YELLOWDOG, Rome is in the "survival" mode, no time for things that make sense.

The next religious fad may well be Lucifer worship, the 4th Abrahamic religion. It too will use the Bible as it's source document, undeniable word of their God, Lucifer.

Did Lucifer actually lose the fight with Michael for control of the kingdom of heaven or is Lucifer disguising Himself? Could Lucifer have overthrown God in heaven and taken over? What would Lucifer say He was, His title as the new Lord of heaven, God? What did the being in the fire Moses spoke to say when Moses ask, "who's in there"?

http://www.hoax-buster.org/sellyoursoul has the authenticated pictures of the big battle in the shy when Lucifer and his angels had it out with Michael and his angels. According to those pictures and writings that accompanied them Lucifer lost. Did Lucifer lose or is He invoking the principle of "those who believe without seeing" all doubters being shut out of heaven? All are shut out of the place run by the being in the fire Moses made the deal with according to the three great faiths. Are they just being fooled by a sickly God that lost out in heaven?

If so, Lucifer won, then only those who worship, honor, adore, glorify and sacrifice to Lucifer will be entering the kingdom of heaven. How could we deny those who faith that God is really Lucifer just like the Bible says He is, how could we deny them chaplains? Winning fights is what the military is all about. We certainly want our boy's chaplains to be on the winning side do we not? Who won, Michael or Lucifer? Did Michael land on the deck of an aircraft carrier and declare victory too soon and end up losing?

I nominate you for the papacy, or if that's not possible, a key job in the Curia.
What you say makes more sense and is more atuned to the Gospel than what we hear coming from Rome these days.

Bgone: "Correct, we would need at least one Pagan chaplain for every god and there's a lot of gods"

Paganpalce: Umm, no. Not correct. Paganism doesn't work that way. What part of 'Polytheist' are you not understanding, here?

furthermore, military chaplains are trained to serve the needs of members of various faiths. i.e. a chaplain might be Catholic, but knows how and must be comfortable with providing services and rituals for any other religion. therefore a Pagan chaplain would not only work with Pagan servicemembers of all varieties, but also any religion of servicemembers in the company he was assigned to.

"I was told of a case in Iraq where a Pagan group was meeting in a tent, and the tent was taken from them and they had to meet out in the sun...they had things thrown at them and went through great discrimination, even as they were wounded and one died."
and then the mean Christians killed the puppies and ate them. And then they threw rocks. And this guy, okay? uh, this guy was mean. And one died. oh, I said that already.
get a life.

Frank: "so where is this pagan church?"

You're standing on it.

Bgone: "Correct, we would need at least one Pagan chaplain for every god and there's a lot of gods"

Umm, no. Not correct. Paganism doesn't work that way. What part of 'Polytheist' are you not understanding, here?

WHOZIT, during WW2 and Korea there were many who "saw the light" on the way to the mail box where "greetings" from the draft board waited. The ministry has been a safe haven for a long time. Check out the word, sanctuary.

With Pagan chaplains there would be a rush to the ministry, oh, about the time the boat hit Omaha beach. That would be for those who chose to "rough it" out rather than take holy orders and eat in the officer's mess sooner.

Correct, we would need at least one Pagan chaplain for every god and there's a lot of gods. That brings up the obvious that the three great faiths have solved: Where do I send the money with some reasonable degree of confidence it will go to the correct god's treasury, like the loot form Jericho,, went straight to God's treasury.

Why do all religious discussions always lead to money?

This is a thoughtful and well-written screed by a man of faith. His delineation and demarcation of the role that church and state play in our society should be followed much more closely by those who claim to be preaching God's truth but have no problem flouting some of the basic tenets of the book they follow so closely. Nevertheless, I must take slight issue with his exultation of Cicero. While Cicero was a moderate in his time who often judged fairly and did a great deal to salvage the failing Roman Republic, he could also be harsh and eqivocating. While some may see this as a result of a well thought out process, and indeed it was in many cases, it also demonstrates a lack of convictions which helped usher in the Roman Empire. Cicero was also a terrible anti-Semite, and while the Jews of that era differed vastly from the Jews of today, his essays on Jews could be seen in the same light as what Martin Luther or Adolf Hitler would say two thousand years later. However, back to the point at hand, and that is, we must respect all faiths but establish none in the public sphere.

Assigning Pagan chaplains would be difficult if not impossible. "Pagan" is an umbrella term for a variety of religious practices outside the triumvate of Islam-Judeo-Christian. Neo-Pagans, Wiccans, Gaiasts, Hellenists, Norse...even within these specific practices, there are significant variations. There is no seminary for Wiccan priest/esses. There is no seminary for Modern Norsemen.

Who decides who is qualified to be a chaplain? If you follow Odin, would you feel well served by a Chaplain who follows Gaia? In another of these 'expert' opinion bits, there is a professor of Christian History is attempts to teach about the polytheists whose belief systems lead to practices within early Christianity and some child claims that such practices are not Pagan, that she knows what Pagan is because she is a Pagan and those are not her beliefs. This would, I think, be pretty much the response of any one Pagan to finding their base Chaplain was not of their brand of "paganism", just as a Unitarian might find having a Southern Baptist Chaplain might not meet his/ her spiritual needs.

Elect a Pagan? We just might in this next election. Mouthing Christianity, the LDS Doctrine and Covenants, Pearl of Great Price and Book of Mormon would not match most folks notion of a Christian Church, despite their name. Is their Christ the Christ of the Lutherern? Is their interplanetary God the God of the United Methodists? Is their Heaven that aspired to by the Church of the Brethren?

Well put Mr. Reese. Why doesn't your church take the identical position in Poland. Why does it prohibit proselytizers of other ilk?

Well put Mr. Reese. Why doesn't your church take the identical position in Poland. Why does it prohibit proselytizers of other ilk?

In case you aren't familiar with ancient Egyptian angels that served Pharaoh you can have a look at http://www.hoax-buster.org/sellyoursoul We can argue that the big money does not go to those who lead the multitudes to hell or we can ask if Pharaoh got the big money. The answer is too obvious?

Are Pagan Jews, Christians and Muslims leading us to heaven or hell? Why not let the "honest" Pagans in on the TAX money or is it a matter of greed on the part of the three great faiths,, in angels? Will one more hell bound group spoil the whole barrel?

Question Rev Reese.

Is there such a thing as a monotheist? Aren't angels actually Pagan gods. According to Pagans gods are supernatural beings. Aren't angels supernatural beings, gods that serve God? Bad angels, bad gods, bad servants of God even tried to take over heaven?

In the ancient Egyptian book of the dead we have pictures of gods, not disputed to be gods by anyone. Well, there is this one fellow why says those gods are serving God, Pharaoh to be exact and thus they are actually angels. Perhaps angels are gods? Everyone believes they are gods. Are they angels too as he says?

We must be careful to not identify God, a man, the son of god/God, Pharaoh? Is that the problem? Why we can't bring ourselves to admit there is no such thing as a monotheist,, unless of course there is a class of folk who only believe there is one supernatural being. Angels are supernatural beings?

With the above in mind, are we not all Pagans or atheists? I prefer secular to atheist. There may well be A god and one may not believe something that doesn't exist that doesn't exist,, unless one can prove it doesn't exist. Don't you think?

Moderate:
**Should come to pass that a great many people in the Military become Pagans, then it should be treated like the religions that have more members.**
There are already more Pagans than Muslims in the military, yet there are Muslim chaplains, but no Pagan ones.

** So long as they render unto Caesar what is Caesar's.**
Meaning what? Pay taxes? We do that.

**Also, it depends on the Pagan practices. The ritual incineration of babies in the worship of Molek, say, would not be consistent with modern law.**
Neither would the stoning of adulterers. What's your point?

Well said, Father Reese. I would vote for Cicero too.

As to a Pagan Chaplaincy, I think that should be a matter of volunteers doing the work. Should come to pass that a great many people in the Military become Pagans, then it should be treated like the religions that have more members. So long as they render unto Caesar what is Caesar's.

Also, it depends on the Pagan practices. The ritual incineration of babies in the worship of Molek, say, would not be consistent with modern law.

The most dangerous members of the military chaplaincy are those who use their position to push a particular and exclusivist view of religion. The most notorious are not the Catholics the evangelical Christians (look up Mikey Weinstein and the US Air Force Academy).
At least pagans don't believe in denigrating the faiths of others.

Reese, you show your lack of understanding of Christianity with every post! "To those whom much is given, much is expected", and being a priest you have much to answer for! You know darn well the God won't take excuses and your wanting to be politically correct won't float when you know what responsibility God has given you. How can you turn your back on the Eucharist and Jesus' desire to have all come to him {not to be the best pagan you can be}. May God have mercy on your soul!

And, frankly, on the 'Christians persecuted Pagans, Pagans persecuted Christians,' ...you cannot simultaneously say our interrupted heritage and modern existence illegitimizes Paganism as a valid spiritual path, while simultaneously claiming modern Pagans have somehow oppressed Christians.

This is simply not true.

In understanding us, it's *simplest* to start with the idea that this is a new religion (really a bunch of em) of ancient Gods in a modern world. If you start from there, you might be better able to see the cultural connections without presuming some nonexistent continuity between tree-huggers and the likes of Nero, ...the Roman elites that Cicero spoke of so indignantly (and possibly with some amount of hyperbole) were clearly way out of step with the culture of the time.

What's this story you're talking about, Terra? Hadn't heard about that one.

Aww, I thought this one was going to be more about Cicero, and was saving it for last. I found Catholic school to be kind of crazy, but I just loved the Latin. :)

On this, though:

"Does that mean that every military base must have a pagan chaplain? No. It would be entirely legitimate for the military to have some religiously neutral, pragmatic regulation that requires there be a certain number of adherents before a chaplain is assigned to a base."

I think this guy doesn't have the facts on the issue: today's rally isn't about 'A Pagan chaplain on every base,' but rather that despite the fact that there are more Pagans serving openly in the armed forces than have several other faiths with multiple chaplains... Pagans have *none:* This is about exclusion, about being completely unrepresented, marginalized, and, in fact, discriminated against, not some 'special demands.'

Our troops are at war, and do not enjoy the rights they are supposed to be defending. That's what this is.

**I was told of a case in Iraq where a Pagan group was meeting in a tent, and the tent was taken from them and they had to meet out in the sun...they had things thrown at them and went through great discrimination, even as they were wounded and one died.**

So much for freedom of religion.

Gary,
I was told of a case in Iraq where a Pagan group was meeting in a tent, and the tent was taken from them and they had to meet out in the sun...they had things thrown at them and went through great discrimination, even as they were wounded and one died.

It is up to Pagans to take a stand...whether in the military or as a civilian, we need to stand for all of our rights.

We do need a Chaplains, that will understand the religious needs of those in their care. Dealing with discrimination, death, fear...those are what Chaplains are for.

terra

As an enlisted military pagan, I would be happy if the base would allow us to use facilities or areas for pagan gatherings the same way that Catholics are allowed to use the rooms for bible study. I don't need a military-appointed chaplain; I just need a place we can gather year-round and meet without discrimination that we are not "mainstream."

As I recall, there were times in the early church when Christians were called 'Pagans'.

Could it be that the Christian and Pagan viewpoints are really just two different windows to the same "God"?