All Comments (17)

Chuck Colson, a criminal and an agent of a regressive theocratic movement, is now criticizing someone else as a regressive theocrat. That's rich Chuck, that'a really rich.

Hello 4th Watch,

The Pope, or rather the Vatican, only seek Christian/Muslim dialogue/debate following the flap on his speech. It is hard to get the attention of the Pope/Vatican, even by Catholic lay believers.

Personally, I'd rather the Pope/Vatican address the concerns of Catholics around the world first on any given issues of interest to Catholics themselves. You know those issues. And always better to carry an intra-faith dialogue/debate.

Sometimes, I wish the Pope/Vatican would show more respect and understanding towards his flock. But then, I am an "outsider".

--------------------------------------------------
Hello Larry,

You : "Watch where you step. The cheese has fallen off your cracker."

Crackers and cheese? Don't like them. Part of cheap food at western "cheese and dip" coctails hour and parties.

My post was addressed to Mr. Charles Colson. He deserved a Muslim mirror on what he wrote. I am only happy to oblige.

A good weekend to you both.

"J"

Bob,
PS,

Now you said you were Wiccan...oh really?
You know it's really stupid to claim something that is so easy to prove wrong.

A few eacy questions would do it.

What is your trad? Who is your Elder? What is The Rede?

terra

Jihadist.

Watch where you step. The cheese has fallen off your cracker.

bob,
When I was 10 I went to a friend's church with her...I was never so scared in all my life. The preacher was screaming at how we were all sinners and then people started talking gibberish, they started shaking and fell like stones..others got white sheets and covered them up, as they were shaking and twitching.

I ran out and hid in the car.

Then I heard of snake handlers that danced with poison snakes. Then there were the Shakers...they did not last because No sex.

Gosh we Witches are pretty boreing compaired with you Christians.

bob,We do not believe in demons...you all have that entity called the devil. It is none of ours. Just where did you get that thing with the eyes from? Legs crossed with fingers touching and flames? WTF?? Maybe you need to follow Priver's advise...before makeing an opinion about something...know from what you speak.

You know nothing about us, but decide all the B movies and badly written books must be right...you have no exuse to be ignorant and spout garbage...you are on the innernet...google us. Wicca...just like I googled Jim Jones and Heavensgate...

terra

Jihadist
Concerning the Pope

It strikes me that this Pope was seeking Christian/Muslim dialogue/debate as a result of his speech.

I won’t pretend to understand all the nuances that obliged Muslims into worldwide riots, apparently some of his words were unforgivable, as death threats fell like rain upon him.

I asked myself why a Pope would deliver this particular speech to the Muslim world.
To stoke Islam’s fire, pick a fight, no way.
To show disrespect, don’t think so.

I think he is as we are… simple unapologetic believers who speak their mind in an attempt to open dialogue so as to give and gain understanding.

Sincerely

Hi there Mr. Colson:)

Good to see ya again. Ms. Susan Jacoby said in one of her threads that bigots should come to your thread. Good proposal by her.

I, as an unapologetic believer, religionist, Muslim can be classified and happily accept the labeling of "bigot" by atheists, agnostics, anti-theists, apatheists, freethinkers, secular humanists and what have you. Not that apatheists would care, being indifferent to all beliefs. So they claimed.

Oh yes, I am as muddled by your essay as you said the Archbishop of Canterbury may be. I will thus, in my apparent muddledness and obvious bigotry, and may I add, without reason and logic, which are over-rated characteristics anyway........

Colson : I have read carefully the Archbishop of Canterbury’s words and believe that he muddled them.

Moi : I too, have read the Archbishop's speech. But well, the Archbishop, like Pope Benedict 16 and Dr. Willis E Elliot, are fellows who have multiple degrees in theology. Only God knows what they said and what they meant in the complexity of their language.

We, the less multipled degreed ones, surely do not have the depth and breadth of knowledge to fully understand the nuances, the deep intellectual "reason in faith" that they propounded in their lectures, speeches and other written and verbal pronouncements. So, we are "muddled" on what said. After all, why use the words "big" or "huge" when one can use "gigantic" or "elephatine"?

Colson : I don’t believe any responsible Christian leader would ever propose trying to mix Anglo-American jurisprudence with the law of a regressive theocratic movement.

Moi : Well, the American jurisprudence is derived from the English, and this is the first time I heard "Anglo-American" being used by many Americans in On Faith in response to this question. Rather confusing as Americans usually tend to dissociate themselves from their former colonialist, those tea-drinking Redcoats and monarchists.

"Anglo-American" is usually used in regard to UK-US political or military alliance. Or, for someone of English-American parentage, or, in popular culture as in an ""Anglo-American" production of a movie or other business ventures.

Oh yes, the English legal system is more different from the American than many suppose, with those fellows in wigs called barristers and solicitors and Queen's Counsel and all that.

Colson : Even reserving the law for personal matters would have incredibly negative consequences. Sharia law abuses women, who have at long last achieved something close to equality under Western law.

Moi : I know. Terrible is it not? While we want to divest those parts of the Shariah that is unjust to women as formulated and determined by "men". Unfortunately, they do get lots of ideas on how to demean women so sweetly and subtly from their non-Muslim brothers.

We are all now expected to look like Giselle Bundchen in a string bikini, write as well as Toni Morrison, dance and sing like Tina Turner, chrage into politics like Hilary Clinton and tolerate our husbands' sexual escapades as well as her. After all, freedom and liberalism also means being permissive of our husbands' libido too. We must be free!

Colson : Much of the unique genius of Western liberal democracy rests upon the longest enduring legal tradition within history, embodied now in the common law and Anglo-American tradition. It has preserved freedom as the rule of law as no other legal system ever had.

Moi : I am not too sure about the full meaning and extant of "common law" in history and currently in the UK and US. For one, as to what exactly is a "common law" wife one read of in centuries past.

Of course, British law is derived from the Magna Carta and the US from its Constitution and Bill of Rights. Perhaps laws preserved freedom, but the question now is - are laws ensuring freedom for individuals and protecting them from others and from the state? Or are laws giving states freedom to what they want over individuals and groups?

Laws can be restrictive on one's freedom or civil liberties, as in the Patriot Act. Oh yes, Britain also have its Internal Security Act which was also put in place by the British and continued to be in force in many of the former colonial countries of Britain, including Malaysia and Singapore. Quite restrictive on personal freedoms, including freedom of speech and freedom of assembly, and more restrictive than the Shariah in place in Malaysia as it has the full brunt of the state on those unfortunately enough to be deem a threat to "national security", "public harmony" and such.

Colson : If we start mixing different traditions -- which would be like oil and water -- it will undo the greatest experiment in the history of ordered liberty. It truly will invite "Eurabia."

Moi : Surely the mixing of different traditions is absolutely fabulous and not boring at all. Surely in the United States, and as an American you would know, if there is no mixing of "traditions", there won't be rock which is a blend of Caucasian country music and African-American blues; there won't be tap-dancing which African-Americans may possibly adapted from the Irish jig; there won't be chili con carne (a Tex-Mex dish not found in Mexico?

Mixing oil and water in a hot pot makes for a deliciously non-bland blend. So, go ahead and undo the American experiment. Americans would be culturally and intellectually poorer for it.

And where is Eurabia? I have read writers of old writing about Eurasia. Perhaps you are concerned about Shariah being implemented in Europe when the Muslim hordes takes over Europe as hyper-ventilated by a Mr. Robert Spenser among others. Well then, while we are at it, why not "Eurabiamerica" to cover North America as well?

Colson : I would prefer to think that the Archbishop is simply confused; no right thinking person would even suggest this.

Moi : Ah well, we Muslims had thought that Pope Benedict 16, in his speech regarding "reason in faith" is simply confused too, and no right thinking person would say the things he said in his speech.

We ranted and vented and forced our governments to lodge a protest and make appropriate noises of shock and dismay, for after all, Pope Benedict is the leader of over one billion Catholics and we though the Pope as the "infallible one" speaks for all Catholics and all Catholics will follow him.

Upon reading the Pope's speech in full, and finally deciphering all that theologically turgid prose, we finally figured out that the Pope, a man of faith, is also, a wee regressive and no different from some of our Muftis who also make some absurd speeches and fatwas on current social issues.

But, at least, our Muftis, when questioned, challenged or critisiced on their speeches, statements or fatwas, never said, "I am sorry for your reaction, but I don't regret what I've said." and arrogantly leave it at that.

Dr. Rowan Williams is not a muddled man. He is exceptionally misunderstood. As the spiritual head of a state "established" religion, I am a wee surprised that he look beyond his faith and fellow religionists to speak on possibilities to address some issues affecting a minority group (in this case, British Muslims) in the context of their own faith.

We know now that Dr. Rowan Williams is not religious dogmatic, a church excluvist, a one faith primacist as many would like him to be. It would seem that he is, in his own way, is more accepting and inclusive of people of other faiths than many of his citizens in the self-vaunted and self promoted multiculturalism of Britain.

And pray, what does "multiculturalism" actually mean for British and Americans?

Thanks and regards
"J"

"The Mike Huckabee that would proudly ammend the U.S. Constituion (if he could) to be in line with his god's view?"

While not in agreement with Mike Huckabee, I will defend ANYONE's right to attempt to amend the Constitution. Doing THAT would change the law we live under and make his idea about law constitutional. Even MIke Huckabee has a right to try and change the fundamental document we live under. Which is what the Muslims should do if they want to impose Sharia law on the rest of us, or to create separate "personal courts."

Contracting with each other is the only way that Muslims can use Sharia law in this country -- and those contracts would be subject to the limits of contract law. If they can convince others to change the constitution, we change our nature and they get their personal courts. I don't think they have a snowball's chance in hell of that. No accomodation without following the procedure laid out in our constitution for accomodation -- amendment.

"but people have no right, even if they believe with all their heart, to summon daemons and use spells and to chant with their eyes rolled back into their head, with their legs crossed, fingers touching, and flames burning everywhere."

As a witch, I'm interested to know why you're thinking people who are Wiccan do this. You've certainly got a wonderful imagination, most likely brought about by one too many Hollywood movies.

Never seen anyone I know in any ritual I've been a part of rolling eyes back in their heads.. or summoning demons or spinning heads around (though that would be a really neat ability to have as a teacher!) or spew split pea soup.

and we use candles, and incense, same as any church. Do we chant? No more than any church that says the Lord's prayer or any other prayer.. we do sing and drum and dance though, which is a whole lot of fun. and then we eat all kinds of good food.

You've really got some odd ideas about what a Wiccan actually is. Please at least attempt to know something about which you speak and not believe everything you read.

"but people have no right, even if they believe with all their heart, to summon daemons and use spells and to chant with their eyes rolled back into their head, with their legs crossed, fingers touching, and flames burning everywhere.
"

That's a whole lot like 'speaking in tongues' isn't it? And Bob, as a matter of fact they do have a 'right'. 'Right' is a legal term, not a religious one...

Bob,

I can appreciate clever satire but for some reason I don't think you're kidding.

But I do love a good demon show. Especially when their eyes disappear like in The Exorcist. It's absolutely magical.

... Boo!

Sorry. I know how easily you scare.

Boo!

Sorry. I just can't resist.

Boo!

George in Alaska,

Chuck is blind to Christian theocrats. Mike Huckabee is a regressive Christian theocrat.

Hope that's cogent enough for ya!

Terra:

Dealing with inmates using demons and witches usually makes matters worse. You can call this discrimination or persecution, but people have no right, even if they believe with all their heart, to summon daemons and use spells and to chant with their eyes rolled back into their head, with their legs crossed, fingers touching, and flames burning everywhere.

I know you will take this personally, but too bad.

It may seem as though it Wiccan helps, but Wiccan is just evil in disguise. In the long run, it hurts people and makes them worse than they already are, which is why there is so much persecution against them. People just don't want anything to do with spells, daemons, and witches, just to name a few. Every Wiccan I know, including myself at one time, is utterly DARK, even though they may seem loving, kind, and gentle. What's on the outside does not always reflect what's on the inside, and when you let dark forces control your soul, mind, and life, the outcome is DARKNESS! And I say all of this from experience.

Chuck,
Have you paid any attention to the testimony given to Congress, to the Commission on Civil Rights...the presentations will then be given to the President. I think you might find it of interest. It does talk of you...not by name, but attitude.

The speakers included
Abu Qadir Al-Amin, Imam, San Francisco Muslim
Community Center; Carolyn Atkins, Warden, Maryland Correctional Institution-Jessup; Frank Cilluffo, Director, Homeland Security Policy
Institute, The George Washington University; Lane Dilg, Staff Attorney, American Civil Liberties Union Program on Freedom of Religion and Belief;Gary Friedman, Chairman, Jewish Prisoner Services International; Alex
Luchenitser, Senior Litigation Counsel, Americans United for the Separation of Church and State; Patrick McCollum, Statewide Wiccan Chaplain,California Department of Corrections, a member of the American Correctional Chaplain Association; the Program Chair for the National Correctional Chaplaincy Directors Association; and the Chaplaincy Liaison for the American Academy of Religion.
Steven T. McFarland, Director, Task Force For Faith-Based and Community Initiatives, Office of the Deputy
Attorney General, U.S. Department of Justice; Patrick Nolan, Vice
President, Prison Fellowship; Joseph Pryor, Chaplaincy Administrator for
the Federal Bureau of Prisons; and Gregory Saathoff, Executive Director,
Critical Incident Analysis Group, University of Virginia.

One of the speakers Patrick McCollum is Wiccan... Here is the presentation that Patrick gave:And he was sworn in "Under Goddess." LOL...I bet that caused some mutterings..LOL.

U. S. Commission on Civil Rights
Briefing on Prisoners' Religious Rights
Friday, February 8, 2008
Washington, DC

Remarks by Wiccan Chaplain Patrick McCollum

Position Statement on Religious Discrimination in Prisons
Good morning.

I would like to thank the Commission on behalf of the Wiccan community and on behalf of minority faiths in general, for offering us the opportunity to contribute to the dialogue on religious discrimination in United States’ prisons. I will focus primarily on the accommodation of Wicca and the discrimination Wiccans face in State and federal prisons, but I would like the commission to recognize that one can easily insert the name of any other minority faith in place of Wicca, and still have the exact same end result. That is, these problems are endemic for all minority faiths that are not in the family of religions of Abraham.

I’d like to start with a few true examples of discrimination to illustrate the severity of the problem:

A Wiccan inmate has cancer and the prison guards refuse to transport him to his chemotherapy treatments unless he removes his religious pentacle medallion which they have objections to. He chooses to forgo his chemotherapy and keep his pentacle.

A Wiccan inmate has been trying to go to Wiccan services for months, but the guard at her dorm refuses to give her a pass. The guard says it is for the good of the Wiccan inmate's soul.

Another dying Wiccan writes his volunteer chaplain that he needs to see him before he crosses over. The chaplain makes numerous attempts to reach prison staff to receive the necessary clearances, but no one responds. But worse, prison mailroom staff refuse to forward the chaplain's mail, so that the inmate knows why his chaplain isn't coming.

Over more than a decade, I’ve had the opportunity to interact nationally with both administrators and inmates on religious accommodation issues. While practices differ from state to state, I found discrimination against minority faiths everywhere. The reason for this is what I call the Dominant Religion Lens Factor.

The Dominant Religion Lens Factor is a process whereby administrators and security staff view all faith practices from the perspective of the Dominant faiths only, leaving no consideration that there are different ways to practice religion. The Dominant Religion Lens Factor is exacerbated by the fact that almost all of the administrators, who oversee religion programs in prisons, are members, and often clergy, of the very same Dominant faiths from which they take their cues, and even worse, many of them believe that their particular faith should dominate the landscape. Consequently, these people make determinations of what faith practices are or are not acceptable, based on the premise that if it looks like the Dominant faith’s practices, then the practices are probably okay and should be accommodated, but if the practices do not look like the dominant faith’s practices, then both the practices and the faith itself are suspect, and accommodation should be restricted. This particular way of viewing religion, replicates the very same kind of oppressive view that our forefathers and foremothers left Europe to escape, and if there is to be any hope of achieving equal religious rights for prisoners, then this whole way of viewing religion by those in charge, needs to be changed.

Here’s how this works:

I arrived one morning at a prison to conduct Wiccan religious services. I put the inmates to work moving the chairs in the chapel into a circle, which is the typical configuration utilized for Wiccan religious services. Almost immediately security stopped us, saying that we could not conduct our services sitting in a circle, citing security. They instructed me that as the chaplain, I had to stand up front at the pulpit and that the inmates had to sit in the pews and that I had to conduct "sermons" from there. I tried to explain that Wiccan clergy do not give sermons and that creating a circle is the Wiccan way of creating “Sacred Space”, but they would have none of it. They forced me to conduct my services from the pulpit, completely negating all of the necessary steps to actually conduct a legitimate Wiccan religious service.

What was particularly odd about this scenario is the fact that staff and chaplains, regularly stand, sit, and closely interact, with inmates all of the time, and that’s not seen to be a security issue, but conducting religious services in what to them appeared to be a non-traditional way, seemed in their mind to pose a problem. Eventually I was able hold appropriate services, but to this day, staff still make comments about the inappropriateness of this type of a service, and for that reason, among others, ridicule Wicca as not being a real religion.

So, let’s take a look at where the Dominant Religion Lens Factor ultimately leads:

I had a Wiccan inmate whose wife died. He was called in by a staff chaplain and given the news. In the course of the conversation, the inmate was told that perhaps his had wife died because of his participation in the Wiccan services, and that if he repented and started attending "real" religious services, there was a chance he could still be saved.

These kinds of interactions are common for minority faiths in prison. And while administrators may not be aware that they are operating in this prejudicial way, the end result for Wiccans is still the same - discrimination.

And then there’s the worst case scenario, which actually occurs often, where certain prison administrators, staff, and chaplains fully believe that they have a mission to discourage minority faiths from practicing at all. In this context, the Dominant Religion Lens Factor empowers them and encourages them to act on their biases, which ultimately leads to the kind of behavior in the case cited.

Another problem I’ve observed is the great difficulty that Wiccans face when trying to gain access to their sacred religious items. In this instance, the number one reason cited for denying them is security, when in fact there isn’t a security issue at all.

Wiccans typically use an altar adorned with various religious items. These items are usually composed of a chalice, a few candles, incense, and typically a few natural objects like, a feather, a small crystal, or a flower. A small statue or depiction of deity might also be included, and sometimes a Wiccan religious book. These items are highly sacred to Wiccans and play a critical role in their ability to conduct their religious services. Even so, Wiccans are regularly denied these items nationwide.

Now, here’s the kicker:

In every case I’ve investigated, every single institution that denied these sacred items to Wiccans, allowed the very same items to be used in services conducted by the dominant faiths. For example Catholics use a chalice during communion, and Muslims and the Catholics use incense. Protestants & Catholics use candles, and both also have sacred art present. Depictions of Jesus and Mary in prison chapels are commonplace, as are other symbols of Christian faith and deity. I’ve also attended many services where flowers are present, and all of these faiths use a holy book. So why is it that these dominant faiths get all of this without a problem, and yet Wiccans and other minority faiths don’t? It’s because the administrators and security staff see the dominant faith’s use of these items as normal, and the minority faith’s use of these exact same items as weird or dangerous, because the services in which minority faiths utilize these items look different to them than those that they are used to.

Another area in which the Dominant Religion Lens Factor plays out involves accommodations that involve significant resources. A good example is the allocation of regularly employed chaplains.

This is a problem throughout the country. California is an example. Even though there are more Wiccans attending religious services at the institutions in question than there are of some of the dominant faith groups who already have regularly employed chaplains, the State has told the Wiccans that they have to prove that their religious tenets require a chaplain before the institution will consider hiring one. So, far the inmates haven’t been able to prove that, although they’ve been trying for nearly five years. But the odd thing about this proof requirement is that the Protestant inmates, who do have regularly employed chaplains, were never required to prove their need for a chaplain at all. And even more telling is the fact that Protestant religious tenets specifically state that clergy is not necessary to practice the Protestant faith, and in fact, the whole Protestant reformation was based on that principle. So, to clarify this situation, if the same standards that are being required of the Wiccans were to be applied to the Protestants, then all the Protestant chaplains would have to be fired.

This is the same issue for other resource allocations, such as space, budget, books, special religious programming and the like. Protestant congregations in most prisons have bible classes, revivals, videos, and choirs; and I even recently attended an event where Bikers for Christ, brought in a dozen full dressed Harleys for the inmates at a several institutions to interact with. All of these accommodations are provided to the Protestants even though none of these things are required by their tenets. Yet the Wiccans are permitted only those things that they can prove are required by their faith tenets. This sets up a very unfair situation, where resource allocation is not accomplished by an equitable formula.

In addition, those who review inmate grievances, including even some courts, also tend to look at the issues through the Dominant Religion Lens, as well, making it difficult for even the most egregious of these problems to be addressed.

The issues I’ve discussed involve clear and obvious violations of the Constitution of the United States, RLUIPA, and RFRA, as they directly violate the civil rights of the Wiccans involved, yet no one questions them. Why is that? Could it be that our government has established religious favorites?

Here are my recommendations to this commission:

If we want to achieve religious equality in prisons, then we have to restrict the hiring of administrators, staff, and chaplains into gatekeeper positions for our nations’ correctional religious programs. Only individuals who do not see it as their duty to promote certain religious practices over others should be hired in such positions. This should be a Bona Fide Occupational Qualification. We must also educate those who do act as gatekeepers, about pluralism and the guiding principles of religious accommodation in general, so that all inmates will be permitted a reasonable and equitable opportunity to practice their faiths. And we need to establish a separate grievance process for religious issues, which gives inmates a direct line to action in these areas and protection from retaliation. This new grievance process should include experts in non-traditional faiths, so that the Dominant Religion Lens Process is avoided. And lastly, we also need to get rid of administrators and chaplains who believe that breaking the law by violating inmates’ religious rights is justified by faith.

Thank you.

Rev. Patrick McCollum

Freestinker:

Make a cogent point.

Freestinker:

Make a cogent point.

Chuck says:

"I don’t believe any responsible Christian leader would ever propose trying to mix Anglo-American jurisprudence with the law of a regressive theocratic movement."

Hey Chuck,

Does the name Mike Huckabee ring a bell? You know, the Southern Baptist preacher Mike Huckabee who is running for president? The Mike Huckabee who claims to be a responsible Christian leader? The Mike Huckabee that would proudly ammend the U.S. Constituion (if he could) to be in line with his god's view?

A responsible Christian leader who proposes to mix Anglo-American jurisprudence with the law of a regressive theocratic movement. Yeah, that Mike Huckabee.