All Comments (301)

I agree with everything that Starhawk said about Wicca, and I am a Wiccan. I wrote my own couplet for the Wiccan Rede: "If ye love one, love all; o'er all religions stand tall." Even Christians do not love everyone, with the exception of some of their saints. What is this love? An "agape" love for all, and an "erotic love" for one's lover, and a "filial" love for one's brothers and sisters in the faith. Agape love is pure love, based on the dignity and innate quality of worth of each being, from people to the soil we walk upon. That kind of love, if put into practice, could save the world. No more war over petty religious differences. I have hope for the future, and I believe such love should eventually embrace us all, or we will go to our ruin.

I agree with everything that Starhawk said about Wicca, and I am a Wiccan. I wrote my own couplet for the Wiccan Rede: "If ye love one, love all; o'er all religions stand tall." Even Christians do not love everyone, with the exception of some of their saints. What is this love? An "agape" love for all, and an "erotic love" for one's lover, and a "filial" love for one's brothers and sisters in the faith. Agape love is pure love, based on the dignity and innate quality of worth of each being, from people to the soil we walk upon. That kind of love, if put into practice, could save the world. No more war over petty religious differences. I have hope for the future, and I believe such love should eventually embrace us all, or we will go to our ruin.

Can't or don't want to read?
Bissell went further than Revere but Revere got all the credit. It made for better poetry.

www.bayequest.info/unbridled/unbridlednews-revere.htm

www1.whdh.com/news/articles/local/BO49091

Other sources include boston dot com, answers at yahoo.com.. but again, you don't want to acknowledge that you have no leg to stand on. Not my problem.

Funny you accuse me of doing the very same thing you are doing.

It's also funny that you quote Roosevelt- I'd agree with him if Iraq was anything like what he described as a 'worthy cause'. We had no business being there.

"They unprecedentedly have only one of some 12 appropriation bills passed."

Why do you think that is? The Dems have a VERY slim margin. People are p'o'd that the Repubs are keeping Dems from doing what they were supposed to do when elected- getting the troops out. We're finally starting to see where we should have been about four years ago. Whoopee.

Bush is the biggest disaster this country has seen and you're a wonderful example of what fear does to people. The propaganda machine has worked.

"The terrorists look the same as the innocent, and no one really knows who the enemy is, not even the Iraqis. That's why they are most of the victims."

So we should just kill everyone? Nice, that.

I'm still laughing at your 'the Dems caused 9/11'. Bush was in office when the memo came down the pike in August of 2001 that said that OBL was determined to strike in the US.. and did nothing.

He has now killed more Americans than OBL. Not to mention Iraqis. He has spent trillions of dollars on a war that has done nothing but explode a powder keg in the middle east.. our children are going to be picking up the tab for this. He sent all those troops over there to die, not to come home where he may have to be responsible for paying for their health care/schooling/job skill development/reintegration/therapy.

"George Washington prayed often; he even knelt down and prayed on the battlefield. I suspect many soldiers pray in time of war. Isn't that's why it's said, "There are no atheists in fox holes?"

Ask an atheist soldier sometime. And yes, they're out there. I think war creates new atheists.. and I certainly can't blame them for that. Washington knew that war must never be used preemptively to promote something. He understood that it wouldn't work. He was a smart guy.. and incidentally, didn't even need your Jesus. Just asked for a direct line. Deism and Christianity.. two VERY different things.

Here's a little gem I like- "Those would give up their liberties for a little safety deserve neither liberty, nor safety." Ben Franklin.

You're leaving? Watch for shadows.. if people are out to get us now, it's all thanks to King George. You're not my nemesis.. just another link in the web. Get involved, because it's going to take all of us to undo what W has done. Help out. And most importantly, get to know someone different than you. Don't be angry cause you can't 'pin down' someone's belief. It's a personal thing.. and you never knew anything about mine that you couldn't look up in your book and find some bad information. You know nothing of me. Learn from others and grow. Stop trying to push what is your opinion and your belief system onto others as the 'truth', cause you'll be decimated, and REALLY unsuccessful. Really try to understand others- try to walk a mile or ten in their shoes.. see the world through their eyes.. cause that's the only way out of this. What we do, right here, right now, matters. Love your neighbor as yourself. Namaste.

Blessed be.

If it wasn't for Bush there'd have been a lot more Iraqis alive and still living in their own homes. And there would be more than 4000 of our own in the same situation. At home, not dead.

Bush sent our troops over to die, not to come home. He's killed more Americans than died on that day. Notice how we can't even take care of our wounded and traumatized soldiers once they get home? The amount of money he's wasted on this stupid power grab is absolutely staggering, and will have costs that our children will have to bear.

We haven't really made any successes, we're only now starting to see where we should have been more than 4 years ago.

People are p'o'd at Congress because the Repubs have done everything in their power to stop the Dems from doing what the people asked for- to get them out of a needless, endless war. The war has lasted this long because the Repubs don't want out. They have nothing invested in this war.

Blackwater was granted immunity. No court martials, no accountability, nothing. It took the murder of civilians to finally get someone to do something.

"The terrorists look the same as the innocent, and no one really knows who the enemy is, not even the Iraqis. That's why they are most of the victims."

So we should just kill everybody? Nice solution, that.

Paul Revere didn't make that long trip. He was one of the Minutemen, but didn't get that far. Bissell was the one that made such a long trip. Longfellow immortalized Revere because he heard it from Irving. Plus, it made for better poetry. Nice try.

The Dems caused 9/11? Nice try. The August Memo that said that Bin Laden was determined to attack the US was ignored by the Bush Administration. They knew about it and did nothing.

It's funny you mention Roosevelt.. and I'd agree with that quote if Iraq was ANYTHING resembling a worthy cause.

Ben Franklin: Those who would give up liberty for a little safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.

Bush is the worst disaster this country has seen, and you're a great example of what fear does to people.

"Namely, you rely on historical sources though you unwittingly discredit historians, unless they agree with you."

You do the exact same thing, especially with Aristotle.

You're leaving? Watch the shadows.. and pay attention. It's about what we do, right here, right now. Don't force people to suffer as a 'prayer up to god'. Help out. Get involved. Love your neighbor as yourself. You may really be surprised.

Blessed be.

REPLY TO PRIVER:
“BLACKWATER”
As to Blackwater, get yourself in the middle of Iraq or Afghanistan and then be a critic. See what you'll do when someone who is approaching you and refuses to answer you. Sometimes they guess wrong, as our military sometimes does, but that's the way war is. You do the best you can.

Blackwater wasn't the only organization who was shooting when there was no response. Many that didn’t shoot died. The game is dangerous, and when your life is at stake, if you don't react you may not get another chance. The terrorists look the same as the innocent, and no one really knows who the enemy is, not even the Iraqis. That's why they are most of the victims.

To say that Bush's mistakes have killed the Iraqis would be laughable if it wasn't so hellishly disgusting and repugnant. Ask the Iraqi people who is killing them instead of the troglodytes and iconoclasts back bitters, and muckrakers. The Iraqis want us there and don't want us to go until Iraq is safe; bet on it.

The other day a Dem Congressman returning from Iraq admitted the Dems had caused, in his opinion, the war to last at least two years longer than it should have because the Iraq people feared the US was pulling out. The Iraqis got that idea from the cacophony of the Dems defeatism in the House and Senate who maligned and insulted their Iraqi president, the Iraqis elected under the threat of death from the terrorists, as are government officials.

The Dems maligned the Iraq parliament and the Dems have the lowest approval rating in history and the worst record in Congress. They unprecedented have only one of some 12-appropriation bills passed.

The Iraqi’s were starting to make their own bed with the terrorists for fear of a Dem pullout and that put a damper on their cooperation. said the Dem. Now that Iraqi people realize Bush could be trusted and was a man of his word, that he is not going to run out on them, they are coming back, and we are winning.

The Dems knew they were undermining the war and the confidence of the Iraqi people. Moreover, the anti-warmongering left-wing seditionists inspired them. They wanted to undermine the war and weaken the Iraqi's resolve to fight, as did the New York Times and all the mongrel left wing media in addition to Moveon.Org. and their Hollywood emulators. The Dems chose political expediency over the security of the country. They caused 9/11; don't kid yourself.

You can sit here and judge others in a comfortable surrounding but that's not where Blackwater is; they're in the arena of death. They have to make quick decisions because their life is at stake. Fifty-five didn’t make them quick enough.

Ask the Congressmen and Senators who were over there when Blackwater was guarding them. You think they didn't want Blackwater who lost only one customer? Think again.

Waxman and company are demagogues that are undermining the war. Has Waxman ever been there? I don't think so, and even if he were, he'd be the first one to ask for Blackwater to protect his ignominious derriere; make book on it.

Moreover, Blackwater didn't have free reign; they were under the auspices of the State Department.

I am now leaving the particular forum not for anything personal, but because there is something screwed up on it. It takes me forever to scroll, about a half hour to highlight on this forum, and every time I sign in on it, it jams up my computer at one time or another with ridiculous pop ups that my antivirus pop up programs can’t stop. When they appear, everything stops for about two minutes, or even at times the whole forum page disappears and that’s ridiculous too. This never happens on any of the other forums just this one.

Your nemesis is gone to fight and stir up the other sophists who live in the alternate world where up is down and down is up. So good by, adios. smile, and give your face a holiday. I am out of here.

REPLY TO PRIVER:
“BLACKWATER”
As to Blackwater, get yourself in the middle of Iraq or Afghanistan and then be a critic. See what you'll do when someone who is approaching you and refuses to answer you. Sometimes they guess wrong, as our military sometimes does, but that's the way war is. You do the best you can.

Blackwater wasn't the only organization who was shooting when there was no response. Many that didn’t shoot died. The game is dangerous, and when your life is at stake, if you don't react you may not get another chance. The terrorists look the same as the innocent, and no one really knows who the enemy is, not even the Iraqis. That's why they are most of the victims.

To say that Bush's mistakes have killed the Iraqis would be laughable if it wasn't so hellishly disgusting and repugnant. Ask the Iraqi people who is killing them instead of the troglodytes and iconoclasts back bitters, and muckrakers. The Iraqis want us there and don't want us to go until Iraq is safe; bet on it.

The other day a Dem Congressman returning from Iraq admitted the Dems had caused, in his opinion, the war to last at least two years longer than it should have because the Iraq people feared the US was pulling out. The Iraqis got that idea from the cacophony of the Dems defeatism in the House and Senate who maligned and insulted their Iraqi president, the Iraqis elected under the threat of death from the terrorists,as are government officials.

The Dems maligned the Iraq parliment and the Dems have the lowest approval rating in history and the worst record in Congress. They unprecedentedly have only one of some 12 appropriation bills passed.

The Iraqi’s were starting to make their own bed with the terrorists for fear of a Dem pullout and that put a damper on their cooperation. said the Dem. Now that Iraqi people realize Bush could be trusted and was a man of his word, that he is not going to run out on them, they are coming back, and we are winning.

The Dems knew they were undermining the war and the confidence of the Iraqi people. Moreover, the anti-warmongering left-wing seditionists inspired them. They wanted to undermine the war and weaken the Iraqi's resolve to fight, as did the New York Times and all the mongrel left wing media in addition to Moveon.Org. and their Hollywood emulators. The Dems chose political expediency over the security of the country. They caused 9/11; don't kid yourself.

You can sit here and judge others in a comfortable surrounding but that's not where Blackwater is; they're in the arena of death. They have to make quick decisions because their life is at stake. Fifty-five didn’t make them quick enough.

Ask the Congressmen and Senators who were over there when Blackwater was guarding them. You think they didn't want Blackwater who lost only one customer? Think again.

Waxman and company are demagogues that are undermining the war. Has Waxman ever been there? I don't think so, and even if he were, he'd be the first one to ask for Blackwater to protect his ignominious derriere; make book on it.

Moreover, Blackwater didn't have free reign; they were under the auspices of the State Department.

I am now leaving the particular forum not for anything personal, but because there is something screwed up on it. It takes me forever to scroll, about a half hour to highlight on this forum, and every time I sign in on it, it jams up my computer at one time or another with ridiculous pop ups that my antivirus pop up programs can’t stop. When they appear, everything stops for about two minutes, or even at times the whole forum page disappears and that’s ridiculous too. This never happens on any of the other forums just this one. So good by, adios. smile, and give your face a holiday. I am out of here.

IN REPLY TO PRIVER:
“PAUL REVERE”

“Revere became a figure of popular history and legend, however, because of his ride on the night of Apr. 18, 1775, to warn the people of the Massachusetts countryside that British soldiers were being sent out in the expedition that, as it turned out, started the American Revolution (see Lexington and Concord, battles of). William Dawes and Samuel Prescott also rode forth with the news. Revere did not reach his destination at Concord but was captured by the British; nevertheless, it is Revere who is remembered as the midnight rider, chiefly because of the poem by Henry Wadsworth Longfellow. He designed the first seal for the united colonies, designed and printed the first Continental bond issue, and established (1776) a powder mill at Canton, Mass.”

He was a Midnight Rider, one of three, he was captured before he reached Concord, nonetheless he was there, and history wasn’t wrong though Wadsworth may have been. However, Wadsworth wasn’t a Historian writing history; he was a poet. Moreover there is a difference between historical lore and historical fact.

In addition, you got your information from historians while at the same time you impugn their credibility. Now that is ridiculous isn’t it? Namely, you rely on historical sources though you unwittingly discredit historians, unless they agree with you.

As to the interview with Bush who said, he prayed to God to help him in his decision, I have never heard of any American President who did not pray to God. Maybe Clinton didn’t, but if he didn’t, he sure acted as if he did. Still it's hard to figure out why a guy with no conscience could pray, unless it was to Beelzebub, his patron saint, or to the pagan Goddesses of Love Aphrodite and Venus to give bring him a few temple prostitutes.

However, praying to God is not the same as saying God told him to invade Iraq though the Bush-wackers, who know little about praying, like to make it the same.

George Washington prayed often; he even knelt down and prayed on the battlefield. I suspect many soldiers pray in time of war. Isn't that's why it's said, "There are no atheists in fox holes?"

Back seat Generals, Monday night quarterbacks, the most uninformed experts we have, give us all kinds of advice as do the clueless Dems, or the shrieking Hillary, who has more war strategies than John Kerry did, and all the liberal columnists, and the anti-American blogs put together. Such critics have no responsibility if their plans fail. They just go on babbling into the darkness, like a horse better who only picks the winners after the race, and never bets any money.

Theodore Roosevelt:
“It is not the critic who counts, not the man who points out how the strong man stumbled, or where the doer of deeds could have done better. The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena, whose face is marred by dust and sweat and blood, who strives valiantly, who errs and comes short again and again, who knows the great enthusiasms, the great devotions, and spends himself in a worthy cause, who at best knows achievement and who at the worst, if he fails, at least fails while daring greatly. His place shall never be with those cold and timid souls who know neither victory nor defeat.”

And, now you have an excellent and profound portrait of President Bush, by a previous President.

Wow. That's flawed logic if ever I heard some.

All you've shown in all this time is a lack of concern for women and their ability to decide what is best for them. If you had your own way, babies would be born without the need for women or concern for the mother's health at all. All gays would be persecuted just for existing and loving whomever they do.
That's prejudice at it's finest. Nice.

Pain is not an indicator of evil. That's ridiculous. Tell that to a child suffering with cancer, that they got it by being a bad person.

If there were no men, there would be no bible. Man came from other creatures. Read your science. Age of the earth is about 4.6 billion years. Man, a few thousand at best.

"It's no more different for one's love of one's neighbor for the love of God when one offers up his suffering as a prayer to God to save others."

You seem to imply that killing a child is ok if it's 'offered up as a prayer to save others'. Your god demanded such tests. Saved from what, exactly?

How about the fact that people are not born bad- it's being told that by others and withholding vital education that can have others make an informed, educated decision about their own bodies.

IN REPLY TO PRIVER:
“LIVES OF THE UNBORN”
“There you go again with your not quite 'pro-life' agenda. I say again, if you are so concerned about children, then put your tax dollars and your home or livelihood where your mouth is and sponsor an unwanted foster child until the age of 18 or 21.”

ANS:
I support Catholic charities, what do you support? I wonder if you are injudiciously blind. How many times have I told you of the Catholics’ tremendous amount of care for stressed pregnancies, the mothers, and their families that is given by Catholic agencies and charities?

As many unborn, as possible, are being taken care of. The mothers must come to us, before they are legally murdered by the pro-abortion majority of liberal Dems, the troglodytes, barbarians, atheists, agnostics, and the pagans who believe morality is relative and abortion is a right. There is no right to evil.

Relativity rationalizes abortion as utilitarian and a personal choice, makes euthanasia acceptable if it’s a personal decision, and advances homosexual activity as a legitimate lifestyle in the Culture of Death.

IN REPLY TO
THE CREATOR AND A GODDESS:

“If there were no man, the earth would still be. She would still be, in some form. From the earth came man, and from man came your book and therefore, your God and your church.

ANS:
Man did not come from the earth; he came from God who created man into His image and likeness by giving man an immortal spiritual nature, of which the world can not give because it’s material.

The Bible did not come from man; it is the Word of God. Man was only chosen to record it.

IN REPLY TO:
Not really. Only since someone decided your god must be followed-or else.

ANS:
“The obligation to moral action in the natural order is, moreover, generally believed to depend on the motives supplied by religion; and it is at least doubtful whether it is possible for moral obligation to exist at all apart from a supernatural sanction or religion.”

Yes, man decided to adhere to the truth and the laws that were given to man by God because man reasoned to truth. Those who didn’t chose God’s advice destroyed themselves spiritually and physically because the violated their conscience and nature.

No one is forced into anything; man reasoned to God and was a witness to his Wisdom revealed to man in God's Creation. The Pharao Ramses II decided he didn’t think much of God or His Wisdom, so his whole army was drowned because of his obstanancy; his country and his people were devastated by the many plagues that were visited upon them and his son died from one of the plagues. Someone said, "Your arms are to short to box with God, He'll kick your butt." Unfortunately, many find that out when it's too late. So be wise and make your life fruitful.

IN REPLY TO:
"Human and Christian prudence suggest for the majority of sick people the use of medicines ...and have them administered according to the doctor's advice. Since in your view suffering has so much meaning why bother with painkillers at all?

ANS:
“It is evident again that all evil is essentially negative and not positive; i.e. it consists not in the acquisition of anything, but in the loss or deprivation of something necessary for perfection.

“Pain, which is the test or criterion of physical evil, has indeed a positive, though purely subjective existence as a sensation or emotion; but its evil quality lies in its disturbing effector, the sufferer.”

Again, suffering is an evil caused by sin, not something good or desirable. Sacrifice, as an offering up to God, is a prayer to God. It is a noble and propitious thing.

There is no greater love for man than one who sacrifices his life to save the life of others, as a soldier risk his life in war for his country and its people, or as one looses his life to save a victim in a burning house. So too is an offering up of one's suffering to Jesus.

I've seen a mother give up one of her kidneys to save her child's life. That's a lot of suffering and pain given for the love of her child. It's no more different for one's love of one's neighbor for the love of God when one offers up his suffering as a prayer to God to save others. Do Pagans, who offered babies up to their god have a problem with that?

Suffering is something that is an inevitable evil; it is not sought or wished for but unavoidable physical evil. However, when man suffers, instead of leaving it go for naught, he offers it up for as a sacrifice to God and joins it with the suffering of Christ on the cross for the conversion of sinners.

Christ died on the Cross that man might be saved from eternal death. Because God intensly loves man, the suffering on earth honor God by their joining in the sufferings of His only Son with their suffering for the conversion and reparation of the sins of others.

Why did it take the deaths of all those innocents for the State Department to finally do something about Blackwater? This is supposed to be a war fought by our army, right? so why then are these other folks even subcontracted in the first place? they are not subject to any penalties for their own crimes that they've committed. They got off without any penalties for killing anywhere from 8-20 people depending on the story you read. Many of the Blackwater folks were trigger happy.

The Armed forces have no say over what they do- they cannot be subjected to court martial. A lot of innocent Iraqis died because of their blunders. Only when it made news did the State Department do something. It's been shown through their OWN investigation that those people were fired upon without any provocation. This has been the MO of the entire administration- change nothing until reports surface of wrongdoing. Until then, accuse the reporters and dissenters of being 'unpatriotic'. You're a great example of what this does to people.

Bush stated in an interview with Bob Woodward that he 'appealed to a higher father' when asked about whether he allowed his father to give any advice. Check my sources? 60 minutes, CBS news, washington Post, Asia times, truthout. org, jurist.law.pitt.edu .. I could go on.

What do any of those terrorists acts you mentioned have anything to do with Iraq?

And what I really love is your invoking Saddam killing all those people.. when in fact is was the US who gave him the arms and the money to do that during the Iraq/Iran crisis under Reagan; at that time he was our own ally because we hated Iran more. We lost any claim to some sort of higher moral ground by saying we were removing a 'horrible person' who wouldn't have been quite as dangerous in the first place if it wasn't for us.

Funny you bring up the whole Stem cell research thing. Those embryos that are not used for IVF get thrown out anyway, thereby destroying any chance there may be to try new research to save lives.

I love how you invoke Al Qaeda- we can't even find the guy who masterminded 9/11. Where the hell is OBL? He's somewhere making home movies in Pakistan. We should have been looking for him, and only him. All the hijackers on those planes were.. SAUDIS. Iraq had absolutely no connection to the Twin Towers. The way to have gotten to Al Quaeda is NOT to have made them world Famous. OBL is now the de facto spokesman for any group with a grudge against the US. Why? Bush made it that way. So any group now can attract attention to any agenda they have by calling themselves al qaeda even though they may not have a thing to do with OBL himself. This is just what he wants.

During Sarcozy's recent visit, Bush invoked the relationship between George Washington and Lafayette, saying this new relationship would be based on that old one to try to reconnect France and the US- what Bush doesn't know, among other things is that Washington, in the last letter he wrote to Lafayette Washington said (paraphrasing): 'It doesn't matter HOW good an idea is. Promoting it by the use of force DOES NOT work'.

You talk about terrorism.. when in fact the only terrorists around are still in the White House.

The idea that Bush cares anything at all about life would be laughable if it wasn't so damned dangerous.

You're a wonderful example of how fear eats away at people at the expense of our democracy. What would your guy do? He went and upset the money changers and called for a change in the status quo, did he not? You'd probably call him a liberal scum too. And that's just sad. Even as a Pagan I can have some respect for the message of love that he was trying to bring.. although he certainly wasn't the first, the last or the most original one to do so.

You've no leg to stand on, my friend.

IN REPLY TO
PRIVER:
"I wonder how much you are concerned with 25 million lives over their. Bush seems to think those 3,000 and those 25 million had and have dignity. What's your view?"

ANS:
Every human being that God has created has equal dignity. God created man because He loved him. He loves all, and yes, even the terrorists. Have you heard of the Beatitudes? And so it is written, “What ever you do to the least of my brothers that you do unto me.” (Mathew 25: 31 to 46) Try reading it sometime.

IN REPLY TO:
What the hell does this have to do with anything?

ANS:
Is helping others a problem for you? Have you ever read the parable of the Good Samaritan? (Lk 10: 25-37)

How one regards human life matters. It has consequences. Over 48 million unborn have died from abortion because their lives had no value to pro-abortionists. Isn’t that what religion is all about? Is it not written, “Love your neighbor as yourself as God so loves you?” Mother Theresa is a Christian contemporary example of such love; what is a Pagan example?

IN REPLY TO:
“According to W himself, God TOLD him to invade Iraq. He doesn't give a damn about life.”

ANS:
Don’t believe ever ridiculous thing you read. Show your sources.

IN REPLY TO:
“If he ever cared about life he would have stayed far away from there. We have no business being there. Not that we ever did.”

ANS:
You might think about what you’re saying before you say it. Are not the Iraqis human, and their live matter? Here is just a few murders and assaults on Americans by these terrorists since the mid ‘70s before the 9/11 fiasco. Thousands have been murdered by these terrorists. Notwithstanding, Saddam murdered some 300,000 Iraq people, and maimed and raped as many. Saddam threatened the President's life and all Iraq's neighbors' and their sovereignty.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_terrorist_incidents#1970

“Al Qaeda took credit for September 8: TWA Flight 841: Bomb kills 88 on jetliner. Attributed to Abu Nidal and his terrorist organization. December 11:

“A bomb set off by the Puerto Rican nationalist group FALN in East Harlem, New York permanently disables a police officer. The officer lost an eye because of this act.

“December 29: Bomb explodes at New York's LaGuardia Airport, killing eleven and injuring 75.

“September 10-September 11: Croatian Freedom Fighters hijack a TWA airliner. One police officer was killed and three injured.

“June 25, 1996, Khobar Towers bombing -- In all, 19 U.S. servicemen and one Saudi were killed and 372 wounded; see FBI Most Wanted Terrorists.”

Are you suggesting we have no right to defend ourselves?

IN REPLY TO:
“And how is it caring for others, especially Iraqis when the government hires secret agencies that aren't even part of the Armed forces who can just go over and kill willy nilly without any accountability?”

ANS:
Absurdity begets absurdity. For willy-nilly killings try the terrorists. Willy-nilly is it? Some 55 of those body guards died protecting people they were hired to defend because the US couldn’t do it. Only one victim of these terrorists happened by Blackwater's heroic efforts.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blackwater_USA#Iraq_War_involvement

“U.S. ambassador to Iraq, Ryan Crocker, told the U.S., "There is simply no way at all that the State Department's Bureau of Diplomatic Security could ever have enough full-time personnel to staff the security function in Iraq. There is no alternative except through contracts.”

“On October 5, 2007 the State Department announced new rules for Blackwater's armed guards operating in Iraq. Under the new guidelines, State Department security agents will accompany all Blackwater units operating in and around Baghdad.” Willy-nilly, I don’t think so.

"The State Department will also install video surveillance equipment in all Blackwater armored vehicles, and will keep recordings of all radio communications between Blackwater convoys in Iraq and the military and civilian agencies that supervise their activities. Still there is no will-nilly here.

The US House passed a bill in October, 2007 that would make all private contractors working in Iraq and other combat zones subject to prosecution by U.S. courts and Senate Democratic leaders have said they plan to send similar legislation to President Bush as soon as possible."[74] That isn’t will-nilly.

We are in a life and death struggle for survival in Iraq. The terrorists are wont to appear as humble citizens and are indistinguishable from innocent people. It’s easy to judge accidents as intentional in wars when your prejudice is an obstacle to your objectivity and especially when you’re not in Iraq experiencing the danger.

IN REPLY TO:
PRIVER:
“FAITH BASED ORGANIZATIONS”

ANS:
Who but charitable NGOs can be more helpful to the poor? Catholic World Charities are renowned for their work for the poor throughout the world.

Who has helped AIDS victims in Africa more than the Catholic charitable program “Dream?” Though you impugned the work of Mother Theresa, India, a pagan government, lauded her work and her love for their people. No government organization can match the works of charity by Christians. Not even the UN who went to aid tsunami victims and raped their children.

IN REPLY TO:
“The government has no business supporting 'faith based organizations.' We are a secular country. Founded that way, and remains that way. Besides, the only 'faith based organizations' he would promote are those that agree with his own twisted personal belief system.”

ANS:
So is the government's business aiding pregnant mothers by paying to have their unborn murdered? Why is it repulsive to you that government not support charitable organizations who will save these children, the mothers and their families, when the government supports Planned Parenthood that help murder their babies?

Again, you have been given multiple charitable organizations that aid and assist pregnant mothers, but you lament the government supporting them. Are you equally resentful of government's support of Planned Parenthood?

When we say we are a secular nation it doesn’t mean we are, a nation that is exclusive of the Creator, at least the Founding Fathers never thought so. They based all of our inviolable rights on being endowed by a Christian God.

You might try reading the Declaration of Independence some time and the Bill of Rights. While you are at it, try reading the Proclamation of Thanksgiving by President George Washington, our first president who was very familiar with the Founding Fathers.

You are living in an era of one of the greatest presidents in our time. We have an outstanding, economy, low inflation, and unemployment in spite of Katrina, the stock market scandals, the 9/11 disaster and the failing economy inherited from Clinton.

There still hasn't been a 9/11 since 9/11. That's not good enough, so maybe the country will get Hillary, the choice of the terrorists and another facilitated 9/11 from the Clintons. That is why bin Laden cheered the Dems victory in Congress and terrorists are supporting Hillary for president.

The president has restored the dignity to the White House after a pervert and consummate self-admitted liar occupied it and disgraced it.

Unfortunately, truth, dignity, and character didn’t matter to the majority and America reelected a degenerated misogynist misanthrope and his party. They are a good example of morality being relative. Lying is okay if it's about sex, even in a Federal Court. So too is adultery, if you're a Dem President.

We are winning a war the Dems continuously are undermining for political expediency as they did in Vietnam. The Dems' maladroit Senate Majority Leader is so politically and prejudicially blind; he lamentably claimed we’ve lost the war in the face of its patent victory.

Moreover, the liberals' penchant for Embryo research has failed, thanks to the President's belief that human life is sacred. The Father of Eugenics agrees; the embryo is human, as do the former Eugenics Chairman of Mao Clinic and the Father of IVF. Principles matter.

Moreover, Bush's ethic for the value of life is not twisted but distinguished and eminently remarkable. Because he chose two outstanding Supreme Court Justices, he has ended the horrific practice of Partial Birth Abortion that sucks the brains out a child while he is being born.

The Clintons vetoed an anti-Partial Birth Abortion bill twice. Incredibly, the Dems gave the Clintons a second term, when they nearly destroyed our nation’s integrity and generated the Culture of Death.

The President has buffeted Embryonic Stem Researchers (ESCR), who, not satisfied with the murder of over 48 million unborn, had proposed to murder millions of embryos.

ESCR is a crime against humanity, a sham, and a political ploy that has not produced one health benefit even although it has been fully funded in England since 1996.

Eschewed by Dems, adult stem cell research is proving the President’s astuteness. It is an expose of the debauchery of the pharisaical Dems, and their embodiment of the Culture of Death.

Now instead of murdering human embryos, thanks to Bush, science has discovered how to create a stem cell that is even more versatile than the sham promises of the ESCR

Alternate stem cell research has produce over seventy medical miracles that include cures for leukemia, and a break through for sugar diabetes.

The prosperity of our nation is due to a Presided who recognizes the dignity of all human life, and that the dignity of human life stems from the roots of God’s Christian moral absolute that all human life is sacred.

Apparently not reading again.

We are merely participants here until she shows us the door.

The goddess gives birth to the god every year. He is another aspect of her. Many faces, same divine. Self-generating, independent and immanent.

For me, all natures do change, because change is the only constant. Man has changed over the millenia, there's nothing to say that it won't in the future. Into what? who knows? Everything comes from Nature. And will return to her. For me, there is no escaping the natural cycle, no matter how much we want to.

Since for me the divine in Nature is absolutely everywhere, it's not possible to ever be separated. Hell doesn't exist. Your Heaven has no interest for me as you seem to forget. For me, my soul isn't necessarily exclusively mine forever, just part of a larger whole. What interests me is what we do, right now.

Starhawk puts it this way:
"'Polytheism’ means the belief in many different names and approaches to the sacred. While most of us believe in a deep, spiritual unity at the heart of existence, we also believe in the value of many different names, faces, symbols, and paths to that heart. No one has a monopoly on truth, in our teachings, and every religion and spiritual tradition holds a perspective that has value and is uniquely suited to some individuals’ needs."

"The Goddess is the great, creative life force, the living being whose body is the universe, the cycles of birth, growth, death and regeneration that animate all things. She is the oneness that underlies all, but different facets of her story and her power are revealed to us in the form of particular Goddesses and Gods from many different times and cultures. Each is like a gateway that leads us to a particular path of development and growth."

"The Goddess is not just God-in-a-skirt, she represents a different spiritual orientation, one which locates the sacred in this world, in the cycles of nature, in the body and all its processes, that sees sexual communion, birth, maturation, healing, and even death and decay as sacred processes."

"Religion is a human construct—the set of images, beliefs, stories, ethics and explanations we use to wrap our human minds around the Mysteries. Goddess—or God, Creator, whatever you choose to call the great underlying connectedness—is more than we can conceive."

"Every religious system is just one possible doorway through which we catch a small glimpse of the awesome love and creativity that infuses the multiverse. From the Pagan perspective, it’s all poetry. If I say, “My love’s eyes are as blue as the sea” and you say, “My love’s eyes are as blue as the sky”, we don’t need to fight a religious war about it. Maybe I thrill to Beethoven and you adore Beyonce — it’s all music."

This is my path. You have your view, I have mine. One is not better or more 'logical' than another, In your attempts to 'pin down' my belief you have shown what I think is a limited view of what Christianity could be about. The nature of my belief is always in flux and based directly on my own experiences. With new information, new experiences, comes new understanding. But it's all poetry, music. All paths are valid and lead to the same end.

Let me ask this. What do you, personally, get from your belief system?

IN REPLY TO
PRIVER:
“Limbo”

ANS:
Limbo never was a teaching or a dogma. It was an attempt to explain what happened to those who died without being baptized and whose only sin was Original Sin. No one was forced to believe it; it was an option.

IN REPLY TO:
"She is the natural cycle, which INCLUDES death. It is a part of her and she of it, because from death the cycle of life continues."

ANS:
In plant-life, the seed dies and the plant comes to life or fruition. In humans, life is eternal. The body dies but the soul, the force of life, is eternal. It doesn’t die and it doesn’t create human life, God does.

Again, you have given your Goddess parts, making It a dependent being. Therefore, it can not be a True God. It is a mortal god, but God is immortal.

IN REPLY TO:
"Can you ever think for yourself without resorting to quoting others?"

ANS:
Sorry to have to quote you so much, but you continuously forget what you write. References are to show that what I tell you is not only my concepts but also the concepts and conclusion of credible scholars and historians. They are concepts that have been tested and tried throughout the centuries. They've beam wedded in the wisdom of tradition, of which you cavalierly dismiss. Moreover, such references verify my rationale, and show their not just whimsical ideas but the beliefs of many.

IN REPLY TO
MAKING JUDGMENTS:

ANS:
The judgment Jesus was speaking of was the final judgment. Without judgments, we couldn’t surmise anything, Moreover, your interpretation would abolish Courts, and Justice and that would be ridiculous and irrational, wouldn't it?

In addition, we are all obliged to speak out against evil and counsel those of evil. Matthew 18:15-20 I believe it was Edmund Burk who said that the greatest evil is for good men to see evil and say nothing about it.

IN REPLY TO:
"'personal morality' isn't what's screwing up the country. It's people who insist that others…”

ANS
There is no personal morality, on personal belief. All moral laws exist in the Natural Moral Law created by God, and imbued in man’s nature. They are the laws that govern all Human Behavior, no matter what religion or belief. Any one who has their own moral laws makes morality relative and therefore meaningless. Namely, that which is against the moral proper behavior of man’s nature is adverse to it and not licit.

Violate the Moral Law and you end up in disaster. Countries that have done this, usurped the powers of God and decided what was moral. They implode from their own iniquity, or others destroy them because of their threat to society.

We have many examples of this, Cuba, North Korea, China, the Middle East, the totalitarian governments in Asia and Africa, and all the materialistic ideologies that rail against human nature. Their fate is death of man and death of man’s soul sending it to the depth of Hell.

IN REPLY TO:
"PROVE HEAVEN EXISTS. You have no way of doing so."

ANS:
Simply put, Heaven is God. When man resides in God, he is in heaven. Thus, prove there is a God and you prove there is a Heaven. You’ve been given six proofs of God from reason, notwithstanding Scripture. Try reading them.

As to Hell, if you're not with God, you're in Hell, Hell means not to be in Heaven God for all eternity. Those who contradict God condemn themselves to eternal damnation, because God can not have a contradiction.

IN REPLY TO:
"A Goddess has a gender."
Actually, she really doesn't.. we use the term Goddess for a couple of reasons- because she encompasses both male and female attributes at the same time, just as light and dark cannot coexist without each other."

ANS:
Now you’re changing your belief again. I think you might have at least looked at one of my links that noted a Pagan God is both sexes.

To the contrary, God has no sex. In addition, God can not have contradictory attributes. He is pure actuality, no potential, He is who is. He has no darkness; He is pure Light, meaning Pure Actuality. There is no Darkness in God. Darkness is the lack of Light but God lacks nothing.

IN REPLY TO:
"We also personify her that way because she is the cradle, the womb of all life. She gives birth to the Sun god who she mates with and he dies at the end of October until he is to be reborn at the winter solstice. And the cycle continues."

ANS:
You said you believed in a monotheistic god, and now you mention multiple gods, which is an oxymoron.

You write,”Paganism is not always polytheism. There are some that see the Divine as one creative overarching force and all the Gods/Goddess names are different facets of the same Divine.” Do you know what you believe? Accordingly, you believe everything is in constant flux, things that are. soon become things they weren’t because all natures change.

Aristotle's idea of the umoved mover doesn't justify the Christian god. According to him that god sat back and thought thoughts about himself thinking about thoughts all day. Which directly contradicts your bible.

Have a nice day.

I never said I was a strict polytheist. I wait to see what my experience will lead me to. If you ever read anything I've said you'd know that there are many different schools of thought within the umbrella term of Paganism. And they're all over the map. All part of the same thing. Nature. From which all life springs.

And it's interesting you say that I've 'mangled' your statement without bothering to explain yours. Why is it something good is the work of your 'god' and something bad the result of 'free will and choosing evil'?

All the rituals, tools, etc. in Christianity are rooted in Paganism. That has been for thousands of years before Christianity ever showed up. We have simply reclaimed them for what they are and adopted them for modern life.

Interesting you talk about the use of languages.. coming straight out of Druidism, that. Religious value of words. The irony was there was an emphasis on the oral tradition, and what was written down was the unimportant detritis.

Using your ill informed, Christian language and bad information to put words into my mouth that I've never said is a blatant attempt to define that which you do not know. I look at the history. What really happened in an attempt to suppress true knowledge in the face of a group that wanted solely political power, converts.. and money.

But again, you don't want real dialogue. You want conversion.. and obedience by your government to your own way. You want to institute a very dangerous slippery slope that allows the government to dictate the actions of its citizens in places that they don't belong. That is the ultimate in devaluation of human life, because you don't care one whit about those who are here already and struggling.

About governments who are hurting people with their policies.

I said you weren't listening. The quality of your responses are not rooted in anything I've actually said, but what you have claimed I've 'insinuated'. I don't say what I don't mean. I didn't say you were a bad person. And you call me prejudiced?

and your last paragraph once again proves my point that Paganism had led to Christianity. Of course Paganism was influenced by ideas in the orient as well. Why do you insist on beating a dead horse?

I ask again, what part of 'love your neighbor as yourself' are you following?'

IN RESPONSE TO PRIVER:
"Since God has endowed man with a free-will man can choose evil or good. If he chooses evil, he pays the consequences; if he chooses the Good, he reaps his just rewards."

“Wow. I missed this little gem, blaming the Jewish victims for what they went through on their 'free will' and 'original sin'

“Nobody deserves to have to go through what they and others did. You have just lost any credibility you ever had with such bigotry. That god sat around and did nothing. inexcusable, and unjustifiable by saying it happened because someone exercised the brains that they were born with. There is simply no justification for saying that. None.

May you never be in a position of political power.

ANS:
How you’ve managed to mangled my above statement is incomprehensible, but it is not surprising.

Yes, you do have a problem with languages, as you admit. Namely, you think all the languages are incomprehensible except your own, and if one doesn’t use your own language, what ever in heaven it is, their's is inconsequential.

You make truth relative and therefore meaningless. Facts, historical documents, truth, and reason are all relative to you. Absolute truth is subject to change and therefore has no credibility.

The ridiculous and absurd take precedence over reality because that is what relativity is. Yes, in your world, all things are changing and in effect, nothing is what it was.

What absurdity! The irrational becomes rational and the rational becomes irrational. As the great sage of improvidence, Al Gore once said, “Up is down and down is up!” And, so it is in the alternate world of gibberish rigmarole.

You claim that Aristotle, the Father of Logic, the designer of the Scientific Method, and the first to coin the term “circular arguments” is so simple minded that he didn’t know that his own proof of God is circular, but you know it is even though you inadvertently admit you have no sense of what an Unmoved Mover even is.

You deny all the scholarship and historical documentation of theologians and historians by claiming they are irrelevant and even false because you give them no standing in your alternate world of contradictions.

Further, you claim there are no moral absolute truths. Truth becomes relative and therefore unwittingly rendered meaningless. Hence, you write, “Nothing is ever absolute. And man's nature is changing all the time.” I wonder what nature he changes into if he ceases to be human.

Consequently, murder and stealing are not absolutely and admittedly evil; they are relative. It all depends on whom you are murdering or stealing from, I guess.

Moreover, you claim we only know what we think. Hence, it becomes impossible to known what is real because reality is only in the mind. I am sure you will disagree with that because it’s true and therefore irrelative in your fatuous world of chimerical inventions.

You deny the definition of a Pagan that is stated in the dictionary because you have your own definition in a language that no one speaks but you.

You go on about the wonderful world your Goddess has given you and then inexplicably say you haven’t chose a patron Goddess yet while at the same time denied you believed in polytheism.

Consequently you write,” “Wrong. I don't actually have a patron god/dess at the moment. Whether or not that changes in the future remains to be seen.” Notwithstanding, did you not claim that Paganism does not support Polytheism?

IN REPLY TO:
“Your examples do nothing to serve any argument because it's based firmly in your belief that what is true for you is true for everyone, and that's just not the case.

ANS:
First, they are not only examples; they are facts. Yes, reality does not depend on what one thinks; it exists in spite of whether you think it exist or not.

You might do a little historical research on Paganism. You might find instead of Paganism being the root of Christianity, it is Christianity that is the modern root of Paganism.

In doing so, you’ll find that Pagans, when on their odyssey searching for a god that would work for them, drifted toward adopting the rituals of Christianity and monotheism that actually worked for man.

Paganism was consistently a disastrous failure and the Pagans needed something that didn’t continuously end in disaster. Therefore, they saw the advantages in Christianity and were drawn toward many of its beliefs, monotheism being one. You might start with the link below.

http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/11388a.htm

“Whether Paganism made straight a path for Christianity may be considered from two points of view....Attention is nowadays directed, not only to the ideas of the Divine nature, the logos-philosophies, popular at the Christian era, but especially to those oriental cults, which, flooding down upon the shriveled, officialized, and dying worship of the Roman or Hellenic-Roman world. They fertilized within it whatever potentialities Paganism yet contained of purity, prayer, emotional religion, and other-worldliness generally.”

Oh, and btw..

Satanists have to believe in some form of Christianity. They just worship the other side. And the self.

The saints have seen satan? I'm sure they must have, otherwise they wouldn't be part of the Christian canon, now would they? Surely you can do better than that.

The devil has nothing to do with any pantheon in Paganism.

Paganism has always been linked to understanding and working with natural forces that abide in everything. And it still exists, even today.

Like I said, there are some folks who can make a pretty interesting case that Jesus himself was a witch.

Can't back anything up with anything other than one website with an agenda and name calling. Nice.

I ask again: what part of 'love your neighbor as yourself' are you following?

Come to think of it, I sincerely hope you don't speak for all Christians. I still have faith that there are Christians out there who can talk about their faith in a truly nonjudgemental way without condemning others. There are a few of those gems here buried among all the shouting at this site. Which is why those of us that are here make the effort to change the conversation. I hope to have one someday.

You have been fed a whole lot of misinformation, not just about Pagans and who we are, but you insist on not even attempting to get to know someone unlike yourself.

And I have to wonder why your faith is so shaky that you're threatened by the mere fact that your Church happened to place some of its holidays smack on top of those of the people who were celebrating the solstice long before Christianity ever showed up. Are you truly that incapable of looking at ALL the aspects of the history of the Church and making a conscious choice to accept those facts? Both good and bad?

I can understand the bad parts of American history and learn as much as I can about it as a way of making a CHOICE every day to believe in the promise of what America really is supposed to stand for. It strengthens my faith in the possibilities that America can be about. And makes me want to strive for that every day.

YOU don't get to define me or anyone else. Neither does a bible, dictionary or any other book. My beliefs are truly my own.

I can say honestly that I've actually told you remarkably little about what my particular path is and what it teaches. And that's a good thing, because you don't want to try to truly understand anything about how the world works. You prefer to insist that your little bubble is the truth for everyone when most empirical evidence doesn't even back up any of your claims. And when your own 'evidence' points to the same conclusion I've already stated, you are incapable of seeing what's right in front of your face.

I respect your right to claim that your path is true for you. It's what is right for you. And that's ok. When you begin to insist on it's 'correctness' for all people, particularly in light of some glaring errors by a church that you think is 'infallible', that is overstepping the line.

Seeing as how you judge others based on what they do and try to add additional condemnation and punishment on top of whatever consequences their actions have wreaked of their own accord. It is not up to you to be the judge. Seems to me that's what your guy Jesus was all about.

What part, exactly, of 'love your neighbor as yourself' are you following?

IN RESPONSE TO PRIVER:
"Ah.. I see it. The whole strawman about stalin is to try to tell us that we worship the devil."

ANS:
I don't believe you see anything. Never said such a thing. Stalin, by definition was a pagan, and did worship Satan.

IN REPLY TO:
Funny it took you so long to get to THAT misconception.

ANS:
What’s funny is you coming up with that canard.

IN REPLY TO:
Pagans don't believe the devil exists.

ANS:
That’s also something else that’s funny.

http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/11388a.htm

“What pagans are you talking about? Devil Worshipers are pagans. That ‘s unfortunate for them. I see you don’t believe in people being possessed. Some Saints have seen Satan. Padre Pio had wrestling matches with the Devil. Some pagan cults were called Beelzebub.

“There are no moral or spiritual ideas in the worship at all, no conception of a resurrection that might stir human hopes. Adonis personifies merely the life of the fields and gardens that passes away and blooms again. All that Hellenism could do for this Eastern god was to invest him with the grace of idyllic poetry" ("Cults of the Greek States", II, 649, 1896-1909; cf. Lagrange, op. cit., 220, 444 etc.)

"Mithraism is usually regarded as a rival to nascent Christianity; but Nature Worship ruined its hopes of perpetuity. "Mithra remained", says S. Dill, "inextricably linked with the nature-worship of the past." This connexion cleft between it and purer faiths "an impassable gulf" which meant its "inevitable defeat" ("Roman Soc. from Nero to Aurel.", London, 1904, pp. 622 sqq.), and, "in place of a divine life instinct with human sympathy, it had only to offer the cold symbolism of a cosmic legend" (ibid.). Its very adaptability,

“M. Cumont reminds us, "prevented it from shaking itself free from the gross or ridiculous superstitions which complicated its ritual and theology; it was involved, in spite of its austerity, in a questionable alliance with the orgiastic cult of the mistress of Attis, and was obliged to drag behind it all the weight of a chimerical or hateful past.

“The triumph of Roman Mazdeism would not only have ensured the perpetuity of all the aberrations of pagan mysticism, but of the erroneous physical science on which its dogma rested.

“We have here an indication why religions, into which the astral element entered largely, were intrinsically doomed. The divine stars that ruled life were themselves subject to absolute law.

“Hence relentless Fatalism or final Scepticism for those sufficiently educated to see the logical results of their mechanical interpretation of the universe; hence the discrediting of myth, the abandonment of cult, as mendacious and useless; hence the silencing of oracle, ecstasy, and prayer; but, for the vulgar, a riot of superstition, the door new opened to magic which should coerce the stars, THE CULT OF HELL, AND HONOUR FOR ITS MINISTERS -- things all descending into the SATANISM AND WITCHCRAFT OF NOT UN-RECENT DAYS.

"Even the supreme and solar cult reached not Monotheism, but a splendid Pantheism. A sublime philosophy, a gorgeous ritual, the support of the earthly Monocracy which mirrored that of heaven, a liturgy of incomparable solemnity and passionate mysticism, a symbolism so pure and high as to cause endless confusion in the troubled mind of the dying Roman Empire between Sun-worship and the adorers of the Sun of Righteousness -- all this failed to counteract the aboriginal lie which left God still linked essentially to creation.

(See F. Cumont, "Les religions orientales dans le paganisme romain", 2nd ed., Paris, 1909, especially cc. v, vii-viii; "Le mysticisme astral", Brussels, 1909, invaluable for references and bibliography; "Textes et Monuments . . . relatifs aux Myst res de Mithra", I, 1899, II, 1896; "Théol. solaire du paganisme rom.", Paris, 1909.)

“We do not hint that these elements which have been assigned as the origin of an upward revolution have always, or only, been a cause of degeneration: it is important to note, however, that they have been at times a germ of death as truly as of life.“

The above are facts, not fiction, or delusion, and not belief of some phony mysticism. Unfortunately, it’s the history of Paganism.

IN REPLY TO:
"You have to believe something exists in order to 'worship' it. Anyone who worships the devil believes in some form of christianity.

"Your examples do nothing to serve any argument because it's based firmly in your belief that what is true for you is true for everyone, and that's just not the case.

"Obviously not listening.

ANS:
Obviousely your not listening because you prejudices blind you to the truth.,

Wow. you really do love to hear yourself talk, don't you? In the words of Scarlett O'Hara "my how you do run on".

My statement was trying to get you to see that attempting to define my belief system as a Pagan when you obviously know nothing about who we are or what we do makes about as much sense as you standing in front of a group of African Americans and telling them what their lives are like.

Oh.. and people wrote the dictionary. Which reflects a certain bias of those doing the writing. If you actually looked at the word 'pagan' from the latin 'paganus',meaning 'country dweller'. That's it. All the other 'definition's come from an evidently slanted view.

On this:
'So is Jesus, who said He is God, a huckster, a magician who bamboozled hundreds of thousands of gullible people and rose from the dead when they murdered Him.?'

You said that, not I. There are some who can make a pretty good case for the idea that maybe Jesus himself was a Pagan. Assuming of course, that he actually existed. That I'm not convinced of either. There is no archaeological proof. Stories abound throughout time of resurrection of deities or semidivine characters all the time. It's a little too coincidental.

Interesting that you blame all the ills of society on abortion... 4000 of our people and who knows how many others have died in the wars and counting so far, that a self proclaimed Christian started. There are much bigger problems.

"You intimated that abortion didn’t cause mental breakdowns."

For some it doesn't. I know you don't like to hear that in your sweeping generalizations, but there you go. There are always exceptions.. and two sides to every story.

Of course you can't understand Jabberwocky.. but Lewis Carroll could. As we Pagans do. :)

Your path is your own. Not mine. All will lead to the end. All are valid.

The Goddess gave birth to all creatures, and therefore all gods. She is the true mother of all. She is both mother of all mothers and mother of all fathers. If it weren't for women, none of us would be here.

Change is the ONLY constant in this life.
I for one am excited about the possibilties of what life could be.

Oh, saying that the Constitution was based on your version of 'natural moral' says nothing about it being founded on any aspect of Christianity. IF anything, it's a product of the Enlightenment age. The realization of the dream of being able to pursue basic human rights. America is based on the Constitution, not the 10 commandments.

The founders were loose Deists. Not Christians.

As far as Christmas goes, you've already proven my point that a group of folks got together and said 'let's put Christ's birthday on the date that those folks over there celebrate the return of the Sun- maybe then they'll be more easily convinced to worship Jesus.' Why are you belaboring my point that you've already proven?

On your 'taking on a divine nature'.. what if we all have such a capacity..and that it's not acquired.. just a small part of our humanity.

I think it's about time we ended this, don't you? You seem to feel the need to be right.. discounting anyone who doesn't think like you- without looking at how the bigger cost of what you call 'pro life' has nothing to do with actual life and everything to do with pushing government into people's bedrooms and into their bodies. I sincerely hope for your sake that never happens, cause then you'd really see the effects of what you've wrought.

Blessed be.

IN REPLY TO PRIVER:
["You’ve done the same; you’ve chosen what you believed from many polytheistic gods, and, as you say, picked and chose one that was beneficial to you."]

“Wrong. I don't actually have a patron god/dess at the moment. Whether or not that changes in the future remains to be seen.”

IN REPLY TO:
Are you saying there are multiple Goddesses? You’ve abandoned your Goddess? That sure sounds like if you don't like one choose another.

IN REPLY TO:
[God was not created, “I am Who am,” no beginning and no end.]

“Actually he was created by those who wanted others to follow as they did.”

So is Jesus, who said He is God, a huckster, a magician who bamboozled hundreds of thousands of gullible people and rose from the dead when they murdered Him.?

IN REPLY TO;
You have absolutely no empirical proof that your view is somehow more objective than others. Such is the essence of 'faith.'

ANS:
The Founding Fathers seemed to think so. They based their Constitution on the Natural Moral and guaranteed man his inalienable rights, inviolable standards of civil rights that are immune from government interference. They are so authentic that they made America the envy of every nation in the World. No one has access to these rights more than Americans.

Moreover, the nations that have eschewed the wisdom of Christianity as proffered by the Catholic Church are social disasters. Look at the social order in the Middle East, China, and India. Look at what the Supreme Court has done in Roe v. Wade when it legalized murder of the unborn and negated the Right to Life of the unborn.

By that decision, man has the authority to determine what innocent life may live. Over 48 million have died so far. That number is six and a half times the population of New York City.

You can see the turmoil that occurred during the Twin Tower’s tragedy, only some 3,000 died. We are talking of over 48 million dead unborn by abortion. The Culture of Death is slowly encompassing the country and many are sleeping while it’s happening, just like it did to the Germans.

Notwithstanding there is the cannibalism of the body parts of the aborted that are being sold on the open market. We are moving toward the legalization of suicide. Suicide is becoming one of the leading causes of death in the land of plenty, because of the Culture of Death and the Sexual Revolution which triggered it.

The Moral Law is objective absolute rights of every human being. Those who reject the objective absolute Moral Law condemn themselves to ignominious and unmitigated adversity.

IN REPLY TO
"Reason confirms scripture? no, circular logic that you enjoy using confirms scripture."

ANS:
Please show the circular logic. Aristotle was the first to define “circular logic.” He is the Father of the Scientific Method, and the Father of Logic. Are you willing to show how he didn't know that his proof of God as the Unmoved Mover was “circular logic.” That would be ridiculous, now wouldn't it?

In addition your last post show you knew nothing about what an Unmoved Mover is. I have already said, “Know what you are saying when you say it.”

IN REPLY TO:
[You have been shown that Aristotle’s proof of God confirms the God who told Moses, “Tell them I am Who am.]

“Which ultimately means nothing since scripture is meaningless unless you choose to give it such.”

ANS:
Evidently so does reality to you. However, your statement doesn’t make sense. If nothing is meaningless since Scripture, every thing is meaningful since Scripture. That wouldn't be the "Circular logic," you're talking about would it. It looks more like a tautology.

IN REPLY TO:
“Nothing is ever absolute. And man's nature is changing all the time.

ANS:
That’s bizarre nonsense. If man’s nature changes at any time, he ceases to be human. Man, accordingly, would be something different every time he changes. What is he changing into?

If the Natural Moral Law isn’t absolut, the Founding Fathers were sure fooled. In addition, if murder and stealing are not absolutely illicit than they can be licit. The Hitler and Stalin regimes agreed with you, as does Communism and materialist in China. They all didn't mind killing people.

Look at the disasters these nations have wreaked upon their people and the world and themselves. They are a patent expose of the fallacy of your statement. Murder is always wrong; thievery is always wrong. Right to Life is an absolute value, otherwise you have no right to live, and that would be ridiculous.

IN REPLY TO:
I ask you again, would you attempt to define the black/latino experience of others in this country to a group of them, to their faces? I doubt it.

ANS:
That’s foreign to me. Are you reading my post or someone else’s? You never asked me that as far as I know. Moreover, you don’t know whether I am Black or Latino or what I do.

When I did say something about Blacks is was quoting, Bill Cosby who said that 70 percent of Black pregnancies are out of wedlock, and over 50 percent end in abortion. Before Jesse Jackson became a politically expedient Democrat, he said Abortion is Black genocide. Does that bother you?

IN REPLY TO:
“and carelessly throwing out names like stalin are an attempt to equate what you obviously don't know anything about with those who felt it ok to harm others. Which is a false premise, and therefore a strawman.

Now that’s real gibberish. You must talk in a discernable language. I can’t understand jabberwocky.

IN REPLY TO PRIVER
JESUS GOD AND MAN:
“Besides, I thought the story of your Jesus is that he's supposed to be 'god' himself made mortal. The result of sexual union between deity and mortal? Which is also a large part of any Pagan mythos.

ANS:
Jesus took on a human nature, a human nature and a Divine one. He did not cease to be God but had two natures. “Colossians are threatened with the deception of philosophy (ii, 8). St. Paul reminds them that they should think according to Christ; ‘for in Him dwelleth the fulness of the Godhead”

“Jesus is true God and true man. The “Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of God, the Only-begotten, generated of the Father that is, of the substance of the Father, God of God, Light of Light, True God of True God, begotten not made, the same in nature with the Father by Whom all things were made" (see Denzinger, 54).

http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/07706b.htm#I1

“3. The Hypostatic Union Of The Divine Nature And The Human Nature Of Jesus In The Divine Person Of Jesus Christ

http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/07706b.htm#I1

“The Divine nature was really and truly united with the human nature of Jesus, i.e., that one and the same Person, Jesus Christ, was God and man. We speak here of no moral union, no union in a figurative sense of the word; but a union that is physical, a union of two substances or natures so as to make One Person, a union which means that God is Man and Man is God in the Person of Jesus Christ.

“We now take up the crucial question of the nature of this fact, the manner of this tremendous miracle, the way of uniting the Divine with the human nature in one and the same

“The council had implicitly defined the union of the two natures in one hypostasis, a union called physical in opposition to the mere juxtaposition or joining of the two natures called a moral union.

“The human and Divine natures are united in one Divine Person so as to remain that exactly which they are, namely, Divine and human natures with distinct and perfect activities of their own.

“This union of the two natures in one Person has been for centuries called a hypostatic union, that is, a union in the Divine Hypostasis. What is an hypostasis? The definition of Boethius is a complete whole whose nature is rational.

“It is to be remembered that, when the Word took Flesh, there was no change in the Word; all the change was in the Flesh. At the moment of conception, in the womb of the Blessed Mother, through the forcefulness of God's activity, not only was the human soul of Christ created but the Word assumed the man that was conceived. When God created the world, the world was changed, that is. it passed from the state of nonentity to the state of existence; and there was no change in the Logos or Creative Word of God the Father. Nor was there change in that Logos when it began to terminate the human nature. A new relation ensued, to be sure; but this new relation implied in the Logos no new reality, no real change. All new reality, all real change, was in the human nature.

“Anyone who wishes to go into this very intricate question of the manner of the Hypostatic Union of the two natures in the one Divine Personality, may with great profit read St. Thomas (III:4:2); Scotus (in III, Dist. i); (De Incarnatione, Disp. II, sec. 3);"

IN REPLY TO:
"And perfect love and perfect trust are all Her ways. I get that you don't think so.. but this is my truth.. and everything she touches, changes".

ANS:
A Goddess can not be perfect it is a dependent being. Only Perfect Act, which is the First Cause of all Causes, can be perfect. It is a contradiction and therefore irrational to presuppose a contingent being is perfect act or a Creator.

IN REPLY TO:
I don't follow Augustine, either. Sorry. His words hold no water for someone who doesn't use them.

ANS:
You make a statement, and there is a reasonable argument against it, and you have no ratioinale to counter it. I assume you have no idea who he is. He is a brilliant thinker. By saying his rationale has no standing with you only goes to show your mind is closed to the truth because of your dispositions. We are talking about reason, and Augustine is a renown Metaphysician a former pagan and a renowned Theologian. In his Confessions he explains why chose Christianity over Paganism.

IN REPLY TO:
You often mention Aristotle.. who famously said 'Know your audience,' which you have proven you have failed to do.”

ANS:
Rather know what you are talking about before you criticize it. I only respond to what you write.

IN REPLY TO PRIVER
"You implied that the misery that laid ahead for some unborn, namely their quality of life, apparently justify their being aborted."

“That comes directly from some of the parents of those children themselves that I deal with every day. Not me. The anguish and hardships they face are real, on a day to day basis."

ANS:
Never said they were untrue.

IN REPLY TO:
For some of them if they had to do it all over again they may have done things differently. They've even told me as much. Read what I wrote, not what you 'think' is there.”

ANS:
Are you in another world? I quoted what you wrote. Do you not read what you wrote? I never said what you wrote was untrue. You intimated that abortion didn’t cause mental breakdowns. I gave you the testimony of a multiple personal testimonies that it did. Did you read just one of them. I suspect not. As you have written you act on intuition and that negates you reasoning.

IN REPLY TO:
["Communists are pagans; Fascists are pagans; materialist are pagans,"]

“Paganism is an overarching term for a series of religious beliefs. Encompassing none of the above. More proof you weren't listening. And as such it deserves such respect as to be capitalized, please.”

ANS:
All the above worship pagan gods.
Definition of Pagans:
1. One of a people or community observing a polytheistic religion, as the ancient Romans and Greeks.
2. a person who is not a Christian, Jew, or Muslim.
3. an irreligious or hedonistic person.
–adjective
4. pertaining to the worship or worshipers of any religion that is neither Christian, Jewish, nor Muslim.
5. of, pertaining to, or characteristic of pagans.
6. irreligious or hedonistic.

IN REPLY TO:
["Second, Pagans might worship holidays but Christianity does not."]

“What? Nobody said anything about worshipping holidays- like any religious system it has it's own days for celebration of the seasonal cycle."

ANS:
The Solstice is a celebration of the Sun God, and his birthday. It has certain rituals that honor the Sun on the day of the Solstice.

Celebration has one meaning in its definition thus: “To perform with appropriate rites and ceremonies; solemnize.” The Sun is an inanimate object, not a God. Pagans have worshiped the Sun God in their celebrations.

IN REPLY TO:
[You condemn the authenticity of a Goddess because you give it sexuality, making her mortal and not a god.]

“Um, nope. The Goddess is everything and everywhere for us."

ANS:
She is a woman god. To be a Goddess she must be feminine and have a gender, making her human, or a dependent being.

IN REPLY IN:
“Seeing as how none of us and no life at all would be here without the sacred union of both male and female in the sexual act, She is the giver of life.

ANS:
Since she is female making her a dependent being, she can not create a human life. God intercedes in the union of man and woman by giving the conceived a spiritual soul which is created by God, namely, made from nothing. The ensoulment is a creation by God of a being that hadn’t existed. A Goddess is not a Creator.

IN REPLY TO:
I condemn nothing. The only constant is change, repetition of ancient natural cycles of creation and destruction.. so I don't understand why it has to be some 'unmoved mover'.”

ANS:
By condemned is meant negated. God is changeless, consequently the Unmoved Mover, That means he doesn’t change; he is Perfect Act, lacks nothing in his being. Why he is the unmoved mover is shown in the previous post, with the link.

IN REPLY TO PRIVER
"You implied that the misery that laid ahead for some unborn, namely their quality of life, apparently justify their being aborted."

“That comes directly from some of the parents of those children themselves that I deal with every day. Not me. The anguish and hardships they face are real, on a day to day basis."

ANS:
Never said they were untrue.

IN REPLY TO:
For some of them if they had to do it all over again they may have done things differently. They've even told me as much. Read what I wrote, not what you 'think' is there.”

ANS:
Are you in another world? I quoted what you wrote. Do you not read what you wrote? I never said what you wrote was untrue. You intimated that abortion didn’t cause mental breakdowns. I gave you the testimony of a multiple personal testimonies that it did. Did you read just one of them. I suspect not. As you have written you act on intuition and that negates you reasoning.

IN REPLY TO:
["Communists are pagans; Fascists are pagans; materialist are pagans,"]

“Paganism is an overarching term for a series of religious beliefs. Encompassing none of the above. More proof you weren't listening. And as such it deserves such respect as to be capitalized, please.”

ANS:
All the above worship pagan gods.
Definition of Pagans:
1. One of a people or community observing a polytheistic religion, as the ancient Romans and Greeks.
2. a person who is not a Christian, Jew, or Muslim.
3. an irreligious or hedonistic person.
–adjective
4. pertaining to the worship or worshipers of any religion that is neither Christian, Jewish, nor Muslim.
5. of, pertaining to, or characteristic of pagans.
6. irreligious or hedonistic.

IN REPLY TO:
["Second, Pagans might worship holidays but Christianity does not."]

“What? Nobody said anything about worshipping holidays- like any religious system it has it's own days for celebration of the seasonal cycle."

ANS:
The Solstice is a celebration of the Sun God, and his birthday. It has certain rituals that honor the Sun on the day of the Solstice.

Celebration has one meaning in its definition thus: “To perform with appropriate rites and ceremonies; solemnize.” The Sun is an inanimate object, not a God. Pagans have worshiped the Sun God in their celebrations.

IN REPLY TO:
[You condemn the authenticity of a Goddess because you give it sexuality, making her mortal and not a god.]

“Um, nope. The Goddess is everything and everywhere for us."

ANS:
She is a woman god. To be a Goddess she must be feminine and have a gender, making her human, or a dependent being.

IN REPLY IN:
“Seeing as how none of us and no life at all would be here without the sacred union of both male and female in the sexual act, She is the giver of life.

ANS:
Since she is female making her a dependent being, she can not create a human life. God intercedes in the union of man and woman by giving the conceived a spiritual soul which is created by God, namely, made from nothing. The ensoulment is a creation by God of a being that hadn’t existed. A Goddess is not a Creator.

IN REPLY TO:
I condemn nothing. The only constant is change, repetition of ancient natural cycles of creation and destruction.. so I don't understand why it has to be some 'unmoved mover'.”

ANS:
By condemned is meant negated. God is changeless, consequently the Unmoved Mover, That means he doesn’t change; he is Perfect Act, lacks nothing in his being. Why he is the unmoved mover is shown in the previous post, with the link.