White House says Pagans don't have loving hearts and don't care for the poor

[Yorick]

Originally posted by Chewbacca: quote: Originally posted by Maelakin: The persecution of the Christians began in 64 A.D. by a Pagan Roman Emperor, Nero. The persecution continued up to it climax during the years of 303 A.D to 313 A.D., the reign of Emperor Diocletian. During this time, many Christians were severely tortured until death and scriptures were burned. Come a few years later Emperor Constantine comes into power. He declares Christianity as the only official religion of the Roman Empire and begins persecution of all others. Temples were desecrated, people were killed, and scriptures were burned. His persecutions expand into all areas of Asia Minor and Palestine. Divination of all forms, believed to be paganistic in nature, including astrology, is outlawed by Constantius. The persecution of Pagans in this manner continues on through the Inquisitions. So, as Pritchke suggested, it was a cyclic event.

Thanks for the facts! You have pointed me in a new direction for some research.

It should be mentioned that if it is up to Pagans, the cycle would end with us.

Considering we have no scriptural decrees that could be interpreted in way that would inspire intolerance or persecution, that we have no interest in declaring our faith as the only true faith, as well as the the Witch's rule: Harm none and do as thou will , It is unlikely that the persecution of Christians by Pagans will ever occur again. I did find an old news article from the 90's about an alledged incident involving an individual Wiccan threatening a Christian in Maine, but I could find no cross-reference for the event. [/QUOTE]Except that as I pointed out some of the facts are incorrect, and Pagan societies in India are still persecuting and killing Christians.

[Azimaith]

I'd rather have a exact number rather than a rough estimate with a margine of error of 9,500,000 as you said anywhere from 500k to 10 mill. Thats a bigarse area to cover, in my opinion, for the US any group with less than 5million members is a fringe group. That is of course comparing to the tens of millions of christians we have here.

[Yorick]

Originally posted by Maelakin: Actually, I believe Pikachu’s comment refers to the discussion on the existence of God. In that discussion you used emotional statements as a basis of fact. This would be in line with the current assessment that sometimes solid evidence is needed in order to support an argument. Describing something you feel will of course result in using emotional statements, but using emotional statements, as a foundation for a factual argument, doesn’t hold any weight, similar to what you yourself have stated.

Discussions about the existence of God necessitate experiencial accounts, either for or against, as FAITH is the key element.

Discussion the behaviour of existing institutions and collections of humans requires a factual assessment of those groups, as ANALYSIS is the key element.

Apples and oranges. One is sociology, the other theology. You cannot apply the same discussional tools to every conversation.

[Chewbacca]

Originally posted by Yorick: quote: Originally posted by Chewbacca: quote: Originally posted by Maelakin: The persecution of the Christians began in 64 A.D. by a Pagan Roman Emperor, Nero. The persecution continued up to it climax during the years of 303 A.D to 313 A.D., the reign of Emperor Diocletian. During this time, many Christians were severely tortured until death and scriptures were burned. Come a few years later Emperor Constantine comes into power. He declares Christianity as the only official religion of the Roman Empire and begins persecution of all others. Temples were desecrated, people were killed, and scriptures were burned. His persecutions expand into all areas of Asia Minor and Palestine. Divination of all forms, believed to be paganistic in nature, including astrology, is outlawed by Constantius. The persecution of Pagans in this manner continues on through the Inquisitions. So, as Pritchke suggested, it was a cyclic event.

Thanks for the facts! You have pointed me in a new direction for some research.

It should be mentioned that if it is up to Pagans, the cycle would end with us.

Considering we have no scriptural decrees that could be interpreted in way that would inspire intolerance or persecution, that we have no interest in declaring our faith as the only true faith, as well as the the Witch's rule: Harm none and do as thou will , It is unlikely that the persecution of Christians by Pagans will ever occur again. I did find an old news article from the 90's about an alledged incident involving an individual Wiccan threatening a Christian in Maine, but I could find no cross-reference for the event. [/QUOTE]Except that as I pointed out some of the facts are incorrect, and Pagan societies in India are still persecuting and killing Christians. [/QUOTE]Really? Hindu Pagan societies? Is their creed "Harm none do as thou will?" If not then they are not the type of Pagans I am refering too.

And Like I posted, I plan to do some research.

Tsk Tsk You left Witches off of your list of those targeted during the inquisition.

[Yorick]

Originally posted by Chewbacca: quote: Originally posted by Cerek the Barbaric: quote: Originally posted by Chewbacca: Regardless, accusing me of being resentful of Christians and Christianity is just simply a false baseless personal attack that never should have been made in the first place. Good luck proving it.

{sigh} My "accusation" of you being "resentful" of Christianity was not a false, baseless, personal attack Chewbacca. In fact, it was not an "attack" at all. It was an observation based on your own words and reactions to posts made in this thread (and in others in the past).

"Good luck proving it" you say? I already listed some of the reason I made the observation. But if you want a recap, I can do that.

This thread started out as discussion of the Faith Based Initiative and the supposed prejudice of James Towey, who is in charge of running the F.B.I. He made some remarks in the context of a live internet interview that you found objectionable and that you believed proved pagans were being denied federal fund based on nothing more than this mans' personal prejudice....and you pointed out in your opening statement how angry this made you. You wanted to show James Towey how much you care for the poor and you suggested that a simple Google Search would provide numerous examples of pagans doing charity work.

I did the Google Search, and I found that all the "pagan charities" it provided were NOT set-up to help the poor or afflicted. Rather, their only goal was to promote the ideals of paganism. As I said then, there is nothing wrong with those "charities" doing that, but that doesn't meet the qualifications required to recieve federal funds from the F.B.I. So the implication that Towey is denying funds to pagans based on his personal prejudice appears to be innaccurate. Rather, it appears that his statement was based on his actual experience with the pagan groups that had applied for aid. According to Towey, every pagan group that applied for aid was NOT doing actual charity work for others, instead - they were merely set up to promote paganism. I agreed that it was ignorance that made him extrapolate that experience out to make the statement that pagans don't have loving hearts. Still, it appears that the pagans were denied funds based on their Mission Statements rather than on Towey's personal ignorance and prejudice.

So - up to that point - the discussion was going fine. Then, after I echoed Yorick's suggestion that you provide a list of pagan charities to Towey yourself, you responded with the post I listed above. You can sit there and say you aren't angry or resentful or whatever you want to Chewbacca. It doesn't matter to me. All I know is that, once I made that post, you responded with a VERY angry post saying "Christians had persecuted pagans for centuries" and that you had a right to be angry and that you werent' going to "lie down and take it" or "stay in hiding" anymore. You proclaimed that you were going to "speak out against prejudice" and if I didn't like it, that was just too bad. That was JUST as much a personal attack on ME as my response is to you.....because I NEVER suggested nor implied ANY of those things to you. I challenge you to go back and find ANY comments I made that suggested you should just lie down, take it, remain in hiding, or just keep your mouth shut. The fact is, I didn't say anything of the kind, Chewbacca...but all of a sudden you are angrily denouncing the centuries long persecutions suffered by pagans at the hands of Christians and are suggesting that I and Yorick had basically told you to sit down and be quiet about it. Then, you got very angry at Yorick for "dragging Christianity" into this thread and called it both "disgusting" and "distasteful". You then said that this thread should only be about examples of pagan persecution (in effect) and that you were simply going to ignore any more attempts to steer the thread off of that topic.

The fact is, Chewbacca, that - starting with the post I quoted above - your tone became extremely angry and personal. My pointing that out is NOT a personal attack on you...it is nothing more than an observation based on the tone and implications of your own words. My "attack" on you was simply an attempt to get you to recognize the anger in your posts and to realize that you were making some incorrect assumptions and "attacks" of your own.

You know, Chewbacca, I like you a lot. I'm very sorry that my comments have made you so angry and defensive. I suppose I am guilty of being "defensive" myself. I felt your comments to me that it was just "too bad" if I didn't like you speaking out against prejudice were unwarranted and I guess I felt the need to address that and "defend" my actions. All the while, I knew in the back of my mind that it was a bad idea and that it wouldn't be taken the way I meant it. I've listed the reasoning behind my comments and there is no point in repeating them anymore. Obviously I was wrong to make the statements I did and I should have just followed my first instinct to keep my mouth shut.

So I am simply going to leave this discussion completely. I will follow the thread for at least the next few posts, but I won't be adding (or distracting) from the discussion myself. [/QUOTE]Christians persecuting pagans is a historical fact and it still occurs today. If I were to omit the word 'Christian' from the previously mentioned post then it would not accurate. It would actually be misleading as no other group but Christians are on record for harrassing pagans. Its a fact. Are you ashamed of this fact or something and having trouble admiting it? It seems whenever I mention this fact I get accused of Christain-hating. Well that is going to have to stop.

My passion, which had been misconstrued as anger, is to insure this persecution ceases to exist.

Sorry if my being an uppity outspoken Pagan is so threatening to you guys but thats the way I am.

Well whatever, your 'observation' is incorrect and pretty much amounts to defamation of my character. It is going to have to stop. I dont care about an apology, I just want it to stop. [/QUOTE]Need I point out we have been replying to you Chewbacca. You made the first post. Are you suggesting we do not have a right of reply on this forum? Must we mutely accept your proclaimations no matter how erroneous or coloured they may be?

Be the change you wish to see. If you want us to stop... stop yourself.

[Yorick]

Originally posted by Chewbacca: Really? Hindu Pagan societies? Is their creed "Harm none do as thou will?" If not then they are not the type of Pagans I am refering too. And Like I posted, I plan to do some research. Tsk Tsk You left Witches off of your list of those targeted during the inquisition.

You lumped Hindus in with Pagans earlier in this thread Chewie.

Show proof Witches we victims of the inquisition. When done compare that to the Huguenot massacres. The Inquisition targetted heretic Christians.

[Yorick]

http://www.summerlands.com/crossroad...e/0000007a.htm

If Witch-hunting was Pagan-hunting, you'd expect it to be worst when either there were a lot of Pagans or the Church was particularly powerful. Neither is true. During the early Middle Ages, when much of Europe was still Pagan, Witch trials were virtually non-existant. Well, perhaps at that point the Church's position was still too tenuous -- it didn't have the power to attack Witches directly. Maybe. But when the Church was at the height of its power, in the late Middle Ages, there were *still* very few trials. The Burning Times did not happen in the Middle Ages. When the Church controlled Witch trials, very few Witches died or were tried. Things didn't become monstrous until after the Church's power was shattered by the religious warfare of the Reformation, when the Church lost its monopoly on Witch trials. Second, the actors are wrong. The vast majority of Witches were killed by non-religious courts. The Inquisition and church courts usually killed about 1% of those accused; local secular courts often killed approximately 90%. If the Church was really trying to wipe out a rival religion, why were its courts the ones most likely to let a Witch go free? When the Inquisition was created in the 13th century, several inquisitors requested permission to try Witches. Pope Alexander IV rejected their request, pointing out that there was nothing heretical about Witchcraft. It was not a religious crime, therefore it was not the Inquisition's business -- unless, of course, inquisitors found Witches who were Pagan or who "abused" Christian sacraments in their spells. But the Church would not assume, ipso facto, that a Witch was a Pagan.

[Chewbacca]

Originally posted by Azimaith: I'd rather have a exact number rather than a rough estimate with a margine of error of 9,500,000 as you said anywhere from 500k to 10 mill. Thats a bigarse area to cover, in my opinion, for the US any group with less than 5million members is a fringe group. That is of course comparing to the tens of millions of christians we have here.

Well there is a lot of difficulty in nailing down how many Pagans there are for a varity of reasons. Barnes and Nobles estimates a U.S. customer base for books about Wicca and other Earth Religions at 10,000,000. That stat is from 1999.

Here is a link with an overveiw:
http://www.religioustolerance.org/wic_nbr.htm

Besides, we cannot be compared to Christians in relation to the word "fringe" according the dictionary definition of the word. We are not secondary nor peripheral to Christians nor are we a form of extremist Christianity. We are a minortity compared to Christians but we are not fringe.

In relation to the rest of society, we vote, pay taxes, are doctors, teachers, soldiers and students. We live in the world and partcipate as citizens. We have family, friends. We give to charity and enjoy the good things in life. If we are a fringe group, so is everyone esle.

Bottom line, using the word Fringe to describe is technically inacurate. It also seems to be used in a deragtory manner by people who are prejudice and biased against pagans and would love to spread the false notion that we are a crazy baby-eating fringe group with nothing to offer society. They want to make us out not to have any real or meaningful spirituality. People like President Bush and Representative Barr would carry this misconception further and try to deny the rights of Wiccan soldiers to worship for example.

Nothing personal, but using the word fringe to describe pagans and you are inviting a strong, relentless rebuttal. It is innaccurate and wrong. Whether if we are 100,000 or 10,000,000 we are a minority group not a fringe group.

[Chewbacca]

Originally posted by Yorick: http://www.summerlands.com/crossroad...e/0000007a.htm quote: If Witch-hunting was Pagan-hunting, you'd expect it to be worst when either there were a lot of Pagans or the Church was particularly powerful. Neither is true. During the early Middle Ages, when much of Europe was still Pagan, Witch trials were virtually non-existant. Well, perhaps at that point the Church's position was still too tenuous -- it didn't have the power to attack Witches directly. Maybe. But when the Church was at the height of its power, in the late Middle Ages, there were *still* very few trials. The Burning Times did not happen in the Middle Ages. When the Church controlled Witch trials, very few Witches died or were tried. Things didn't become monstrous until after the Church's power was shattered by the religious warfare of the Reformation, when the Church lost its monopoly on Witch trials. Second, the actors are wrong. The vast majority of Witches were killed by non-religious courts. The Inquisition and church courts usually killed about 1% of those accused; local secular courts often killed approximately 90%. If the Church was really trying to wipe out a rival religion, why were its courts the ones most likely to let a Witch go free? When the Inquisition was created in the 13th century, several inquisitors requested permission to try Witches. Pope Alexander IV rejected their request, pointing out that there was nothing heretical about Witchcraft. It was not a religious crime, therefore it was not the Inquisition's business -- unless, of course, inquisitors found Witches who were Pagan or who "abused" Christian sacraments in their spells. But the Church would not assume, ipso facto, that a Witch was a Pagan.

[/QUOTE]What an excellent peice of religious propaganda that leaves out key facts. You will have to do better than this. I would find a less biased source to begin with.

I find failing to point out that the civic courts that did predominatley try Witches did so with the blessing of the church and according to guidelines layed down by the Church and according to ideaology found in scripture to be a gross oversight. Also many of the Witched who were "freed" by the church were only "freed" after they confessed and repented under the duress of TORTURE.

[Chewbacca]

Originally posted by Yorick: You lumped Hindus in with Pagans earlier in this thread Chewie.

And like I have already mentioned I did so only becasue hindus, like Western Neo-PAgnism isa non-Abrahamic religion. Again I ask, do these so called Pagans, or should I just call them Hindus, live by the rule "Harm none do as thou will like the pagans I was OBVIOUSLY REFERING TO?


Do you actually read my posts and think about them? It seems to me that you do not. May be you would communicate better if you did.