  Version 8.2 |
|
|
|
|
<-- WNest 2.1|
|
Wren's Wrants
& Wramblings
|
Features... News Links Who Is Wren W Nest Logos |
Go to the... |
| Witchvox Chapter: Wren's Nest News | Chapter Page Views: 56,555,150 |
 Update: Under Pressure, Pitts Drops Out Author: Americans United for Separation of Church and State Source: Americans United for Separation of Church and State Title: PENNSYLVANIA CONGRESSMAN DROPS OUT OF RELIGIOUS EXTREMIST CONFERENCE AFTER AU PROTEST Rep. Joseph R. Pitts (R-Pa.), who had been scheduled to speak this weekend to a radical fundamentalist group that seeks to impose "biblical law" on the nation, announced yesterday that he has cancelled his appearance. Faced with media pressure as a result of Americans United's letter, Pitts quickly caved. Acknowledging the cancellation, Pitts spokesperson Gabe Neville told the Associated Press, "Congressman Pitts doesn't believe in stoning anybody." | |
| Community Thoughts: There are 26 comments posted | Reverse Sort |
| Conservativism Not Right Wing Extremism | Nov 21st. at 5:35:31 pm EST |
|
by Dan (Québec City) One thing that bugs me about such groups is that they call themselves Conservatives when in fact they are right extremists.A conservative believes in making change slowly while folks like this want radical changes in society. It should also be remembered that while some conservatives may be long winded, boring and rather full of themselves they should not be placed in the same categorie as religious fanatics. |
| Goat, Continued | Nov 16th. at 5:49:13 am EST |
|
by Antistoicus (Chicago) - wc_xemail - Web Could the emphasis on monotheism seen after the return from Babylon be a Persian influence ? Perhaps. Persia was certainly well-regarded by the Jews/Judahites/Judeans (Southern Israelites) at that point, having been their liberator from the harsher realities of Babylonian rule (which, admittedly, were positively idyllic compared to those endured by their Northern kin under Assyrian rule). There might be somthing far simpler at work, here, though : as anybody who has ever seen an immigrant subculture try to endure knows, a lot of folklore tends to be lost in the process. If the people in the subculture don't work really hard to maintain their heritage, it will tend to be "dumbed down" into something that doesn't have quite as much detail. Western Semitic Paganism, prior to the disruptions which the Assyrians and other Mesopotamian conquerors had inflicted on the region, had already possessed something akin to a monotheistic element. There was a clearly supreme god named El (a name Yahweh is sometimes called by in Judaism today); even his greatest enemy, usually referred to only by the title Ba'al, could do no more than have those dear to him harmed. While the cults of other gods were important, His was clearly the one of greatest importance to the people, and would be the last one to be forgotten. What I would suggest is that the Jewish people, in being uprooted and having their lives and communities disrupted, as they were forcibly moved into a new land where they were a minority, lost much of their culture in an all-too-familiar way. While Babylonian religion, perhaps, would have been similar to polytheistic Judaic folk religion in many ways, it was the religion of the enemy who had destroyed their homeland, and thus, something that the Jewish people would have had an aversion to. The rise of monotheism, perhaps, might be less one of influence than one of cultural simplification. |
| Babylon, Persia And Israel (response To Goat) | Nov 16th. at 4:47:23 am EST |
|
by Antistoicus (Chicago) - wc_xemail - Web Persia vs. Babylon as an influence ? Hmm. It isn't necessarily a question of influence here. Babylon was definitely NOT a monotheistic culture, and monotheism would not be a reflection of Babylonian influence. Were they to see what followed, including the destruction of most of their literature and the suppression of the worship of their gods at the hands of some of the followers of the monotheistic religions that followed, they would probably be horrified. The family relationship I mentioned between what we might now call "the old Judeo-Paganism" and Babylonian Paganism is not so much of a parent-child relationship, with Babylon in the role of parent, as a sibling relationship, both finding roots in Sumeria, and in the sea of state religions that arose in the region, with much exchange between city-states. Persia, while quite ancient by the standards of say, Germany or England, is quite a young nation by Middle Eastern standards, and would not have been around to mold Canaanite religion. Some might suggest a Persian, Zoroastrian influence in the development of Judaic monotheism; certainly, such an influence can be seen in Christian dualism, with its conflict between God and Devil. There is, however, no Jewish Ahriman. "The Satan" is merely a being who tests the worthiness of men's souls, no more evil than the person who writes a test, or the proctor who administers it. He is seen as being a faithful servant of God who rejoices when men pass the tests he puts out, as opposed to the bitter malcontent Shaitan of Islamic belief, who cheers when Man falls, out of spite. (In the Koran, Shaitan is damned for failing to have bowed down before the first man, feeling himself to be above such a thing, Allah then condemning him for his disobedience). Mainline Christianity seems to have reduced Satan to a similar petty level in much of its folklore and official theology, I am told .... (cont'd above) |
| Anti - | Nov 15th. at 8:24:26 pm EST |
|
by goat (indiana) wow. obviously, i'm not completely familiar with modern jewish movements (although i have been schooled on the difference between reconstructionist and conservative and orthodox, etc. - just sloppy language choice on my part there). I would have to agree with you about what actually went on in Israel (I made a sly remark about it in my first post); I guess I was just posting on the possible interpretations I've heard of. Again, I'm not very familiar with modern Jewish movements, so my views are skewed. As to the rise of Jewish monotheism, I would just like to add that while Babylon was a major player, I think it's important to recognize also the role of Persia. Monotheism, arguably, started in Persia, and it was the Persians who defeated the Babylonians. Goat |
| PA State Rep. Samuel Rohrer May Still Be Speaking. | Nov 15th. at 2:46:50 pm EST |
|
by Moonfire (Central PA) Unfortunately, PA State Rep. Samuel Rohrer may still be speaking. (Can't confirm that, but I haven't heard anything to the contrary.) I guess we'll see. *sigh* This crap gets old after a while and I'd rather just ignore it. But we need to stay aware and active, otherwise a lot of momentum can be gained in a short time and suddenly these groups are in influencial positions, even if only for a short time. I'm HOPING that if this congressman speaks, I get a chance to hear it. I'd like to be able to report back to the community, good or bad, on this person's opinion of such an extremist viewpoint. Oh, and on another not, the "The Jewish Pagan Resource Page" link posted by a previous poster was very informative. -Moonfire |
| Basis Of U.S. Government | Nov 15th. at 12:40:04 pm EST |
|
by Lughaidh (Texas) - wc_xemail In a number of posts here and, especially, in the world of the RR, there seems to be this idea that this country was founded on christian principles. Some, maybe, but not enough to justify the implementation of the ten commandments (of which the Tanach contains three versions). Have we become so numb by hearing this 'christian nation' stuff that we can't remember basic civics lessons? Ours is a REPUBLIC with DEMOCRATIC principles! You don't find that in the Bible anywhere ... Jewish or Christian. You find that in Greek and Roman thought. The Jewish people were ruled by judges and kings. Many christian nations that followed were also ruled by kings. The basis for our government has nothing to do with Judaism or Christianity (well, not much anyway) but has everything to do with classical civilizations that provided so much art and culture. Look at the buildings in the Capitol! They're Greek revivalist! Look at the statues of the founders! They emulate the Greek and Roman styles! Where was the Jewish senate? There wasn't one! You had to go to 'pagan' ROME. I'm glad to see he pulled out. We don't need to create a duplicate B.C.E. middle-eastern government here. |
| Liars All | Nov 15th. at 10:40:03 am EST |
|
by Ashe Winterwolf (Irving, TX) After reading this article, the only thing I have yet to determine is which one is the biggest of the liars. While the words coming out of Bush were supportive and kind, the actions I've read about being taken against people who even look like they are of Middle Eastern descent speak louder than Shrub's words. The very fact they are coming out of Bush sullies them in my eyes. Question: How do you know when Bush is lying? His lips are moving! Sorry, couldn't pass that one up. I love my country, I'm terrified of my government. |
| Bush, Fundies, And Islam | Nov 15th. at 10:19:00 am EST |
|
by DrgnDancer (New Orleans) Beliefnet has an article about Bush's comments, Powells elaboaration on Bush's comments, likely motivations for the statements (and the timing of the statements) and fundementalist reactions. Decent read with some reasonable commentary. http://www.beliefnet.com/frameset.asp?pageLoc=/story/116/story_11699_1.html&boardID=48321 |
| Unless.......... | Nov 15th. at 6:56:32 am EST |
|
by Old Gray Mouse (Sturbridge MA) Pitts backed out because he suddenly realised he would be one of those put to death? mouse |
| Moonfire : Maybe Good ? (Oh, And A Judeo-Pagan Lin | Nov 15th. at 6:54:34 am EST |
|
by Antistoicus (Chicago) - wc_xemail - Web I'm sorry to hear that these people are your neighbors. I glanced briefly at the page you linked to, especially the biblical argument for capital punishment, along with the glib dismissal of humanitarian arguments against the practice. Yes, these people represent Fundamentalism at its very worst. But how numerous are they ? Assuming the worst at the outset is going to do nothing for your peace of mind, and it might just leave you attacking a candidate who doesn't deserve to be attacked. It's good to check these things first. I'm sure that political considerations crossed the man's mind for the same reason you seem to be sure they did, without knowing much about him : he's a politician, and thinking about such things is how he gets his job. But, is it fair to automatically assume that the only consideration crossing his mind was a self-serving one ? One other thing : Somebody named Lughaidh from Texas mentioned that he had been studying Judaism. I'm going to toss in a link to a Jewish Pagan resources page that I think that he might find interesting, because it is a nice place to start finding other resources, at the very least. "Judeo-Paganism" is not necessarily synchretic, exactly; earlier, polytheistic forms of Jewish folk religion did exist, as mentioned before, prior to the Babylonian exile, and some will attempt to reconstruct some form of that old folk religion, maybe with some admixture of the Cannanite religion it is rooted in. I hope he and others enjoy the link. (There is also a Jewish Pagan webring at http://I.webring.com/hub?ring=japring, "JAP" standing for "Jewish American Pagan", here. Take some of what you are reading with a grain of salt, though : Akhenaton as the father of Judaism ? Look for the "Jewish Pagan Resources" page there, if the link below comes up broken). |
| Political Move Or Not... | Nov 15th. at 6:25:51 am EST |
|
by Shadow (St. Augustine, Fl) It is a good thing he dropped out of the speech. However, again, his title is liason. I still say keep your friends close and your enemies closer. It may have been a political motivated move, but then again, what isn't politically motivated in a elected officials life? |
| Yep, He Dropped Out...good Or Bad?... | Nov 15th. at 3:42:42 am EST |
|
by Moonfire (Central PA) The decision was political. Don't know the man well enough to be glad either way. I might just check out this conference tomorrow for informational gathering purposed. I don't know about you, but I'm feeling a little threatened - and it's being son right here in my back yard :( I live nearby. There's a scary thought! -Moonfire P.S. I posted a link below giving information about this conference, the specific local church, and the National Reform Association that is sponsoring it. |
| Outsider Rights : Disturbing But True | Nov 15th. at 3:05:13 am EST |
|
by Antistoicus (Chicago) - wc_xemail - Web Continuing on Goat's point regarding "Jewish Reconstructionism" (by which I assume he doesn't mean the movement begun by the late Rabbi Mordecai Kaplan) : a legitimately reactionary Jewish movement akin to the "Christian Reconstructionists" would find itself in a bind, because a respect for established tradition goes far back, and one would have to strip away much of that accumulation to return to the past, contrary to the most basic rule that the past was governed by. So, the very concept of a Jewish counterpart to extreme Christian fundamentalism wouldn't mean anything. Here is a part of the accumulation : the idea that it is wrong to harm a traveller, or other outsider present in the community. Today, we take that for granted as being part of what defines civilized behavior, but such a view has not always prevailed. For example, the Keltoi, before the Romans arrived, extended no such consideration to visitors, unless those visitors arrived with the permission of the local king, who placed them under his protection; otherwise duties were defined along kinship lines, and if you had no local kin, you had no local protectors, and thus, no recognized rights to be honored. New Guinea saw similar atitudes well into this century, with outsiders being viewed as being good "enemies" to slaughter to appease the tribal ghosts, by many tribes. The objection to this sort of thing is based in natural law, a recognition of the fundamental rights of Man, which is now an established part of Jewish tradition. But, it would be as anachronistic to expect to see such a concept in the culture of Mosaic era Jewry, as it would be to seek Egalitarianism in Medieval Europe; the concept simply hadn't been developed yet. The ancient Jew who seperated himelf from the community, seperated himself from the basis on which he was protected; today, other, non-contractual bases for a protection from violence are recognized. |
| Return To The Goat And Judaism | Nov 15th. at 2:28:20 am EST |
|
by Antistoicus (Chicago) - wc_xemail - Web Yes, I know I've been writing a lot here, but Judaism is a whole different civilization, and when basic cultural assumptions break down, one is let with a lot of explaining to do. Goat made reference to Conservative Jewish Reconstructionism. (Word to Goat : don't utter that phase near a synagogue. "Conservativism" and "Reconstructionism" are two very different movements in Judaism, and the latter isn't especially fundamentalist. You may end up in the middle of a very lengthy debate with a pack of annoyed yeshiva students. You would not like). Aside from the different use of these words, Fundamentalism in a Jewish context would be a funny concept because the Tanith (the canonical Jewish scriptures) wasn't compiled until very late in the history of Judea; the Sanhedrin, which had the authority to re-interpret Jewish law, predates it by a good stretch. Re-interpretation can be quite bold. For example, there are ritual violations which call for a certain number of lashes. The Orthodox will still honor the letter of the law, but make use of a loophole - nowhere in Torah or the Talmud does it say how hard a lash must be. What are delivered are light taps with a soft leather strap, a symbolic observance that remembers the history without preserving its brutality, and without breaching the contract between Israel and its God that is the covenant spoken of. |
| Meade, Read Again | Nov 15th. at 1:52:39 am EST |
|
by Antistoicus (Chicago) - wc_xemail - Web There is nothing ambiguous about saying "the congressman is not in favor of stoning anybody"; that is a clear-cut rejection of the so-called Christian Reconstructionist platform. It strikes me that in the eyes of some here, the man is damned if he does, and damned if he doesn't. If he spoke to the group, he would have been condemned for giving it credibility; we heard that very complaint before he said "no". Now that he has done as many (especially Pagans) have asked, he is being condemned for that instead. Let's be fair. A politician gets many requests to speak, and from time to time, some of the many groups that he hasn't heard much about will turn out to be ones that he wishes to avoid. Such is life in a republic. To condemn a politician for stumbling into one of those groups makes about as much sense as condemning a mugger's victim for turning the wrong corner. Sometimes, one just doesn't have enough time to see what is about to hit one until it does. |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Copyright 1997-2010 The Witches' Voice Inc. All rights reserved
Note: Authors & Artists retain the copyright for their work(s) on this website.
Unauthorized reproduction without prior permission is a violation of copyright laws.
Website structure, evolution and php coding by Fritz Jung on a Macintosh G5.
Any and all personal political opinions expressed in the public listing sections (including, but not restricted to, personals, events, groups, shops, Wren’s Nest, etc.) are solely those of the author(s) and do not reflect the opinion of The Witches’ Voice, Inc. TWV is a nonprofit, nonpartisan educational organization.
Sponsorship: Visit the Witches' Voice Sponsor Page for info on how you
can help support this Community Resource. Donations ARE Tax Deductible.
The Witches' Voice carries a 501(c)(3) certificate and a Federal Tax ID.
Mail Us: The Witches' Voice Inc., P.O. Box 341018, Tampa, Florida 33694-1018 U.S.A.