Don't Blaspheme!!! [Archive]

Slytovhand

04-23-2008, 02:16 AM

Hey.

I just thought I'd throw this one into the ring and see how it fares...

At work a month or 2 ago, someone made a comment, which was overheard by on of the more obvious christians. She responded with "Don't take the lord's name in vain - it's blasphemy".

The alleged blasphemer replied by saying that they weren't christian, so it's not 'my lord' to take in vain, so there is no blasphemy, go stick it (perhaps not an exact quote..:p)

So - here's my thoughts/question....

Can it be blasphemy, and if it continued, would it be a form of religious vilification or discrimination (or something similar). What if the person (or others) continue to 'blaspheme') and is overheard?

Now - I want to compare and contrast, which is why the point is being made.

Hinduism holds that cows are a sacred animal, and thus are not allowed to be harmed in anyway - particularly killed. If the above is a form of blasphemy, then surely eating a roast beef sandwich in front of a Hindu is just as blasphemous, and thus should merit the same sort of official response (remembering - this is at work). The reply might be - that is being seen... so what about the emails sent out from the canteen with today's dishes... Beef Stroganof anyone?

One of our staff members (maybe more..??) is a Jainist.. so the harming of all animals is right out - all life is sacred. Do their beliefs just have to be squashed, and they have to just tolerate it, because basically - it's inconvenient?

Thoughts anyone?

Slyt

(oh - in case it's not enough of a 'fratch' because it doesn't directly involve me, as a pagan, my beliefs get walked over often enough that I bring this up. Halloween?? A mockery of a high holy day...)

Rapscallion

04-23-2008, 06:33 AM

Much of this can depend on the person being offended. I would imagine that a Jainist who protested that you were spraying insects out of your garden would get pretty short shrift. It's pretty hard to live with those aphids (unless you are me and close your curtains...), but it's worthy to note that if you say a certain word is offensive then it's far less of a bind to avoid it.

There's also the critical mass involved. If one or two people share a belief, then it won't impact on others so much. However, if a region has a large percentage of their population of the same faith, then laws are enacted - witchcraft laws in the UK, for example. The UK blasphemy laws were only there to protect the christian faith and not the jewish or muslim religions. I know there was a brouhaha about it a little while back, but I don't remember the outcome.

In the above example, if the person isn't a christian, why are they invoking the name of the christian deity? I'd put that down to social conditioning.

Rapscallion

Amethyst Hunter

04-23-2008, 06:59 AM

Not blasphemous, but maybe just inconsiderate?

anriana

04-23-2008, 07:37 AM

None of those examples would be discrimination. Rude, possibly harassment if it was ongoing, yes, but not discrimination.

As for the xtian example, I highly doubt the offensive person said "Oh my Yahweh!"

Jaden

04-24-2008, 06:39 PM

Speaking as a Christian, I hold to 1 Corinthians 5:12-13, which basically says (as a summary) "You can't judge people outside of the church." So I wouldn't be offended if a non-Christian blasphemed around me.

Norton

04-24-2008, 07:05 PM

Very nice, Jaden! Even as a non-believer, I know the Bible has some very good advice in it. I wish more Christians would take that scripture to heart.

Sylvia727

04-24-2008, 08:12 PM

In the above example, if the person isn't a christian, why are they invoking the name of the christian deity? I'd put that down to social conditioning.

I believe the person said "oh my lord" which might not have any religious connotations at all. Even if they said "oh my god" or "goddammit," that might not be religious at all. Christians use the word god as the name of their god, but that doesn't make God the only god. For all the overzealous coworker knows, when I say "goddammit" I'm praying to Zeus to smite someone with a lightning bolt.

Saying "god" doesn't mean anything in modern culture. Everyone says it, and it is completely divorced from any religious meaning. That said, some of the sayings I hear can be pretty offensive - "Jesus fuck" being the most common, but also crude variations on the sexuality of Jesus Christ and the Virgin Mary. That's unacceptable. They're obviously just running their mouths off for the shock value. It's "lewd, rude, and crude" to quote one of my teachers, and it should be rewarded by walking away and refusing to deal with the offender anymore than absolutely necessary.

Can it be blasphemy, and if it continued, would it be a form of religious vilification or discrimination (or something similar). What if the person (or others) continue to 'blaspheme') and is overheard?

The dictionary definition of blasphemy is "an impious utterance against sacred things". So if I don't hold it sacred, how can I blaspheme against it? This isn't (or shouldn't be) a religious issue, but a social issue. It's rude for one to say disrespectful things about another's personal beliefs. Your coworker should have said "Excuse me, but I feel that the Lord's name is sacred. I understand that you might feel this way, but I would really appreciate it if you tried not to use it in a casual manner." If the other coworker argued or got defensive, she could say, "I'm not blaming you, I just feel that you might not understand my religion."

Myself, I like to take the Antichrist's name in vain. As in, "Son of the motherfucking Antichrist!" or "Blood of the Antichrist!" or "Bastard offspring of a diseased whore and the Antichrist!" Most Christians laugh or roll their eyes, and the ones that find it offensive generally find me offensive anyway, so I don't take it personally.

(oh - in case it's not enough of a 'fratch' because it doesn't directly involve me, as a pagan, my beliefs get walked over often enough that I bring this up. Halloween?? A mockery of a high holy day...)

Christmas and Easter? The same. Thanksgiving? Symbol of oppression. Valentine's Day? Commercial exploitation of religious festival.

I'm sure your beliefs are belittled and ignored frequently, but Halloween is not the best example. Halloween, or All Hallows Eve, was believed to be the day the evil spirits came out. So the villagers carved scary faces in turnips to frighten them away. They gave treats to the village children in a ritual meant to placate the spirits. It's the same customs, even if the gestures are empty.

I know that All Hallows Eve lines up with Samhain, and I seriously doubt that it was unintentional. Most or all religions have stolen from other religions. But no one is trying to oppress pagans by following semi-pagan, semi-Christian traditions.

Pedersen

04-24-2008, 08:41 PM

I know that All Hallows Eve lines up with Samhain, and I seriously doubt that it was unintentional. Most or all religions have stolen from other religions. But no one is trying to oppress pagans by following semi-pagan, semi-Christian traditions.

Okay, fun time.

Not planning on citing sources for this post, too many of them to be found for all of what I have to say, and it would take hours to type this post.

Christmas: December 25. Birthday of Jesus. Wait, maybe not Some scholars believe he was born in 4BC. Others are not at all certain of the time of year. So, all in all, why was this date chosen? Historically, the pagans celebrated the winter solstice, which occurs around Dec 20 to Dec 23. The Catholic Church wanted to convert pagans, but that meant allowing them some way of keeping their holidays, including winter solstice. So, Dec 25 was chosen.

Easter: the first Sunday after the first fourteenth day of the moon (the Paschal Full Moon) that is on or after the ecclesiastical vernal equinox. Yeah, that's a firm date. Christ was definitely resurrected on that day. Celebration in fairly short order after the vernal equinox, another special day for the pagans. Noticing a pattern here?

And, if you want something truly fascinating, look up Mithra, and Saul of Tarsus. You would know Saul of Tarsus as St. Paul, converted on the road to Damascus. Saul came from an area of Turkey which was a strong Mithraic base. It is very likely that Saul himself was a follower of Mithra.

Mithraic belief systems held that the bull was sacred, and would be consumed in a specific ceremony. This ceremony included strong focus on the consumption of the body and blood of the bull as a representation of Mithra himself. Sound familiar at all?

Now, for even more fun: Read the New Testament. Lots of messages about "love thy brother", "turn the other cheek", etc. Then you toss in the testament of St. Paul, and suddenly you find the basis for various atrocities committed by the church over the centuries, including the Inquisition.

And that's just a small smidgin.

Even though modern day Christians might not be trying to oppress pagans, there is strong evidence that several Christian holidays were begun specifically to oppress and subvert pagan theologies.

Sylvia727

04-24-2008, 09:09 PM

I just reread this post, and I think it could be read as abrasive and argumentative. Since I can't figure out another way to phrase what I'm trying to say, please take it with a grain of salt. I'm trying to have a philosophical discussion, not a flame war. If it seems otherwise, ask for clarification and I will try to elaborate.

---

Pederson, I knew all of that. It doesn't make a difference to me.

Early Christians shamelessly stole from pagan religions. They stole festivals, myths, traditions, and everything that wasn't nailed down. And they made it their own.

To use an example that someone on this board used a long while ago:
Early Xian: "Hey, neighbor pagan, wanna come to our Yuletide party?"
Pagan: "Why sure, that sounds like fun!"
Early Xian: "Psych! It's really a Christmas party. Ha ha, you're a Christian now."
Pagan: "Dammit! Now I have to go to church on the sabbath and wear uncomfortable clothing."

Is Christmas any less of a religious experience because some of its original practitioners called it by a different name? Is Easter less of a holiday because it was originally a celebration of the spring goddess Eostre? Am I supposed to stop having fun on Halloween because someone else believes that the spirits of the dead really do come out on this day?

The Christians stole from the pagans. The Romans stole from the Greeks. If you go back far enough, every religion had a small following that was later combined with other religious traditions. No one loses their religion if another person follows a different version of it. Remember, imitation is the sincerest form of flattery. The early semi-pagan-semi-Christians believed in their holy days, under whatever name you want to give them. That belief later evolved into modern Christianity, but it doesn't change the fact that the early pagan 'converts' didn't really convert to Christianity, they just adjusted their vocabulary.

(This is not aimed at anyone on this board. I know this person in real life, I just think it's applicable here.)
If my holiday threatens your holy day, then your faith isn't strong enough. I'm not oppressing you by following a "bastardized" version of your traditions. Religions evolve just like any other organization. It's not a corruption of your purity.

Amethyst Hunter

04-25-2008, 06:29 AM

Myself, I like to take the Antichrist's name in vain. As in, "Son of the motherfucking Antichrist!" or "Blood of the Antichrist!" or "Bastard offspring of a diseased whore and the Antichrist!"

That is awesome. :D

(Yes, I do love to discover new ways to swear, heh heh)

Pedersen

04-25-2008, 01:14 PM

Pederson, I knew all of that. It doesn't make a difference to me.

That's a surprise. Most people don't know about the shared symbolism of the Last Supper and Mithra.

Is Christmas any less of a religious experience because some of its original practitioners called it by a different name? Is Easter less of a holiday because it was originally a celebration of the spring goddess Eostre? Am I supposed to stop having fun on Halloween because someone else believes that the spirits of the dead really do come out on this day?

Are African Americans any more oppressed when people put on black face and bad accents while eating chicken and watermelon? Are Christians any more oppressed when people say "Happy Holidays" instead of "Merry Christmas"? Are Native Americans any more oppressed when people offer them fire water while saying "How"?

No one loses their religion if another person follows a different version of it.

Right. The modern day followers of Mithra can vouch for that, too.

If my holiday threatens your holy day, then your faith isn't strong enough. I'm not oppressing you by following a "bastardized" version of your traditions. Religions evolve just like any other organization. It's not a corruption of your purity.

My reply to said person: My faith isn't in question. Keep in mind that, at this time, you have no idea what my faith is. And I'm not discussing it here. For all you know, I could be a druid, or a Christian, or a Buddhist, or an ancestor worshipper. You have no idea what religious traditions I follow.

You're not corrupting my purity. You're ridiculing it. You're making very light of my religious beliefs. With your actions, you are telling the world that I do not matter, and that I can be laughed at without consequence.

As for whether or not others are being oppressed when you do these things, look at my questions above, and consider the following:

<note: All below is edited to add in from original post>

Christians celebrate Easter as the day that Christ was resurrected. What if the tradition were to become for non-Christians to, on Easter Sunday, wear a toga, put fake wounds on their hands and feet, and go visit their family and friends saying "Yo! I'm back!"? What if that tradition were to become practiced by a majority of the population? Would Christian oppression be occurring then?

Be careful to say that no oppression is occurring. Ridicule is a very powerful form of oppression (in fact, it might be the most powerful form of non-physical oppression).

Sylvia727

04-25-2008, 11:27 PM

That's a surprise. Most people don't know about the shared symbolism of the Last Supper and Mithra.

Anthropology geek. Reading dusty textbooks about people's beliefs 2000 years ago is my idea of a good time.

Right. The modern day followers of Mithra can vouch for that, too.

I would argue that Christians are the modern day followers of Mithra. But then again, I don't see anything inherently different between Mithra and Christ, or between the Virgin Mary and Isis, so someone with a different religious perspective than me might agree with you.

Be careful to say that no oppression is occurring. Ridicule is a very powerful form of oppression (in fact, it might be the most powerful form of non-physical oppression).

Oh, absolutely. But I'm not ridiculing anyone else's traditions when I celebrate my own. I didn't attend a pagan festival and think "Oh hey, I should plagerize that." Christmas, Easter, and Halloween rituals have been in my family for centuries. I'm not certain when Christianity stole pagan beliefs - about 1200 or 1500 years ago, maybe? A really long time. So for 1200 years my ancestors have been celebrating a religion in a certain way.

This is my family's religion. It has over a millenium of belief stamped on it. At the beginning it might have been a mockery, but after all this time it can't be anymore. It's been consecrated, if you will. The shape of the thing became the substance of the thing. My Halloween has been completely divorced from someone else's Samhain.

And yeah, Halloween is a religious festival in my household. It's the day before All Hallow's. If I go out in a scary costume and get candy after my prayers, the same thing my ancestors did to scare away the spirits, that's not a mockery of anyone. It's a ritual my family has been doing for centuries. I enjoy it, of course, but then again I don't subscribe to the "religion must be shameful and painful" school of thought.

You're not corrupting my purity. You're ridiculing it. You're making very light of my religious beliefs. With your actions, you are telling the world that I do not matter, and that I can be laughed at without consequence.

Nope. I'm celebrating my own religious beliefs. Or even if it's not particularly religious anymore, I'm celebrating my family's beliefs and traditions. Once upon a time some very bad people who called themselves Christian set up Halloween as a bastardized Samhain. Why they did it is irrelevant to my traditions, though of course it's very relevant to a discussion of historical pagan oppression. What matters is why the people celebrated it. No one can tell me that my peasant ancestors in some wet Welsh village were carving vegetables into jack-o'-lanterns in order to mock or hurt their pagan neighbors. They were doing it because they believed evil spirits would get them if they didn't. And that's what I'm celebrating: my family's traditions.

Christians celebrate Easter as the day that Christ was resurrected. What if the tradition were to become for non-Christians to, on Easter Sunday, wear a toga, put fake wounds on their hands and feet, and go visit their family and friends saying "Yo! I'm back!"? What if that tradition were to become practiced by a majority of the population? Would Christian oppression be occurring then?

At the time this little scene got started? Yes, almost certainly the Xians would be oppressed. Because I cannot think of a single reason to do that without intending to hurtful or shocking. Centuries and generations later? No, because it wouldn't be the Xians' god they were mocking anymore. It would be its own tradition with its completely different meanings. No one would connect the two anymore. (Except for scholars and history geeks, of course.)

I think a huge part of the communication gap is what we mean when we say worship, belief, religion, etc. For my part, I don't see how genuine belief or a celebration of family traditions can be an oppression of someone else. If you would care to explain, clarify, or correct?

Slytovhand

04-26-2008, 12:40 AM

Ok - firstly - Pedersen...get out of my head :p... Christians celebrate Easter as the day that Christ was resurrected. What if the tradition were to become for non-Christians to, on Easter Sunday, wear a toga, put fake wounds on their hands and feet, and go visit their family and friends saying "Yo! I'm back!"? What if that tradition were to become practiced by a majority of the population? Would Christian oppression be occurring then?

That's my line.... :p

Secondus...Anthropology geek. Reading dusty textbooks about people's beliefs 2000 years ago is my idea of a good time.
That's 3 of us :D... although, I prefer mine a bit older (and sometimes younger...Sumerian, Hittite, Egyptian, but also Celtic and Native American. Don't mind a bit of Mayan and Olmec as well).

As to the origins of Samhain, that have become a mockery since ... no - it's not actually about They were doing it because they believed evil spirits would get them if they didn't. And that's what I'm celebrating: my family's traditions.

It's actually about honouring those who have 'crossed over' in times gone past. It is about remembering them, and giving them the same respect they would deserve if they were here now. That's why, when you go to the various countries that celebrate 'The Day of the Dead', they are all jumping up and down and having a carnivale atmosphere, not one of fear. The ritual and significance was bastardized some time ago to become 'keep away the evil spirits'.

It has over a millenium of belief stamped on it. At the beginning it might have been a mockery, but after all this time it can't be anymore. It's been consecrated, if you will. The shape of the thing became the substance of the thing. My Halloween has been completely divorced from someone else's Samhain.

'Consecrated'? Why, because one religion has put it's stamp all over something that was sacred to someone else, that makes it ok? And no, Samhain is still alive and well, and it pretty obvious that Halloween is a take off of it. So it isn't as 'completely divorced' as suggested.

All Saint's Day or All Hallow's Eve was a time for a vigil. It was a time for the veneration of saints - so that the whole idea of trick or treat is nowhere to be seen - it would be completely out of place. (Also as per Day of the Dead). And this 'Halloween' thing, as we have it now, is quite a recent event, historically speaking, and has no religious significance.

Ok - getting away from history, and into the here and now, and also a bit more closer to the topic raised... If I'm at work, and it's October (or earlier), and work is deciding to put on a halloween theme, what if I object on the basis of the above argument - that it is a mockery of my beliefs? After all - there are the whole 'ghosts and spirits and stuff' that comes associated with it (not unlike togas, thorns and stigmata of a mocked Easter...). If I object, is it therefore 'fair' for management to use the historical line Sylvia used above as a way for them to ignore my issue?

Slyt

DesignFox

04-26-2008, 07:16 PM

I think a lot of what we need to remember is a person's intent when they do something.

I think people would look askance at you Slyt, if you objected to Halloween as a mockery of faith, because they don't see it that way. No one is intentionally mocking the Pagan religion. They're celebrating the secular Halloween.

I think that makes a world of difference.

I also tend to think that the "new" religions in the beginning, adopted the same traditions as the "old" religions to make converting people easier...I don't see that by adopting those holidays they were intentially mocking anybody...they just wanted to make people feel comfortable with some of the new beliefs by easing them into the new system.

Eventually, things got violent. But the churches wouldn't have had as many converts if things started out that way.

It was gradual, at first.

Some people have looked into the history and prefer to follow the old traditions...but just because traditions have changed, doesn't make them a mockery...not in today's context. Most people don't even know where some of the traditions came from, so I hardly see them as being callous in their actions.

You can't really say I'm making fun of you if I don't even know what to make fun of.

I would think, too, if someone told you what they were doing and what they believed, that people on your side would respect their right to hold those beliefs...as much as the other people respect your right to hold yours.

Slytovhand

04-27-2008, 03:15 PM

Ooh...I dunno Fox..

Let's just say that this year (as against the other times I've mentioned it), work decides once again to do a Halloween theme - 'ghosts', bats, skeletons, etc,... all the usual.

I go to my manager and make an objection, based on as I've said. She will look askance at me (well... she does anyways... I'm weird :p).

So - she can either say 'yep, I understand', or 'nope - I don't accept that, it will go ahead'. Given the latter, what would I be thinking? And, is ignorance any excuse at that stage? (but that's just a hypthetical - until it happens).

As for your second bit... yeah - true. But that's sort of what started the OP...

DesignFox

04-27-2008, 05:12 PM

Well, Slyt, perhaps the celebration could go on for the rest of the company, but you would be excused from attending. Or maybe some other compromise could be reached.

Part of your manager's job would be to find a suitable solution for both the secular partiers and yourself. But I think it would be unnacceptable for one person to kill joy the whole operation because of a misunderstanding or a difference in belief.

I mean, as an example, we had a kid in my elementary school who was a Jehovah's Witness. He could not participate in ANY parties of any kind or celebrate any holidays in class. Did we all stop decorating and celebrating because of one person's belief? No. He was excused from the classroom. I always felt bad for him to be left out like that, but that was his parent's choice in not letting him celebrate.

Why should all the other kids not be allowed to have a celebration of their beliefs because his belief was different?

He wasn't purposely excluded...it was a choice based on his parent's religious standing.

This same thinking always annoys me when it comes to decorating for the holidays. Why should the kids who believe in Santa not be able to decorate their classroom door with a Christmas tree, presents and a fat man in a red suit? Because the Jewish kids feel left out? Um...so put a Menorah and Dreidel up on your door then...why is it such a big deal?

Why do people get so bent out of shape over simple things rather than accepting them with the spirit in which they are intended?

(I'm not saying you necessarily do...this is rhetorical)

Slytovhand

04-27-2008, 06:36 PM

(keeping in the spirit of rhetoric...)

Well.. firstly, using Halloween as the current example still, Halloween isn't a significant event down here. So it's not really a big celebration that people are having rained on. A couple of years ago, the manager sent an email asking people what they should do as some form of activity for October (they were doing stuff to increase morale), and it was decided to make it a Halloween theme....

For your first suggestion, we were talking about a workplace (a call centre). 'Excusing' someone from 'attending' would be very inappropriate - unless they wanted to pay someone for taking the day off....

I'm a bit lost on the christmas line...because the tree, fat man and presents aren't part of a religious festival which jewish kids should be excluded from. Besides - there is Hanukkah (with different symbologies). But that's me and a specific example....

The weird thing here is that no religious festivals are 'celebrated' in this call centre. We have a range of different religions amongst the staff, yet the closest to it is 'christmas' - and i put that in ' ' because it's not the religious version, but the secular version (ie - tree and gifts).

This issue is a bit of a general one which we do all have to submit to the whims of individuals (as per my OP on the subject). Consider 'offensive' material at work. Pictures of naked women are a form of harassment - even if no females work at that place (assuming that a woman makes a complaint). Religion and beliefs is just another area in which it rears its head.

Slyt

DesignFox

04-27-2008, 07:15 PM

hmm. Well, put into that context, it bears some thinking about it. Like I said, maybe the manager could come up with a better solution that fits everybody.

I guess my point is that we can't always make everyone happy. Someone is always going to feel left out or offended by something.

I guess the question is where we draw the line...and if someone approaches you and says it bothers them, then I guess it is the responsibility of the group to try not to make that person feel unwelcome.

My Christmas analogy came out because when I was young, we would have door decorating contests for the holidays. At one point when I got older, we were forbidden to put up anything of a religious nature. No Jesus, No crosses, No Santa, No Christmas Trees, No Reindeer, No Menorahs...nothing that could in anyway be associated with any religion... only "winter" scenes were allowed.

The whole idea was that someone might be offended or feel uncomfortable if their religion wasn't represented. Well...if there are no Jews in my class, why would anybody think to put up a Menorah? Conversely, if there were no Christians in the class, why would any Jewish child think to re-create a Baby Jesus scene?

What's offensive about that?

My point, I think anyway, was that no one else in the office is Pagan. So why would they think anything was wrong with what they were doing? Why is religion such a big deal?

I mean, I can see the sexual harrassment argument, except that some men might also be made uncomfortable if naked photos are hung up on the bulletin board. And it can be argued that naked images of women are a form of objectification. How can you work with someone if you're wondering if all they're really picturing is you without your clothes on?

Well, I have to think some more...maybe someone will have better words for the point I'm trying to make... :o

Sylvia727

04-28-2008, 12:23 AM

Ok - getting away from history, and into the here and now, and also a bit more closer to the topic raised... If I'm at work, and it's October (or earlier), and work is deciding to put on a halloween theme, what if I object on the basis of the above argument - that it is a mockery of my beliefs? After all - there are the whole 'ghosts and spirits and stuff' that comes associated with it (not unlike togas, thorns and stigmata of a mocked Easter...). If I object, is it therefore 'fair' for management to use the historical line Sylvia used above as a way for them to ignore my issue?

I'm a bit lost on the christmas line...because the tree, fat man and presents aren't part of a religious festival which jewish kids should be excluded from. Besides - there is Hanukkah (with different symbologies). But that's me and a specific example....

The weird thing here is that no religious festivals are 'celebrated' in this call centre. We have a range of different religions amongst the staff, yet the closest to it is 'christmas' - and i put that in ' ' because it's not the religious version, but the secular version (ie - tree and gifts).

Do you see a difference between these two? Why is okay for your workplace to mock my religion but not yours? The jolly red man giving out presents under the tree has nothing more to do with the "true spirit of Christmas" than silly costumes and free candy has to do with the "true spirit of Samhain".

Which is my second argument for secular Halloween. No one associates it with a religion anymore. I'm fine with secular holidays. I don't feel that they detract from religious holy days, even when they're on the same day and supposedly celebrate the same things.

---

It doesn't look like my "family consecrated values" argument is going down too well, but I can't say anything that hasn't been said before. Yeah, my religion celebrating the same thing a different way makes it a different holy day. Actually, I really think it makes it the same holy day, but either way one shouldn't be shut down in favor of another. That's my opinion. You don't have to share it.

DesignFox

04-28-2008, 02:01 AM

<snip>
Which is my second argument for secular Halloween. No one associates it with a religion anymore. I'm fine with secular holidays. I don't feel that they detract from religious holy days, even when they're on the same day and supposedly celebrate the same things.

<snip> Yeah, my religion celebrating the same thing a different way makes it a different holy day. Actually, I really think it makes it the same holy day, but either way one shouldn't be shut down in favor of another.

That's better. Thank you Sylvia.

What's wrong wtih me celebrating my way, AND you celebrating your way?

It may be tricky in public places, but ultimately if we're all coming together in good faith and good spirits, what's the big deal?

radiocerk

04-30-2008, 03:14 AM

There is at least one Halloween "symbol" I take insane offense to, which was always intended as a mockery.

The pointy-hat, green skinned, wart covered witch on the broom. Put that together with the owl, bat, toad and cat (which are supposed to be her familiars) and it makes me REALLY unpopular when it comes to decorating time. As for it being in the spirit of fun, or some such nonsense, I don't crucify things in my fornt yard at Easter.

And the bunnies and eggs were ours first. As was the "Christmas" tree and wreath, and a WHOLE lot of other symbols that not only have the Christian majority embraced and made theirs (which I think is cute actually, and don't mind in the least), they get butt-hurt whenever anyone makes references to their origins, or tries to describe them in any other way.

There is a reason I stop reading the opinion section of the paper during November and December. Every time I hear a "war on Christmas" description, I want to smack someone.

Sylvia727

04-30-2008, 03:47 AM

There is at least one Halloween "symbol" I take insane offense to, which was always intended as a mockery.

The pointy-hat, green skinned, wart covered witch on the broom.

I can't argue with that at all. It's as much a stereotype as an offensive racial image. The only (very shaky) defense those people can claim is ignorance. Most people don't associate the Puritan "congress with the beast" women with the New Age hippy skyclad Wiccans, and they don't associate either with their next door neighbor.

they get butt-hurt whenever anyone makes references to their origins, or tries to describe them in any other way.

I just have to laugh at that. I was raised Christian, but any text one picks up on the origins of Christianity or Christian traditions will cover at the very least 3-5 non-Christian items that predate Christianity. In other words, there's no excuse for ignorance except sheer naivete.

There is a reason I stop reading the opinion section of the paper during November and December. Every time I hear a "war on Christmas" description, I want to smack someone.

Some of these articules manage to make their points in a tasteful way, decrying how instead of multicultural we've become noncultural. Others are just hateful bigots with nothing better to whine about. And yeah, I want to smack some of them too.

DesignFox

04-30-2008, 02:03 PM

I think society is changing the view of the witch. More and more you have "pretty" witch costumes and decorations to combat the "ugly" witch pictures and costumes.

I always think of the Wizard of Oz and just think of it as the difference between a "good" witch and a "bad" witch. :)

And there was an episode of Bewitched where Samantha had a discussion with her husband over the "ugly" witch portrayal. (and how old is that show?)

So...I don't think people are that ignorant, anymore. Things are changing. People are realizing that a "witch" isn't a bad person.

EDIT: and now I think the word witch sounds funny because I've used it too many times in one post...

Slytovhand

05-01-2008, 06:58 AM

Thanks Radioclerk, that sort of helps to sum things up a bit for me as well, certainly as it pertains to that specific 'holiday'.

If they're putting up witches everywhere, surely it denotes that it is a 'religious' festival? (well - no - probably not....) And one that isn't actually shared by those who are doing the celebrating - thus it's not a 'secular' one at all. Secular is Australia Day (which has it's issues down here...), Labour Day, Mother's and Father's Day etc...Your Thanksgiving would fit in nicely.

Yes - I do think society needs more 'secular' celebrations. Either that, or we need to fully embrace the religious ones more wholistically. And explain where all those things come from that don't otherwise make sense, but still respect where they came from. ie - "here's your chocolate bunny and egg, in memory of the spirit of Spring and the Goddess Eostre, and remember how that represents renewal and rebirth - when you go to church to celebrate your lords resurrection." Or, to get back to Sylvia's point on the other page, the jolly man in red handing out presents under the tree are all pagan motifs, so in one sense there isn't a mockery going on (other than towards the traditional pagans...). But it does confuse the heck out of me what christians are doing with all that stuff. The gift-giving I can understand (gold, frankincense and myrrh), but the rest of it?? Is it ok to mock your own religion??

Oh - DesignFox...So...I don't think people are that ignorant, anymore. Things are changing. People are realizing that a "witch" isn't a bad person.
Ah...if only that were true...<sigh> Trust me, many still are....I'm in a forum called UniPagan, and I've heard of the advertising materials and posters for a UniPagan group at (strangely) the unis, but those posters get grafittied or ripped apart or down. And this in an arena of 'higher education' where one might expect a higher level of tolerance.

On that line, most of the witches I know you wouldn't pick in a crowd (which makes it a bit difficult when you're looking out for them:p)

DesignFox

05-01-2008, 05:17 PM

I guess I'm just in sheltered Slyt. I've always lived in a fairly tolerant and diverse state, and I just don't "see" the evils people around me see.

I guess it's because I'm so tolerant of people overall. I have my prejudices...but I keep them in check and try to judge people on their own merit. I don't really get offended easily and sort of live and let live.

Maybe I just don't see what all the hoo-pla is when people get upset over certain things...because I'm a bit harder to upset? And I'm not a part of any group or religion that has traditionally (at least in recent history) been oppressed.

(well, except that I'm female, but I like to think we've worked out most of those issues, at least in my country)

*shrug*

That said- I know better than to hang up pictures of "witches" around Pagan people...I don't go knocking on my Christian friend's door dressed as Jesus...and I don't do things to insult my Jewish friends....I use my sense.

I DO think people are getting better overall. The witch issue has been addressed, and I do see changes being made. We have "happy holidays" now instead of just saying Merry Christmas. The malls get decorated for multiple holidays instead of just one. And people are granted days off based on their religious background (I had a Wiccan manager who needed certain days off for the solstice, etc.)

Again, maybe that's just been my experience. But I see things changing. It won't happen overnight. But it is happenening.

I don't understand the militant, "OMG you CAN'T do THAT! I'm SO OFFENDED!" attitude...

Overall, I think a lot more people need to be a lot less sensitive.

Sylvia727

05-01-2008, 09:10 PM

If they're putting up witches everywhere, surely it denotes that it is a 'religious' festival?

Witchcraft and magic are still heavy themes in fantasy. Look at the Harry Potter books if you want an idea of how modern society perceives witches. If 'witch' became strictly a religious term, I myself would have to throw away maybe a third of my novels.

This just adds to the perception of Halloween symbols. People put up the stereotypical 'witch' image because they associate it with fantastical stories and myths, not modern day religions. I'm not saying it's not offensive, merely that people don't know it's offensive. It's pointless to blame them for their ignorance. Raise awareness, because they don't understand why you're offended, and will only get defensive if confronted.

And explain where all those things come from that don't otherwise make sense, but still respect where they came from. ie - "here's your chocolate bunny and egg, in memory of the spirit of Spring and the Goddess Eostre, and remember how that represents renewal and rebirth - when you go to church to celebrate your lords resurrection."

Why do I have to mention someone else's god in order to worship mine? What's wrong with saying "The chocolate bunnies and eggs represent renewal and rebirth"? I'm aware of the origins of my religion, as many others are, but that should hardly be a requirement. I don't think it makes me inconsiderate if I fail to mention details about the origins of certain traditions. I don't have to be educated about the history of my religion to be a good ____ist or a good citizen or a good neighbor.

Or, to get back to Sylvia's point on the other page, the jolly man in red handing out presents under the tree are all pagan motifs, so in one sense there isn't a mockery going on (other than towards the traditional pagans...). But it does confuse the heck out of me what christians are doing with all that stuff. The gift-giving I can understand (gold, frankincense and myrrh), but the rest of it??

What are Christians doing with all that stuff? Besides celebrating family, love, the birth of hope of salvation, togetherness, and the corporate dollar? I don't understand your question. Are you asking for a detailed justification of each Xian tradition?

Is it ok to mock your own religion??

I don't think religion should be mocked at any point. It is a sacred and personal part of many or most people. But good-natured and friendly-intended ribbing could be okay no matter what religious persuasion the ribber was of.

Oh - DesignFox...
Ah...if only that were true...<sigh> Trust me, many still are....I'm in a forum called UniPagan, and I've heard of the advertising materials and posters for a UniPagan group at (strangely) the unis, but those posters get grafittied or ripped apart or down. And this in an arena of 'higher education' where one might expect a higher level of tolerance.

Yup. The Gay-Straight-Alliance on my university put up posters promoting homo/het equality, and all 500 were torn down with 2 hours. Worse, campus security and university administration refused to do more than a token investigation, despite an attorney's testimony that this was a hate crime and could get prison time for the offenders. Worse still, the school newspaper published an editorial which essentially said, "get over it, faggots."

Intolerance: still alive and kicking.

Maybe I just don't see what all the hoo-pla is when people get upset over certain things...because I'm a bit harder to upset? And I'm not a part of any group or religion that has traditionally (at least in recent history) been oppressed.

That could well be my problem. I'm not seeing the extent of the damage because I'm not experiencing it. I think I'm seeing most of it, but without walking a mile in a pagan's shoes, I'll never know.

Overall, I think a lot more people need to be a lot less sensitive.

I think people need to be more sensitive to others' perspectives and to others' motives. As the offending party, I need to understand where the other person is coming from and make reasonable accomodations for them. And as the offended party, I need to understand why the offender is doing whatever, and make reasonable accomodations for them.

I think the primary issue is communication. Individual groups of people need to work out what is acceptable for them. For example, I can fulfill my magical fantasies by dressing up as a sorceress, but until you tell my witch costume is offensive to you *in a polite and nonhostile manner*, I won't know to make the switch.

Slytovhand

05-02-2008, 04:09 PM

Witchcraft and magic are still heavy themes in fantasy. Look at the Harry Potter books if you want an idea of how modern society perceives witches. If 'witch' became strictly a religious term, I myself would have to throw away maybe a third of my novels.

This just adds to the perception of Halloween symbols. People put up the stereotypical 'witch' image because they associate it with fantastical stories and myths, not modern day religions. I'm not saying it's not offensive, merely that people don't know it's offensive. It's pointless to blame them for their ignorance. Raise awareness, because they don't understand why you're offended, and will only get defensive if confronted.

True, but in this age, and with all the media around, witchcraft is at least been seen as a religion now, rather than merely a bunch of loons (or devil-worshipers). Yeah - educate is good - when people choose to listen. Some do, some don't. OH - as for HP, I do recall all the hoo-ha about the fundies wanting the books all banned....<sigh> some people....

Why do I have to mention someone else's god in order to worship mine? What's wrong with saying "The chocolate bunnies and eggs represent renewal and rebirth"? I'm aware of the origins of my religion, as many others are, but that should hardly be a requirement. I don't think it makes me inconsiderate if I fail to mention details about the origins of certain traditions. I don't have to be educated about the history of my religion to be a good ____ist or a good citizen or a good neighbor.

What are Christians doing with all that stuff? Besides celebrating family, love, the birth of hope of salvation, togetherness, and the corporate dollar? I don't understand your question. Are you asking for a detailed justification of each Xian tradition?

No - not a requirement, nor a justification. I was just putting that in because you mentioned not getting the jolly man in reference to christmas - which neither of us gets.... so it was rhetorical.

I don't think religion should be mocked at any point. It is a sacred and personal part of many or most people. But good-natured and friendly-intended ribbing could be okay no matter what religious persuasion the ribber was of.

Damn..I forgot what that was in reference to.... other than maybe cos Xtians are doing large amounts of pagan worship :p (bunnies and eggs stuff).

Yup. The Gay-Straight-Alliance on my university put up posters promoting homo/het equality, and all 500 were torn down with 2 hours. Worse, campus security and university administration refused to do more than a token investigation, despite an attorney's testimony that this was a hate crime and could get prison time for the offenders. Worse still, the school newspaper published an editorial which essentially said, "get over it, faggots."

Intolerance: still alive and kicking.

:eek: Holy Crap!

That could well be my problem. I'm not seeing the extent of the damage because I'm not experiencing it. I think I'm seeing most of it, but without walking a mile in a pagan's shoes, I'll never know.

I usually wear sneakers.. there more comfy :D

I think people need to be more sensitive to others' perspectives and to others' motives. As the offending party, I need to understand where the other person is coming from and make reasonable accomodations for them. And as the offended party, I need to understand why the offender is doing whatever, and make reasonable accomodations for them.

I think the primary issue is communication. Individual groups of people need to work out what is acceptable for them. For example, I can fulfill my magical fantasies by dressing up as a sorceress, but until you tell my witch costume is offensive to you *in a polite and nonhostile manner*, I won't know to make the switch.

Words of Wisdom :D

Oh - I just had a thought.. years ago, I was trying to talk about the significance of various beliefs to non-followers, and I said that Buddha was to Buddhists as JC was to Xtians. The Xtians I was 'explaining' this to took masses of offence, cos JC is the son of God, and Buddha was just a man.

What would be your thoughts on what I was trying to explain??

Slytovhand

05-02-2008, 04:16 PM

Sylvia727

05-02-2008, 08:36 PM

True, but in this age, and with all the media around, witchcraft is at least been seen as a religion now, rather than merely a bunch of loons (or devil-worshipers).

It is seen as a religion, but most people don't make the connection. Wiccan =/= magical hag, in other words.

Oh - I just had a thought.. years ago, I was trying to talk about the significance of various beliefs to non-followers, and I said that Buddha was to Buddhists as JC was to Xtians. The Xtians I was 'explaining' this to took masses of offence, cos JC is the son of God, and Buddha was just a man.

What would be your thoughts on what I was trying to explain??

You should have elaborated further and the Xians should have shut up and let you. In my experience, it usually takes half an hour before an innocent, well-intentioned slight can be resolved. One person starts out saying what they meant, the other says what they heard, the first person clarifies, the second person says why s/he found this hurtful, the first person reassures the second that s/he would never want to be hurtful, and then they dance around for another ten minutes reassuring each other that they're still friends. Or maybe that's just my friends. But it works, I assure you.

From what I understand of Buddhism, Buddha was just the first guy to 'awaken'. He's not anyone particularly special; he did it right and his advice might be worth listening to. Whereas Jesus is the Messiah, the Son of God, and God himself, and he should be worshipped and obeyed. It might be more apt to say that Buddha is like a prophet of Judeo-Christian-Islamic traditions, in that his advice will help immensely but isn't the be-all and end-all. (Excepting Mohammad in Islamic traditions, AFAIK).

DesignFox

05-02-2008, 08:43 PM

I suspect that we draw people to us who share similar attitudes and outlooks.

That could be, too.

I tend to be very open and accepting of other people, so I guess I just draw in other people who share the same attitudes.

And, I do try not to hurt the feelings of others. If a person brings something to my attention in a non-confrontational manner, I certainly try to avoid causing them distress. Usually, we can come to a compromise.

If some fanatic gets all in my face with the "I'm so persecuted" "you can't do this because of ____" line, I roll my eyes at them.

I like to understand as much as I can about other people, but I would expect that same courtesy from the other side of the fence. ;)

It's like I said about people being overly sensitive, which Sylvia elaborated upon (and that is what I was intending to say...)

We need to communicate and understand each other, rather than getting up in arms right away. (and, IMO, a lot of what people get up in arms about- religiously speaking- is stupid shit).

Slytovhand

05-03-2008, 07:48 AM

It is seen as a religion, but most people don't make the connection. Wiccan =/= magical hag, in other words.

Really?? hmmm.. dunno - either way.

You should have elaborated further and the Xians should have shut up and let you. In my experience, it usually takes half an hour before an innocent, well-intentioned slight can be resolved. One person starts out saying what they meant, the other says what they heard, the first person clarifies, the second person says why s/he found this hurtful, the first person reassures the second that s/he would never want to be hurtful, and then they dance around for another ten minutes reassuring each other that they're still friends. Or maybe that's just my friends. But it works, I assure you.

Yeah - we danced :p I sort of gave up, cos it appeared they didn't want to listen. Funny thing was, there was another almost fundy christian working with us ('fundy' in the sense of very very religious, rather than just a believer), and she and I could have some really good serious debates, and questionings. That sort of connection she would see where I was coming from (although, as you said below) not quite the same.. but that was fair. I was only looking at significances - not equating.

(Excepting Mohammad in Islamic traditions, AFAIK).

Please explain......

Slytovhand

05-03-2008, 07:49 AM

That could be, too.

I tend to be very open and accepting of other people, so I guess I just draw in other people who share the same attitudes.

And, I do try not to hurt the feelings of others. If a person brings something to my attention in a non-confrontational manner, I certainly try to avoid causing them distress. Usually, we can come to a compromise.

If some fanatic gets all in my face with the "I'm so persecuted" "you can't do this because of ____" line, I roll my eyes at them.

I like to understand as much as I can about other people, but I would expect that same courtesy from the other side of the fence. ;)

It's like I said about people being overly sensitive, which Sylvia elaborated upon (and that is what I was intending to say...)

We need to communicate and understand each other, rather than getting up in arms right away. (and, IMO, a lot of what people get up in arms about- religiously speaking- is stupid shit).

Well - true... but 'stupid shit' is relative. It's all that 'stupid shit' that has caused and continued wars... but that's just humans for you...if they learnt to obey me in the first place, all that crap wouldn't have happened :D

Sylvia727

05-04-2008, 04:17 AM

I sort of gave up, cos it appeared they didn't want to listen.

Now that's just sad. How are we supposed to acheive interreligious harmony if people won't listen? I've been listening to the viewpoints of everyone on here, even if I disagree, trying to understand where they're coming from and what they mean. People that won't listen to other religious viewpoints reek of intolerance, even if they're only being disrespectful.

Please explain......

As Far As I Know, and I Am Not A Muslim:

The first pillar of Islam is that there is no god but Allah, and Mohammad is the last and greatest prophet. So equating Mohammad with Elisha or Moses wouldn't fly. Even equating Mohammad with Jesus wouldn't fly, because to the Muslims Mohammad is a greater prophet, and to the Christians Jesus is on a whole 'nother level, as an incarnation of God himself outanks a mere prophet.

Slytovhand

05-04-2008, 09:55 AM

As Far As I Know, and I Am Not A Muslim:

The first pillar of Islam is that there is no god but Allah, and Mohammad is the last and greatest prophet. So equating Mohammad with Elisha or Moses wouldn't fly. Even equating Mohammad with Jesus wouldn't fly, because to the Muslims Mohammad is a greater prophet, and to the Christians Jesus is on a whole 'nother level, as an incarnation of God himself outanks a mere prophet.

oh - okies...

But... what if I was merely trying to get someone (such as a Xtian) to understand just how important someone was to another's religion...such as saying that Mohammad is to Islam as Jesus is to Christianity? No - certainly not trying to [I]equate/I] the two... but if a Xtian didn't understand just why Mohammad is so damn important to them?? I usually try to put things into the perspective of the person I'm talking to.. to give them some reality on the subject... and hopefully more appreciation.

If it was the other way (talking to a Buddhist), would there be a real issue saying that the Xtian's JC is to them as Buddha is to you (given the obvious religious significances and differences)?