Pagans Take Stand on Military Intervention

Jason Pitzl-Waters —  October 13, 2007 — 2 Comments

Yesterday, a group of prominent Pagan organizations and individuals sent out a press release concerning the possibility of preemptive military action in Iran. The statement, spearheaded by M. Macha NightMare, Ellen Evert Hopman, Maureen Duffy-Boose, and Nancy Machin, calls for political leaders to use diplomacy as the primary means of dealing with recent tensions between the United States and Iran.

“We are an ad hoc group of Americans who practice diverse Earth-based religions. We affirm the wisdom of peace, tolerance, and justice. These principles are consistent with the values and beliefs of our Pagan religions. We seek to exist in goodwill and fellowship with all peoples, cultures, and nations. In so doing, we express our love for the Earth and acknowledge our interconnectedness with all living things.

In the face of escalating international tensions regarding Iran, we urge the use of diplomatic actions for a peaceful resolution of differences. We reject any rush to military action, since we believe that diplomatic means will lead to a safer, more just, and more constructive solution. Therefore, we call on our political leaders to use diplomacy to create goodwill, peace, and harmony among nations, religions, and peoples.”

Among the organizations signing on to the statement are the Coalition of Earth Religions for Education and Support, CUUPs, Lady Liberty League, the ADF, Reclaiming, and the Church of All Worlds. The last time such a coalition statement was made, it was in support of the Ninth Circuit’s 2002 ruling to remove “under God” from the Pledge of Allegiance (a ruling that was thrown out by the Supreme Court on a technicality).

M. Macha NightMare, one of the organizers of the statement, admits that such a statement will carry little influence with the administration, but she hopes it will act as the beginning of a big spell-working and a catalyst towards further solidarity actions within the Pagan community.

“I know we rushed this. I felt a sense of urgency. I don’t know how widely this will eventually circulate, and I am not so naive as to think it will do much good in terms of influencing the administration, but I do believe it shows solidarity among Pagans, concern for the commonweal, and a willingness to stand up and be counted. The more we can act in solidarity, the more seriously we may be taken as a valid voting block … I’m viewing this as a big spell-working.”

No matter your view on relations with Iran, it should be interesting to see if this does inspire more coalitions of Pagan and Heathen individuals and organizations to start taking stands, and injecting their voices into debates over political and social issues.

Send to Kindle

Jason Pitzl-Waters

Posts

  • Anonymous

    I wouldn’t count on this being quite the stand you think, as it looks as if the organization list was not handled properly.

  • Anonymous

    Did you read this?Dave Finninposted by Broomstick Chronicles | 2:36 AM | 1 comments Sunday, October 14, 2007In Hot WaterWell, I did my best, but, as my friend Oak would say, “mistakes were made.” No sooner did I release that press release than I received objections and corrections. My most egregious mistake was to list Lady Liberty League as a supporter. LLL does not take public stands on political matters, only those that directly concern Pagan legal rights. For that, I apologize to LLL and to Jerrie Hildebrand personally. My mistake was using a former press release that LLL did sign as a template for this one and neglecting to remove their names.I also apologize to Caroline Kenner, the Chesapeake Pagan Community and the Sacred Space Foundation.A few folks complained that their names were not included and they would have wanted to sign. I circulated the press release — so many people seem to confuse ‘press release’ with ‘petition’ or ‘letter’; it is neither — with the words “TIME-SENSITIVE” in the subject line and said in the text that we intended to release is around midnight on October 12. Yes, it was rushed.I had tried to list organizations separately, to strengthen the statement by inferring memberships. In order to accomplish that that, I lifted the names of people who’d signed and listed an organizational affiliation and put them into a list of organizations. This was a mistake. As things turned out, I got some of those folks in trouble with their organizations because they apparently weren’t authorized to sign on behalf of the entire groups. To them I also apologize, and will do so to their memberships as a whole if requested.