Unleash the Hounds! (Link Roundup)

Jason Pitzl-Waters —  August 28, 2011 — 198 Comments

There are lots of articles and essays of interest to modern Pagans out there, sometimes more than I can write about in-depth in any given week. So The Wild Hunt must unleash the hounds in order to round them all up.

That’s it for now! Feel free to discuss any of these links in the comments, some of these I may expand into longer posts as needed.

Jason Pitzl-Waters


  • Anonymous

    Can we stop referring to Dan Halloran as heathen? He threw his Heathenry under the bus and portrayed himself as a monotheist to get elected, so as far as I’m concerned he’s not really heathen.

    • Where did you hear that?

      • Anonymous

        If you look at the interviews he did while running, he spoke about growing up Catholic, and “downplayed” (his words, not mine) the polytheistic nature of Heathenry in order to get elected.

        I realize that in order to actually do that, you’d have to take time away from your incessant ranting about how those Scary Brown People that wear towels on their heads are going to force us Good White People 5000+ miles away to follow their belief system–so if you like I’ll be glad to back myself up by posting some links.

        • No, in order to know anything about it I would have to get knowledge about a single New York Politician in an obscure news articles from several months back while living in another state far from him and not be focused on larger world events, some of which may include a tyrannical monotheistic ideology bent on world domination.

          I’m guessing you don’t realize that 5000+ miles isn’t what it used to be. It like a what, 12-16 hour flight?

          No idea what any of that has to do with scary brown people and white people. I think you have racial issues.

          • Anonymous

            If you didn’t care–which is what you imply with your first sentence–then why did you ask?

            Also, I do have racial issues–specifically, I have issues with delusional fools who are swimming in denial about the real reason why they ignore a much more immediate threat in favour of a threat that has no chance whatsoever of taking root here in the US.

            Just sayin’.

          • Yeah, except I’m not ignoring said threat. I’m just aware of more than one threat in this world. OMG the Skurry Chrustians our out to get me, there’s nothing else in the world that matters, Is your attitude. I’m aware of Christians, Muslims, Atheist, Socialist, Capitalists, and many, many others out there. But if we’re going to talk about dangerous Monotheistic Ideologies, I don’t think we should just focus on the one when another has shown it is perfectly willing to kill it’s own people to kill us.

          • AQ

            Actually, yes you are ignoring the threat presented by Christian Dominionism in favour of your anti-Islam jihad–which, as I have already pointed out, can only be racially-motivated (since we’ve already ruled out that it’s motivated by ignorance, given your “lalalala I’m not listening!” reply to somebody who pointed out the White Supremacist bias of the sites that you use as “information”.

  • I disagree with Mr. Lupus, and wrote about why on his blog… will spare you most of the debate, except to say that GLTBQetc. folks benefit from lower taxes, jobs, and a strong military as well as the rest of us. This is what a conservative agenda promotes. Terrorist organizations routinely murder homosexuals in East and West Asia and Africa, citing Sharia Law. They would cheerfully do that here, as well. Thus, homosexuals benefit from a strong military and law enforcement, as do everyone else.

    • Harmonyfb

      Alice, if you’ll point me toward a candidate who is fully committed to social, religious, and personal liberties, yet is tight with a dollar, I’ll happily vote for them. When ‘conservative’ (in quotes because those calling themselves that these days are usually anything but) politicians spend most of their campaign repeating hateful Dominionist rhetoric, I’ll take a spendthrift who believes in freedom over them any day of the week.

      • Cara

        Gary Johnson

    • The Bony Man

      The real problems is that 99.9% of the “Conservatives” running for office are tied to terrifying religious organizations. About the only one is Fred Karger, the openly gay Conservative candidate, whom I would consider voting for, should he be able to overcome the anti-gay bias in “Conservative” circles and make it past the primaries, which I am afraid is rather unlikely.

    • Homosexuals, bisexuals, transgendered people, and minorities of all stripes benefit from a strong military and law enforcement when its direction and the laws it upholds are not arrayed against them.

      Today’s conservative candidates and their enablers would take liberties that LGBTQIs have fought for years to attain. Already we’re hearing calls from conservatives to reinstate DADT and keep DOMA, and to uphold Prop 8. If there were candidates who could divorce themselves from the right-wing Christian groups who seek to suppress women’s rights, LGBTQI rights, religion and non-religious minority rights, etc., then maybe you’d have a good argument here. Every conservative I’ve seen in the Republican debates so far, except for perhaps Jon Huntsman, has courted the right-wing of Republicans and independents. The current crop of conservative candidates for national office and my state are, almost to a person, incompatible with my beliefs in the rights of Americans of all stripes to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.

      • Just out of curiousity, what is the I for in LGBTQI? Not being a smart aleck, I really wanna know.

      • The I is for Intersexed.

        • The heck is Intersexed? O_o

          • Anonymous

            Look, there, up in the sky its….the dictionary!

            1: existing between sexes
            2: intermediate in sexual characters between a typical male and a typical female

            (courtesy of Mr. Mirriam and Mr. Webster)

          • So..it’s a hermaphrodite? Man, why does everyone and their uncle have to come up with new terms for everything.

          • Baruch Dreamstalker

            “Man, why does everyone and their uncle have to come up with new terms for everything.”

            Because traditional terms are tainted by use for hatred and rebuke. People don’t want to call themselves or those whom they love by names that sting so.

            Of course, sometimes such a term is rehabilitated — “queer,” for example.

          • Guest

            Because it’s scientifically inaccurate to just say “hermaphrodite”.
            “Intersexed” encompasses a wide range of physical and chromosomal conditions. The classic half-male/half-female (with the sex organs of both) hermaphrodite is generally *not* the case with most intersexed people.

          • Ah, thank you, most informative. If still rather complicated XP

          • Intersexed has a specific meaning, and it is less ‘loaded’ than hermaphrodite. Hermaphroditic usually implies that one has a perfect set of both male and female reproductive organs, and for many intersexed people that is simply not the case. Some may have secondary or primary sexual characteristics in or out of the body. This Wikipedia article does a decent job of explaining it:
            “True hermaphroditism in humans differs from pseudohermaphroditism in which the person has both X and Y chromosomes (not to be confused with the normal XY chromosome of males), having both testicular and ovarian tissue, and having both but ambiguously looking external genitalia. One possible pathophysiologic explanation of this rare phenomenon is a parthenogentic division of a haploid ovum into two haploid ova. Upon fertilization of the two ova by two sperm cells (one carrying an X and the other carrying a Y chromosome), the two fertilized ova are then fused together resulting in a person having dual genitalial, gonadal and genetic sex.”


          • Thank you.

            “Intersexed” is not in the older copy of Webster’s that I own.

    • Pagans and gays do not benefit from having people in power WHO HATE THEM, no matter what their stands are. Lower taxes aren’t all that great when you’re being put in camps — and don’t kid yourself Bachmann wouldn’t at least try!

    • Grimmorrigan

      Reading comprehension fail.

      I fail to see what your point had to do with bulk of this article. He never states that Conservatism is imcompatable witl Paganism, marriage equality, or equal rights. If you are a Pagan and a LGBTQ ally I fail to see why you would not vote for those who rely on hate for their votes.

    • Anonymous

      That has to be the most ridiculous and frankly, offensive thing…I’ve seen on The Wild Hunt in a while. It’s like saying, “Black people would’ve benefited by supporting the Confederacy, because they would’ve fared better with States’ Rights!”

      And frankly, the only difference between an Islamofascist and a Christofascist is that ISLAMISM WILL NEVER HAPPEN IN AMERICA. Not tomorrow. Not in 50 years. Not unless America ceases to exist.

      If you are worried that the 1% of Muslims in America (most of whom are not Islamists) are somehow going to enact “Sharia Law,” while simultaneously supporting the much larger percentage of Christian Dominionists in positions of power in American government, who want to enact laws that are almost IDENTICAL to “Sharia Law,” then you really have a complete disconnect from reality. Worrying about Muslims taking over is like Christians worrying about Pagans taking over. It’s such an absurd and ridiculous concept, that I’m amazed that Glenn Beck fans can even manage to feed themselves. We’ll sooner have a “Zombie Apocalypse” in the USA than see “Sharia Law.”

      Give me a freaking break. Stop supporting the Christian Right, and stop making excuses for supporting them, and their Dominionist agenda. It’s sick.

      And remember what Sam Adams had to say about people who worried more about money and taxes than rights and Liberty:

      “If ye love wealth better than liberty, the tranquillity of servitude than the animating contest of freedom, — go from us in peace. We ask not your counsels or arms. Crouch down and lick the hands which feed you. May your chains sit lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that ye were our countrymen!”

      • Baruch Dreamstalker

        Bryon, I don’t read A.C. as saying Islamism would come to govern America, but that terrorists in America, of whatever religious stripe, might well target sexual minorities. As with most of her comment I don’t agree (I think abortion clinics are likelier targets) but I don’t take umbrage at it. I think we need to make room for conservative Pagans in our tent.

        • Anonymous

          Hey, I’m dating someone who’s much more “Conservative” (at least on economic issues) than I…but A.C. attempting to equate Conservatism with LGBT Rights is absurd. Pretty much every major Conservative politician in this country has voiced his/her opposition to LGBT Rights, and such has always been the case…because Conservatism is not about “small government,” a “strong military,” or “low taxes.” It’s about fighting change and supporting the status-quo (or reverting to a previous state).(*)

          Any other definition of “Conservatism” is based on Newspeak and propaganda…and certainly not on dictionaries, political science, or the historical record. Most Conservatives are Christian Supremacists, and are extremely “Big Government” when it comes to social issues, like abortion, the promotion of Christianity and Christian morals, disdain for non-Christian civil rights, and the fight against LGBT Rights.

          One can be “Libertarian”(**) and Pagan…but to be truly “Conservative” and Pagan, particularly in regards to social issues, is anathema. It’s like being a Jewish Nazi or an African-American Klansman.

          Furthermore, the idea that a “strong military” is somehow connected to Conservatism is preposterous…and ignores history completely, particularly Liberals like FDR, JFK, and of course, the Centrist who was CINC when Osama bin Laden was taken out. Under the last Conservative president, we saw soldiers not receiving enough supplies or battle armor, while private mercenaries were paid six-figure salaries and private defense contractors ripped off the American people.

          If you are for Pagan/Non-Christian Rights and/or LGBT Rights, then you are most certainly NOT a “Conservative.” You may not be a “Liberal,” particularly if you disagree with Left-Wing economics…but stop calling yourself a “Conservative,” because you aren’t one. All you are doing is helping the _real_ Conservatives…who just happen to be far more dangerous than some mythical threat of “Sharia Law.”

          * Oxford Dictionary Definitions:
          CONSERVATIVE: “a person who is averse to change and holds to traditional values and attitudes, typically in relation to politics.”
          LIBERAL: “(in a political context) favoring maximum individual liberty in political and social reform”

          ** And for the record, regardless of what the Newspeak propagandists will have you believe…Libertarianism is the concept of being Left-Wing in regards to social issues (i.e., “Civil Libertarian”…like as in the ACLU), and Right-Wing in regards to Economic ones. It is not a synonym for “Conservative.”

          • Don
          • Anonymous

            The only real problem I have with Gus’s article is his “synthesis” regarding the term “Conservative,” and attempt to separate it from “Right-Wing.” Burke’s “Conservatism” was more in line with “Classical Liberalism” than what scholars/politicians/etc. refer to when using the term “Conservative.”

            As I learned back in high school, the general accepted terminology is thus: “Reactionary” (Far Right), “Conservative” (Center Right), “Centrist,” “Liberal” (Center Left), and “Radical” (Far Left). Unfortunately, in America, the terms “Reactionary” and “Radical” are not used very often, and instead a qualifier is put before “Liberal” or “Conservative.” (i.e., “Hardcore Conservative,” or “Extreme Liberal”…)

            Regardless, Conservatism in America is inextricably tied to Christianity, and with very few exceptions, is guided almost totally by Christianity. I could easily point to a great myriad of sources backing this up. You can’t say that with Liberalism or Libertarianism.

            And sure, one can be “conservative” in regards to certain positions without being completely hypocritical as a Pagan. But to call one’s self a “Conservative” is to align one’s self with Social Conservatism…which is the aspect of Conservatism which is tied directly to Dominionism and Christian Supremacism. If one says, “Well, I disagree with Social Conservatism…but I believe in Fiscal Conservatism…so I’m a Conservative,” then one is showing ignorance of the term, and is, as noted previously, a “Libertarian.” And if you would sacrifice personal Liberty and Freedom for the sake of lower taxes…then I have no use for you as a human being…as I find that to be a completely immoral and unethical position.

            It’s like saying, “Well…I’m a Liberal…but I don’t believe in welfare, Social Security, or any so-called entitlement programs.” No, you’re not a “Liberal.”

            Heck, I don’t even identify as “Liberal” any more, and prefer to think of my self as a “Libertarian Pragmatist.” But for now, when it comes to social issues, the only ones who even remotely stand up for non-Christians, homosexuals, or other minorities…are the Liberals…particularly the “extreme” ones.

          • Souris Optique

            Yeah, but he also said the U.S. should cut the South loose, and southern pagans can just go suck it. 😛

          • Anonymous

            No way am I giving up Florida. Besides, we have Harry Potter Land and Disney World here…and most Fundies aren’t too keen on either. 😉

          • Baruch Dreamstalker

            I don’t dispute the disconnect between classic conservative philosophy (as sketched by AC) and the actual posture of conservative politicions (as expounded by you). But “conservative” and “liberal” position labels are hard to divest when one has grown up with it.

        • Baruch, I think the Islamism was Bryon thing. However, I would say to Bryon that Islam taking over is not a thing that will never happen. The fact is that it already has over a billion followers and is the fasted growing Abrahamic religion out there, and that a large number of its followers are on the same level as the the Christian Dominionists…makes it a rather probable outcome.

          • Anonymous

            In the USA? Are you smoking crack? There are a billion Hindus in the world as well. Ya think they’re gonna take over the USA as well? Put down the pipe and stop reading World Net Daily.

          • Anonymous

            …and for the record, if you read the response that A.C. mentioned to Lupus in her comment…she makes it quite clear that she DOES believe that Islamism is more of a threat to the USA than Dominionism…which is just @#$!ing stupid, really.

          • Hindus, to my knowledge are not a supremacist, intolerant religious force that believes everyone has to bow to their religion or die. And that’s just the Moderates you see in the Islamic countries in the middle east.

            And no, I am not smoking crack. Nor do I read WND.

            As for Islamism being more of a threat than Dominionism, well, it’s hard to say. So far, the Dominionists haven’t created “Christo-law” areas where normal law enforcement or emergency services can’t go, where non-Christian women are assaulted and raped simply because of the color of their hair or their lack of Christianity, nor beat up school kids for bringing ham in their lunches.

            The Islamists have all done those things over in Europe with Sharia law zones, No-Go areas where Natives of the various countries can’t even go, (and Muslim kids beating up non-Muslim kids for not practicing Islamic Dietary law) and they’ve already started Honor killings here in the US (and not the good old fashion European style where you kill the Man that offended, but rather the Woman who was the victim). I mean, you can look up the official, but unpublished, stats on Rape over in Scandinavia and 100% of stranger rapes are Muslim men on Nordic women. To my knowledge, the Christian Dominists haven’t done anything to that level.

            Both are Supremacist Monotheistic Ideologies, and neither should be taken lightly, but when it comes down to it, the Islamists certainly have a leading edge in destruction.

          • Anonymous

            We don’t live in Europe. There is not a single Islamist in power in the US gov’t. There are no “Sharia Law” zones in the USA, because such things are incompatible with the Bill of Rights. And if you think that Right-Wing Christians don’t beat up homosexuals, non-Christians, or people who don’t believe in their Christofascist views here in the USA…or that Christofascists never resort to the occasional bomb or shooting here in the USA…then you don’t read the news very much.

            The Sikhs who get gunned down for wearing turbans…the homosexuals who get beaten to death…the doctors who get blown up in their clinics… Sorry, but those are a lot more pressing to real American patriots than something that happens in a country where they are not protected by the Bill of Rights and Separation of Church and State. When Al Qaeda attacked on 9/11…they did nothing but galvanize America against their goals. It probably set back the Islamists a few centuries… Nobody is sympathetic to them…least of all in the gov’t.

            But when a Christian beats up a homosexual, or a Christian Terrorist blows up an abortion clinic…a lot of Right-Wing Christians either shrug and say, “Oh well,” at best…and actively support it at worst. They oppose Anti-Bullying measures in school to protect their bully kids and allow them to keep harassing homosexuals and non-Christians. They donate money to organizations that have been implicated in assisting Christian Terrorists. And sometimes they say things like, “Muslims are calling for the execution of homosexuals in America. This was just released yesterday and it shows you that they themselves are upholding the laws that are in the Bible of the Judeo-Christian God, but they seem to be more moral than even the American Christians do, because these people are livid about enforcing their laws. They know homosexuality is an abomination.” — Bradlee Dean, Conservative Christian Activist, and friend of Michelle Bachmann

          • Merofled Ing

            Norse Alchemist –

            Just out of curiosity – which places in Europe are Sharia law zones or No-Go areas for me? Where are the Muslim kids beating up non-Muslim kids for their diets? You will find all sorts of school bullying here, but where is an instance where those kids didn’t run into trouble with teachers, the police, social workers or Muslim institutions?)

            You see, I live in Europe (the Muslim population in my country is 4% – 5%), and I travel all across Europe a lot, and my hair is uncovered and it is sort of middle brown, and I teach at a high school, so for my safety I ought to know.
            Strangely, our press, even the right wing one, isn’t overflowing with warnings or reports on this. I walk this city and others at all times day and night, and I have not as yet encountered the problems you are talking about.

            Fortunately police, laws and the public have succeeded in eliminating nearly all of the real No-Go areas in eastern Germany. You wouldn’t notice them as long as you keep it shut. You probably look German enough to pass.

            Violence on the streets – yes. There’s been London, but it needs some distortion to turn that into an Islamist outbreak. I’m sure you’re up to it.

            There is brutal violence committed by disoriented young men on public transport. Some of these young men are Muslim, some are Nazis, some are what all of them are: violent louts. A few of these men like to spruce up their mindlessness and brutality with fantasies of racial or religious supremacy. Many of them come from social backgrounds that require intelligent answers. No, I’m not ‘bleeding heart’. I did say louts. I just think there’s more to it.

            Rape. You found some statistics saying that 100% of all rapes in Scandinavia committed by immigrants from Muslim countries are committed by Muslims. I guess that’s true. The rest is “official but unpublished”, so I guess I can’t look it up, bummer. All of these rapes committed on Nordic women. I am a feminist (you would call me sexist, others wouldn’t) – I do not make excuses for rape on any grounds. What you need to do is do some reading on rape, and rape victims. The awful truth here is worse: Muslim women often do not come forward to report the rape. Muslim men have a lot to answer for here, and so does everybody who thinks public Muslim bashing will help her. What helps is Muslim women doctors, nurses, councillors to make them come forward, working at rape crisis centers. (Which a conservative government probably wouldn’t fund. Small government, you know. Low taxes. Let’s go private on such centers. Didn’t Palin help pass a regulation in Alaska that made women pay for the forensics done after a rape?)

            Honor killings – honor and killing don’t go in one sentence. (Hatred and murder do, wishing to be the center of attention and murder do.) Goode olde European style? – this kind of “honor” has always been about blaming it on the woman. Yes, these murders are committed. By Muslim men. Their numbers are: exceedingly too high. Perpetrators go to jail. (You don’t need the military for this, BTW.) The courts then are full of young Muslim women watching the perpetrators be sentenced. You can say that these murders are purely ‘Muslim’. You can also say that these murders happen when people (fathers, brothers, uncles) assume they hold complete and absolute power about others (wives, mothers, daughters). A dangerous delusion exacerbated by lack of feminism in a society and a concocted, all masculine “god” whose prime function is to give leadership roles to aforesaid people. Does this ring a bell? The numbers of these “honor” killings are way below something called: “Family drama: Woman dies of multiple injuries at hands of husband/boyfriend.” (This is not termed honor-killing. It’s termed ‘family drama’. It’s sometimes not even called murder. It’s just an accident, you know, going a bit over the top.)

            I don’t know what you are reading – but it certainly isn’t European papers or the international news section of serious American papers. Fine. There are only so many hours in a day. Just don’t write about Europe then.

          • Baruch Dreamstalker

            Alchemist, don’t just give us homework to ferret out domestic honor-killing stats. At least give us a link. Or refrain from assigning us homework and give us the stats, in context, with comparison to “normal” domestic homicide stats.

          • Baruch Dreamstalker

            Merofled Ing, I think you took a different meaning from “stranger rape” than Norse Alchemist intended. You seemed to think it meant rape by an immigrant. In common US parlance it means rape done by a rapist who the victim does not know.

            I agree with you that rape is so under-reported a crime that any attempt to extract subtle meaning from rape statistics is risky.

          • Merofled Ing

            Baruch Dreamstalker, thank you for clarifying this point.

          • Anonymous

            Forget it Byron–Norse Alchemist has been on this “OMG TEH SKURRY MOOSLUMS R COMIN 2 GET US!!!” trip for years. You’ll never convince him otherwise, because he’s too wrapped up in his racism (and denial thereof) to care what intelligent people think.

          • Acidqueen. would you please stop calling me a racist? I’m not. Seriously. There’s Muslims of all races out there. Islam isn’t a race. Now, if you feel better about disrespecting a religion by miss naming them, and feel better about yourself by writing me off as “just another racist” fine, go ahead. Nothing I can say or do is going to prove to you that I’m not a racist. Perhaps it is the fact that I am Scandinavian and have all those Scandinavian things to my religion that the Nazi’s so loved to steal and misuse that you think anyone who walks with the hammer is a racist? Hmmm, let me get this straight. All Christians are Evil, and all Heathens are Racists? Am I missing something here?

            It’s funny that you’re so willing to say “Mooslims” will never ever be a threat, yet the instant a Christian dares to pray you’re screaming religious repression and totalitarianism. So, maybe it’s you who has a racism problem. After all those “Evil White Christians” are out to get you.

          • Baruch Dreamstalker

            The Muslim population of the US is a minuscule percentage and shows none of the signs of violent discontent that crop up from time to time in Europe. American Muslims seem to have assimilated better. Eg, in Europe it sometimes happens that a Muslim woman for whom a marriage has been arranged escapes to a women’s shelter. The Muslim community leaders demand her return in the name of multiculturalism; the shelter refuses in the name of human rights. The state is caught in the middle. We don’t have that problem and there’s no sign of it on the horizon.

            Bryon, Islamism brought us the domestic massacre whose tenth anniversary we will observe in 13 days. It doesn’t need to be of local origin to be a threat.

          • Yeah, and they once said the Christian population in Rome was miniscule. Forgive me for being a little leery of a dominion, totalitarian religion.

            Also, a fair bit of the info I’ve mentioned can be fount at Gatesofvienna.blogspot.com. Not exactly pagan friendly, bit of a Christianist movement starting up there, but will give you good information on stuff on both the Monotheistic religions and their plans. I’m not providing direct links to articles because pretty much every article mentions something, all you really have to do is scroll the main page, and they have links to other sites as well.

          • Baruch Dreamstalker

            Alchemist, thanks for the link. Scanning the book and conference advts told me what I need to know about its bias. I can’t take it seriously as a source.

            As science fiction I can envision a future in which America caves in the way Rome did and the American Islamic population becomes the new cultural force out of a sense of direction everyone else lacks. As science fiction. It does not pass the sniff test for likelihood, given the larger number of Christians (howsoever small as an overall fraction) who also maintain a sense of direction in dire times, howsoever delusional about stuff like evolution and homosexuality.

          • Merofled Ing


            Still, I did check it out (in as far as it is compatible with my fortunately usually low blood pressure), and also used reports in the Austrian press (in German) for further information. (Der Standard, Wien, 7/28/2011 and Die Presse, 8/2/2011).

            One of the subjects I teach is history, and you know what happens once a history teacher gets going… so I’m posting the results as new, I need space.

            For Norse Alchemist, a summary:

            Your citing of this site as a source makes me pity the naïve enthusiast who familiarised you with the alphabet in the first place.
            On an earlier blog you complained about being called ‘racist’ although nobody had called you that. The use of such sites makes you worse.
            And as for reading, here is a link for you:


            Sigh, won’t link. Still apt.

          • Anonymous


            Earlier, I wanted to make a snarky comment about how Norse Alchemist’s posts sound like the absurd conspiracy theories of Anders Breivik…but then I thought better, and decided Jason would probably get upset…

            …and then NA removes all doubt and starts linking to the places where Breivik himself got his tinfoil-hat theories.

            In Internet-speak, I believe someone just “pwned” himself…

          • “Norse sounds like a terrorist, his argument is invalid.”

            Wow, Byron, really mature. That the best you can do?

          • Anonymous

            I’m not the one citing pro-terrorist websites, Chief. Like I said, I don’t even HAVE to make fun of you…when you’re out there doing it to yourself.

          • Funny, I seem to recall the site stating it was openly anti-terrorism. But I guess such details are not important to you.

            Am I making fun of myself? Maybe, but then at least I can laugh at myself while you froth at the mouth and dodge anything that might prove you don’t know everything.

          • Anonymous

            “Funny, I seem to recall the site stating it was openly anti-terrorism.”

            Yeah, most pro-terrorist sites do that. Not surprising really.

          • And of course, they have to be lying. After all if a site says it’s anti-terrorism, they can’t possibly be telling the truth XP

          • Anonymous

            They sure do seem to be wasting a lot of space making excuses for terrorists…if they happen to be Christian, Anti-Muslim terrorists, of course…

            If you saw the same kind of thing on a Muslim site…making excuses for Osama bin Laden, or expressing doubts that Osama was behind 9/11…you’d have no problem labeling them “pro-terrorist.”

          • Anonymous

            Alchy, Alchy, Alchy….

            Please, show me where I said that Heathens are Nazis or that I’m going after you because you’re white like me. Put your answer right here:_______

            You can’t do that, and you know that you can’t do that, because you’re too busy trying to deny that racial bias forms the basis of your irrational anti-Islam jihad to actually put forth even a cursory attempt at a cogent thought.

            All that you are doing, with your irrational and (to be blunt) unintelligent attempts at rejoinder, is reinforcing assertions made by myself and others–that you’re working from a position of racial bias, and that you’re in deep denial about it. Your feeble attempts to reframe my argument as an attack on you because you’re of Scandinavian extraction are pathetic and laughable, and only confirm to me that I’m right.

            Let me restate that last, in terms that you might possibly be able to comprehend:

            All evidence that I have, which is provided by your comments here and elsewhere, tells me quite clearly that your anti-Islam jihad is based on the race/ethnicity of the majority of worshippers. All that you’re doing by screaming what amounts to “I’M NOT A RACIST OMG HOW DARE YOU” is reinforcing that I’m right and you can’t handle having a mirror held up to you.

          • Ah, yes, the old “He who protests must be the thing he’s protesting” argument.

            You are going to believe I’m a racist no matter what I say. Irregardless of anything I say or the fact that Islam isn’t even a race (hint: It’s a religion followed by people of all skin colors). You’re the one who keeps bringing up scary brown people. (apparently ignoring that are White Muslim extremest, and one of the current leaders is an White American Born Convert). But hey, you know, go ahead and call me a racist. It’s not like you’re showing the only way you can fight is by defamation of character.

          • Baruch Dreamstalker

            Acidqueen: Can you cite something Norse Alchemist said that is explicitly racist?

            I haven’t gotten into this heretofore because I’ve hit MEGO over the argument whether Dominionism or Jihadism is the greater threat. But I am particular about whom I call a racist.

            It’s not enough that he cites a website with content that some racists like. That’s guilt by association and, for the first time since I’ve been reading him, NA actually identified a fallacy of debate (though he did not describe it well).

          • Merofled Ing

            Baruch Dreamstalker,
            Norse Alchemist citing a xenophobic hate site, (not ‘a site with content that some racists like’) and repeatedly peddling misinformation taken from that site or its links even after the site has been shown up for what it is, is not ‘guilt by association’. It is buying into right-wing propaganda and spreading it. While I really appreciate and applaud your efforts at toning it down, I cannot agree with defending Norse Alchemist here. Honestly, I don’t care if he’s strictly speaking a racist or not. Nobody interested in a serious debate on Islamist (or other) threats uses sites like this or is blind to their politics.

            For me, Norse Alchemist is beyond Ethel/Othala, so why bother, but if he can’t take it on the chin (or elsewhere) he can’t dish it out. Double true if he’s into Tyr, Thor, Odin. And “Honesty” includes checking info before you pass it on. I think we agree that relying on sites like Gates of Vienna or its links i s n o t checking info.

          • Anonymous

            So, Norse Alchemist, let me see. I outline why I feel that you speak from a position of racial bias, and you only bolster that by indirectly confirming my assertions.

            Also, you have yet to provide “info” from websites that aren’t of a far-right/racialist bent, as has been pointed out at least twice and in great detail by Merofled Ing. That, again, bolsters my view.

            Instead of bothering to come back with any sort of facts or even semi-intelligent commentary, you only complain that you are not a racist and cry that I’m engaging in personal attacks. That doesn’t do anything except continue to tell me that I’ve hit a nerve–and am, therefore, correct in my observations.

            Try though you might, you’re not going to turn lead into gold with this one bubba. I suggest you quit while you’re behind.

      • Not worried about Islam in America at all. Most of the folks who practice it are refugees, and because they’ve endured totalitarian regimes, many of them are conservatives. Am worried about worldwide fundamentalist Islam.

        I do NOT support the “Christian Right”. I support moderate conservatives. I support the Constitution. And I support the right to be “secure in my own property”.

        • Souris Optique

          And I support the right to be “secure in my own property”.

          Why are conservatives always spouting this one as though it sets them apart from liberals in some way?

          I know you *like* to think we’re coming to take all your money and guns to give to some unemployed druggie some where but it just makes you sound ignorant and paranoid.

          • Cara

            Because personal property rights are one are where Liberals like to infringe on constitutional rights. Conservatives tend to infringe in other areas of constitutional rights. Both suck.

    • I have to disagree with him too, but for a different reason. Perhaps it is the Heathen in me but…I don’t appreciate someone telling me what I can and cannot have in my religion to make it “Twue Paganism.”

      No I am not, as a rule, Homophobic. Sexuality doesn’t matter that much to me about a person as much as honesty and doing what they say does. But the fact is that I don’t appreciate someone dictating the way I have to think and feel, or that my “religion” has to believe. I mean there are stands of Paganism out there that are what some would consider “homophobic” (the whole Dianics incident being a case in point), are we saying they aren’t really Pagans? There’s a lot of people who became pagans because there wasn’t some overarching group telling us what we had to be. Are we going to change that just to be PC?

      Religion shouldn’t bow to politics. It’s about something higher, and that’s why we separate “church” and “State” in the US. Generally it’s to keep the State from being taken over by religion, but it is also to prevent religion being taken over by the “state.” It’s a two way street. I’m not advocating homophobia, but I am saying that just because someone of a group says that not liking his group means you aren’t really “Pagan” is not something we should give much power too.

    • Souris Optique

      Since when are conservatives willing to do anything about jobs? Or for lower taxes for *anyone* other than the super-wealthy?

  • Lori F – MN

    T Thorn Coyle has an article on the evacuation of new york. They are NOT evacuating Rikers Island Prison even though it is in the direct path. Shameful. Say a prayer for those stranded there, staff and inmates.

    As for the roundup – Love the stuff on Framing. How very important and true. This isn’t just for Pagans. Pass this one on to all your friends. Especially those heading off for job interviews.

    • The Bony Man

      As a representative of a group protesting DC 40, I read the framing article and really took it to heart. Wish us luck!

    • Just to clarify – Riker’s Island is not in the evacuation zone:

      “We carefully reviewed Rikers Island, as we have done with the entire city, and no section of Rikers Island facilities are in Zone A. Rikers Island facilities are not in low-lying areas, it’s not a costal location and, like nearby small islands Roosevelt Island and City Island, it does not need to be evacuated. We are focused on the areas where real dangers exist. A full Corrections Department staff will remain on Rikers Island and the facility is a fully self-sustaining entity, prepared to operate and care for inmates in extended emergency conditions.”

      -Mayor’s Deputy Press Secretary Samantha Levine


    • Anonymous

      Gods above.

      Rikers Island was NOT in an evac zone, nor was it in any danger. Had Irene strengthened significantly and the island had been in an evac zone, then you would maybe have a point. But the Island was never in any danger whatsoever, and it was high enough to not fear any storm surge from Irene.

      Sheesh. :/

  • Baruch Dreamstalker

    Nice article on framing by Hecate. Lakoff is why I refer to “marriage equity” rather than “gay marriage.”

    • “I refer to “marriage equity” rather than “gay marriage.”

      Exactly! What’s that quote, something about you don’t gay park your car so why would you call it gay marriage? Something like that.

  • Dana Corby

    RE: “An important lesson in framing Pagan pride from Hecate.” Wonderful article! Every Pagan community leader or other Pagan-in-the-public-eye should read this and absorb its lessons. I want to bring particular attention to the point about what you wear to interviews & such: the article is absolutely correct that you should NOT dress ‘witchy.’ When I was doing public outreach I wore a very conservative suit like a female minister might wear, with a modest pentagram pendant. Interviewers were shocked by my ordinariness, and their shock disarmed them.

  • Hbuchy

    folks tired of the two party system might like to participate in an experiment in American democracy, and perhaps field some alternative candidates for 2012.

  • Anonymous

    *and congrats also to the other bloggers that made it into the top 25

    /nit pick

  • I appreciated the advice in framing one’s PR and responses in interviews, as I have a tendency to deny the negative in stating what I can do. BAD habit. I think it’s an alleged modesty thing, trying to avoid sounding too prideful. I’m not pompous, I don’t boast, so I should get over that pattern and get somewhere!

    Thanks for linking to it.

  • Mia

    If it weren’t for some good people I know down there, I’d say go ahead Rick Perry, secede from the union and save the rest of us the trouble.

  • Willm1015

    I like low taxes and small government as well but I like exercising my civil rights in every locality in every state of my own country as well.

    Just out of curiosity how would sharia law take effect in this country ???? Name a terrorist organization that can take over the US or even an Islamic country that can’t even defeat Israel let alone move millions of troops and material half way across the globe. Are they use those flying carpets and weaponized djins ?

    • They can enforce Sharia Law just fine by murdering huge numbers of people, as we saw ten years and two weeks ago.

      They can enforce it just fine by bombing marine bases and aircraft carrier ships.

      Homosexuality is one reason that Fundy Muslims portray America as “Wicked” and the “Great Satan”.

      • Willm

        how is that enforcing Sharia Law ?

        Also our tolerance for homosexuality caused earthquakes & hurricanes according to NOM

        • Yup. And both Fundy Muslims and NOM are wrong, so how come Liberals wish to only fight one of these opponents?

          • Anonymous

            Because only one of them has sufficient power in the USA to actually effect any of their sick totalitarianism. (And for the record, if you think that Liberals, or any Non-Conservatives in general, are “supportive” of Islamism, then you are insane. Liberals only reject the idea that all Muslims should be treated as Islamists…which is bigotry.)

          • “Why should we fear these Nazis, no one would ever agree with their racist nationalism.” -Many a German Jew before the Holocaust.

            Power is a funny thing. It rarely works the way you expect it too, and it rarely has anything to do with morality or numbers.

          • Anonymous

            Funny that you should use that example…since the Nazis are far more akin to the Dominionists in this scenario. Remember that they came to power under a swell of support from the general populace. That ain’t gonna happen any time soon with the Islamists…

          • My point was towards any totalitarian ideology. Often the one that wins is the one no one bothered to watch.

    • kenneth

      One of my favorite Sharia-related bits of hysteria was a move by one of the Western states, Nebraska, I think, to specifically outlaw Sharia in the state. They wanted to be proactive, in case a second or even third Muslim guy moves to the state one day and starts getting ideas….!

      • Funny, I can’t help but wonder what you would say if the Romans had been just a bit more “hysterical” about the original Christians….

        • Anonymous

          False equivalency is false. Christianity took over the Roman Empire because the emperor (Constantine), a totalitarian ruler, used the full might of his office to do so. He had the power…and he used it to favor Christianity and take power away from the other religions…eventually later resulting in those bits of the Theodosian Code allowing for the execution of anyone caught practicing anything but Christianity.

          There are no Islamists in power in the USA (and if you think that President Obama is one…then you are deranged…). It isn’t gonna happen any time soon, either.

          Actually, you just made my point by bringing up the Christianization of the Roman Empire. It had to happen from the top down…not the other way round. And the only ones who have any chance of doing that are the Christian Dominionists…NOT the Islamists.

          • False equivalency may be false, but is an impossibility really impossible?

            Christianity taking over the roman empire was a top down thing. This is true. However, before Constantine, would any Roman Pagan have believed that their Emperor would convert to the religion of slaves and Criminals?

            Or perhaps you’d like a more recent example. In the 1950’s no one would have believed a Catholic could be Elected president. Yet, John F. Kennedy, a catholic, was elected president. Before 2000, no one would have believed a black man could be elected president in the next ten years, but lo and behold, Obama was elected.

            Or how about other impossibilities? Bacteria were thought impossible, the idea of microscopic creatures existing was laughable. Flight by men? Most of Modern medicine, rocket powered flight, men walking on the moon, women having equal rights. minorities having equal rights? A modern democratic government? The Atomic Bomb? All of these were thought impossible, till they existed. So don’t go talking to me about “It is impossible for an Islamist to gain power and force Islamization in the West” when human history is filled with the impossible become completely possible and even the norm.

          • Anonymous

            So in other words, you admit that you’re full of crap, that you know you’re full of crap, but you’re persisting because of what can at this point only be construed as racial bias (since you’ve been so thoroughly trumped on an intellectual level–not that that’s hard–that there’s really only one explanation for why you persist in your delusional cries that Islam is going to take over America).

            Got it.

          • I honestly have no idea what it is with this race thing your bringing up. There’s no race in Islam. It’s a religion. Unless of course you feel that all religion is based only on race, which, okay is your opinion, whatever.

            Also, fail to see how I’m full of crap. I just pointed out, intellectually, how the impossible happens. So when someone says something is impossible I am a bit skeptical. I fail to see how that’s being full of crap.

            And you know, being trumped on an intellectual level would probably mean a lot more if it wasn’t coming form someone who whines about having to do homework and expect everyone to just give links to stuff so the Queen doesn’t have to hunt them down herself. Yeah, my intellect is surely wounded by your sharp wit and clearly superior academic skills 😛

          • Baruch Dreamstalker

            Actually, rocket flight, exploration of the Moon and the atomic bomb *were* thought possible before they came to exist. It’s called science fiction. The classic case is a mid-WWII story that came so close to a description of a nuke as to trigger a federal investigation.

          • Okay, Baruch, fair point on the science fiction stuff. But the point remains, many things thought impossible have turned out to be possible. I see no reason to discount something just because someone says it’s impossible.

  • Willm1015

    Attempts in Uganda to make homosexuality not just illegal but a capital offense were backed by American Christian Fundamentalist groups

    • The decision not to go to war with them was backed by Liberal groups.

      • Willm

        war with whom ? Uganda ?

        • The decision not to start any more offensives anywhere.

          • Cigfran

            Got family in the military? Or do you just like sending other people off to die for your ignorance?

          • I’m not sure I’m seeing what AC’s ignorance is here, other than the fact that she isn’t a liberal.

            Also, that whole no more offensives sure worked well when we decided to get involved in deposing the lawful government of Lybia. You wanna talk about sending people to die for no good reason, Cigfran, talk about that.

          • Anonymous

            So what’s your point then, NA? Plenty of Liberals have started wars, or gotten America involved in them. FDR, JFK, Clinton, Obama…

            You can’t have A.C. arguing that Liberals are always opposed to war for any reason…while simultaneously arguing yourself that Liberals like Obama have gotten the USA into them.

            Pick an argument, at least…

          • sure I can, because AC and I are completely different people who just happen to have similar views on a few things and different views on others. Why pick an argument? There are so many out there. I don’t limit myself to one god, why should i for arguments either?

  • Anonymous

    Ten years later and people are still focused on the amateurs that managed to pull off only one successful attack against on US soil despite their supposed unyielding fanaticism and desire for our destruction and their superior numbers.

    But doctors and staff at women’s clinics have to work behind bullet-resistant glass and security guards, travel in different vehicles from their families and hire bodyguards.

    The guys who aren’t being conned into and walked through attempts at terrorist actions, the guys with actual plans and weapons who only seem to fail by the grace of the gods, they get ignored by the “liberal media”.

    Almost all eyes are focused across the sea at an enemy that has no air power and no naval power even approaching that of the United States while enemies born here on its own soil have racked up a body count over the decades that makes 9/11 look like a traffic accident.

    The real enemy is all ready here and has been for longer than any of us have been alive. The ones on the other side of an ocean who haven’t managed anything of consequence in ten years are far less of a worry for me than the ones who’ve killed people as recently as a few weeks ago. But I guess confronting that isn’t as sexy and daring as pulling on an “Infidel” t-shirt and claiming you’re standing against the billion-strong horde that’s intent on destroying Western civilization.

  • Merofled Ing

    So, here goes, Gates of Vienna Website.

    The title “Gates of Vienna” is enough to put any Austrian or German on alert. Historically this refers to the Turkish/Ottoman siege of Vienna in (July-September) 1683, which lead to the decisive battle in the wars between the Ottoman Empire and the ‘Holy Roman Empire of the German Nation’ (well, the reasons why it was called that would take at least a page to explain), and which the Turks lost. The battle and the expression has had its prominence among Nazi and xenophobic circles ever since the letter bombings perpetrated in Austria in the 1990s by a xenophobic delusional person called Franz Fuchs who targeted the Roma and Sinti minority in Austria and then sent letter bombs to journalists, TV anchor persons and politicians. The then Vienna Mayor lost two fingers of his left hand, which means he was lucky: four people died, and 15 were injured or badly injured. In spite of large police attention Fuchs was only arrested by chance, when two (Austrian) women called the police because he was following them in his car and harassing them. He was sentenced, and committed suicide. In his letters confessing to the bombings he always drew on historical characters who had fought in the Imperial/Ottoman Empire wars. All of this belongs to the question in hand, because any Austrian or German will pick up the reference, the way Americans have heard of Timothy McVeigh or the Unabomber.

    The blogger of the site is based in Virginia/USA according to the information he supplies, and calls himself Baron Bodissey, Austrian sounding name, and character invented by speculative-fiction author Jack Vance. (Courtesy of Wikipedia)

    Bodissey has a “photo”, which actually shows Otto von Bismarck, German Chancellor 1871-1890, when Germany first became a united country. (That would be another page, and I’ll spare you.)

    A regular contributer calls himself Vlad Tepes, which most of the readers here know refers to the historical figure behind the Dracula myths. Vlad Tepes was known for his brutality when dealing with competitors to the throne from his family or other noble families – this made him infamous across Europe – and he is also known for the torture of a Turkish/Ottoman delegation to his court. I’ll spare you the details. Blood pressure thing.

    On a historical level you might possibly argue that Ottoman infiltration of European soils has continued in spite of that lost battle in 1683. In 1684 the first café opened in Germany, in Regensburg, yes, and since then this Turkish brew has conquered the West, in spite of dire warnings as to its danger.
    Warfare was different in those days: War in the morning, let’s see if we can do some trade in the afternoon …

    On a less amusing, current level: Gates of Vienna is one of the sites cited by Anders Behring Breivik in his manifesto (“Vienna School of Thought”). (Source: Der Standard, Wien, 7/28/2011 and Die Presse, 8/2/2011).
    “Fjordman”, Breivik’s hero, regularly posts there. Still.
    The site contains an endless blog on the wheres and whats and wherefores of Breivik’s bombing and shootings, examines tenuous allegedly alleged relations to Poland, and casts doubt on his sole responsibility of the crime in conspiracy theory mode – he probably wasn’t alone etc., well, you know: official but unpublished figures which always loom large in these theories. Getting Poland on the page is important to the ideology behind the site: The Emperor only won the battle in 1683 because the Polish King Johann III Sobieski arrived with his own army in the final stages, again something which Austrians are likely to vaguely remember from school. So again there’s an oblique reference to Europe, Christians standing united against imminent destruction at the hands of the Ottomans, err, the Muslims. The ploy works, posters obediently suggest an Islamist conspiracy behind Breivik.

    I’ve already said, above, what to think of this site. Barf. It will help you with your diet, if you’re looking to lose weight. You might need that blood pressure medication.

    • Okay, not really going to get into the whole calling me naive thing. Seriously, that just a personal attack and I’m not going bother with it at this moment.

      Secondly “Oh no, nazi wannabes like something that happened in European history, it must be bad/racist, and anything/anyone who references it must be racist!!!” Again, seriously, if we completely wrote off anything that the Nazi wannabes liked, I wouldn’t have a religion or be able to admire my Scandinavian/Teutonic culture. Can’t say that “extremist Muslims” who are ecstatic about Islam don’t truly get it, then turn around and say that “Nazis” who are ecstatic about Germanic culture/history suddenly are the sole owners of said heritage.

      Also, how many times have we run into “X cited Y, therefore Y must agree with/be the foundations of X” on here? Yes, Breivik cited Gates of Vienna. Doesn’t mean they had to be his sponsors or even like what he did. What Breivik did was terrible, but just because he cites someone doesn’t mean they agree with him. The Nazi’s cited Nietzsche, but Nietzsche hated the Nazis and everything they stood for. The Nazi’s cited Teutonic/Germanic/Scandinavian culture, even though said culture runs very much opposite the ideas of Nazism.

      Also, Yes it was the Holy Roman Empire. It was a legacy title left over from Charlemagne, who got it because the Catholics highjacked his empire (though they didn’t have to try very hard). However, @Merofled, you failed to mention that the Turkish Empire that was invading Vienna and the rest of that part of Europe, happened to be a Caliphate. For those of you who do not know what a Caliphate is, it is the equivalent of what happens when you take the Church, make it the head of the state, and say that any nation that follows the religion is now part of that State. I.e. one giant theocratic empire. So essentially what the entire Seige of Vienna and the war surround it was, was an official act of armed forced conversion by the Turkish Caliphate upon Europe. And since everyone here has proven to be such fans of Forced Christian Conversion, I figure they have the right to know just what kind of invasion it was GoV refers too.

      PS yes Vlad refers to Dracula, yes he did lots of horrible things. However, his Muslim opponents were doing pretty much the same things on their side, and Transylvania was pretty much the only nation between Europe and the Caliphate of Islam (it also happened to be rather tiny, especually in comparison to an Islamic Empire that ran from the Med to India). He is also very much the folk hero in his home lands, who see him more as a savior.

      • I remember a dispute over whether the Ottoman’s actions were primary motivated by religious reasons or just plain old fashioned imperial ambition.

        • Christian and Muslim nations have never made any distinction between “religious reasons” and “plain old fashioned imperial ambition”. Wherever Christian nations have conquered non-Christian peoples, they have sought (and often succeeded in the attempt) to “convert” their new subjects. The same goes for Muslim nations. In fact, this is often used as a rationalization for the conquests in the first place.

      • Merofled Ing

        FTR, the naïve bit was a clearly misguided and failed attempt at constructing you a back door, only I didn’t insinuate naïve. Rather not really getting what you read, Otto. And no, not a terrorist.

        Gates of Vienna is not a Nazi “wannabe“ site. It’s as Nazi as it gets without making itself liable to prosecution under Austrian law.
        Fjordman is not just a minor incident on that site, but a major contributor.
        It is not a history site about early modern Europe or about real battles and the politics of the 17th century. There’s no discussion of Asen, the Imperium or Nietzsche. It is a nominally Christian site, steeped in xenophobia, using half-baked historical narratives as cyphers. It is not about immigration or a discussion of monotheism or fundamentalism. It’s a hate site, and proud of it.

        As for the rest, let me cut it short. Please keep Nordic Gods out when defending such websites. No, not everybody who likes European Paganism is a white supremacist.

        • Cigfran

          Wow. That site and everything associated with it is just pure filth. It’s like the Skadi forum or the Apricity with a pseudo-intellectual crust.

          I’m glad NA posted it… now I know what else to toss on the trash heap.

  • Please stop taking my words out of context and misquoting. Thank you.

    Fundamentalist Islam is more of a threat, worldwide, than Dominionist Christian policies are here in America, to anyone, homosexual or not.

    Some of us seem to forget that America includes military bases, embassies, our planes and ships. So, there have been more than one little teensy attack by fundy Muslim terrorists ten long years ago (and wasn’t that enough?)

    That fundy Muslims are killing homosexuals ANYwhere should be upsetting to us… as upsetting as various groups, fundy Christians and fundy Muslims, killing indigenous Witches and Pagans and neo-Pagans. Such reports regularly make it into “The Wild Hunt”.

    We seem to have a paranoid mentality about the imminent takeover of America by fundy Christians and dismiss any negative actions by fundy Muslims. Even though the latter group perpetrated a mass murder in recent memory. Liberal bias derived from a liberal press, perhaps? We’ve had terrorist attacks by BOTH groups on our soil.

    But no, neither one are set to immediately take over the country.

    Last I looked, Michelle Bachmann is trailing so far behind in the polls that she will never catch up. Ever. A few people who comment on this blog are catastophizing about this possibility.

    Romney is ahead of everyone, including Obama. You might not like Romney but he’s not a puppet for the Christian right.

    Perry is a good 30 – 40 percent behind Romney, depending on what poll you read on what day. No need to panic.

    The worry about Dominionist Christians rounding us all up and stuffing us into interment camps is merely paranoia. It’s treatable with medication and lots of expensive talk therapy, which now, thanks to Obama, is available through the national health care plan at taxpayer expense.

    And if we ARE so worried about imminent takeover by fundy Christians, whom we believe are going to outlaw Pagan religions, throw us into concentration camps, and kill all the Gay folks… why are we voting for candidates whose goal is to repeal our Second Amendment rights?

    Okay, that last was sarcasm. Strike it from the record. (and pass the ammo)

    What we CAN do is continue to fight for our rights as Pagans in the courts and through legislation, as I have for the past twenty years. Did you know there were more Pagan rights violations during the Clinton Administration than during the Bush years? Yes. The internet wasn’t so commonly used, and so there wasn’t the awareness, and there weren’t as many big splash cases as the Pentacle Quest, but there were more groundbreaking cases which assured the rights of Pagans during the 80s.

    • Perry is now ahead in several polls over Romney (13 points in both the Gallop and CNN polls)

      • As of the 25th, it says for the Gallup. Last week, Romney was ahead by 7 points. It’ll change again by the end of the week. Lookit the graph, overall, Romney has been at the top.

        As of the 21st, both are ahead of Obama, according to Gallup. Another poll I read, on MSNBC, had Romney ahead of Obama… we’ll see, won’t we?

        • Anonymous

          Gallup is a pro-Conservative pollster (as is Rasmussen). If you look at the totality of polls, you will see that no Republican is actually polling ahead of Obama. Only a single Gallup poll puts Romney ahead, whereas all of the other polls show Obama with a consistent lead. (http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2012/president/president_obama_vs_republican_candidates.html)

          Perry is currently ahead of Romney, according to Gallup, CNN, PPP, and Rasmussen. (http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2012/president/us/republican_presidential_nomination-1452.html) However, I predict that Perry’s current lead will slacken as people “get to know him,” the same way that public sentiment turned away from Palin after a similar “bump” in the polls when people had not heard much about her.

          Romney will likely end up back in the lead, but only because he is not particularly “Conservative” on a lot of issues. Sure, he’s no friend of homosexuals, and thinks Christianity should be more heavily promoted by the government…but he’s not been very much of a “defender” of the Second Amendment, and “RomneyCare” is his Waterloo.

        • I have a hard time seeing Romney winning given his problems with the base but we shall see.

    • Anonymous

      When was the last time you heard of a Liberal, or anyone else, running on a platform of “repealing the Second Amendment?”

      I believe in the Bill of Rights (All of ’em!), so am not in favor of eliminating the Second Amendment myself…but I certainly don’t see any real infringements, or even “tough-talking” in that regard happening. A few Liberal talk-show hosts, like Dr. Rachel Maddow, raised voices about it in the wake of the Arizona shootings…but that quickly died a silent death.

      On the other hand…all of the major Conservative candidates are running based primarily on a Social Conservative, pro-Christian, ideological platform. Even McCain…who wasn’t very Socially Conservative up until the 2008 elections…suddenly embraced the Christian Right and flip-flopped on a multitude of issues to appease the Christian Supremacists. The only major candidate who isn’t kowtowing to them is Ron Paul, and he’s the Republican equivalent of Dennis Kucinich. (In other words: Good luck with winning the primary!)

      And yeah, rational people oppose it when Muslim Supremacists in other countries do horrible things…but the idea that Islamists are more dangerous to America than Christianists is just ridiculous. And yes, that’s EXACTLY what you said…no “twisting of words” is necessary. Here’s your exact quote: “We realize that fundamentalist Muslim groups are much more dangerous than Dominionist Christians.”

      As I’ve stated before, Islamists can attack America like they did on 9/11 a hundred times more…and still…we will move not one step closer to Sharia Law. It’s an absurd strategy, and even Al Qaeda realized that, and stopped bothering. Terrorist strategies like that only work when there is a significant community in the country that is sympathetic to the aims of the terrorist. That’s why Islamists blow up Liberal mosques in places like Pakistan all the time. They can keep the Liberal and Moderate Muslims from attending the non Islamist mosques, and force them to attend the extremist ones…out of fear of being blown up. That’s how terrorism works: Fear.

      And what happened after 9/11? Did Americans flock to mosques, seeking to learn about Islam and convert? Nope. Instead, it galvanized America against Islamism…and also created a new wave of Christianists.

      Furthermore, your comparison to things that happened in the 1990s is just silly. It’s a logical fallacy called “Presentism,” and is comparable to when certain African-American leaders complain about pictures of early Americans like George Washington are put up in schools, because, “they were slave-owners.” Liberalism is often called “Progressivism,” because it is about moving forward…therefore the “goal lines” are always changing. Conservatism, on the other hand, is about fighting AGAINST change and progress. Every time that someone is fighting FOR Pagan Rights…that person is being “Progressive”…and every time that someone is fighting AGAINST Pagan Rights, that person is being “Conservative.”

      You really shouldn’t throw words around if you don’t know what they mean.


      A Well-Educated, Former US Army Intelligence Analyst

      • When was the last time you heard of a Liberal, or anyone else, running on a platform of “repealing the Second Amendment”?


        It is a slippery slope, with more registrations, more classes, more statutes about gun ownership. Here in SW MI, there was recently an uproar about more regulations about sales of guns at gun shows.

        • Anonymous


          • Google them. “Michigan Gun Registration” + 2008 and “Gun Show Regulations”.

          • Anonymous

            So….you make assertions, and then expect us to do your homework for you.

            That’s laziness, and I refuse to subsidize it.

            Please do your own homework and provide proof to back up your statements, and then explain how gun show regulation and gun registration equates with “repealing the 2nd Amendment”. Bonus points if you can do it without dredging up NRA propaganda.


            An Armed Progressive

          • Yes, because the Gods forbid you should have to do your own homework, Acidqueen, rather than being spoon fed the facts people want you to know.

          • Replying here, cuz for some reason I can’t reply to AcidQueen…

            I just Googled that and found way too much information, way too many articles, to sift through. So I’m inviting others to go look, and pick and choose.

            You also likely aren’t interested in gun laws of Michigan if you live in Iowa or New Jersey or Arizona.

          • Anonymous

            When one makes assertions, it is generally considered good form (i.e. not intellectually dishonest) to provide something to back it up. IOW, your audience shouldn’t have to do your homework for you.

            I realize that you and NA have a problem with that, but I refuse to let you or him get away with the “Google is your friend” dodge.

            You made the assertion. The onus is on you to back it up.

        • Anonymous

          If we want to talk about “slippery slopes”, who is it that’s managed to ban marriage equality in over half the states in the US, actually put defunding Planned Parenthood on the table and has made gain after gain towards restricting if not criminalizing abortion? I would really listen seriously to all this talk of “creeping sharia” if I could but unfortunately I can’t seem to make it out over the sound of galloping dominionism.

          While fundamentalist islam makes headlines in the US, fundamentalist christianity is making policy at the highest levels of US government.

      • I believe that fall under passing gun control legislation that is so strict and punitive that it makes even owning a gun prohibitively dangerous, much less even firing it in self defense. And there have been a great many “liberals” who have stood by such legislation. Indeed, “Liberals” are the ones who generally pass such legislation. So repealing, no, making it a bloody booby trapped maze no one can get through, yes.

        “As I’ve stated before, Islamists can attack America like they did on 9/11 a hundred times more…and still…we will move not one step closer to Sharia Law. It’s an absurd strategy, and even Al Qaeda realized that, and stopped bothering.”

        Huh, really? They stopped bothering? And here I was under the impression that our Military had harassed them and tied them up with those massive cluster f***s we call wars in the middle east. After all, why come to America to kill Americans when Americans come to you? As for the pulling a 9/11 a hundred more times…sure, probably won’t bring us to Sharia law, but it would succeed in forcing us to give up more and more of our liberties in the name of security, which would effectively kill what the US is anyways and turn us into a police state. And after that….well, police states are easy to take over from the inside.

        Btw, your definitions of “Progressive” and “Conservative” seem highly biased to me. I am in many ways a “conservative” only I am “conserving” a tradition over a thousand years old. Am I then fighting against Pagan rights by embracing my ancient heathen heritage and “conserving” it?

        You might also want to see my post about “X quotes Y” in the comments above before you start talking about me pwning myself. And you might want to rethink your tactics if the best argument you can come up with is “Alchemist sounds like a right wing terrorist racist.” Just because someone quotes someone else, doesn’t mean that the quoted party is responsible for the acts or interpretations of the quoter.

        Also, would it be rude of me to ask why you are a former analyst rather than a current annalist?

        • Anonymous

          “Also, would it be rude of me to ask why you are a former analyst rather than a current annalist?”

          …because an Anthrax vaccine caused me to develop ankylosing spondylitis and Crohn’s Disease, and I was given a medical retirement. Google it. It happened to a lot of people.

          And if you think my definitions of “Conservative” and “Progressive” are “biased,” then I guess you are one of those people who thinks that all textbooks and dictionaries are “biased,” and that the only “real” history can be found in the conspiracies of guys like Alex Jones. Watch out for those Bilderburgers and their Chemtrails!

          And yeah…if I were quoting Che Guevarra, Josef Stalin, and Mao Tse Tung…you might be correct in assuming that I’d be a Communist…or if I were quoting Oswald Spengler, Alfred Rosenberg, and Adolph Hitler, you might be correct in assuming that I’d be a Nazi.

          • only half right. I do believe that all text books are biased. I’m academic. Everyone puts their bias into their books, including Alex Jones, whoever that is. No all works are biased, because books are written by people, who have agendas, and like to say that the other guy who believes different from them is a terrorist, or naive, or ill-educated, or what have you. Everyone thinks their right, and everyone else is wrong.

            Me? I just look for facts without opinions, and strip away the opinions when I do. Who is right and who is wrong? doesn’t really matter in the long run. History is not the story of what happened, but the story of what people tell themselves happened. The News isn’t what goes on, but what people think is going on.

            Me? My agenda is simply to live, learn, have fun discussing, ticking off people who think they are all knowing by poking wholes in their ideologies, and making sure my kin and my ways get to live on for another generation.

          • Anonymous

            If you’re Academic, I’m the King of Siam.

          • Got my degree and everything. So tell me, how is Siam this time of year? Is it much like De Nile?

          • BTW we might be arguing but thank you for your service.

      • “We realize that fundamentalist Muslim groups are much more dangerous than Dominionist Christians.”

        They are. When was the last time a Dominionist Christian blew up a military base, an aircraft carrier, or two of the largest financial and trade centers in the world. When was the last time a Christian rightist beheaded anyone?

        I’m objecting to the implications that it is ALL Muslims — I’d never said anything of the sort.

        There are quite a few Pagan Paranoiacs stating that it’s ALL Christians, however!

        • Anonymous

          Um…if you’re going to use examples from outside of the USA, might I point out that Anders Breivik is most certainly a pretty good example of someone blowing up buildings and killing lots of people in the name of Christianity… Or how about the Christian Terrorist groups that operate in India…killing people or forcing them to convert to Christianity?

          This country also has had its share of Christian Terrorism, from the (2nd) Ku Klux Klan to the Army of God, Eric Rudolph, and others.

          You claim that you aren’t in favor of Christian Dominionism…but every time that Jason makes an article pointing out the totalitarian, Christofascist, ideologies of specific Conservative leaders…you (and a couple other usual suspects) always here to defend them or minimize the importance of their Dominionist beliefs.

          Look at it from another way: If these were Islamist candidates, with well-documented stances of being pro-Sharia Law…and someone was here saying things like, “Well…sure they’re Islamist…but it’s not like they’re gonna introduce Sharia Law or anything! I mean, I like lower taxes, and Mohammed here is in favor of lower taxes…so Imma vote for him!” wouldn’t you be sickened? Wouldn’t you stand up against this?

          How can you be so blind?

          • Maybe by listening to our other senses, rather than just relying on eyes hidden behind rose tented sunglasses? Or violet, in your case.

          • Anonymous

            They’re blue, actually. I always know when I’ve won an argument though…because the person always starts making fun of my glasses and hat.

          • I wear MY dark glasses becuz I’m legally blind, and light hurts my eyes. Fortunately the Gods compensated my loss of vision with a stratospheric IQ, large breasts and stunning beauty. Thank you, Goddess. 🙂

          • Funny, and I know i’ve one when someone starts calling me naive and a potential terrorist. And since you pretty much stated those first….

          • Anonymous

            You’re mixing up my statements and those of “Merofled Ing.”

            The closest I came was stating that your conspiracy theories sound almost identical to Breivik’s conspiracy theories…which was proved by you, when you cited a conspiracy theory blog where Breivik got some of his wackadoo theories.

          • Conspiracy theory…right. Because a religion that states as one of it’s five fundamental rules that it is the only religion and all others must be made to believe or else is really a conspiracy theory. Especially when there’s plenty of news articles out there beyond just that one site which talk about this stuff.

            But hey, go ahead and wrap yourself in the security blanket. You still implied I was a crack smoking crazy person who believed the same things as a terrorist. If that isn’t character assassination, I don’t know what is. And since you said that long before I mentioned your blue shades or that very nice hat of yours, I still think by your own rules of winning when the other person makes fun of you…that I won. Thanks for playing, talk to the hostess for the home game.

            Yeah, except I don’t care about the Win conditions you set. I make my own conditions.

          • Merofled Ing

            Norse Alchemist, yeah !!! by your own conditions you have won. You put your own case so well, the others needn’t compete.

          • “You claim that you aren’t in favor of Christian Dominionism…but every time that Jason makes an article pointing out the totalitarian, Christofascist, ideologies of specific Conservative leaders…you (and a couple other usual suspects) always here to defend them or minimize the importance of their Dominionist beliefs.”

            Not at all. I am here to point out that there are millions of good, decent upstanding Christians, and millions of moderate conservatives, who aren’t gonna let Dominionism take over our party.

            Show me one post where I have defended Bachmann or Perry. Betcha can’t. What I have repeatedly said is that they do not represent the Republican party as a whole, and if they are somehow nominated, then I will be forced to vote for a third party.

            What I am doing is minimizing the paranoia about Dominionism as a threat.

            I’ve fought for Pagan rights in court and in legislation at great personal expense.

            In our local government, wanna know who voted in favor of enforcing the Religious Land Use Act? That’s right, the Republican members of the board.

          • Anonymous

            “Not at all. I am here to point out that there are millions of good, decent upstanding Christians, and millions of moderate conservatives, who aren’t gonna let Dominionism take over our party.”

            Alice, the Dominionists have already taken over the Republican Party. You’re just too focused on those skurry Mooslums to notice.

          • And you, Acidqueen, are so busy buying the agenda of others and being biased that you’re willing to just write off people because of what they think, rather than bother to open your mind to possibilities other than what your beloved leaders tell you. Or perhaps some of us already know about the Dominionists, and are simply looking for the next domino that’s going to fall.

      • “A Well-Educated, Former US Army Intelligence Analyst”

        Did you see the incident coming, with the Muslim military officer in Fort Hood, who started randomly shooting his comrades? Army Intelligence either missed the signs or was hampered by political correctness.

        • Anonymous

          I was already out by then, and frankly, such things were completely out of my purview…as I was tasked with plotting out enemy actions.

          You might wanna ask counter-intel, or the guys in the military police…but don’t blame some guy in an armored cav regiment trying to figure out where the next attack is going to take place. We’re not all “Jack Bauers.”

        • It’s the political correctness, AC, they’re too scared of being called racists to do their jobs, so they select for people who refuse to believe that people with religious motives other than “Christians” could possibly want to take over. Unless of course, they’re on one of those weeks where they decide that anybody who likes European Paganism is a White Supremacist. XP

    • Souris Optique

      Why does everyone assume liberals are unarmed?
      And it sure is funny how Obama’s furthering this “goal” of his by allowing firearms in national parks.

      • Anonymous

        Well, Obama has been a huge boon to the firearms industry and resellers. All it takes is one uninformed, panicky person to start blathering about The Coming Gun Ban and the next thing you know prices for firearms and parts triple overnight.

  • Oberon Osiris

    I live in the Detroit metro area, very near Dearborn, which is considered the largest amount of Middle Eastern/Muslim/Arab residents – outside of the Middle East! (and for probably nearly 30 years)
    Although they have very much influenced the local flavor and culture in Dearborn and some other areas of the Detroit area, they have never introduced, or tried to introduce Sharia law ever. And probably never will. Since I know people in this community I can tell you with certainty they are pretty Americanized in most respects. Later waves of immigration, since the ’80s have brought more traditional culture adherents but there is not one change with local politics. They live in an American country and obey American laws, and from where I sit, they mostly all like that and get along.
    One of my oldest acquaintances (over 30 years), is a social activist, Ismael Ahmed who founded ACCESS (http://www.accesscommunity.org/site/PageServer), an Arab American community center and much more.
    “Ish” is a third generation Arab American; his grandmother was a worker and marcher in the original Labor/Union movement of the 1930s (I suppose that is a “sure-sign” of his un-Americanness to you “conservative” Pagans), and Ish himself helped form the Detroit chapter of Rock Against Racism (which started in England back in the late ’70s). He was actually more into punk rock at that time, than I was. He also served in Vietnam, like most other American men at that time.
    With Ish, R-A-R and others, I went to march against Nazis in Indiana, way back then, and other projects like Rock Against Reagan, the 1980 Detroit Punk/Rock concert that played against the Republicans National Convention that nominated R.Reagan, right here in Detroit. A beautiful, AMERICAN man. He currently serves as an Assistant to the Provost at U-M Dearborn and regularly drops in on my wife who is a Librarian there.
    While Ish may be a high-profile example of the types of Arab Americans that I know, there are others. During the 16 years I worked in Medical (1986 to 2000) I met dozens of Arab/descended Doctors or other Medical Specialists. They are polite, highly intelligent, humane and caring – especially the ones I met during the 7 years I worked at Childrens’ Hospital. The only thing that really separated them from most other people was that they did not drink alcohol. Funny that. Around here in Michigan, most of the conservative Pagans I have met seem to have that in common – drinking to excess. And we know, medically, that alcohol abuse raises blood pressure – and tempers. Maybe if more of the conservative Pagans didn’t drink so much, they wouldn’t have so much to be angry about?

    • There was no attempt to set up official Sharia Courts in the UK until just a few years ago.

      But the real issue is one of principle. There should be one secular law for all US citizens. Period. No exceptions.

      Every liberal’s favorite Imam, Feisal Abdul Rauf, is the founder and head of an organization dedicated to the worldwide spread of Sharia. It’s called “The Shariah Project”. It was founded at a meeting of Muslim clerics in Malaysia in 2006. In Malaysia (considered a “moderate” Muslim country), people accused of apostasy are turned over by the secular authorities to Shariah courts for prosecution.

      Rauf does not deny his promotion of the spread of Sharia law. Rather he tries to convince everyone that Sharia is really a good thing, which is exactly what one would expect from someone dedicated to the spread of Sharia!

      • Oberon

        Well, that was a very long post of mine, but in essence what I was trying to say is that Dearborn, Michigan, home to the largest muslim/Middle eastern population outside of the Middle East is so Americanized that I don’t believe they would, as a population, want Sharia law themselves. I live on the ground here and know many folks in the community. I work in the 2nd largest public library in Michigan, which has its own incredibly diverse population; Russian immigrants, African Americans, Orthodox Jews,e tc. etc. and I give public service every day to folks like these, and have personal rapport and communications with them, the City Municipality has many Muslim/Middle Eastern folks working here.

        We all get along. We are interested in our community as that; not a fringe or insular ‘part’ of a community. We are together.

        Check out Metro Detroit sometime!

        • I believe I made the point that most American Muslims are law-abiding and decent working people… and am trying to make the point that so are most Christians.

          Neither groups’ fundamentalists rule the entire group.

          However, fundy Muslims have done more damage, nationwide as well as worldwide, than have fundy Christians.

          BTW it’s 116/68. “Around here in Michigan, most of the conservative Pagans I have met seem to have that in common – drinking to excess. And we know, medically, that alcohol abuse raises blood pressure – and tempers.” Your pal Kelly Weaver already tried that tactic here on the Wild Hunt… yes, I used to drink and drug to excess, a quarter of a century or more ago. That is why I currently promote a safe, healthy drug-free conservative lifestyle, cuz I’ve been there, and know how dangerous the opposite behavior can be. Most of the crowd that I associated with back in the day, when you knew me, Oberon, are STILL drinking and drugging to excess. They’re still claiming to be Pagans, and they’re still liberals, and most of them have been on Welfare for 20+ years.

          • Oberon

            I did not say I was speaking of you. I made a generality that I have seen very often. As you know, I rarely ever went to your side of the state, so I know only you as you came to my side of the state. The last time was around 2002 when you came to Federation’s Project 2022 or whatever that was called. I recall chatting with you and you asking me to hang out and drink with you. Perhaps you wouldn’t have been drinking to excess that time, but who knows? And it certainly wasn’t 25 years ago. I only met you perhaps 18 or 19 years ago. Detroit’s community itself didn’t really begin until around Fall of 1987 – I was there, and I didn’t really start networking with people in your area or greater Michigan until a few years later. Hair-splitting? Perhaps. I just remember dates, names, faces and other things much better than almost anyone I know (must be the Mercury in Scorpio), and since I’ve always had medical complications that forbade much drinking, so well, at least the brain works pretty good.
            In general I think that if you are Conservative, this would apply to drinking etc. Yet, I certainly don’t see that with more conservative Pagans on this side of the state. And they are always angry and more concerned about others’ affairs. Yeah, yeah, the taxes the taxes. Sorry, AC, we all have to put up with taxes that support things we don’t want them to. For me that would be nearly all of the military. My understanding is that most of the taxes in my state that support the roads rebuilding, clearing of snow, etc. on *your* side of the state, come from the taxpayers in Detroit area, since we are probably the largest group of them in the State. Like I said you can’t have it both ways.
            What is this nonsense about Kelly being “my pal”, I know her less than I know you, actually. Though she does seem to be a person I would like. I get an email from her about 1.5 years.

          • That’s funny, cuz we always hear the complaints that Western and Northern MI has to pay extra taxes to support Detroit… especially after Kwami Kilpatrick ripped everyone off. Our departed governor even said that was why she’d not lower taxes.

            Really, I don’t care what other people do with their lives… as long as I am safe, and don’t have to pay for others’ mistakes. The Liberal platform seems to be that we are obligated to fund others’ bad behavior, with social programs.

        • Baruch Dreamstalker

          Perhaps the difference is the motive for emigration — going to Europe for work, coming to America for freedom.

  • How much Sharia is too much? By the time you find out it’s too late.

    One can’t advocate zero-tolerance for politicians who are in bed with openly homophobic Christian groups, while simultaneously looking the other way when it comes to Sharia.

    The Muslim population of the UK is estimated at a little below 3%, while in the US it is a little over 2%. Sharia Courts are now a fact of life in the UK, and it is only a matter of time before they set up shop in the US, if they are not stopped.

    When it comes to religious freedom and separation of church and state, Pagans can’t afford to be inconsistent.

    • Anonymous

      The only way that Sharia courts could become legal in the USA is for the Separation of Church and State to be demolished…and the only people looking to do that right now are Right-Wing, Conservative Christian Republicans. And why? Because they want the same things as the Islamists…just with a different name for the same Abrahamic deity.

      • Ahh, but you are missing the key point: Legality. According to Islam, and Sharia, the laws of the US are illegal, for they do not come from Allah. Therefore even an “illegal” Sharia court (be it here or in the UK or anywhere else) is therefore still “Legal” to Muslims, irregardless of the legality we view it with. And those who find themselves before the Sharia court, legally or illegally, shall find themselves being treated by those of that Sharia Court as if said Court was the Legal Authority.

        And they don’t need Christians to do anything.

        • Anonymous

          Now I KNOW that you are smoking crack.

          • and now I am pretty sure you’re just being stubborn and delusional. 😉

            After all, it’s not like there’s no groups out there who exist outside of the law, who do not recognize the law, and who spite the law. Nope, none at all. No mafia, no cartels, no terrorist groups, nothing. Everyone lives perfectly legal lives and respect the law, even when the guiding principles of their lives dictates otherwise.

          • Anonymous

            You just used the example I was gonna bring up: The Mafia. I’m talking about politics. You’re talking about a shady criminal underworld. They are not even remotely the same thing.

          • Oh my god I cannot believe you just said that. Now I know you’re the one on crack.

            Politics and Shady Criminal underworlds are not the same thing? Ignoring the long, documented history of Politicians in pretty much ever “civilized” civilization being for all intents and purposes “crooks” or at the least highly corrupt, America alone has a long history of Criminal Empires Controlling the politics. And of politicians controlling Criminal Empires.

            But my point was this. Laws only work when people agree to follow them. As soon as people do not agree to follow them, the laws do not work. Therefore, we have Law Enforcement, to make people agree to follow said laws. However, some people, for various reasons including Religion, will still not follow laws they do not recognize. You’ve whined about enough Christian Organizations doing just that, I find it impossible to believe that you think Islam wouldn’t do the same.

            Actually, I take that back. I completely believe you would consider it impossible for anyone but a Christian to act that way.

          • Anonymous

            You know what I mean. You went from talking about Sharia Law government takeover…to something about super Top Secret underground mafia Sharia Law courts…that one might be dragged into unwillingly.

            Sorry, but I’m about as worried about such things as I am about being brought before some mafia “godfather” for something…which is to say, I’m not, Sport.

          • Actually, it was Ap who brought up the Sharia courts (which exist btw). The Mafia was an example of an illegal thing existing despite its legality. Which you insisted couldn’t happen.

            As for being dragged before a Sharia Court against one’s will. It happens. Muslim woman? guess which court you’re going to for family issues over in the UK? Sharia court. Not to mention the numerous girls of many nationalities that are kidnapped, raped, and forced to marry their Muslim kidnapper and convert. Oh, and it isn’t just happening in places like Egypt and Jordan. It’s happening in Norway, Germany, France, And the UK.

            I’d offer you links, but you’d whine they were from a “Terrorist website”. The Ironic thing is, I could get them from actual terrorist websites, but I don’t think you read Arabic (i don’t either so don’t feel bad), and you’d still argue I was getting my info from Terrorists. So you’ll forgive me if I don’t bother, Sport.

          • Anonymous

            Look, Buddy. I’m the only one allowed to call people “Sport™” or “Chief™.” You need to come up with your own condescending terms if you’re gonna play this game! 😀

          • I’m sorry oh great and wise one, please forgive this Heathen’s ignorance in your ownership of terms. The gods forbid I should trespass in the territory of those who are so much wiser and more knowledgeable than this lost soul. XP

            How about I simply call you kiddo. Now go eat your ice cream and dream that there is only one group of people out there who doesn’t like you. You can call me sport and naive all you want, but the fact is that just because you want the Christians to be the only and greatest threat out there, doesn’t mean the world is going to cater to you. 😉

          • Anonymous

            “…just because you want the Christians to be the only and greatest threat out there, doesn’t mean the world is going to cater to you.”

            Where did you get that idea, Chief? (And yeah, “Kiddo” is a great one. I wish I’d thought of it…)

            I’m against Islamofascism as much as Christofascism. The difference is…only one of those ideologies is represented by elected officials in the USA. Only one of those ideologies has a major American political party (The Republicans) bowing to their every wish. Only one of those ideologies has any chance of coming to power in the USA, where I live.

            And frankly, having been a “participant” in the War on Terrorism, I think when it comes to our non-domestic attempts to deal with Islamofascism, I have the right to be more than a little dissatisfied with our country’s progress in that arena. Thanks to W, we’ve been supporting one of the most despicable Islamofascist regimes in the world (Pakistan), in the “hopes” that they would help us fight another Islamofascist regime (The Taliban). Yeah, that worked out well. At least Obama had the guts to cut off the hundreds of millions of American taxpayer dollars flowing directly to Pakistan. (That’s a much better solution to our deficit issues than stopping aid to poor Americans. That’s for damned sure.)

            The idea that being against Islamofascism in other countries is incompatible with realizing that it’s nowhere near as important in THIS country as Christofascism…is logically inconsistent. Your hatred of Muslims has made you an unwitting ally with the Dominionists. Congratulations.

          • First of, I don’t hate Muslims. I really dislike Islam, much to the same degree I like Christianity. And I’m going to have to disagree with you that my issues with Islam have made me an ally of the Dominionists. Seriously, my good man, I can hold more than one thing in my mind and deal with more than one threat. Should a Dominionist show up in my area, I’ll rip into him with the same zeal i would for an Islamist. So I’d like it if you would not make assumptions about my loyalties and perhaps even try to control your friend Acidqueen from calling me a bloody racist.

          • Anonymous

            If you aren’t an unwitting ally of the Dominionists…then why are you arguing with such zeal in a thread about Dominionists…that we shouldn’t worry about them? This thread has absolutely NOTHING to do with Islam…but you keep telling us to not pay attention to the Christofascists…and instead pay attention only to Islamofascists…

            I take it back: It’s not your “hatred of Muslims” that has made you an ally of the Dominionists…but rather your minimization of the threat of Dominionism. By saying they aren’t a threat…and supporting the Conservative groups and ideologies that put them into power…you are just as much an “ally” of them as the British authorities who allowed the creation of “Sharia Courts” are an “ally” of Islamofascism.

          • Anonymous

            …and for the record, I have no idea who “acidqueen” is, just like I have no idea who “Norse Alchemist” is… On the other hand, anyone who wants to know who “Bryon Morrigan” is, can just type my name between “www.” and “.com.”

          • Merofled Ing

            Sharia courts in Britain (to my knowledge the only European country that has them):

            Basically these courts operate along what might be called ‘out of court settlement’ elsewhere.

            “Muslim arbitration tribunal (MTA), a network of sharia courts, has been operating in London, [et al] since 2007 under the 1996 Arbitration Act. These make decisions that are legally binding and can be enforced by the English courts, provided they do not conflict with English law and both parties choose to use them.”

            “Dozens of sharia courts in the UK are regularly giving illegal advice on issues including marriage and divorce, a report published today claims.
            Decisions concerning marriages not recognised under English law, polygamy, and disputes regarding children are being made by at least 85 sharia courts, according to the report by the thinktank Civitas.
            There is no clear divide between the functions of imams and the sharia courts.”

            Source: The Guardian,6/29/2009, link posted below. Add me to the contra.

            All of the papers are critical of these courts. So am I, for a number of obvious reasons, which needn’t be spelled out on a post like this. I’m posting links to the major British (national, quality) papers. These courts only marginally concern the debates here, but since they’ve come up, it’s probably better to rely on the four major British papers than to rely on Gates of Vienna uh, I can’t call that info.

            As for the British papers:
            The Guardian is rather left/liberal in its outlook.
            The Times is conservative, it belongs to Rupert Murdoch.
            The Daily Telegraph is sometimes called The Daily Torygraph, it is partisan conservative.
            The Independent strives to be independent, (party-) political bias would be up to the individual journalist.
            Since there are quite a few articles on sharia courts in Britain, it’s best then to go via the search facility provided by each of them. (I’m not setting any homework here. I’m just not posting 50+ links.)
            Obviously, we can (nearly) all deal with moderate bias in papers, to those worried, there’s a reason I’ve gone through all of these (quality, national) papers, and there’s a reason I’m posting them all. They’re daily papers, so the articles focus on day-to-day development.




            http://www.telegraph.co.uk/ (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/search/?queryText=sharia+courts&Search=)


          • An interesting group in the UK specifically focused on the issue of Sharia is the “One Law For All” campaign. Their website is: http://www.onelawforall.org.uk/

            This is a group equally opposed, on principle, to any religious encroachments on the legal system. They recently issued a major report giving their position on right-wing opponents of Islam, especially groups like the EDL. Their position is pretty much summarized by the title of that report: “Enemies, Not Allies”: http://www.onelawforall.org.uk/new-report-enemies-not-allies-the-far-right/

            Here’s an excerpt: “A new report by One Law for All explores how the far-Right has attempted to hijack opposition to Islamism for its own ends. It focuses on the British National Party, the English Defence League and Stop Islamisation of Europe/America, and exposes how their activities, associations, opinions and intentions reveal a racist and inhuman worldview, which must be resisted and criticised with as much vigilance as Islamism itself.”

          • Merofled Ing

            Thank you very much for finding this group, and for posting their links.
            I hope they are successful in their opposition to sharia courts. Groups like these are what we need to deal with Islamist threats, and others.

        • Oberon

          “And they don’t need Christians to do anything.”
          Would that be the Christians whose Jesus said “Render unto Caesar”? I don’t see them interested (the far right-conservative types) in adhering to that. If so, well, we would not have Dominionists, right…
          Jesus said so. *That’s* what Jesus would do: have people obey the laws of the land.

      • Challenges, often successful, to the separation of church and state happen all the time in the US. For recent examples see the “Issues” section of the website for Americans United for Separation of Church and State (http://www.au.org/issues/).

        Here’s one specific example: right now US taxpayers are funding Christian missionaries here in the US (through “faith based initiative”) and around the world (through “foreign aid” dollars handed out to missionary groups). Among the groups receiving such funds is World Vision, which openly declares that they will hire only Christians!

        • Anonymous

          World Vision is a plague that supports Christian Terrorism in India, and should be treated like any other terrorist-supporting organization.

  • Says Mr. Lupus on his own blog, “Executions for homoeroticism still take place in various parts of the Middle East to the present day, whether sanctioned by the state and carried out under Sharia law, or as vigilante acts by communities or even the families of the LGBTQ people concerned because of the extreme shame and “sinfulness” that such people are thought to represent”

    I asked him, with all due respect, and without it being a rhetorical question, cuz I really wanna know, why then he supports candidates who refuse to fund a strong military? What will help to solve this particular problem is bringing Democracy to the Middle East.

    • Arguable. Personally I don’t think that democracy will matter much, because even Mainstream Islam (much like Mainstream Christianity) is so…”homophobic” to use the parlance of today’s PC people, that it won’t matter if they have self government. So long as they have Islam, they will hunt down and execute people based on their sexuality, just as they hunt down people based on their religion over there.

      • Cigfran

        ‘PC people’? You mean… what? People for whom homophobia is a living concern?

        And what would you call it, Mr. non-PC?

        • Well, lets look at it. Most of the time when I hear about homophobia, it’s in relation to anyone who doesn’t like homosexuality is simply scared of it. Now, ignoring the fact that one can not like a thing without being scared of it (for example, I dislike certain veggies but i do not fear them) or even certain people (I certainly dislike racists of all colors, despite what some people would like to believe about me being one, without fearing racists). I am not veggiephobic, nor racist-phobic. Phobias are considered psychological disorders.

          Now, Anti-Homosexual I would find a perfectly acceptable term. I just take issue with people insist the only reason people are anti-homosexual is because they fear it in the form of a psychological disease. I find this insulting to all parties. For are we not meant to be free to think and feel for ourselves without the threat of being labeled psychologically ill?

    • Willm

      right gay bashing and killing gay people never happen here either

      Look at Jamaica, not a hot spot of Islamic terrorism but but still not gay friendly.

    • Baruch Dreamstalker

      AC, we tried to bring democracy to Iraq militarily and that didn’t work out terribly well. Obama is presently trying non-military means elsewhere in the Middle East and, while it hasn’t had success in the first year (which is what his critics seem to hold as a standard) at least it hasn’t tanked spectactulary and expensively.

    • kenneth

      Exactly which candidates of any mainstream standing have refused to fund a strong military? As a country, our military budget is absurdly outsized for any rational foreign policy which is truly rooted in self-defense. It is large enough, in fact, to provide for the reasonable (even vigilant) security needs of an entire planet. With something like 1,000 bases across the globe, it is an imperial army which exposes us to more attacks and ultimately provokes them through resentment of local populations.

      It is not, and never has been about “bringing Democracy” to the Middle East or anyplace else. We have, for many decades, actively undermined democratic movements wherever we felt their outcome would be inconvenient to us. At any rate, it is not even possible to “bring” someone democracy at the point of a gun. Never been done and never will be. We replaced a strong thugocracy in Iraq with a weak one and replaced the Taliban with a drug dealer in Afghanistan. Neither country is a single nanometer closer to being a democracy for our being there.

      I will go so far as to say that a “strong military” in the imperial sense of the word not only does not strengthen a republic, it in fact actively saps and hollows out its true strengths. Despite our vaunted efforts to defeat anyone on a battlefield and take ground away (not hold it) from anyone anyplace, we are rapidly becoming a second rate power in all the ways that really matter. We have spent trillions (yes, big T) on wars we can’t afford. We do this by taking payday loans from China, a very UN-democratic state which has used our money to hollow out our economy and place itself way ahead of us in virtually every sector which will count for anything in the new century. We are so dependent upon them that we are arguably a client state, or soon will be.

      We’re building trillion-dollar science fiction technology weapons for enemies who don’t exist and fighting imperial wars, but we have rotting infrastructure, an education system which will leave MOST of its graduates unable to compete and many tens of millions of Americans with no hope of meaningful employment on the horizon. A country which blindly buys and fields more weapons in these circumstances is only a “strong” country in the sense of the word used by North Korea or the former Soviet Union.

    • kenneth

      One other thing needs to be said about Sharia and Islamist movements in general. They did not arise in a vacuum and it was our militaristic foreign policy in large part which helped create the conditions which allow radical movements to flourish in the Muslim world. Most people don’t remember this, but at one time, we were the good guys in the Arab world. From about the end of WW II to the 60s or so. We gave them a better shake than European powers, gave them better terms on oil extraction, even stood up to other western powers to their advantage from time to time.

      Most of these countries were on a path toward secularization and modernization. Unfortunately, these countries had none of the cultural groundwork for democracy and wealth which came exclusively through resource extraction (money which can be stolen and hoarded easily by an elite).

      These characters essentially took all of the money for themselves, invested very little in the “human capital” of their nations and brutalized anyone who tried to oppose them by political means. In every single instance we were the thugs most visible and consistent ally. We supported them over oil and other expediencies, even giving them the hardware to slaughter their own people into submission. Hussein was OUR boy for decades before we speciously flew in as “libarators.” WE supported the Taliban and turned a blind eye to the more vigorous support of them by our “ally” Pakistan because it served our ends for a long time.

      The founding of radical Islam has our handprints all over it, and our endless wars in that part of the world furnish a wonderful validation of the narrative used by terrorists to recruit. We are the best thing that ever happened to a radical Imam anywhere. Now we sit and pretend that Sharia movements sprang into being out of nowhere or from some faulty circuit in the Muslim mind and that it can all be solved with more boots on the ground.

      • Anonymous

        kenneth, I like what you have to say, but it’s not going to resonate at all with people who want simple solutions for complex problems. Most folks these days don’t know about things like Operation Ajax and for the most part they don’t WANT to know. It’s a lot easier to just say “They’re the bad guys because it’s their nature to be evil” instead of “They’re pissed at us because we keep screwing with them”. Nobody wants to be the villain, but there comes a time when people have to make a choice between admitting responsibility for something and trying to make it right, or loudly and belligerently claiming that they’ve never done anything wrong ever and anyone who says different is just a liar and a traitor. The first choice takes actual WORK. The latter requires nothing but shouting along with the crowd. Pity that the supposedly brave, responsible and tough among us keep choosing the easy path.

        • Baruch Dreamstalker

          Ruka, if you know of a nation which has collectively pondered its past sins and repented them please let me know. Scripture doesn’t count.

          What the national interest calls for is that the government take on that attitude while the people remain unreconstructed. Unfortunately, when Obama tries even a little of that, the Right beats him up for doing “apology tours.”

          • Anonymous

            Baruch, I wish I did know of such a nation. And that’s pretty much the problem. Humanity seems to have a problem with looking in the mirror. What’s worse is that the fact that no other nations do it becomes its own justification for not doing it ever.

          • kenneth

            Germany took a pretty good crack at it.

          • Baruch Dreamstalker

            They had a good postwar de-Nazification program, to be sure.

        • Yeah, we screwed the Middle east. And the middle east screwed us. it’s in the history books. It’s hard to say who screwed the other first, though arguably its been going on since the Muslim Caliphate started chomping away at the Christian Byzantine Empire and both totalitarian Monotheistic ideologies have been going at it ever since. Who is at fault? Everyone, them and us.

      • Both Hussein and bin Laudin violated agreements with us, after we funded their wars with Iran and Russia, respectively. They turned on us like dogs. Yes, I too have a long memory.

        • Anonymous

          Both of those individuals and many more besides who have been our allies in the name of “national security” went on to abuse, murder and torture their own citizens and the citizens of neighboring countries. Our government turned a blind eye to all of it until it was convenient to notice. Saddam Hussein didn’t wake up one morning and decide to not be a good guy anymore. The Shah of Iran didn’t surprise anybody by having his SAVAK secret police abduct, torture and murder Iranians. Our government knew exactly what kind of dogs these people were and then pretended to be shocked when they supposedly slipped their leashes.

          What good’s a long memory if you don’t learn anything from the experiences? Our government keeps backing murderers and psychotics and then pretends to be shocked when the inevitable happens. Or they pretend nothing is happening as long as their pet tyrants are killing the “right” people as often as they kill innocents. And a lamentably large segment of the United States’ population seems perfectly willing to play the same game of voluntary blindness along with them.

  • A reminder to everyone: Please be sure to remain civil in your conversations here. That includes no name-calling. I’d hate to have to freeze another thread. Disagreement and debate is fine, but lets all remember the rules of hospitality.

    • Anonymous

      Just make sure that you only lock it after I’ve just posted, so I get in the last word. You know, since you’re part of the Vast Liberal Media Conspiracy™ and all. LOL.

      • Doing my best Jason. Ain’t always easy. Especially when emotions run high and everyone and their uncle thinks their right. Me, i’m not sure anyone is right, I just don’t like people jumping on to one set of tracks and forgetting there rest of what’s out there.

  • Mia

    I’ve noticed some references to Rome and the takeover of that empire by Christianity in the comments here.

    There is an interesting book that spends almost a third of its content discussing why that happened called “The Germanization of Early Medieval Christianity” by Russell: http://books.google.com/books/about/The_Germanization_of_Early_Medieval_Chri.html?id=y9Ysp4U4C_IC