Category Archives: Society

Paganism, Religion, Society

Uptight people amuse me some days

Leave a comment

Last night, I went to the weekly Pagan Meet and Greet over at Jitter’s Cafe. By the time I arrived there, Belinda and Karen were already there. So I got my drink and ordered a wrap for dinner before taking my seat with them. I don’t recall much about what we talked about while there. That’s probably because I was too busy daydreaming and watching the rather good looking kid who was playing pool at the time.

Eventually two people, who I will call V and P since I’d rather not use their names without their permission, stopped in at eight. V and P are husband and wife, and Belinda and I had met them while at the naturist festival. We originally met them when they came to the Thursday night seance and kept bumping into them for the remainder of the festival. When we found out V and P were also from the Rochester Area, we told them about the meet and greets, because they seemed really interested in getting to know more about us and learning what we believed and practiced.

This means that V and P love to ask lots of questions, and the three of us (Belinda probably carried the conversation while Karen and I each chimed in when appropriate) spent at least an hour happily answering each query. We covered topics ranging from the meaning(s) of the pentagram to psychism and psychic development to totem animals, and everything in between. V also asked about the local Spiritualist church and how they compared to us. We gave the best answer we could give, having never been to the local Spiritualist church. When V asked if I’d recommend them, I told him that I wouldn’t make a recommendation for against something I have no personal knowledge of. However, I also pointed out to him that in general, I’m inclined that just about any experience is a positive experience, even if that experience leads someone to say, “This really isn’t for me.”

I found out later that our conversation had apparently upset another customer at the coffee shop. According to Belinda (I was too engrossed in conversation at the time to notice), a man sitting about twenty feet from us got fed up during the part of the conversation when we were discussing Wicca, witchcraft, and the pentagram. In fact, we apparently offended his sensibilities so much that he eventually stood up, walked back out to the front room of the coffee shop, and glared at us as he passed our table on the way. When Belinda told me about this, I just smiled in amusement and made a rather unapologetic comment.

About a half hour after V and P left, our original trio decided it was time to leave as well. After all, the coffee shop was closing in five minutes, and we try to make sure the owner doesn’t have to kick us out. As is our usual custom, the three of us stood by our cars gabbing for a while longer. As the coffee shop closed, a car drove buy us and the driver glared at the three of us. I glanced at Belinda and she confirmed (at least as well as she could be certain) that it was the same gentleman who stormed by us earlier in the evening due to our conversation.

At this point, I was amused beyond maturity and admit (though unrepentantly) to making a rather juvenile comment at this point. The idea that our conversation upset him so much that he was still stewing over it after walking away almost an hour previously simply astounded me. I cannot imagine letting someone else’s actions have that much control over my moods — especially for such a prolonged time.

I am assuming — and maybe incorrectly, though I doubt it — that this man was a fundamentalist Christian. I can’t think of any other group of people who would be so offended by our conversation, to be frank. And this experience just reminds me how completely worked up some fundamentalist Christians get over such topics. I just don’t get it.

He was not a part of our conversation. We did not direct our conversation towards him. And while I admit that it would’ve been rather difficult for someone in the back room of the coffee shop to overhear at least parts of our conversation (we’re a lively bunch, after all), I’d argue that’s merely the nature of such venues. It’s still no big deal. And if you don’t like what you overhear, you try your best to ignore it or move where you’re less likely to overhear without acting all uppity about it.

I’d certainly understand his reaction a bit better if we had been discussing Christianity negatively. But we weren’t. In fact, we barely discussed Christianity at all. The only time the topic came up at all was (1) when V mentioned his upbringing in the Catholic church briefly and (2) when I commented that Spiritualists often tend to get into some of the same practices some Pagans do (e.g. mediumship, healing work, trance channeling) but tend to do so from a more Christian frame of reference.

Now, to the man’s credit, I’ll admit his reaction could’ve been much worse. He could’ve become confrontational and openly hostile towards us. Or he could’ve made a complaint to the owner of the coffee shop (though I doubt it would’ve done him much good, as said owner seems to have an affinity for our merry band of gabbers). Instead, he chose to just keep his anger to himself. But even that seemed to be a bit of an overreaction.

But I guess what really gets me is when I ask myself who this man’s reaction will ultimately affect. If he gets angry so easily over such things — and he’s bound to come into contact with such conversations more than this one time — it’s not the people he’s mad at who will eventually develop ulcers and other problems.

Religion, Society

Thoughts on Justice

Leave a comment

Recently, I joined Circle and Cross Talk, an email discussion list dedicated to dialogue between Christians and Pagans. The other day, one of the list members posted an article, The Just World Theory. I posted my own thoughts to the list and thought it appropriate to post them to my blog as well.

Hello all.

After giving some thought to the topic (as well as what I want to say about it), I’ve decided to weigh in on the “Just World” hypothesis. Unfortunately, I’m at work and thus have access to neither the article nor the excellent thoughts everyone else has already shared. So please forgive me if my thoughts are rambling and don’t stay quite on target. Of course, in fairness, my thoughts would probably stray even if I *did* have access to the discussion so far. 😉

I honestly can’t say that I’m surprised by the article’s suggestion that most people operate under the philosophy that we live in a “just world,” and that therefore we are inclined to think that people have somehow brought their fate upon themselves. And to some degree, I don’t think that this is an entirely bad thing. While I cringe in horror and disgust at the suggestion that a rape or murder victim did something to deserve such brutal treatment, I also cannot deny that some people find themselves in situations of their own making due to the choices they have made. For example, the person who gives into our society’s consumer mentality and consistently spends money in excess of their income will need to recognize the part they played in creating their situation when they eventually find themselves crushed under insurmountable debt. Until they do so, and correct their spending habits sufficiently, they will continue to find themselves in that situation. (Indeed, many people who do not learn this lesson before making use of consolidation loans and other tools for making one’s debt more manageable simply spend their way back into a worse situation than the one they were trying to escape.) After all, there are those situations in which the concept of personal responsibility does apply.

However, there is a huge difference between such a scenario and a situation where someone is victimized by another person (or a case where someone who finds themselves in debt due to the high costs associated with an unexpected medical emergency, to offer my own counter-example) is unthinkable. A victim has been clearly wronged by someone acting in a reprehensible manner. There are no factors that nullify that or even mitigate that fact. And to suggest that a victim “had it coming” for any reason is unthinkable and, in my opinion less, morrally reprehensible. In short, comparing the two scenarios is like comparing apples and bicycle tires.

What bothers me even more deeply about the whole concept of the “just world” hypothesis, though, is the implications of how we as a society understand justice. It suggests a paradigm in which justice is nothing more than the process of punishing wrongs and rewarding right behavior. To my mind, this understanding of justice is incomplete, poorly devised, and practically useless.

To me, justice is about maintaining and restoring the right order in all situations. To again draw back to the example of someone being raped, punishing the rapist alone is not justice. A victim has been traumatized and seriously wronged, and true justice must address that and rectify these wrongs as much as possible. This means helping the victim to heal from this ordeal, physically, emotionally, and spiritually. It means helping the victim to put their life back in order as best as anyone can accomplish. In this sense, I sometimes think that the civil law system offers more true justice than the criminal justice system in the fact that it enables victims (and their families) of violent criminals to sue those who wronged them, as they can then use that money for expenses that reasult as a part of the healing process.

To go back to my own example, justice is not served if we simply determine that someone is in debt due to their own poor financial choices, either. Even if said person is in that situation due to his own choices, he doesn’t deserve to be left there. In that instance, justice is served by not only helping him get out of debt, but gently pointing out his own part in getting there and showing him how to make better choices in the future so that he can avoid returning to the same situation down the road.

I’m convinced that the belief that the world is a just world is a false one, no matter how appealing the idea is to all of us. But I think that part of the reason it’s false is that the underlying premise of what justice actually entails is flawed. True justice requires action, and we are the actors.

My apologies for being so long-winded.

Regards,
— Jarred.

Paganism, Society

The benefits of public Pagan events

1 Comment

In an email conversation discussing the incident at MPPD 2007 involving the CCL of Maine, Tracie asked some interesting questions about the philosophy behind public Pagan events:

In other words, what is the motivation behind pagans doing big public events anyway? Why do we need the attention? In what way does it serve our Gods?

Over the past eight or so years, I’ve attended various public Pagan events:

As I mulled over Tracie’s questions, I thought back to each of these events I attended. And to be honest, with the possible exception of Starwood, I’m not sure any of them got all that much attention. And to the best of my knowledge, not even Starwood seemed to draw a great deal of attention from the non-Pagan community. So I find myself wondering how much attention we as Pagans are drawing or trying to draw to ourselves with such events, anyway.

As I think of each of these events, what sticks in my mind were the opportunities to meet like-minded people, make friends, and otherwise engage in networking. And to me, this is the true value of such events. They provide us with the chance to get together and find people and opportunities that we might otherwise miss.

Such events and the networking opportunities they offer particularly provide a great service to people who are new to a geographic area or are new to or just becoming interested in Paganism. Such publicized events provide them with a readily accessible and obvious starting point. In a single day (or however long the event lasts), they can meet many people and start getting an idea of who they fit with both religiously and on an interpersonal level. Similarly, established organizations and groups can get to know these newcomers and make similar evaluations.

Such events also offer the benefits of bringing together diverse groups for networking purposes as well. It provides groups the opportunity to touch base with one another and exchange any information or concerns that may effect the Pagan community as a whole. Such networking can help lead to a healthier community overall.

Of course, such events also tend to have workshops that can be educational and informative. While this benefit strikes me as secondary to the networking I’ve already described, I think it’s still important and serves a positive purpose. This enables people to learn new things and provides for an opportunity to exchange ideas. Again, this lead to the betterment of those in attendance, both as individuals and as a whole. And I cannot think of a better service to the gods.

Personally, I tend to see the attention such events might draw from the wider (i.e. non-Pagan) community as a side-effect rather than a primary goal. (I’m sure others will disagree, however.) Sometimes, that side effect has consequences that are unfortunate, such as the encounter with the Maine CCL at MPPD. However, I think that the clear benefits of these events — benefits that rely on the events being both public and widely publicized in order to be maximized — far outweigh the downside.

Paganism, Religion, Religious Discrimination, Society

Investigating a Disturbance at Maine Pagan Pride Day

Leave a comment

Earlier today, I ran across the CCL of Maine’s statement that they were removed from Main Pagan Pride Day this past Sunday. The CCL’s comments included accusations of censorship:

League Executive Director Michael Heath remarked, “These same pagans who cling to the First Amendment for their freedom of religion, trample upon it by rejecting freedom of the press. Their audacity and hypocrisy is at the same time stunning and pathetic.”

Jason Pitzl-Waters addresses these claims quite well with a brief civics lesson:

The First Amendment right concerning Free Speech, and a Free Press, doesn’t mean that a (perhaps hostile) reporter can’t be ejected from private property, even if an event on private property is a “public” one. Freedom of the Press was enshrined to prevent governmental censorship or reprisal.

Being curious about the incident and concerned about the possible misrepresentation of the situation on the part of the CCL of Maine, I contacted the coordinators of MPPD. Richard Vinton was kind enough to respond to my inquiry. He assured me that despite my own doubts about that aspect of the CCL’s claims, MPPD made no attempt to restrict what photographs could be taken. Indeed, Richard included in his email the same disclaimer that the CCL displays on their site, verifying it’s legitimacy.

However, Richard went on to explain that Mr. Hein was asked to leave for taking pictures:

He [w]as asked to leave because he was causing a
disturbance. He entered a workshop that was already in session and began
taking photos of the class members and interrupting the instructor. He
misrepresented himself as a member of the press but holds no press
credentials and it became very clear the he intended to continue being a
disturbance.

Given the CCL’s documented past of encouraging harassment and resorting to misrepresentation, it is not hard to believe Richard’s indication that Mr. Hein was activel creating a disturbance. It is perfectly reasonable that the MPPD organizers and security would choose to eject someone for such inappropriate and rude actions.

Richard also speaks highly of how well the situation was actually handled:

What should be noted is the fast and professional response
by our team of Guardians. This entire incident lasted no longer then 10
minutes and very few people in attendance had any idea it took place
before the misleading story on the CCL web page.

I’m inclined to consider this excellent news indeed.

Gender and Sexuality, Rants, Religion, Society

Hatemonger number one comes to my neighborhood

7 Comments

This afternoon, when I checked my email, I found a missive from the GAGV. It started out with the following words:

It has been brought to our attention that Fred Phelps, who is known for picketing funerals of victims of AIDS, is planning a ?God Hates Fags? protest here in our community today at the memorial service for the five Cheerleaders from Fairport High School that were killed recently.

Of course, my perverse sense of humor immediately cackled with glee at the thought that my area (Fairport is just to the east of Rochester) has somehow earned the attention and protests of Fred Phelps and his merry band of hatemongers. Phelps and those like him amuse me to no end, and part of me would love to check out the protest tonight just for the sake of satisfying my morbid curiosity.

But on the other hand, I can’t help but feel bad for the friends and families of these girls. I can only imagine what it must be like to have such hatemongers intrude upon what is already a sacred time of expressing the pains of grief and loss.

Of course, Phelps and his group really give no strong explanation of why they chose this funeral to picket. Indeed, their only comment (other than to rattle off a long and nasty sounding Bible passage) about this stop in their picket schedule is to decry the girls who died as “raised-for-the-Devil, American whores.” Personally, I find these inflammatory and awful words, and words that I find hard to believe Phelps has any basis for using. After all, he doesn’t know these girls personally.

Personally, I suspect that Phelps simply chose this funeral to picket on the grounds that it’s the day before another scheduled protest that will take place approximately two hours from the Rochester area. As such, it strikes me as (1) a protest of convenience and (2) nothing more than another opportunity to toot his own self-righteous horn. (I cannot fathom a more despicable violation of a funeral than that.)

In the end, I think that the Fairport High School are right in their assessment that Phelps is simply looking for more intention and their subsequent request that those attending the memorial service ignore him to the best of their abilities. However, I hope that those in attendance at least shoot him a consterning look that communicates the shame he should feel.

Paganism, Religion, Society, Tarot, Witchcraft

Exploring mixed feelings

Leave a comment

While checking out The Wild Hunt today, I ran across Jason’s post where he talks about an attempt to get a fortune telling law overturned in Casper, Wyoming.

Let me first state that I wish Ms. Forest the best of luck. I am a strong believer that such laws should be removed. Having had readings from a handful of professional tarot readers, I believe that they offer an excellent service. And while I might understand the city’s desire to prevent potential con artists from defrauding people through tarot readings and other psychic readings, I do not think that such a blanket prohibitiion is the way to go about it. (Truth be told, it’s my experience that the psychic community does a fairly good job of policing itself.) I also think that such a blanket prohibition singles out Pagans and is unethical until governments also look to address the practice of prophecies and words of knowledge that goes on in many charismatic and Pentecostal churches, churches which often turn around and ask for donations. (I even attended one such church that brought in a “professional prophet” for one service and took a special offering that went to said prophet for her ministry.)

That being said, I do find myself bothered by one part of Ms. Forest’s argument. I’m not at all comfortable with the following statement:

It keeps her from charging for tarot card readings, a key aspect of Wiccan religion, she said.

While I certainly think that tarot readings are a handy tool for Witches and Pagans alike, I am not at all comfortable the suggestion that it qualifies as a “key aspect” of our practice. And I certainly would not consider the kind of readings professional readers offer client for monetary compensation specifically essential. (After all, there is a difference between what is essential or key and even that which is highly beneficial.) To present these readings as so key suggests to me that Ms. Forest and I practice rather different religions. (Of course, this is not entirely surprising, as I don’t consider myself Wiccan.)

Of course, it is entirely possible that Ms. Forest is making this claim simply for the sake of political expediency. And I can certainly see the appeal in such an approach. After all, a claim of religious freedom is probably the best argument against this law. But again, I’m not sure that claiming it as a key practice is entirely necessary to make that argument.

Of course, ultimately, I don’t know whether Ms. Forest made her claim out of sincere belief or in the name of political expediency. I cannot and will not judge her motives. But in either case, the idea just leaves me somewhat uncomfortable, despite the fact that I agree with her goal to get this law removed.

Humor, Movies, Society

Now I’ll have to see the movie

1 Comment

Matt Hill posted the following clip from Loggerheads on his blog. I had to share it here.

The horror!

Of course, what I think is particularly funny is how the husband makes the comment about another neighbor only being “half mad” since only one of the new neighbors is Mexican. It demonstrates how we can easily make fun of another person’s prejudice while being completely oblivious to our own.

Daily Life, Friends, Going Out, Health, Society

I’m not sure I like iPods.

4 Comments

Last night, I ate with the Cheap Dinner Group again. To be honest, I think I’ve gone every week for about a month now. I think it’ll be difficult to drop down to only attending every other Monday night once my father starts staying at my place on Monday nights regularly again. It’s just nice to get out and chat with people that night.

At the end of dinner, just before we left, I got a massive cramp in my left thigh. I wasn’t ready to go yet, so I had fun trying to manage to get the muscles to relax while still sitting there. At one point, I had to stand up briefly. I’m not sure what brought the whole incident on, but I managed to survive it without too much difficulty.

After the dinner, I went for my walk. I walked West on Park Avenue until I reached Alexandar, which I then took to East. From there, I headed back to Berkeley, crossed back to Park from there, and continued back along Park until I got back to my car. The whole trip took me just under 45 minutes, which made it a pretty good walk. It was actually quite pleasant, though I was somewhat disappointed that I didn’t get hit on this time. Oh sure, last week was just a fluke and I shouldn’t realistically expect it to happen all the time anyway. But it still would’ve been nice to get another little ego boost out of the whole thing.

During my walk, I came to my conclusion about iPods. One of the things I noticed is that the vast majority of the other people walking, running, or riding bike along my route had an iPod in them. So as a result, they were lost in their own world of music and endorphins. And while I can certainly see how that might make the process of exercising more enjoyable in some ways (and certainly helps with focus), it also has a negative impact on my other reason for walking.

At the risk of showing just how old fashioned I am, I tend to still see going for a walk through town as a social act. The whole idea brings up rustic images of Main Street in a small town right around sunset. People are all walking along, greeting each other as they pass.

“Hello there, Joe!”

“Hey Sam! How are the kids?”

“Pretty good. Eugene called the other night. Susan had the baby two nights ago. A little girl.”

I’ll be the first to admit that a small city like Rochester probably isn’t going to support that kind of neighborly intimacy. Like I said, I’ll be the first to admit I’m old fashioned (and something of a country bumpkin in some ways). However, you’d think there’d still be room for simple pleasantries.

Wearing an iPod enables a person to isolate themselves from that kind of interaction. “Being off in their own world” becomes pretty literal after a while. And I find that a shame.

Of course, it wouldn’t be so bad if this isolation was just limited to wearing an iPod while exercising. We seem to be pretty insular on many levels and in many areas of our lives. So to me, the problem wasn’t so much that everyone wears iPods while out getting their exercise as that this fact is representative of what seems to me to be a greater problem.

Emotions, Gender and Sexuality, Personal Development, Society

Pre-Acceptance Issues

5 Comments

Since I first began to check out Misty Irons this weekend, I’ve spent a certain amount of time looking over her site and blog. I find her search for truth refreshing and inspiring. Also, I admire her honest desire to create and facilitate dialogue. So when I ran across her three part series on how queers and conservative Christians “talk past each other, I was more than a little fascinated. For this entry, I’m going to focus on the contents of Part 1, where she talks about her initial difficulty in understanding gay pride.

In all reality, both my personal experiences and my observations have led me to conclude that gay pride is a difficult concept for most queers to understand when they’re first coming to terms with their sexual orientation. I remember the first year or two of my own journey where the whole idea made no sense. I remember telling my friends, “I may be able to accept that I’m gay, but I see no point in being proud about it.” I also argued that it made no more sense to be proud of being gay than it did to be proud that I had blue eyes.

Just as Misty had to get a clearer picture of the coming out process and the difficulty and self-hatred that is usually involved in the early stages of the coming out process to understand the subsequent pride, I had to go through that process before I could truly appreciate and even experience that pride for myself. And I’ve noticed the same lack of understanding in the handful of other gay people (mostly men) I’ve known while they’re going through that stage of their life again. So it only makes sense that non-queers would only be able to understand the idea of gay pride only after becoming familiar with the processing leading up to it.

This is where Misty notes that not everyone who is gay talks about this early period of self-hatred. In fact, she goes so far as to suggest that its discussion is practically forbidden in the gay community:

It was a strange thing, then, for me to learn that when someone who is gay makes such an honest admission, they are practically shouted down by fellow gays for ?self-hatred.? The very admission that helped to open up my mind and heart, just enough to encourage me to keep on digging, is considered a heresy in the gay community.

Again, based on my own experiences and observations, I am inclined to agree with her assessment. And like her, I find this state of affairs troubling — both for the reasons she mentioned and my own. To that extent, I think it’s important to consider what motivates this push for silence.

First, I think that we must face the simple truth that we as humans prefer to avoid that which causes us pain — or even makes us uncomfortable — whenever possible. The early stages in the journey to self-acceptance are often extremely painful. Even among those who were raised in “gay-friendly” family environments, there’s often still a certain amount of discomfort in the coming out process. For those of us who were raised in environments that took a much more negative outlook on homosexuality, the process can be downright hellish. I don’t think it’s any that wonder we might be a little hesitant to drudge that back up or put it on display for others.

Of course, this explains why an individual might not want to expose their own past pains. It does not explain why an individual would actively discourage another person from doing so. It does not explain why we are so quick to silence those going through the process and haven’t fully escaped that self-loathing or sense of resignation to move into actual self-acceptance and self-affirmation.

My personal theory on that one is that we silence them because seeing their pain reminds us of our own. Allowing those who are still on the journey to speak too strongly of these things reminds us of that past we’d like to move beyond and forget about. Unfortunately, attempting to silence them robs us of something the experience offers us: an opportunity for deeper, more complete healing of our own pains.

I also believe that in some ways, it’s a well-intentioned attempt at protecting the person who is hasn’t reached the point of self-acceptance. To put as fine a point as possible on it, admitting that one wishes one wasn’t gay is a pretty good invitation to the proponents of ex-gay therapy to offer you their alternative. That’s an alternative that many of us have tried and failed at, sometimes at great personal cost. So the thought of seeing someone else open themselves up to going down that road themselves can cause some pretty strong reactions. And it is not surprising, however unfortunate it may be, that sometimes, the reaction results in strongly discouraging someone from making such statements.

Ultimately, I think this kind of reaction is more harmful than good. Not only does it prevent would-be supporters from fully understanding us, but it also has negative effects on us. Not being able to be open about our experiences and feelings only inhibits us from finding healing and wholeness. Hopefully, this truth is something that we as individuals and a community will come to understand and seek to change the way we handle these issues in the future.

Paganism, Politics, Religion, Religious Discrimination, Society

People in glass houses?

1 Comment

Jason Pitzl-Waters made his readers aware the Maine Christian Civics League’s attempts to shame Kennebec County Democrat Chair Rita Moran for being Pagan. Indeed they seem to be quite outraged by the idea that a Pagan hold’s such a position, and go through a great deal of effort to make it sound like a horrific thing.

Of course, from my perspective, I don’t see how anyone can find it all that horrific. Indeed, my reading of the CCL’s diatribe struck me as an attempt to make something out of nothing. They even go so far as to try to make it sound like Ms. Moran has something to hide by referring to her involvement in “underground” pagan worship circles. Indeed, one wonders at the use of the word “underground” to describe Immanent Grove, which is well advertised.

Stranger still is the fact that they report that Moran supports the “Pagan Preserves Project,” a fundraising program designed to finance a long-term goal of purchasing property in Maine for Pagan religious use. Why this is more scary than Christians raising money for a new church building escapes me.

The CCL goes on to reveal their most disturbing bit of news about Moran, and that’s “the involvement of Moran’s Apple Valley Books store in promoting her pagan-worshipping beliefs to Maine’s children.” This kicker is no doubt intended to conjure images of Moran handing out copies of Satanic literature to impressionable young minds directly. However, CCL’s own clarification ruins that image. Instead we are dealing with a bookstore that is listed on the Pagans’n’Parenting website. The CCL describes this website as “a pagan resource for parents to involve their children in pagan worship.” So instead of an unethical figure who targets children behind their parents’ backs, the CCL is criticizing a woman who simply offers resources to parents already interested in teaching their children about Paganism. I find it hard to imagine how any rational person — even one who disagrees with Pagan theology — can find that particularly alarming, let alone sinister.

Originally, I intended to limit this posting to a mockery of the CCL’s “alarming” revelation. To be honest, I still find it entirely laughable and the sign of truly paranoid people who will try to create alarm out of nothing. Unfortunately, an update to Jason’s original post includes and email from Ms. Moran that has given me pause to reconsider. It would appear that as laughable as I find the CCL’s post, it has become a source of actual concern to Ms. Moran and those who would support her. According to her, even worse and potentially more damaging rumors have begun to circulate about her as a result of this “revelation.”

What I find particular sad are the allegations that the organizers of the Maine CCL have been “investigating” some people who have left comments on their site in support of Ms. Moran in order to post additional information about them. If this is true, the only conceivable reason to do so is to encourage their supporters to harass these people in addition to Ms. Moran herself. Quite frankly, this strikes me as entirely unethical behavior, and certainly not behavior that those who are calling other people’s character into question should be doing.

But in the end, one must wonder. Do those involved with the CCL truly have so little faith in their own religion and the victories it promises that they have to resort to such tactics? Is such behavior the best that the CCL has to offer the world? If so, then the CCL and those associated with it are truly empty and devoid of any real spiritual value.

In which case, one must wonder if their criticisms of Ms. Moran is anything more than simple projection.

UPDATE: My friend Lauren left a comment on the CCL site. They decimated the original post and added the links to her MySpace and StumbleUpon pages. They also included her email address in the comment text. (She provided the email address when filling out the comment form as it is required, but did not expect it to be published.)

The full text of Lauren’s unedited comment (with the exception of the last part, which she had to retype from memory due to last minute editing) is as follows:

I’m sorry, what?

As a conservative Christian, I am offended at the picture you attempt to paint of this woman– quite the fanfare for something hardly scandalous.

It is to my knowledge that her supposed “underground” pagan worship circles are actually well advertised.

It is hardly a crime to have a book store where proceeds go to something you support; that is the beauty of our country, and it is her business what she supports, especially when it is concerning what is done on PRIVATE land.

I applaud her for offering literature to Pagan parents. But that’s not the real issue here; since when do Democrats actually allow parents to raise their own children in whichever way they would like? (I digress!!)

I understand what you are trying to do here, and I understand that you wish to allow Christians safe alternatives through education. I also understand you wish to foster Christian values in all areas of life. I understand because I am a firm believer in Christ and I wish to know what I am partaking in, where my money is going, and what I am supporting, in hopes of honouring God. However, it saddens me that this woman is shown as a monster for doing nothing illegal, and nothing but using her own earned money, private property, and supporting parents who have already chosen to raise their children in Pagan ways. These are things she is doing on her own private time.

I presume you know your organisation wields power. The potential for rumours and character destroying information being passed along is very high and that fact is frightening. Perhaps it would have been more effective to show awareness through her organisation or her bookstore rather than through her personal name, that is if I am right, and it is educating you seek to do.

[There is a passage in Galatians where Paul refers to freedom in Christ (chapter 5), which is the freedom to do what is good, what is right, and what is honourable. It is contrasted to the “old man”– a slavery to sin and to the law (chapter 3). It strikes me as fruitless to fight against slavery when one can instead fight for freedom.]

In Christ,

Lauren

As you can see, they did a significant amount of editing.