?

Log in

[icon] To Wiccans_Unite - Wiccans Untie!!
View:Recent Entries.
View:Archive.
View:Friends.
View:Profile.

Security:
Subject:To Wiccans_Unite
Time:07:36 pm
You know if you paid any real attention to this group you would see we have more important things to do then send anyone to you for "fun".

We love pointing out your hypocrisy of "Tolerant Wiccans and Pagans" yet you ban anyone who may be a friend or just watching this community.

You are nothing but spoiled little children who do not seem to understand the stupidity in which you have embroiled yourselves. One has to wonder what a community that is open to all pagans and wiccans truly is like if they ban certain pagans and wiccans for being friends with certain people or expressing opinions about certain things.

If you truly wanted to learn you would not be banning people.

I pity you for you will gain no knowledge but false knowledge, which will only get you hurt.

sad.
comments: Leave a comment Previous Entry Share Next Entry


enyo
Link:(Link)
Time:2005-02-08 06:43 pm (UTC)
I have a problem with that as well. I'm not for banning people or for closed discussions. I think deleting posts and manipulating converstation is just as wrong and being rude and disrespectful to the point of driving people to distraction.

Bingo. Behold, that is one of the main problems that I have with wiccans_unite. There's not much unity when you're banning people left, right, and center.

The terminology implies something about what it is speaking about. Terminology has alot to do with how people are viewed.

You're right. It does. And, to me, when you say "Wicca is whatever you want it to be", and your response to disagreement is to stick your fingers in your ears and yell "LA LA LA, I'm not listening!" or to throw a tantrum, *that's* when you earn the term "fluffybunny".

If one were to say that solitary Wicca is not a valid path and apply a silly term like "neo-wicca" to it- it degrades the practice while exhalting the only-slightly-older by historical standerds BTW way.

You know, I don't think I've *ever* heard someone say that solitary Wicca is not a valid path. I *have* heard people say that it's not a valid term. And you know what? I agree with them. Why I am Not a Wiccan, an essay that I wrote a few years back, explains this perfectly.

I do welcome your comments about it.

I'd like to be able to debate without being belittled.

I love debate. I don't think that anyone here has belittled *you* personally for your own particular set of beliefs.

Flamewars are not what I'm after- knowledge is.

Don't underestimate the power of a good flame war. Flame wars *do* offer knowledge, particularly if the combatants are firm believers in citing sources and differentiating between opinion/fact. I'm proud to say that I actually stripped the fur off of a few bunnies in a good flame war, and they've become fully functioning non-fluffy pagans because of that.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)


lkrobinson
Link:(Link)
Time:2005-02-08 08:03 pm (UTC)
Haha :) I don't think anyone here has attacked me personally...since no one knows me personally. I enjoyed your essay. I can agree that it's a valid argument. Defining Wicca as "whatever you want" is demeaning to it. The thing is if I were defining Wicca the emphasis would be placed on the fact that it is a religion. There are religions that have many many sects and many of those sects say one or all of the other sects are invalid. Looking at it from an unbias (well as much as possible...which isn't very possible...I'm trying to look at it as I looked at other religions in school) perspective the original form by Gardner has branched off. Other traditions have been created and the path of solitary has also been created. I believe that if you are a Wiccan you practice certain rituals, and hold certain morals and beliefs. You have traditions that are basic and would allow you to participate in those same rituals held by most other Wiccans no matter their traditon. The basic structure must be the same for it to all be Wiccan- or else it's another form of ritual, worship or magic.

Religions change. It's life and no matter how many bunnies you strip- there will be more. They will keep coming especially with authors like the Raven-doggy lady out there.

Buddhist, Christians- there are many who would call one sect or another false. It doesn't matter to the sect being called false. I'd just rather not have to avoid contact with people from other sects when I would think that we would have enough in common to be able to get along.

I also have a problem buying into the whole mystery and initiatory tradition only idea because Gardner himself published. That doesn't seem very secret to me. He also borrowed from so many people. See here is where it gets to the place I'm so tired of going. The origin of the religion. What exactly happened, as opposed to the myths spawned? I'd love to know- but you know what? I'm satisfied no knowing. I don't worship Gardner I worship my gods. I may use the same rituals, but it doesn't mean I must agree with every political rule involved. If that were true there would be far less Christians since they don't listen to the Pope. All those invalid sects shouldn't call themselves Christians because Christians must be baptised by a priest who received Holy Orders which can be traced back to Peter and the Apostles. That's initiation- even for the non-clergy members. Who would force that issue? Who would tell them to come up with another name? It is the original Christians, now "Catholic", who had to specify themselves just as those belonging to traditions in Wicca name themselves accordingly. It's just how language works, for better or worse I don't believe us discussing it will change it. (Wouldn't that be something- a handful of people on lj change the world!)
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)

[icon] To Wiccans_Unite - Wiccans Untie!!
View:Recent Entries.
View:Archive.
View:Friends.
View:Profile.