I was always an agnostic. I've become an atheist in very recent years only because I can't understand what kind of a God would allow things like the tsunami in Indonesia and Hurricane Katrina, along with various and sundry genocides and hate crimes throughout history, to happen.That's an interesting reason. One answer would be, "an imperfect one". Believers have various answers to the Problem of Evil, but omnibenevolent and omnipotent are really incompatible with the world as we know it.
Really, I'm a humanist - I believe that we are more than the sum of our parts - that we are tied to one another through our very humanity, and that that common thread is in itself a higher power.I like that very much. And the essence of our humanity is our ability to love each other, no?
I like that very much. And the essence of our humanity is our ability to love each other, no?
But I still like Tom Paine's "My country is the world, and my religion is doing good."
I have a lot of time for the Quakers, and if I were a christian, that's the only kind I could be. Very thoughtful people. I like "Walk cheerfully in the world, seeking that of God in every one." The "Inner Light" is the same thing. (And my grandmother used to quote "the Kingdom of Heaven is within you" and conclude that the kingdom of Hell is too: ie we are rewarded and punished for our deeds by what they do to our selves.)
But in the US, a branch of the Quakers has gone back to conservative christianity, the branch with churches, ordained ministers and set liturgy. That's the branch Nixon belonged to. The branch with meeting houses, every member a minister and silent Meetings for Worship until someone is moved to speak, is the branch I think of as Quaker.
I clicked pagan because that seems to be the closest. When I'm hiking in the hills or mountains that's when I feel what apparently I was supposed to feel going to church growing up, and never did - peace and joy, connectedness, being in the presence of something greater than myself.
And DEL, I've been a feminist from day one too. Which is why religions in general make me run away (helter skelter style), because none is really cool with women.
Buddhism apart, but it's more a philosophical sort of spirituality than religion. Or else I don't know enough about it yet.
I had no religious upbringing whatsoever, for which I am now thankful. Oh, except I was baptized because everyone else in the family is religious (catholic), and my parents gave in to that.
I have a real problem with organised churches or cults, and a problem with the idea of there being a god. I have always been an atheist, agnostic at best sometimes, but I picked "Buddhist" because I wanted to say which sort of spirituality I'd be closest to.
She thought the B'hai B'hai were pretty good, but apparently they were only pro-women on paper and not in actual practice.
Isabelle,
I read a nasty quote from the Buddha about women once, but I couldn't trace the source, so I can't say if Buddhism is basically good for women or not.
A friend of mine is very feminist as well, brought up in a Catholic school and she shopped around for a religion. She thought the B'hai B'hai were pretty good, but apparently they were only pro-women on paper and not in actual practice.
wow, isabelle. we are spiritually identical, it seems.
i identify myself as agnostic, but usually lean towards atheist. but i do identify with many buddhist ideals, and respect them, and appreciate them, but would never convert or consider practicing rituals.
That's right littledarlin, we seem to be identical in several ways (music too). I would never practise rituals either, and I cannot imagine myself converting to anything, religion-wise. I also agree that seeing only males as Buddhist monks was a bad sign, but all I got interested in was the Buddhist outlook on life, NOT the rituals. Now it seems even the Buddha didn't think too high of women either. I think I'll just keep worshipping Brokeback Mountain.
(And I still haven't worked out how to quote/unquote!).
Littledarlin, if on top of all the rest you are a feminist, then... :-* :-* ;D
To tell the truth, I was expecting to come across something nasty about women from Buddhism, sooner or later! I'll try to research that, or if you find it, please let me know.
Thanks Del. It's the same story over and over again, isn't it? *SIGH*
And if the monks have the obligation to remain celibate (I wasn't 100% sure about that), ok, then that's me. Bye bye Buddhism. Not that I thought of becoming one for real real, really!
And if the monks have the obligation to remain celibate (I wasn't 100% sure about that), ok, then that's me. Bye bye Buddhism.
Yeah, pathetic isn't it? I don't suggest you read St. Augustine's writings on women on a full stomach lest you lose it.
I HAVE, I HAVE!! Hor-ri-ble! Yes, invented by men indeed (sorry you guys who are not like them, talking to you Andrew :-*)
isn't it grand the way society always blames women? denying women equality because they might tempt men, just their very presence, not counting their actions. as if women can't be tempted? as if it is expected of men to not be able to control their urges? please.
Golda jumped in with a not-so-fast. Hey, it wasn't women who were doing the mugging. If there was going to be a curfew, it should be for the men!
Well of course, the idea of a curfew then dropped like a lead balloon. What? Men restrict their movement in society? Unthinkable! ::)
I can't believe that 20-30 years later, we still have this kind of opinion, from GIRLS! But then, at least in France, I think the way women are considered in society is going backwards, not forward. And I am also sorry to say that it is due to the growing presence of Islam here, coupled with a surge of the hard nut Catholics who want to show they are there too and won't leave all the space to the Muslims![/color]
I can't believe that 20-30 years later, we still have this kind of opinion, from GIRLS! But then, at least in France, I think the way women are considered in society is going backwards, not forward. And I am also sorry to say that it is due to the growing presence of Islam here, coupled with a surge of the hard nut Catholics who want to show they are there too and won't leave all the space to the Muslims![/color]
Hi girls, do you mind if I stuck my nose in your conversation? Being male after all. I actually vote for women to take over the world. I'm sick of the mess that men have made of things and I think they've had their turn in the driver's seat. Basically, I think the vast majority of men are misogynistic on one level or another, and it reflects in all fields of life. It's not that women aren't allowed in religious hierarchy because they may tempt the men, it's because men see them as inferior. Since when did it become the men's prerogative to think that? And why do women let them? There are more women on the planet then men, so how is it that men dominate?
Ok, before you have to ask, I have this view because I was mostly raised by my mother and three sisters, and between them if there was any chauvinism in me it was beaten out at an early age. Even though I'm gay and prefer the company of men in all things sexual, for everything else in life give me a woman! My best friend is a woman and I spend most of my time with them in all things spiritual and social - alas this also probably why I don't get much sex. <sigh>
How is it you turn out so well and Tom Cruise turn out so controllling? Cruise, too, was raised by his mother and sisters and talks about having such 'great resepct' for them. Then he controls Katie into the ground.
I always liked the amazon woman thing: women in charge (I'd sit at your feet adoringly) and all the straight males can do all the work that doesn't require decision making.
I've been interested in Buddism for a little while, because from what I've heard (I haven't looked into it that much yet) it does agree with a lot of the things I believe in (like Isabelle said, lack of judgement). A friend of mine wants me to go on a buddist retreat with him and I'm excited about it.I have time for Buddhism, but like all of these, it can be misused. I knew a couple of Buddhists who didn't seem to care for people much. I think they were misapplying the doctrine of non-attachment. To me, non-attachement means not to be selfishly attached to material possessions (becasue all things decay, die, fade away - or get pinched), but that doesn't rule out healhty concern for others.
I will however, probably, always believe in God (or a God). There has to be something there. And I am often surprised by the beauty of faith.
I have time for Buddhism, but like all of these, it can be misused. I knew a couple of Buddhists who didn't seem to care for people much. I think they were misapplying the doctrine of non-attachment. To me, non-attachement means not to be selfishly attached to material possessions (becasue all things decay, die, fade away - or get pinched), but that doesn't rule out healhty concern for others.
My man has just been reading the Bhagavad-Gita, and I can never come to terms with its justification for warfare.
I can't believe that 20-30 years later, we still have this kind of opinion, from GIRLS! But then, at least in France, I think the way women are considered in society is going backwards, not forward. And I am also sorry to say that it is due to the growing presence of Islam here, coupled with a surge of the hard nut Catholics who want to show they are there too and won't leave all the space to the Muslims![/color]
It's not that women aren't allowed in religious hierarchy because they may tempt the men, it's because men see them as inferior. Since when did it become the men's prerogative to think that?
And why do women let them? There are more women on the planet then men, so how is it that men dominate?
Mental wiring. Men think they're dominating. Women think we're cooperating.
Hey, I thought this might be the right place for it.
Now BEAR with me if this is totally KNOWN and has been since the birth of the human race round your end! It is not known here (an American friend gave me this):
Religious views of life:
Taoism: Shit happens
Confucianism: Confucius says, shit happens
Buddhism: If shit happens, it isn't really shit
Zen: What is the sound of shit happening?
Hinduism: This shit happened before
Islam: If shit happens, it is the will of Allah
Protestantism: Let shit happen to someone else
Catholicism: If shit happens, you deserve it
Judaïsm: Why does this shit always happen to us?
Atheism: I don't believe this shit
Agnosticism: Is this shit for real?
She thought the B'hai B'hai were pretty good, but apparently they were only pro-women on paper and not in actual practice.
This all gave me a good chuckle for my Thursday morning! :laugh:Hey, I thought this might be the right place for it.
Now BEAR with me if this is totally KNOWN and has been since the birth of the human race round your end! It is not known here (an American friend gave me this):
Religious views of life:
Taoism: Shit happens
Confucianism: Confucius says, shit happens
Buddhism: If shit happens, it isn't really shit
Zen: What is the sound of shit happening?
Hinduism: This shit happened before
Islam: If shit happens, it is the will of Allah
Protestantism: Let shit happen to someone else
Catholicism: If shit happens, you deserve it
Judaïsm: Why does this shit always happen to us?
Atheism: I don't believe this shit
Agnosticism: Is this shit for real?
My friend has a shirt with those on, but it has a few more that I can't remember. I just remember the last one is:
Rastafarian: Let's smoke this shit!
But now I just think that with all that goes on in the world that's so hateful and ugly and tragic, if there is a God, he is not only imperfect but at best indifferent and at worst wrathful. I think it's just that I don't want to live in a world made by an indifferent or wrathful God so much that I'd rather believe there isn't one. That it really is all random. But I find peace in that - because when something extraordinarily beautiful comes out of randomness, that is the miracle. I don't need a God to make that happen.
You know what, I do believe that "it really is all random" and I still believe in God. I mean, the only way for God to NOT "allow" crime, murder, rape, hurricane Katrina, etc to happen would mean that God would have to control us like puppets. I think we have free will, and I think nature has free will, and that's gives the world an element of chaos and randomness that is sometimes scary. Just my two cents. Then again, I'm just an ignorant kid and I have plenty of time for my opinions and beliefs to change, but that's what I think at the moment.
So who am I to say that one thing is more probable and another isn't? No one has unequivocal proof either way, after all.
So who am I to say that one thing is more probable and another isn't? No one has unequivocal proof either way, after all.
OK, try this one then (again, I hope it's not completely known and has been since the onst of humanity round your end, and I thought this was the right place for it ::)):
It's official: Jesus was Irish
* He had 12 drinking friends
* He trained as a carpenter to work on the buildings
* He was unemployed
* He lived with his mother till he was 33
* He thought his mother was a virgin
* His mother thought he was God
Found this in Ireland. So it's official: The Irish have humour.
I was raised Baptist, and although Baptists have many distinctions; some are more liberal, while others belong to specific associations; for example, American Baptist, etc., all are not kind toward gays. I found the worst to be the fundamentalist/independent sect which take the Bible literally (when it suits them). I became so consumed by guilt, and later disgust, that I got out while I could still run. Since then, my spiritual life is, sadly, non-existent. Are they are denominations that welcome gays? Thanks.
Honey, I don't think you're the least bit ignorant (I know that's not quite what you meant, but humor me :)). The fact that you're posting here speaks volumes for your lack of ignorance, actually. And I don't think what I believe is the only possibility and that everyone else is wrong. Actually one of my mantras is that anything is possible. So who am I to say that one thing is more probable and another isn't? No one has unequivocal proof either way, after all.
Why does it have to be true in order for the lessons to work?
Back in my religious ed days in high-school, the best lesson I remember came from one of the science teachers who said: "as rational beings we know that we came from our parents, they from theirs, and so on. We talk about evolution as the mechanism that leads to our humanity, and the big bang being the beginning of the universe. What we find difficult to talk about however is what created the big bang. That unknown, he said, is God". Now to a 15 year old was a real wow experience, and I've always been amazed that so many see science and spirituality as opposite ends of the spectrum when in my mind they are really one and the same. A famous quote by Albert Einstein was: "There are two kinds of people in the world. Those that do not believe in miracles and those that believe everything is a miracle".
"Men think epilepsy divine, merely because they do not understand it. But if they called everything divine which they do not understand, why, there would be no end of divine things."
-- Hippocrates
Now the two groups that just amaze the hell out of me (pun intended) are the fundamentalist Christians and the splinter group of "intelligent designers". The problem with these groups is they feel the need to believe that the Christian Bible is word-for-word literal and true. When I went to Sunday school it was always talked about the Bible as a book of parables to be used as lessons for life. So when did it become true exactly, and why does it have to be true in order for the lessons to work? This to me is the fundamental problem (another pun) with religions generally, and why religion is so inaccessible to most people. So they have a book that says God hates me because I'm gay? Well gee, I thought you told me that God made me in his image? Make up your mind. Strangely, I don't feel like God hates me. I wonder what's in it for these people to say that he does?
Ennis rode easy, sleeping with his eyes open, but the hours he was away from the sheep stretched out and out. Jack pulled a squalling burr out of the harmonica, flattened a little from a fall off the skittish bay mare, and Ennis had a good raspy voice; a few nights they mangled their way through some songs. Ennis knew the salty words to "Strawberry Roan." Jack tried a Carl Perkins song, bawling "what I say-ay-ay," but he favored a sad hymn, "Water-Walking Jesus," learned from his mother who believed in the Pentecost, that he sang at dirge slowness, setting off distant coyote yips.
Annie Proulx does not have Jack Twist even discuss "The Pentecost" in her original story. Unlike what is said in the movie, and using my own experiences here and if he were an actual person, Jack Twist more than likely told Ennis Del Mar what the Pentecost was if his mother was actually Pentecostal, even if his father did not attend church regularly.
Anni Many of those who attended a Free Holiness Church in rural Oklahoma believed that one only had to go to school as required by the law which said school attendance until age 16. Some of them even thought the King James Version of the Bible was the only one God authorized for Christians to read.
QuoteAnni Many of those who attended a Free Holiness Church in rural Oklahoma believed that one only had to go to school as required by the law which said school attendance until age 16. Some of them even thought the King James Version of the Bible was the only one God authorized for Christians to read.
The Amish also do not believe in higher education. Their children are only educated to the age of what is required by law.
Beautiful posts, everyone. Chris, I'm in that group of people who believes everything is a miracle.
I know that I made this a little long here. Although I am Pentecostal by experience and my basic doctrinal beliefs are very much like the Assemblies of God's "16 Fundamental Truths," and I grew up attending regular church services and special services, I prefer to say that "I was raised AT home and not in a church." The only people that I have known who were raised in a church were those who actually lived in one while growing up. My Parents were Pentecostal by experience, too. But, they did not demand that their children believe just like them. They taught us to make our own choices and believe according to what we felt the Holy Spirit wanted us to believe.
You ask for a profession of faith?
My heart encompasses many forms...
The Amish also do not believe in higher education. Their children are only educated to the age of what is required by law.I have a lovely book about the fundies by a gay man with an Amish background. In the last chapter he goes back to them and finds they are much more tolerant than the Fallwell crowd. It's at home and I'm at my man's place, but I'll post its details tomorrow.
I know about the Amish because we have them in Oklahoma. Mixed among the Amish are people who are Mennonites who have a similar doctrine but, Mennonites are not anti-education. I went to college with Mennoites whom I had known in grade school, too.
I have a lovely book about the fundies by a gay man with an Amish background. In the last chapter he goes back to them and finds they are much more tolerant than the Fallwell crowd. It's at home and I'm at my man's place, but I'll post its details tomorrow.
Sorry, I forgot I'd promised this. It's "God's Bullies" by Perry Deane Young, 1982, Holt, Reinhart and Winston, NY, ISBN 0-03-059206-4 http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0030597064/qid=1148009141/sr=1-1/ref=sr_1_1/104-8302016-5742356?s=books&v=glance&n=283155 (http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0030597064/qid=1148009141/sr=1-1/ref=sr_1_1/104-8302016-5742356?s=books&v=glance&n=283155) at Amazon.com.
It has an interesting section in the middle about Terry Dolan, head of the National Conservative Political Action Committee - first about Young trying to pin him down on homosexuality, then a second account by a (named) man who had sex with him.
(http://img358.imageshack.us/img358/1301/bunniesareevilbykanemo1yk.gif)
(http://img358.imageshack.us/img358/1301/bunniesareevilbykanemo1yk.gif)
Yes Vick please tell us; I've been trying to save it and can't. I only get one pic.It's an animated gif (gif87). If you open it using Internet Explorer, it should animate, but if you use most still imaging software it won't. I played with them quite a lot a few years ago. When I can work out how to make them appear in the message field (and hence work) I'll post some.
I give up. How's it done? Does it involve the [ img ] and [ /img ] markers?
What you do is right-click on the image, select "Properties," copy the URL (address) in the box that displays from beginning to end (highlight it, then right-click, then click "Copy"), then paste (right-click and click "Paste) it into the message text of your post between [ img ] and [ /img ] minus the spaces inside the brackets.So it has to be up on the WWeb somewhere? What if it's in my computer? Must I make it an attachment at the end of my message?
So it has to be up on the WWeb somewhere? What if it's in my computer? Must I make it an attachment at the end of my message?
Hey henrypie, when I somehow find myself in some sort of communion-celebrating church, which is rare, I am happy to walk up there with my little hands folded just so and receive it. It's just so communal. Just because I don't believe that it's somebody's body and blood, I think it's still okay for me to do.
(And really, if people really believe it IS the body and blood of Christ, why the hell are they putting it in their mouths and swallowing it? Ugh.)
That's transubstantiate, dela, not transmogrify. Hee hee.
Oh, I don't. Communion is holy, a sacrament and supposed to mean something very deeply spiritual - asking the god for forgiveness, actually experiencing a miracle inside your body, washing away of sin, etc.I used to take communion at our gay services, understanding that it was communion with everyone there and with those we were thinking of. Earlier, when I felt closer to christianity, I actually took communion (twice) according to the rite of the Church of South India, relying heavily on the line "We are the body of Christ".
If I don't worship or honor their god, I can't bring myself to participate so I just sit it out.
It transmorgrifies or whatever inside their bodies. Yeah, the literal idea of what's supposed to happen is yucky. As a young Catholic relative of mine said, "Yeah I take the Lord Jesus into my body. But I poop him out, too."My mother gave up Prebyterianism when she was told about communion. She just found the idea of eating Jesus - no matter how symbolically - utterly repugnant. (Her father had also had his first depressive breakdown, and therefore she decided, there was no god. It's 90 years ago now and she's dead 20 years, so I guess it can be told.)
I don't have a religion, but since everyone needs an integrated view of existence to guide them, I define my worldview as "naturalistic humanism." For me, human beings should be the basis of ethical considerations.
Very nicely said. I feel the same way.
I'm a Catholic - borned, raised and confirmed. However ... I'm also pro-choice, believe VERY strongly in gay marriage, and am a hard core liberal democrat. Apparently I don't fit much of the "catholic" label. I do attend mass occassionally - mostly because I find it a peaceful hour of my life where I feel fully relaxed ... unless they are talking about money or marriage during the homily *lol* In my opinion people just need to find what works for them - churches and religions aren't for everyone and that is fine by me ... but it's what works for me and so I let it be.
Not picking on Amber or anything, but this post raised a question. For those who still consider themselves Catholic/Jewish/Luthern or whatever but have radically differing views of how things are and should be, how do you reconcile your worldview as it is with your religion's dogma on how it's supposed to be?
Some religions have very strict rules about what it means to be a member (Muslim/Catholic etc) so to my mind, if my ideas differ from what my religion says they must be, I don't consider myself 'one of them'. That's why I left Christianity behind. I couldn't rightly call myself one if I no longer 'followed the member rules' so to speak.
Not picking on Amber or anything, but this post raised a question. For those who still consider themselves Catholic/Jewish/Luthern or whatever but have radically differing views of how things are and should be, how do you reconcile your worldview as it is with your religion's dogma on how it's supposed to be?
Some religions have very strict rules about what it means to be a member (Muslim/Catholic etc) so to my mind, if my ideas differ from what my religion says they must be, I don't consider myself 'one of them'. That's why I left Christianity behind. I couldn't rightly call myself one if I no longer 'followed the member rules' so to speak.
Victoria, I have heard many good things about the Episcopal/Anglican church. If I was ever to ever to attend church again, the Episcopal Church would probably be the church I would attend. For two reasons:
1. It is very close to the Catholic church (from what I understand). I have attended some Anglican Masses before and they are very close to the liturgical structure of the Catholic church.
2. They are more accepting of gay people than my religion (the Roman Catholic Church) is.
However...
It seems that nearly (if not all) Christian religions teach of a vengeful God. A judgemental God. My God is not like this. My God is a God of Love. My God tells me in my heart that it is good to love others and accept others. My God says that it is not only okay, but good to love another human being.. no matter who he or she is. My God teaches me that love is never wrong. My God tells me that I am a good person, and He loves me because He created me. My God always loves me, and He always encourages me to try to be a better person. My God believes in me... and He believes in you.
Yes, I believe in Hell. But I don't believe a person goes there for loving another person. People go to Hell because THEY want to. They go there because they do not love God. They CHOOSE to go there. They NEVER go to Hell because of love. It is unfortunate Christianity disagrees with my God and what He speaks to me in my heart each and every day. My God loves His Creation, and He believes in them.... He believes in us. He believes in us all. And He will NEVER give up on us.
I wish Christians would only understand and accept this. And I cannot attend a church that tells me otherwise.
However...
It seems that nearly (if not all) Christian religions teach of a vengeful God. A judgemental God. My God is not like this. My God is a God of Love. My God tells me in my heart that it is good to love others and accept others. My God says that it is not only okay, but good to love another human being.. no matter who he or she is. My God teaches me that love is never wrong. My God tells me that I am a good person, and He loves me because He created me. My God always loves me, and He always encourages me to try to be a better person. My God believes in me... and He believes in you.
Yes, I believe in Hell. But I don't believe a person goes there for loving another person. People go to Hell because THEY want to. They go there because they do not love God. They CHOOSE to go there. They NEVER go to Hell because of love. It is unfortunate Christianity disagrees with my God and what He speaks to me in my heart each and every day. My God loves His Creation, and He believes in them.... He believes in us. He believes in us all. And He will NEVER give up on us.
I wish Christians would only understand and accept this. And I cannot attend a church that tells me otherwise.
Does anyone know where I can buy Tincture of Gold for an alchemy ritual I'm performing...?
Or if not Tincture of Gold, where I can buy pure gold by the gram?
Does anyone know where I can buy Tincture of Gold for an alchemy ritual I'm performing...?
Or if not Tincture of Gold, where I can buy pure gold by the gram?
Well it was easy enough to procure the gold.... $20.00 on Ebay will get you at least a few grams of unrefined 23K gold in flake form.
Now to procure the rest of what I need for the Tincture of the Sun: that's going to be significantly more difficult. This is hilarious. You would think the gold would be the most expensive part. To get the rest of what I would need to make the tincture will cost me about $350.00... :(
- Spirit of Salt (Hydrochloric Acid) $19.00
- Spirit of Nitre (Nitric Acid) $17.00
- Ether (Purified Ether (C4H10O) $47.00
- Water of Life / Spirit of Wine (Concentrated Aqueous Ethanol 200 proof) $28.00
- Glass Syringe $38.00
- Glassware Kit $189.95
Of course, I don't know what I'm complaining about... Seeing the film 25 times in the theatre, buying two DVDs, the poster, the book, the ~Unmentionable Awards~ consideration book, has cost me about $400.00 total, but thats a rough estimate.... and I guess another $100.00 for various books, notebooks, pens, paints, pigments, for my diligant study of personal transformation, and well I did spend about $200.00 on a computer so I could work on my book in privacy.... Wow, this is really adding up. This is the most expensive thing that's ever happened to me. :laugh: I guess you get out of it what you put into it though, so its all good.
Well it was easy enough to procure the gold.... $20.00 on Ebay will get you at least a few grams of unrefined 23K gold in flake form.
Now to procure the rest of what I need for the Tincture of the Sun: that's going to be significantly more difficult. This is hilarious. You would think the gold would be the most expensive part. To get the rest of what I would need to make the tincture will cost me about $350.00... :(
- Spirit of Salt (Hydrochloric Acid) $19.00
- Spirit of Nitre (Nitric Acid) $17.00
- Ether (Purified Ether (C4H10O) $47.00
- Water of Life / Spirit of Wine (Concentrated Aqueous Ethanol 200 proof) $28.00
- Glass Syringe $38.00
- Glassware Kit $189.95
Of course, I don't know what I'm complaining about... Seeing the film 25 times in the theatre, buying two DVDs, the poster, the book, the ~Unmentionable Awards~ consideration book, has cost me about $400.00 total, but thats a rough estimate.... and I guess another $100.00 for various books, notebooks, pens, paints, pigments, for my diligant study of personal transformation, and well I did spend about $200.00 on a computer so I could work on my book in privacy.... Wow, this is really adding up. This is the most expensive thing that's ever happened to me. :laugh: I guess you get out of it what you put into it though, so its all good.
CM?
Well, I might as well go ahead and say this. When I first joined Bettermost I wasn't sure how people would react to it, but it appears there are some on this forum who study the Old Religions.
Up until about 10 years ago, I was very much involved in the Occult/Pagan religions. I studied Wicca for years.
I most closely identify these days with the liberal Friends (Quakers) and attend a meeting once in awhile because it's a long drive for me. I like them because they focus on the individual's relationship with spirit, there is no dogma, very little hierarchy, and they are tolerant and accepting of people in all their infinite varieties. They also have a very strong record of promoting social justice, which is extremely important to me.
Here's some info to illustrate...Quakers have a testimony called the Truth testimony. This is where we get the 'I swear or affirm...' when taking an oath. Quakers maintain that because they are always called upon to tell the truth, there should not be a special version of truth for official occasions like testifying in court. During the slavery period, Quakers were very active in the Underground Railroad. When slave-hunters would come searching, a Quaker would state, 'There are no slaves here,' which is truth to the Quaker, because in their belief system, no man could be enslaved. From the earliest days of the Quaker movement, women have held roles equal in the church as men. And many Quakers were instrumental in working for women's suffrage in the U.S. Last but not least, most liberal Quaker congregations welcome gays and lesbians and will perform union ceremonies.
-Lynne