And while I am sure you would agree that you don’t officially speak for or represent the LDS Church, I must say that to share the idea that Mormons “believe that our god worships a god” is a bit of a stretch. Where did you find this doctrine? I am a convert to the church, nearly 15 years now, and am not familiar with this being taught. Yes, we know of the couplet of Lorenzo Snow, originally recorded in 1840, but official church doctrine it is not.

You may want to read this:
http://beta-newsroom.lds.org/article/approaching-mormon-doctrine

Too many things in the historical record of the church that were said off-hand or unofficially have been construed as church doctrine, when such permission to do so was never granted. If we took for doctrine everything that came out of the mouth of an Apostle or even a Prophet, we would be in quite a mess.

D&C 68:4 –
“And whatsoever they shall speak when moved upon by the Holy Ghost shall be scripture, shall be the will of the Lord, shall be the mind of the Lord, shall be the word of the Lord, shall be the voice of the Lord, and the power of God unto salvation.”

When are a prophet’s words doctrine? “[W]hen moved upon by the Holy Ghost.” Prophets speak as men many times, and we can’t forget that.

“When I say point by point I mean not to deal with a thousand issues simultaneously coz that makes the topic very difficult to handle.”

Really? I find it quite easy to reply point by point to everything you or another have said. Perhaps the monoculturalist mind is not as practiced as I have heard. Or perhaps it has nothing to do with the monoculture mind and everything to do with your mind.

“It is only the sheer amount of ur writing that prevented replies to each and every word NOT because I’m not used to it.”

So you’re used to my amount of writing, but my amount of writing prevented replies?

“AND Islam doesn’t kill innocent people although ‘innocent’ here doesn’t necessarily follow your dreamy definition.”

You contradict yourself here or you are disengenuous. Let’s suppose Islam commands the death of persons (according to you it does). One must then conclude whether those persons are innocent or not, to know whether Islam commands the death of innocents. If they are innocent, then indeed Islam commands the death of innocents.

This presents a quandary if the persons whose deaths are being commanded have done no harm to anyone else, because this is really the only sane basis for defining innocents. We all remember that according to you (and according to you according to Islam) “innocent” doesn’t fit my “dreamy definition” of someone who is causing no harm to another. So really all one has to do is change the definition of innocent to mean “someone who does exactly what we decide” and wammo bammo, Islam doesn’t kill innocent people.

I said “Is it so difficult to say “I disagree with certain lifestyles but Islam teaches that no one who is not harming another, should ever be harmed, even if that someone is practicing such things as polytheism. homosexuality, lesbianism, transexuality and other things we find wrong…”?”

Now notice, all I am asking is whether we can agree that people who are not hurting others, should not be harmed. Can a monoculturalist JUST SAY THAT? Now, if they cannot say that, if they cannot say that a lesbian, homosexual man, pansexual, transexual or others SHOULD NOT BE MURDERED simply for their state of being, tell me, what kind of person is that person?

Bashar replied: “Nothing is difficult to say. What is difficult is to falsely modify definitions of concepts so that they suite one’s agenda. If I say that I’ll be lying and bending Islam”

So you support the death of people who are harming no one. Alright. Thanks for proving me right.

“to suite your guesswork life philosophy.”

It’s not guesswork that people who are harming no one, do not deserve to be treated with violence. It’s called decency.

“Consequently I’d become like you. I’d rather evaporate first.”

Like me in not wating to see people treated with violence simply for being different. You really detest us that much that you’d not like to spend the rest of your life not wishing violence on another?

I said: “How I know number 2 is likewise obvious. The things your “almighty” gods desire are exactly identical to petty humans. An Almighty god would have no use of such petty human concerns. But controlling humans certainly would.”

Bashar replied: “No it is NOT obvious.”

You’re right it’s not obvious. To anyone that would like to see the deaths of innocent persons, it’s not obvious that an almighty would have no need for the deaths of innocent persons.

“Firstly this is not a proof.”

Right again. That takes a thinking mind. Anyone that supports the deaths of innocents is lacking a thinking mind in crticial, important areas, no matter how smart they are otherwise.

“It is merely another one of your baseless personal conclusions.”

Actually it has historical precedence. Considering that the makeup of gods worldwide has mimicked exactly the culture wherein the god was expounded. That is people tend to choose out of the many Gods and Goddesses that exist, those that fit their culture most. Violent societies tend to choose violent gods. The few gentle societies that exist tend to choose gentle gods (and tend to have abundant resources). This propensity is so prevalent that atheists would say wherein the god was created rather than wherein the god was expounded. Being a theist, I disagree with them. In any case, nope, not baseless at all.

“Generalizing that similarity between the God and petty humans is indicative of falsehood is total nonsense.”

It is indicative of historic fact.

“Many humans have goodness in them and the Almighty God has the full and complete goodness.”

I agree that many humans have goodness in them. Which almighty are you speaking of out of the many that exist? I think your example proves otherwise though. An Almighty that demands the death of persons who are not harming others, doesnot have the full and complete goodness. Such an Almighty only CLAIMS to have goodness.

“The actions of human do not necessarily have to contradict God’s will.”

Actions like murdering people simply for being different, even though they are harming no one?

“Defining what doesn’t suite you taste as “petty human concerns” is the problem here.”

Murdering people for not harming others doesn’t suit my taste. Imagine that. And this is seen as a problem. Very telling.

“Secondly, did you get this conclusion from? (that The God would have no use of such petty human concerns.). It’s just a piece of your endless guesswork.”

Nope. It is a very logical conclusion based on the sheer defintion of an Almighty.

I stated: “If there is a god so wicked as to torture people for merely not believing in her, then that god’s demands are unrighteous and her promises of paradise are lies. Her words are not to be trusted anymore than the words of any one else who is willing to torture another.”

Bashar replied:

“Again another baseless and unproven claim.”

Actually it is a very logical claim. Torture is immoral. Claiming otherwise is, immoral. Even if the one claiming is one of the many Almighty Gods.

“Man, can’t you find a script, a quote from ANY sacred or holy book.”

Again the monoculturalist is trying to push a polyculturalist into zir framework. See, we polyculturalists have something called a CONSCIENCE. We are able to develop our conscience through experience, knowledge, consideration, thinking, observing, wondering and so forth. We can determine merely by looking at something that it is, you know, HARMFUL to another. Neither I, nor any other polyculturalist needs a book to tell us that FORCING INTENSE PAIN on a person (torture), is wrong.

In fact it is a sad fact that too many holy books allow, command and celebrate violence, including torture. Care to quote from your holy book such places? It would be beneficial for the readers to know where The Noble Quran stands on the issue of murder and torture of persons who are not harming others.

“Anything that might help in starting an investigation into this statement. Something that might help me believe that this is a real creed and not another false speculation of yours.”

Had I such books you would not listen to them. But since you keep missing it, I will tell you again, I AM PAGAN. We have no creed, no dogma, no central authority, no scripture, no one to tell us we have to do this or that or the other. We have instead PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY. We cannot just lazily murder someone like a monoculturalist and then claim “the devil made me do it…” er I mean “god made me do it.” We are bound by the confines of human decency, not the pages of some book that commands violence. Anything that commands violence is to be repudiated.

“If you insist on baseless assertions your ‘words are not to be trusted anymore’.”

When did you trust my words? Please, you are an adult? Act like one. Don’t pretend that suddenly you are taking something away from me that you had never granted in the first place. My words are to be trusted, not on the basis of some other book, but on their own merit. Some of my words persons will agree with, some they will disagree with. In some cases, my truth is no anothers truth. In all cases, violence against persons causing no harm should be rejected.

HOW DIFFICULT A CONCEPT IS THAT?

“Whether you like it or not, torture is part of the Divine punishment.”

No it is not. Torture is CLAIMED to be a part of divine punishment by CERTAIN groups, mostly, but not always, monoculturalists. After all certain pagan groups had their “hells” as well. In EVERY CASE, societies that had such a concept, had a centralized and powerful Kyriarchy. But those societies (like the Keltoi of which I am one) that had distributed power, and personal bodily autonomy, tended to have next lives that were a blessing for EVERYONE. No need of divine torture.

This really comes down to what the deity is allowed to do. It is important in centralized societies for the deity to be ALL POWERFUL and have ALL RIGHTS over EVERYONE, ownership as Bashar said in an earlier post. Why? Because the central authority in such a society will be claimed to be the enforcer of God’s commands on earth. Thus, the central authority, the Kyriarchy, will be vested with the same authority as God. That is, the Kyriarchy will own waep men and womb men (and every man inside or outside of the gender binary). The Kyriarchy, like the God, will have FULL POWER over all decisions of the populace.

However, in socities such as the Keltoi, that is the Irish, Welsh, Gauls and others, and socities such as a great many Native American Nations, there was no central authority. Rather each person was fully autonomous. There were chieftans, chiefs, kings and others, but their WORD was not law. And if they spoke against good, they could be deposed instantly (in Keltoi lands). In many Native American Nations, the chief’s word did not even have to be obeyed, but was rather “advice”. Out of RESPECT for his DEMONSTRATED WISE words in the past, people might listen to him.

This then is a sharp contrast and why pagansim and vestiges of it existed so long down through the centuries in Eire. And I thank Bridhe and Lugh daily in my prayers for it. Because of such I am entitled to an incredible birthright of freedom of conscience. Including the free mind to recognize that torture, even when commanded at the hands of a God, is a wicked, immoral, vile and disgusting act which should in all cases be repudiated. It is the honor not of being Pagan, but of being human.

“The agony, distress, depression, fear of the unknown and even earthly disasters are merely a taste of what God is fully capable of,”

Actually those are human emotions and earthly events. God doesn’t cause disasters, natural happenstance does. The ridiculous idea that disasters are punishments from God have led to the ridulous claims that natural disasters in Islamic nations are a punishment for Islam’s not being Christian. The same things are said about war, that a people experience the hardship of war because they are being disobedient to God.

These and other such notions, are logical when we are dealing with the primitive peoples (pagans, muslims, christians, etc) that do not understand science and how the world works. Once we move into an understanding of the Earth, then we, all of us, can move beyond primitive thought. It is for this reason that many Muslims eschew the idea that natural disasters are punishments from God. We Pagans and other Christians join such science minded, modern Muslims who seek not to blame God for things she’s not done.

“so beware.”

Or what? You’ll beat me? Kill me? Considering that death comes to all of us, of what should I “beware”? I certainly have no need to ‘beware” of the threats of an almighty god that has no sway in my life. See, my Gods and Goddesses are SO POWERFUL that they do not need to THREATEN people who do not worship them. Your god on the other hand is so petty and weak, that she has to consistently shore up her lack of authority with threats of violence, in this life, and the next.

Did you think when you said beware and threatened me I would suddenly shake and quiver in fear? Did you think I would fall down and instantly obey your crudely wicked lifestyle that praises violence and murder? Again such words and threats are the words of a petulant child. I’m a grown up and not frightened by children’s ghost stories.

“If your claimed gods really are the nice ones you claim them to be (and are against torture) why don’t they stop agony on earth?”

Another fundamental mistep of monoculture. MY gods and goddesses lay NO claim to being Almighty. See, that is YOUR realm. Rather, you should ask yourself why YOUR all powerful God Allah has not stopped agony on earth. Indeed why has she CAUSED agony if she is all powerful. Is she like a petty child pulling the wings from a fly’s back?

I said: “No. MY experience IS NOT your experience. MY truth is NOT your truth.”

“Yet another load of nonsense. The truth is one. There cannot be multiple truths. This is completely illogical.”

No it’s not.

“There is either my God or yours.”

Actually to you, that is your truth. To a Pagan it is not a monotheistic god OR a polytheistic collection of gods. Rather it is that your god is true AND our gods are true. Polytheism incorporates all gods. So the monoculturalist says either/or whereas the polyculturalist says both/and.

“The ultimately correct path is either Islam or your paganism (in this dialog).”

This is another example of monoculturalist either/or. We can have BOTH/AND. That is, as long as you are not acting with violent oppression of others, Islam could coexist right along side all of the Pagan religions. It’s not your belief in God we object to, but violence. So the ultimately correct path can be Islam, Christianity, Isisism, Asatru, Celticism, and so on.

“These 2 concepts cannot coexist. Me and you are at opposite sides of the spectrum.”

Sure they can. Now, we ARE at opposite ends of the spectrum. You think people being killed for doing no harm to anyone is righteous, I think it is wicked. But multi-theism can certainly coexist.

“One of us has the truth. The other is a fake liar. If “ MY truth is NOT your truth” were a valid statement then you should get annoyed when you get ‘marginalized’ and battered by monotheists coz ‘by your definition’ it is still a truth.”

If monotheists were only disagreeing with me I would not get annoyed. I WELCOME debate, I am Aoirthoir, that name means I love to talk. As does the fact that I am Irish. But, getting battered, seing humans tortured, abused, knowing what they have suffered, because of “your truth” yeah, I will get annoyed at that.

Again I want everyone to notice, how my mere objecting to violent tendencies of monoculturalists and calling out their underserved privilege andhow they use it to disenfranchise persons of every sort, makes me a ‘fake liar’. (If I am a “fake” liar, does that actually make me a truth teller? ) Notice how violence is lauded. Notice how when I mention that one form of marginalization of persons is being victims of murder, Bashar puts scare quotes around the term marginalized, as if being murdered isn’t a marginalization.

I said “There are no “steps” to truth, there are no “steps” to my experience and there are no “steps” to being Pagan. That is a distinctly monoculturalist worldview. “Show me your dogma, show me your central authority, show me your systems, show me HOW TO BECOME pagan…””

Bashar replied: “This paragraph is probably the pinnacle of your delusions. Who the heck are you to decide that paganism has no steps to it.”

Um, a Pagan, cause ya know, it’s probably Pagans that know what Paganism is all about. I love it how monoculturalists will try to define what Paganism is for a Pagan, when they have no experience in our paths. Then they are surprised when we say, Nope, that’s not paganism.

“Paganism is a philosophy and a way of life to some.”

No. It is MANY philosphies and MANY ways of life. No Pagan has a claim to a sole truth or a doctrine or a dogma for all other Pagans. We ALL find, and then walk, our own paths. Quite often our paths cross, and other times our paths diverge. Sometimes as Pagans we agree and sometimes as Pagans we disagree.

“Ways of life and methodolgies DO have steps. Losing ones sanity doesn’t have steps.

Nope. A monoculturalist would perhaps lose zir sanity if ze didn’t have steps. Pagans on the other hand are free to live without others telling us how we are entitled to (or not) reach the divine. This reminds me of the argument that I hear from many monoculturalists “well if there is no hell, no almighty god, I would be out murdering, raping…” Uh really? Then you DEFINITELY need a hell and an almighty. Pagans on the other hand don’t rape and murder because such things are wicked. We don’t have to be threatend with punishments.

I said” “One does not BECOME Pagan. One IS or IS NOT Pagan. Being a Pagan is not about ritual, systems, dogmas, it is about PERSONAL EXPERIENCE. So you are or you are not.”

Bashar replied “Empty words, baseless and meaningless. Unless its your version of paganism which ostensibly you’re to free author as you wish.”

Uh yeah. That’s the f’n point of Paganism. One walks one’s own path.

“I’ll be damned if this is the truth.”

Damned if ya do and damned if ya don’t. Keep in my this is MY truth. You are free to be a Allah fearing Muslim. But know, we in the polyculture are resisting your efforts to mono-anesthetize us.

“Sounds more like dementia.”

Hmm, I wonder how Muslims would react if people started speaking so respectfully of them and their religion. No I don’t. I’ve already seen how Muslims react when someone speaks in such manner about their religion. They cry foul, stomp, protest and demand the words of the “Islamaphobe” be removed.

” When did you become a pagan? At birth.”

I already answered, but you are a monoculturalist, so I understand your need to have things told to you multiple times. I have ALWAYS been Pagan. Life does not start at birth or with conception, live begins much earlier and later than this.

“Did you have this knowledge when you where 10?”

Which knowledge? That people should not be tortured? Yes I did.

“did u know about the She god back then?”

I knew God before I was born. I have always been religiously minded. I’ve pointed out why i use she, interchangeably with he and even ze when refering to either God or others. But I should note the fact that someone chose to refer to God as a she, really got under your craw didn’t it? You seem very focused on it. I’ll ask again, when you refer to Allah as HE, are you implying God is a male and has genitalia? This seems in contradiction to what I know about Islam. If you think that, then it is logical for you to be angry that I refer to ze as she, because you would think that implies female genitalia (it does not). But if you use he in the general sense, then why so focused on the fact that I used she, likewise in the general sense?

“Say yes and you’re an explicit liar.”

This is a claim. You know the same claim was made about Muhammed when he said he had spoken to Gabri-el. In any case I specifically told you how I have experienced God, but you heard not or ignored it. I have noticed that tendency among a great many monoculturalists.

“If so, keep you personal experiences to yourself.”

No.

“They are not fit for humanity.”

They are not fit for some humanity. Some find then quiet beautiful.

“We mostly (except you) haven’t had these experiences.”

Here let me fix that for you:

“We mostly *monoculturalists* haven’t had these experiences.”

There, feel better? I know I sure do. I will note however that I said that my experiences are not your experiences and you called me a liar for that. Then you turned around and said EXACTLY what I had said (you know, the thing that made me a liar) and said you haven’t had my experiences. Imagine that, you say something it is truth, I say the EXACT SAME THING, and I am a liar. How very monoculturalist of you. Thanks for proving me right in yet ANOTHER thing.

“Therefore stop dictating us on how to behave”

Actually it is YOU dictating to us how to behave. See, when you threaten us with violence, murder, and all forms of discrimination, that’s YOU doing the dictating. All we are doing is telling you to STOP dictating, and stop acting with violence to us. It’s not really a hard thing either, you just have to , you know, NOT hurt people.

Notice, please everyone, that telling them that harming people is WRONG, KILLING people is WRONG, well that’s DICTATING to them. This is NOT uncommon among monoculturalist, especially groups that have large numbers of extreme monoculturalists like Islaml.

“because your beliefs which are based on your ‘personal experience with the divine’ doesn’t apply to us.”

My experiences DONT apply to you. That’s what I’ve been saying all along. And YOUR experiences DONT apply to ME. Now since our experiences don’t apply to each other, or to ANY OTHER PERSON ON EARTH, how about you monoculturalists stop murdering people for being different?

I said: “One does not prove ones experiences, one experiences them.”

Bashar replied: “That’s nice way to escape an answer.”

No it’s not. It’s a practical, factual, scientific answer. You’ve even said so above. YOU have not experienced my experiences. But, heck sake, why let the fact that you said EXACTLY THE SAME THING as me, prevent you from repudiating that thing as if somehow I am worse than you.

“FYI Islam is a religion for humanity, a way of life.”

No. It is a religion for SOME of humanity.

“It is not an experience.”

I don’t think you know what the word experience means.

“Especially not one of those “un-experiencable” experiences such as yours.”

Un-experiencable is your word, not mine. I’ve experienced them so they are quite experienceable.

“Moreover if it was really an experience, when did it happen to you?”

IT? I have experiences every moment of my life.

“Was it when you were born or afterwards?”

I had experiences in the womb, we all did. Your experiences were likely different from mine, from the womb onward.

“Did you become a pagan after the experience?”

I didn’t BECOME Pagan. I AM Pagan. See, I’m, not going to let you define me for myself. I already know you’re not a reputable person by the fact that you think it is ok to act with violence against persons of another faith. So why on earth would I let you start to define the boundaries of my faith for me?

“Plz be reminded that if you say yes then you’re lying coz just a few lines above you said that one is either a pagan or not.”

Uh huh. So you thought you were going to “trick” me into saying I BECAME Pagan? Maybe you should have held this sentence for a reply after your “trick” worked.

I will have been Pagan through ALL of my incarnations (this is my first incarnation). I’m not suddenly going to be like …OMG he is so right I BECAME Pagan I was NOT ALWAYS Pagan ALL HAIL the monoculturalist who tricked me out of my “lie”.

Get this into your mind. I AM Pagan. I have ALWAYS been Pagan. I did not BECOME Pagan in the womb or anyplace else. I did not BECOME Pagan when I was born. I AM and WAS and ALWAYS SHALL be PAGAN. That bothers you immensely. Whereas your being a Muslim does’t bother me at all. What DOES bother me is when you monoculturalists act with violence towards others and then GLEEFULLY so, like you in your writings.

“So what is the point of this claimed experience???”

This question is as a dismissive technique. The poly person’s experiences have no point, to the monoculturalist, therefore they have no point. My experiences entire point is to be experienced by me. That and none other. They’re not for you or any other and need no validation.

I said: “However, what is it I am guessing about? That we all have different lives, experiences, needs, desires? That it is NOT GOOD to TORTURE people, even if the torture comes from an Almighty God? Being more powerful does not make it just, it just makes such a god a bully.”

To which Bashar again demanded: “Once again a full dose of your baseless personal reasoning. AND ONCE AGAIN when I say give me proof I do not mean whims and musings.”

You do not GET PROOF of my experiences. But, keep demanding, it helps show how the monoculturalist, including the Islamist, feels they have a right to DEMAND something from others. My life doesn’t need your approval to be valid.

“You don’t seem to understand the difference between your personal opinions and the concept of religion which is a way of life for humanity and not just yourself.”

Actually of the two of us in this conversation, I am the ONE that understands that.

Your way: you are not worshiping my god, and living my way, therefore you are disgusting, deserve to die and be punished by my god.

My way: Your way is different from my way, please feel free to live your way as you wish and leave me and everyone else to do likewise. My way probably isn’t for you. So let’s each live our way, and LIVE being the key word there.

So nope, sorry. You’re the one not getting it. My religion IS ONLY FOR ME, as I have said NUMEROUS TIMES throughout these many posts. Paganism has no dogma but if we were ever to have anything that is shared amongst most Pagans it is simply that, YOUR RELIGION for you, MY RELIGION for me.

I said: “Notice again, difference, means not simply that someone is different, but that they are wicked. Notice again how ze has to impugn bad motives to my experience rather than simply accepting that we are different.”

Bashar replied: “If I impugn your experience then that’s because you aren’t logically explaining it.”

My God given right to to live and hold my faith does not require my explaining anything to you.

“And I won’t accept that you’re different. You aren’t. Nobody is different. We’re all humans”

Um, this is what I’ve been saying all along. If I am not different then why the need to kill and torture and punish people like me?

“If accepting people cause they are different is sensible. Why don’t you accept us the way we are and stop asking us to modify our religion.”

So let’s see. You have stated plainly that “Islam is death”. That such death isn’t for
innocents, but that you and I have a different version of what an innocent is. That my version (people not harming others) is not Islam’s version. That you cannot say that such persons who are doing no harm, DO NOT DESERVE TO BE F’N MURDERED. Thus one can conclude from everything you have said (and even a cursory reading of The Noble Quran), that Islam means death to folks like the Polytheist, The Lesbian, The Homosexual, The Trasngendered and more. (One can conclude the same about other monotheistic religions from reading their holy books). Indeed one can conclude this from the Laws of Islamic Nations, the way those laws are carried out and even violence at the hands of Muslims (and other monoculturalists) in lands where the Law does not support their violence.

All of this violence being an attempt by the monoculturalist to force the polyculturalist and those outside of the mono-culture to change OUR religions and way of life. So when the polyculturalist says to you, a monoculturalist, JUST LEAVE ME ALONE UNHARMED, well, we’re trying to get you to MODIFY YOUR RELIGION. We’re not asking you to change your god, your prayers, your rituals, what you find moral or immoral, what you think is right or wrong. ALL we are asking is to be LEFT UNHARMED. Let me clarify that AGAIN.

THE ONLY THING WE ARE ASKING FROM MONOCULTURALISTS IS TO BE LEFT UNHARMED.

Yet in asking NOTHING ELSE FROM YOU we are told we are being UNFAIR, Islamphobic, hateful, evil, and all manner of other wicked things. Just for asking to be LEFT ALONE.

No, the one NOT accepting differences here IS YOU. Telling you about your undeserved privilege and that murder is wrong IS NOT, controlling of you, it is RESISTING YOUR ATTEMPTED CONTROL OF US.

And yet, with all of these words you still expect me to accept that Islam is a religion of peace. And so do so many.

“Or is this just a one way logic that applies only to you?”

Since I neither support violence against Muslims, nor practice it, yeah.

I stated: “Baseless speculations? You mean for instance when you claimed that I chose to “become” a Pagan simply to “follow my genitals”? This despite the fact that Pagan is what I AM, not what I BECAME?”

Bashar replied: “I still uphold this claim though you could replace genitals by desires to help you clarify the point.”

This is just yet a way of saying I really didn’t “become” a Pagan out of religious convinction, but became one so I could do things that I wanted to do. “You’re a liar and I, the one NOT living your life, get to tell you what you ACTUALLY think…” Good try. Fail.

“That you ‘became’ a pagan is still a baseless claim and you didn’t help me establish its credibility at all.”

My religion does’t need your support to be valid. It’s credible for me and me alone.

“I’m afraid this might be a psychological problem rather than a matter of creed.”

Hmm, again sounds quite a bit like what I have heard many Chrisitans say about Islam. Did you become a Muslim because you have a psychological problem? Are you Muslim because you like violence and wanted a religion that would allow you to practice it? See, when YOU tell OTHERS why they do something, that same thing can be said about you. How about you stop using such insulting language and actually complain about the thing you dislike me saying.

I say “let’s not hurt each other!”
You reply “This is a psychological problem”

I said…”Or do you mean for instance when you imply and even state outright that persons who are different from the monoculture, are not ACTUALLY being harmed by monoculturalists? Because surely you do not mean to suggest that my statement that we all have different experiences, lives, needs and desires is baseless, considering that is an absolute fact. Or do you mean to suggest that my stating that torture is wrong, even by a god, is baseless speculation? Do YOU SUPPORT torture?

Bashar replied: “Yes I still do.”

Yes you still do what? Support Torture? Or state outright that we’re not being harmed by the monoculture?

“Islam doesn’t harm you.”

Alright, it is your assertion that persons like Homosexuals, Polytheists, are not being harmed by Islam. You are right that Islam doesn’t harm ME. I am fortunate to not be living in an Islamic nation. So Islam has little power over me. The same cannot be said of others. You are flat out wrong here. Either you are lying or you are grossly ignorant of what happens to such persons in Islamic nations.

“But there are punishments for crime.”

Crimes like being a polytheist, homosexual, wearing women’s clothes and so on.

“Torture is forbidden in Islam.”

Uh huh. But whipping, killing, beating, humiliating and so on are not forbidden. Indeed in a great many cases they are advocated. See, all we have to do is change the defintion of what constitutes torture and then we can say that Islam, doesn’t torture.

“Only the Almighty can torture. Humans cannot and should not. BTW this is an Islamic rule and I’m not making it up for the sake of this conversation.”

A god that tortures is wicked. As far as it being an Islamic rule, as I’ve already pointed out, all one has to do is define something as not consituting torture (such as unjustly jailing a person, beating them etc) to state that “we don’t torture.”

Ya know Bush did that, change the definition of what torture is. Muslims and a great many were all up in arms about it worldwide. Maybe you Muslims and other monoculturalists could follow you own example and get up in arms about your own beatings and other forms of “non-torture” and then those forms of “non-torture” would stop.

“Although you still have more interesting dreams in the rest of your post,”

Dreams like Muslims, Christians, Pagans, Jews, Atheists, Hindus, Native Americans, and people from around the world living, violence free, without molesting each other with violence.

“I have typed enough for this day. I do have other things to do. And I honestly feel we’re overdoing it with Aaron.”

Aaron’s a tough kid, he can handle it.

“His blog isn’t the right place for this feud. If you want to continue we can but on your personal email”

I quite prefer our conversations to be public. It is beneficial for others to see the utter disdain you hold us Pagans in. The sheer contempt. Then, in the future when I make comments about how a Muslim, A PARTICULAR MUSLIM or PARTICULAR MUSLIM*S have acted with or threatend violence, they can remember your words and know it to be true. Then, when someone ignorantly shouts “ISLAMAPHOBE!” at me, for rejecting your and others violence, maybe, just maybe such persons will stand up and say NO! He is not an Islamaphobe, he is merely objecting to violence and we’ve seen such threats for ourselves.

Because heaven knows, it’s not like those accusatory tongues are going to step up now and accuse you of being a polyhater, despite your outright acceptance of violence towards us. But then why should they, we after all fall outside of their monoculture.

“and addressing a single issue at a time instead of bulk meaningless iterations of the same point over and over again.”

Well then if it is repetition you wish to avoid pick a single point, I will reply to it singularly.

Aoirthor

When I say point by point I mean not to deal with a thousand issues simultaneously coz that makes the topic very difficult to handle. It is only the sheer amount of ur writing that prevented replies to each and every word NOT because I’m not used to it. AND Islam doesn’t kill innocent people although ‘innocent’ here doesn’t necessarily follow your dreamy definition.

Is it so difficult to say “I disagree with certain lifestyles but Islam teaches that no one who is not harming another, should ever be harmed, even if that someone is practicing such things as polytheism. homosexuality, lesbianism, transexuality and other things we find wrong…”?
Nothing is difficult to say. What is difficult is to falsely modify definitions of concepts so that they suite one’s agenda. If I say that I’ll be lying and bending Islam to suite your guesswork life philosophy. Consequently I’d become like you. I’d rather evaporate first.

How I know number 2 is likewise obvious. The things your “almighty” gods desire are exactly identical to petty humans. An Almighty god would have no use of such petty human concerns. But controlling humans certainly would.

No it is NOT obvious. Firstly this is not a proof. It is merely another one of your baseless personal conclusions. Generalizing that similarity between the God and petty humans is indicative of falsehood is total nonsense. Many humans have goodness in them and the Almighty God has the full and complete goodness. The actions of human do not necessarily have to contradict God’s will. Defining what doesn’t suite you taste as “petty human concerns” is the problem here. Secondly, did you get this conclusion from? (that The God would have no use of such petty human concerns.). It’s just a piece of your endless guesswork.

“If there is a god so wicked as to torture people for merely not believing in her, then that god’s demands are unrighteous and her promises of paradise are lies. Her words are not to be trusted anymore than the words of any one else who is willing to torture another.”

Again another baseless and unproven claim. Man, can’t you find a script, a quote from ANY sacred or holy book. Anything that might help in starting an investigation into this statement. Something that might help me believe that this is a real creed and not another false speculation of yours. If you insist on baseless assertions your ‘words are not to be trusted anymore’. Whether you like it or not, torture is part of the Divine punishment. The agony, distress, depression, fear of the unknown and even earthly disasters are merely a taste of what God is fully capable of, so beware. If your claimed gods really are the nice ones you claim them to be (and are against torture) why don’t they stop agony on earth?

No. MY experience IS NOT your experience. MY truth is NOT your truth.

Yet another load of nonsense. The truth is one. There cannot be multiple truths. This is completely illogical. There is either my God or yours. The ultimately correct path is either Islam or your paganism (in this dialog). These 2 concepts cannot coexist. Me and you are at opposite sides of the spectrum. One of us has the truth. The other is a fake liar. If “ MY truth is NOT your truth” were a valid statement then you should get annoyed when you get ‘marginalized’ and battered by monotheists coz ‘by your definition’ it is still a truth.

There are no “steps” to truth, there are no “steps” to my experience and there are no “steps” to being Pagan. That is a distinctly monoculturalist worldview. “Show me your dogma, show me your central authority, show me your systems, show me HOW TO BECOME pagan…”

This paragraph is probably the pinnacle of your delusions. Who the heck are you to decide that paganism has no steps to it. Paganism is a philosophy and a way of life to some. Ways of life and methodolgies DO have steps. Losing ones sanity doesn’t have steps.

One does not BECOME Pagan. One IS or IS NOT Pagan. Being a Pagan is not about ritual, systems, dogmas, it is about PERSONAL EXPERIENCE. So you are or you are not.

Empty words, baseless and meaningless. Unless its your version of paganism which ostensibly you’re to free author as you wish. I’ll be damned if this is the truth. Sounds more like dementia. When did you become a pagan? At birth. Did you have this knowledge when you where 10? did u know about the She god back then? Say yes and you’re an explicit liar.
If so, keep you personal experiences to yourself. They are not fit for humanity. We mostly (except you) haven’t had these experiences. Therefore stop dictating us on how to behave because your beliefs which are based on your ‘personal experience with the divine’ doesn’t apply to us.

One does not prove ones experiences, one experiences them.

That’s nice way to escape an answer. FYI Islam is a religion for humanity, a way of life. It is not an experience. Especially not one of those “un-experiencable” experiences such as yours. Moreover if it was really an experience, when did it happen to you? Was it when you were born or afterwards? Did you become a pagan after the experience? Plz be reminded that if you say yes then you’re lying coz just a few lines above you said that one is either a pagan or not. So what is the point of this claimed experience???

However, what is it I am guessing about? That we all have different lives, experiences, needs, desires? That it is NOT GOOD to TORTURE people, even if the torture comes from an Almighty God? Being more powerful does not make it just, it just makes such a god a bully.

Once again a full dose of your baseless personal reasoning. AND ONCE AGAIN when I say give me proof I do not mean whims and musings. You don’t seem to understand the difference between your personal opinions and the concept of religion which is a way of life for humanity and not just yourself.

Notice again, difference, means not simply that someone is different, but that they are wicked. Notice again how ze has to impugn bad motives to my experience rather than simply accepting that we are different.

If I impugn your experience then that’s because you aren’t logically explaining it. And I won’t accept that you’re different. You aren’t. Nobody is different. We’re all humans. If accepting people cause they are different is sensible. Why don’t you accept us the way we are and stop asking us to modify our religion. Or is this just a one way logic that applies only to you?

Baseless speculations? You mean for instance when you claimed that I chose to “become” a Pagan simply to “follow my genitals”? This despite the fact that Pagan is what I AM, not what I BECAME?

I still uphold this claim though you could replace genitals by desires to help you clarify the point. That you ‘became’ a pagan is still a baseless claim and you didn’t help me establish its credibility at all. I’m afraid this might be a psychological problem rather than a matter of creed.

Or do you mean for instance when you imply and even state outright that persons who are different from the monoculture, are not ACTUALLY being harmed by monoculturalists? Because surely you do not mean to suggest that my statement that we all have different experiences, lives, needs and desires is baseless, considering that is an absolute fact. Or do you mean to suggest that my stating that torture is wrong, even by a god, is baseless speculation? Do YOU SUPPORT torture?

Yes I still do. Islam doesn’t harm you. But there are punishments for crime. Torture is forbidden in Islam. Only the Almighty can torture. Humans cannot and should not. BTW this is an Islamic rule and I’m not making it up for the sake of this conversation.
Although you still have more interesting dreams in the rest of your post, I have typed enough for this day. I do have other things to do. And I honestly feel we’re overdoing it with Aaron. His blog isn’t the right place for this feud. If you want to continue we can but on your personal email and addressing a single issue at a time instead of bulk meaningless iterations of the same point over and over again.

“@Aoir”

My name is not Aoir. My name is Aoirthoir.

“for the sake of reaching some kind of result I’ll spare the bulk of your [allow me to use ur words] ‘argumentum ad bullshiteum’ and focus on your last concise paragraph.”

Which means your insistence on point by point conversation was bogus. I’ve replied point by point and you have not. You have the opportunity to do that yourself, but you’ve not used it. Again, I notice that my points about murder of innocent persons go untouched. Is it so difficult to say “I disagree with certain lifestyles but Islam teaches that no one who is not harming another, should ever be harmed, even if that someone is practicing such things as polytheism. homosexuality, lesbianism, transexuality and other things we find wrong…”?

I said :“The ultimate truth is that we all have different lives, experiences, needs, desires. The ultimate truth is, that all of the Almighty Gods and their demands, are not really THEIR demands. They are demands of humans that claimed to speak for them.”

To which Bashar said:

“Aoir, HOW DO YOU KNOW THAT?”

How do I know what?

1. The ultimate truth is that we all have different lives, experiences, needs, desires? – Do you REALLY NEED me to answer this or do you think we all have the same of any of these?

Or rather…

2. The ultimate truth is, that all of the Almighty Gods and their demands, are not really THEIR demands. They are demands of humans that claimed to speak for them.

How I know number 1 should be obvious. How I know number 2 is likewise obvious. The things your “almighty” gods desire are exactly identical to petty humans. An Almighty god would have no use of such petty human concerns. But controlling humans certainly would.

“What IF there is a God who sent a messenger to convey his demands?”

If there is a god so wicked as to torture people for merely not believing in her, then that god’s demands are unrighteous and her promises of paradise are lies. Her words are not to be trusted anymore than the words of any one else who is willing to torture another.

“Plz show me the steps that you performed to eliminate this possibility.”

No. MY experience IS NOT your experience. MY truth is NOT your truth. There are no “steps” to truth, there are no “steps” to my experience and there are no “steps” to being Pagan. That is a distinctly monoculturalist worldview. “Show me your dogma, show me your central authority, show me your systems, show me HOW TO BECOME pagan…” One does not BECOME Pagan. One IS or IS NOT Pagan. Being a Pagan is not about ritual, systems, dogmas, it is about PERSONAL EXPERIENCE. So you are or you are not.

“I must know how you reached this conclusion.”

I reached it through a personal experience with the divine.

“If you don’t prove it then you are only speculating/guessing”

One does not prove ones experiences, one experiences them.

However, what is it I am guessing about? That we all have different lives, experiences, needs, desires? That it is NOT GOOD to TORTURE people, even if the torture comes from an Almighty God? Being more powerful does not make it just, it just makes such a god a bully.

” or probably even intentionally lying.”

Notice again, difference, means not simply that someone is different, but that they are wicked. Notice again how ze has to impugn bad motives to my experience rather than simply accepting that we are different.

However, again we return to the “what” I am “lying about”. Am I lying that we are all different? Am I lying to say that torturing people is WRONG and an EVIL ACT?

“Logical arguments can’t be built on your guess work.”

I’m not “guessing” that we all have different experiences. Nice try though.

“You have no right to define the truth with baseless speculations.”

Baseless speculations? You mean for instance when you claimed that I chose to “become” a Pagan simply to “follow my genitals”? This despite the fact that Pagan is what I AM, not what I BECAME? Or do you mean for instance when you imply and even state outright that persons who are different from the monoculture, are not ACTUALLY being harmed by monoculturalists? Because surely you do not mean to suggest that my statement that we all have different experiences, lives, needs and desires is baseless, considering that is an absolute fact. Or do you mean to suggest that my stating that torture is wrong, even by a god, is baseless speculation? Do YOU SUPPORT torture?

“Do correct me if I’m wrong.”

It is for you to correct yourself.

I said: “See, it’s not the “ultimate truth” or the Supreme Being we pagans are not believing. It is those of you who tell us something different than she has told us herself. Why should a Pagan believe you when God herself has spoken to us and what you say contradicts what she said? “My law is love” says she.”

To which Bashar replied:
“No offense but WHO the heck is that She God??”

The Supremem Being.

“And more importantly when and how did she speak to you?”

When hasn’t she spoken to me? God speaks to us all every day in a great many ways. In her creation, in our experiences, in our dreams.

“AND how come she hasn’t spoken to me?”

That is between you and she.

“And who told you it’s a she?”

Are you asking who told me God is female? Because God is not female. If you ask why I use SHE when speaking of God I respond with a tad of Merriam Webster’s definition of He and She:

He -used in a generic sense or when the sex of the person is unspecified
She -used as an alternative to he to refer to a person of unspecified gender

My use of she is in this sense and in no wise implies female genitalia to God. Rather one might ask you, why do you use He when speaking of God? Do you intend to imply that God has male genitalia? Is God male? If not, then why are you using He? If you are using it in the sense quoted from Merriam Websters above, gender unspecified (or even non-existent) then there should be no objection to using She in the same manner.

“Aoir, Are you some type of prophet?”

This is entirely specious. My experience with the divine is no more, or less valid than your experience with the divine. One does not have to be a prophet to experience the divine. Indeed it should be clear from the fact that we Pagans experience the divine on a personal level, without the need of others, that there are no prophets among Paganism. Thus no Pagan would be calling zirself a prophet.

Or did you ask me that simply because I referenced an unspecified, unknown gender with a female pronoun and the fact that I did so bothered you?

I said: “Your law is death and control.”

Bashar replied:
“You’re categorically wrong.”

No I’m not. You’ve made it clear just how you feel about persons that are different from you. You hold them in utter disdain.

“In fact, this is a baseless claim that indicates pure bigotry.”

No it doesn’t. It is based entirely on your words. However, this is an example of why I no longer accept claims like this from monoculturalists. Anyone reading this is suggested to go back and read the sheer vitriol he has for persons who are not monoculturalists. He finds them disgusting, perverse, wicked when they are doing nothing more than living their lives, causing no harm to anyone. Yet, pointing out the controlling words he’s used, is “bigotry”, while his hate speech, is not.

So we have the very nasty things and falsehoods he’s spoken about polytheists, pagans and others which are viewed entirely as NOT bigotry. But, does he stop there? Nope. We’re about to see him cross the racial divide and hurl racially motivated insults. Yet, he is not bigoted.

Now, further in his statement he talks about Islam this and that though I specifically referenced HIM. I said plainly that “**Your** law is death and control,” not “Islams law”. Remember all along I have said there are beautiful things in The Noble Quran and that we should quote those things. The fact that he has yet to quote any of that beauty is telling. HIS law is death and control. So let’s move on shall we.

“Islam’s law is not death nor control.”

Answered in the preceding paragraphs.

“Islam brought enlightenment to the world when your Europe was rotting in its “Dark Ages”.”

I am not European, I am Irish. We Irish were never considered to be European. We never had a dark age.

“Islam sheltered its archenemies when they had no where to go.”

No it didn’t.

“Where do think the Jews lived in the past 1000 yrs? Europe?”

Actually yes, Jews did live in Europe in the past 1000 years. The lived in many other places as well, Russia, the Middle East, Asia, and other places.

“where your ancestors’ Church”

You’re talking about Christians. I’m Pagan remember?

“practiced the burning of live humans?”

EXACTLY. And those being burned alive were accused of guess what crimes…Ready?

1. Homosexuality.
2. Paganism.
3. Witchcraft.
4. Goddess Worship.
5. Polytheism.

You know, the very same things you find so abhorrent.

“definitely not.”

The definitely not here refers to Jews being in Europe. But the facts of history tell another story. There were Jews in Europe all of this time.

“The examples are more than abundant but Orthodox Islam’s law is NOT death and control. If Islam was a religion of death it would not have been accepted by a quarter of humanity today.”

I wasn’t talking about Islam’s law, I was talking about yours. But large multitudes following something is neither evidence for or against it.

“Unless of course you think that these 1.5 billion are miserable culture-less peasants whose choices are not comparable to your superior and sophisticated intellect and thus not worthy of consideration.”

Their choice of religion, as I have said numerous times throughout these posts, is just fine, FOR THEM. My religious experience does not invalidate their religious experiences.

“FYI if Islam was as you claim people would have simply left it”

Again I made a claim about YOU, not Islam.

” in resemblance to what happened to ‘your’ church when it was abandoned by its own people (in the height of their misery, before the Industrialization) due to ‘the law death and control’.”

I’m Pagan, not Christian. Is it that difficult a concept to understand that the Christian Church is NOT my church, since I’m, you know, not Christian? I’m Pagan. Simple math really.

“However Islam doesn’t follow the simple-minded “My law is love””

The fact that you find love as a law objectionable really reveals a great deal about you.

“that you yet have to prove to me.”

I don’t prove my religious experiences, I experience them.

“Islam has love for righteousness,”

Muslims and those that say good things about Islam.

“hate for wickedness.”

Polytheists. Pagans. Homosexuals. Transgendered. Transexuals. Cross-Dressers. Persons with 5 wives rather than the requisite 4. Lesbians. Gender-Queers. Polyamorous……..

“Life for goodness,”

Practicing Muslims.

“death for evil….”

Polytheists. Pagans. Homosexuals. Transgendered. Transexuals. Cross-Dressers. Persons with 5 wives rather than the requisite 4. Lesbians. Gender-Queers. Polyamorous……..

Notice, he says here plainly DEATH for evil, and we know from his earlier posts that the list above IS EVIL to him. Yet, he says Islam is NOT a religion of death. He’s right it’s not. As long as you fall outside of any of the categories that they define as evil, which are under all circumstances benign, harmless.

“I know that we differ in the definitions of these terms but this is not my point.”

Yeah we do. I don’t define people as evil just for loving someone or worshipping someone.

“What I mean it that Islam is balanced in its approach and dealings.”

No its not. If those categories are “evil” and islam means as you claim “death for evil” then that means that persons who are causing no harm to others face death. You know, the very thing I claimed at the start of this entire thing. THAT IS NOT BALANCED.

“If you believe that evil somehow does exist on the planet the rule of love and nothing but love would be absurd”

Notice how Bashar keeps implying or saying I have said things I never said. God’s law is love. Simple. This does not mean people obey her law. I do believe EVIL exists, in the form of humans that are willing to murder people and act with violence and other forms of disenfranchisement towards persons who are harming no one.

“[unless you convince me by letting me speak to your She God].”

Notice how many references are made to my “She God”. It really bothered you that I used a pronoun to refer to God? (The Supreme Being in this case…)

But, if we’re going to play this game lets play it right. How about you get Allah to tell me what entitles her to command her prophets to murder people merely for not accepting her. You might tell her in the meanwise that maybe people refused to accept her, because she was, you know, commanding them to be murdered if they didn’t accept her.

“In fact, throughout history and till this day, it was never practiced even by pagan nations.”

Actually there were a great many persons that practiced love. I will agree with you that the Kyriarchy has never practiced love.

“The ‘only love’ rule is as invalid as the ‘only death’ rule.”

You’ve made it pretty clear your not opposed to death as a rule. You could of course say “I oppose death for Pagans, Polytheists, Homosexuals, Lesbians, and other alternative sexualities” but you won’t will you?

Now, “My law is love” is pretty simple. No where does that claim humans are only loving. But don’t let a little thing like sticking to what I said stop you, when you can claim something else entirely.

“So now plz tell me how did you get that idea? Note that this is a historical and social issue that is under current study. I won’t accept unproven personal analysis not hearsay from the She God”

I already told you. But you cannot hear it because you are caught up in irritation at pronouns.

“[must speak to her first].

You get Allah to speak to me, and after she has done so, then I will introduce Allah, and you, to the Supreme Being.

I said: “WHY would ANY of the several Almighty Gods need to control that which they created and instead not love them?”

Bashar replied:
“Why should not God control what he created. Logic dictates that the creator controls his creation”

No it doesn’t.

“and the creation is owned by the True creator.”

No it’s not.

“Your question makes no sense.”

Right. Because you are a monoculturalist and can only see things from your perspective. It never dawns on the monoculturalist that persons with minds, hearts, feelings, should be, and are autonomous persons who OWN THEMSELVES. This idea that we are owned by a creator, is really a smokescreen to allow the Kyriarchy to claim ownership of us, in God’s place.

“Moreover, there is no conflict between control and love.”

Yes there is. Love is not controlling.

“As an analogy, haven’t you ever seen parents who fully control their children yet ultimately love them.”

We’re talking about ADULT, AUTOMONMOUS persons, fully capable of making their own decisions about how they live their lives.

“You must prove this implied characteristic (love but not control) in the Divine entity”

No. See, I am an individual autonomous person. I don’t have to answer to any of the many demands you’ve made in this, or your other posts. Rather, it is YOU that must prove to me why I should live as YOU say I should. Since you are the one seeking to control me and others like me, or if we do not succumb, threatening us with harm of one form or another, up to and including death, it is your responsibility to prove your ridiculous claims.

Keep in mind dear reader, those of us outside of the monoculture are not telling monoculturalists how to live. The only thing we demand is to be left alone to live as we choose without threat, violence, molestation or death at the hands of the monoculture and its criminals.

” otherwise I’ll rightfully accuse you of worshiping a clay toy god that you can conveniently form the way you want. And to me that is no longer a God. It would just be a clay toy.”

This would bother me why? My religious experience is made no more, or no less, by your acceptance or lack thereof. Goddess is in the clay toy as much as she is in the heavens.

A nice little ditty some of us Pagans like to sing:

“We all come from the Goddess, and to her we shall return, like a drop of rain, flowing to the ocean. Isis, Astarte Diana, Hecate, Demeter, Kali, and Anna.”

Amen and Pass the butter.
Aoirthoir

“The ultimate truth is that we all have different lives, experiences, needs, desires. The ultimate truth is, that all of the Almighty Gods and their demands, are not really THEIR demands. They are demands of humans that claimed to speak for them.”
Aoir, HOW DO YOU KNOW THAT? What IF there is a God who sent a messenger to convey his demands? Plz show me the steps that you performed to eliminate this possibility. I must know how you reached this conclusion. If you don’t prove it then you are only speculating/guessing or probably even intentionally lying. Logical arguments can’t be built on your guess work. You have no right to define the truth with baseless speculations. Do correct me if I’m wrong.

“See, it’s not the “ultimate truth” or the Supreme Being we pagans are not believing. It is those of you who tell us something different than she has told us herself. Why should a Pagan believe you when God herself has spoken to us and what you say contradicts what she said? “My law is love” says she.”
No offense but WHO the heck is that She God?? And more importantly when and how did she speak to you? AND how come she hasn’t spoken to me?And who told you it’s a she? Aoir, Are you some type of prophet?

“Your law is death and control.”
You’re categorically wrong. In fact, this is a baseless claim that indicates pure bigotry. Islam’s law is not death nor control. Islam brought enlightenment to the world when your Europe was rotting in its “Dark Ages”. Islam sheltered its archenemies when they had no where to go. Where do think the Jews lived in the past 1000 yrs? Europe? where your ancestors’ Church practiced the burning of live humans? definitely not. The examples are more than abundant but Orthodox Islam’s law is NOT death and control. If Islam was a religion of death it would not have been accepted by a quarter of humanity today. Unless of course you think that these 1.5 billion are miserable culture-less peasants whose choices are not comparable to your superior and sophisticated intellect and thus not worthy of consideration. FYI if Islam was as you claim people would have simply left it in resemblance to what happened to ‘your’ church when it was abandoned by its own people (in the height of their misery, before the Industrialization) due to ‘the law death and control’. However Islam doesn’t follow the simple-minded “My law is love” that you yet have to prove to me. Islam has love for righteousness, hate for wickedness. Life for goodness, death for evil…. I know that we differ in the definitions of these terms but this is not my point. What I mean it that Islam is balanced in its approach and dealings. If you believe that evil somehow does exist on the planet the rule of love and nothing but love would be absurd [unless you convince me by letting me speak to your She God]. In fact, throughout history and till this day, it was never practiced even by pagan nations. The ‘only love’ rule is as invalid as the ‘only death’ rule. So now plz tell me how did you get that idea? Note that this is a historical and social issue that is under current study. I won’t accept unproven personal analysis not hearsay from the She God [must speak to her first].

“WHY would ANY of the several Almighty Gods need to control that which they created and instead not love them?”
Why should not God control what he created. Logic dictates that the creator controls his creation and the creation is owned by the True creator. Your question makes no sense. Moreover, there is no conflict between control and love. As an analogy, haven’t you ever seen parents who fully control their children yet ultimately love them. You must prove this implied characteristic (love but not control) in the Divine entity otherwise I’ll rightfully accuse you of worshiping a clay toy god that you can conveniently form the way you want. And to me that is no longer a God. It would just be a clay toy.

“The real ‘shameful’ language is calling attempts to reach out to you ‘tropes’.”

Sorry, but telling me and my kind that you are disgusted by us, is not reaching out to us. Telling me what I think, is not reaching out to me. Telling me that I am led by my genitals and that I chose Paganism only so I could F’c is not reaching out to me. Telling me that I chose to become a Pagan merely to be different or feel better than another, is not reaching out to me. Every one of these statements, and the great many others you have made about us outside of the monoculture, are tropes.

One of the definitions of trope that Merriam Websters provides us with is “b : a common or overused theme or device”. And yes, these are common AND overused themes from you monoculturalists about us polyfolks. We’ve heard them time and again. I would say, that there hardly goes by a day when someone finds out I am poly, polytheist, polysexual, polyamorous, that I don’t hear such “common and overused themes”, you know TROPES. Since these are common and overused themes (and false to boot), my informing you of this fact, is not shaming language. But, your use of these tropes IS shaming language.

“Although I don’t compromise my Islam, it is normal that in interfaith dialogue conversers try to find common ground in addition to clarifying their fundamental beliefs in the hope that this might spark some interest for the other party.”

Alright, what common ground have you tried to find with me? Do you accept that homosexuals have the right to live unmolested by society at large and the right to marry, own property, inherit, visit their lovers in the hospital? Do you hold that a Pagan has a right to build a temple anywhere in the world, on any property that they own? Do you hold that I should be able to in my home or outside of it, bend the knee to MY gods rather than only yours?

Here though is the common ground I try to attain with monotheists. We are ALL HUMAN and entitled to CERTAIN NATURAL rights. ALLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLL of us. Not a single person should be denied the right to live, love, work, share, pray (or not), marry, have or adopt and raise children, eat, farm, or ANY OTHER ENDEAVOR to which a person may put her hand, should be denied to her. Religion, doesn’t matter. Gender, doesn’t matter. Sexuality or marital status, doesn’t matter. THAT is common ground. Telling me things about myself and other Pagans that are not true, IS NOT.

“I often engage in such dialogue and it mostly ends with a courteous ‘nice talking to you’.”

Uh huh. When you engage with dialogue do you follow the pattern here of telling persons that they are disgusting? Because, you won’t find me telling you “nice talking to you” when you say that about anyone.

“In your case you started by an ‘out of context’”

Hmm. Considering that the OP talked about idolatry and chasteness and we understand how those are falsely defined by monotheists, my objecting to their use as examples of the wonderfulness of any monoculturalist document, religious or otherwise, were right IN context.

” whining”

Very telling that you consider exposing the facts to be whining. So when Muslims complain about unjust treatment at the hands of the United States Federal Government, is that whining? I’m bettin’ heads to stone, neither you nor any other Muslim thinks it is.

” about being marginalized for you paganism and sexuality”

Again, notice how Bashar dismisses the fact that MILLIONS of people throughout history have been MURDERED, BEATEN, ABUSED, DEPRIVED of PROPERTY and FAMILY, and been on the receiving end of numerous other forms of bad behavior at the hands of monoculturalists.

And this is why I don’t buy it anymore when monotheists demand equal treatment. They will insist that some sort of action is rotten, WHEN DONE TO THEM. But then when you say, hey they are doing that to us too!, they surround your complaints with scare quotes and insist it’s just whining.

“knowing that the likely readers of such a blog entry [involving Islam] perceive such issues as silly and perverse respectively”

So where are the usual suspects here to object to this incredibly offensive speech? If I made the same claims were being made about Islam, we’d see post after post about how I am an Islamaphobe. Indeed, for my merely having objected to such hate speech by Muslims about me and Pagans, I’ve been called an Islamaphobe. But, it’s perfectly alright for a Muslim to do so about Pagans and none say a word? Again I say this is why I DONT BUY IT ANYMORE when a monotheist claims anymore.

“(and we, including many many christians, are entitled to our opinion as much as you are).”

Well THIS I agree with. BELIEVE I am whatever you WANT to believe and want to MAKE UP about me. The OBJECTION comes when you cannot leave your religion to yourself and you MUST try to FORCE us to abide the monoculture. Murder, forced conversion or marginalization (jail, reduced legal options etc) are NOT acceptable. Belief, IS.

“I even find the claim of marginalization as absurd.”

This is more argumentum ad bullshiteum. Cases of the sort that I have mentioned from the beginning are WELL DOCUMENTED.

“It is normal that people distance themselves from others whom behave in a repulsive disgusting manner.”

Hmm. That sounds a LOT like the argument I’ve heard from Christians who want nothing to do with Muslims. I have a problem with it when they say it, and I have a problem when it’s applied to Pagans.

“Isn’t one entitled to avoid what he sees as wicked and unclean.”

Except, it never stops just at avoiding does it? It always moves into forcing us to be “clean” and “righteous”. It never dawns on monoculturalists, that maybe forcing others to live as you demand is the truly unrighteous thing.

“These ‘others’ interpret this as being marginalized.”

Hmm. So, when people want to avoid Muslims, not give them jobs, not serve them in eateries, not serve them in stores, not associate with them in school, and such, Muslims don’t object to this kind of bad conduct?

Oh wait, yes they do. In fact, that’s one of the reasons this blog post was written in the first place. I’ll keep these words of yours in mind the next time I speak to a Muslim who is objecting to behavior towards her/him that is the exact kind of behavior towards we pagans that I am objecting to.

“It is simply an issue of different perspectives.”

NO it is NOT. Under no circumstances is it EVERY RIGHTEOUS to act with violence towards people because they are DIFFERENT. Why the stoodle noodle is that so hard for some of you monotheists to understand?

“Your perceive them according to your own personal reasons as being violent and unjustly controlling and ”

Well yes, I perceive murdering people as a violent act, and those murdering as violent persons. Who’d thunk they’re not ACTUALLY violent, it’s just my “PERCEPTION”. Did you REALLY type that?

“they perceive you according to their reasons as blasphemous and impure.”

Hmm. See, this is another odd thing about you monotheists. You attempt to destroy faith in the deities, and you call US blasphemous.

“In spite of that, no one replied expressing their real view of your faith nor your claimed sexual behavior. This, if you ever noticed, is indicative of the good manners of the readers.”

My “claimed sexual behavior”? What claims did I make about my sexual BEHAVIOR? I claimed I am polysexual and polyamorous. Further, I informed that my DRIVE is less than that of most. But my sexual activities, I’ve made no statement about. See, contrary to the belief of the monoculturalists and so many others who wish to silence poly persons, we DO have the good graces to not speak about our sexual activities when there MIGHT be children reading our words.

” Afterwhich, in your avalanche of words, you started implicating Islam for your misfortunes”

No I didn’t.

“(again, from your perspective) when it is your abnormalities that is to blame (our perspective).”

Except, that I made no claims to misfortune. See, in MY case, because I have an overlarge ego, I’ve not had the mishaps with the monoculture that so many like me have. I stand up and immeditely resist the moment someone decides to constrain me to their boxes. So while I have experienced ATTEMPTS to marginalize me, they have all failed. As a result I’ve lived free and as I choose.

Further, insulting language from the likes of you and others is not “misfortune”. Indeed I am IRISH. So my objection to personal insults DIRECTED AT ME, is not that the words are insulting. It is rather that they are almost universally trope driven, thus easy for the “insulter”. You see, in Gaeilge, one cannot insult someone with a few words. One must write pages, actually proving a point about something. Saying “You’re an arse” is not an insult. And so too, the words you’ve written, while “insulting” aren’t really.

OTHERS however have not been so blessed as me. It is FOR THEM that I am speaking out.

“I hope I’m clarifying a point here. But later, you take a step further and start defining Islam and translating verses according to your preferences”

Yup. See, I prefer the interpretation of verses that do not lead to the murder of people different from me and different from others.

“which in an academic debate would make you look like a clown”

You’ve never actually looked up the meaning of the name Aoirthoir, have you? Looking like a clown is a beautiful and beneficial thing. I will note though that you are using a racial stereotype there since there is debate that the clown was nothing more than the Irish bum. (Red nose, baggy clothes, dirty etc). I bet, my informing you this is a racial stereotype won’t prevent you from using clown in the future as an insult though will it?

“not because you can’t have an opinion but because it’s meaningless and can block efforts to reach conclusions when there are people with an opposing view around (whom you’re talking about).”

Right…so the conclusion that it’s harmful to harm people is defeated because I choose to sway myself towards the less harmful meaning of a verse rather than the more harmful meaning of it…?

“At that point I stepped in to clarify the ‘official’ Islamic understanding of a couple of concepts that you mentioned”

I don’t care about the official version of anything when that official version is used to harm people. I really don’t get why it’s such a hard concept that murdering people because they are different is NOT a righteous thing.

“and I really didn’t mean offend or sound crude but it is in my interest that a true version of Islam is maintained. I even ended my post with a kind wish that no two decent humans would differ about.”

Let’s see what that kind wish was shall we “I wish you all success in your quest for the truth.”

You’re words later on however demonstrate without doubt little or great that that was no kind wish at all. The wish was not for TRUTH for me. The wish was for YOUR TRUTH for me. And anything outside of your truth IS NOT TRUTH. Your disdain for my truth, my gods, my religion, my worship, my experience, my concourse with the Gods, my rituals, my knowledge, my visits to the otherworld, my life, my loves and anything related whatsoever to MY TRUTH is exposed in your later posts. However, having been “wished well in my search for truth” so often, only to find exactly the kind of meaning you demonstrate, I found your words suspect from the start. You hardly proved my suspicions wrong, and indeed verified that which I knew.

So, “no two humans would differ about” is entirely false. Indeed MANY of us differ on our truths and some of us, refuse any longer to have YOUR TRUTH forced upon us as if it is OUR TRUTH, when it is no such thing.

“Yet in your ignorance, arrogance and disrespect you even rejected that.”

Notice, if we accept not the monotruth of the monoculturalist, THEIR experience has precedence over ours, and we’re ignorant, arrogant and disrespectful. It is not enough for the monoculturalist that we not interfere in their lifestyles, but live our own. Indeed, merely living our own life is seen as a great insult to the monoculturalist. I wonder, does it make them question the veracity of their own truth, that they are so weak within it, they are bothered by the existences of other truths?

“You then followed this by a river of bragging, whining and a plethora of baseless claims and musings in a writing style that is more suitable for a stand-up comedian or a radio talk show.”

Thank you. This is the nicest thing you’ve said to me.

“You are even ‘aware’ of an audience and address your ‘readers’.”

Yes. It is publically posted, so imagine that, that I would be aware that others will be reading what I write here.

“You see this is indicative of your purpose of posting here.”

And here comes the telling me WHY I do something. Don’tcha love it when people tell YOU what YOU think?

“Most likely you like typing”

Actually I do. I like things I am good at and I am VERY good at typing. Last time I was tested I could type 130 words per minute. With mistakes mind you. But still, that’s a pretty decent number. This reminds me though of those folks back when I used to participate in medical research. See, there were folks that volunteered, like me to be test subjects. Then they would try to shame me for being a test subject. Um, dude you realize you’re doing the same thing I am right? It was quite amusing. And now you’re trying to shame me for posting on a blog comment. You know, the very same thing you are doing. Do ya wonder why I’m not shamed by such attempts at shaming?

“and probably have nothing else, of value, to do.”

Well I could watch my Roku, but this is so highly entertaining and edumational.

“You haven’t got the slightest interest in dialog, communication or understanding at any level.”

If the dialoge is “you polys are evil, wicked, disgusting, untouchable, deserve to die, will burn in hell….” and other such tropes, you’re right, I’m not interested in “understanding”. The curious thing is that so many of you monoculturalists make this claim about us as if you ACTUALLY WONDER WHY we’re not up for your nonesense.

“That is why reaching a conclusion or a minute agreement with you is extremely difficult or maybe even impossible.”

It’s totally possible for a monoculturalist to reach an agreement with me if the agreement is “ya know, maybe people different from me DONT deserve to be ill treated just because they are different…..”

“This is ultimately clear from your writings. This is the real “shaming language”.”

Sorry doesn’t cut it. Pointing out violence, is not shaming language.

“Me and several of my friends, on the other hand, came here coz we were amazed by this blog entry in which a ‘Mormon’ faithfully attempts to understand our religion”

Yeah, and notice he didn’t have to call Muslims disgusting to do any of this. Maybe, rather than calling Pagans, Homosexuals and others disgusting, you could learn a thing from him. (I will note the use of quotes around the term Mormon…. why their use?)

“unaffected by the media, his cultural norms and even his own religion which is unaccepted, as a faith, in Islam as he probably knows.”

Unaccepted?

“To us, what he did was a very commendable act of patience and sincere open mindedness. This was very touching and many wanted to reach out and communicate even more.”

Right. It was very commendable because he spoke highly of Islam. I’ve yet to run into a monoculturalist that didn’t find it commendable when people speak highly of THEIR FORM of the monocultural. Almost universally I’ve found them quite willing to speak negatively of other forms of monoculture and most certainly of any form of polyculture.

“Then you came.”

Yes and made statements about monoculture which you backed up so well.

“Moreover your claim that I didn’t address one point of your posts. How can I?”

Just like I do. Quote me, defend or refute my point. Not that complicated really.

“You need whole books to sort out your confusion.”

This is what we call in Gaeilge as a Cop-out.

“You’re the type of person that makes a false claim then builds a whole mountain on top of it.”

Hmm, that’s why, other than my re-interpretation of the verse that says “there is no compulsion under religion” to mean something less harmful rather than the way you interpret it as something more harmful, you’ve not actually refuted my “false” claims. Indeed, you’ve actually assisted me with deftness of skill, in proving at least one. I stated at the start how monoculturalists view us polyculturalists with utter disdain. You’ve used words like “disgust”, “perverse”, “oppose”, and other tropes to refer to those different from you. So you’ve demonstrated a different, less honorable version of Islam, than the OP has experienced. The kind that I have experienced. You had a GREAT opportunity to refute me in this regard, and you failed.

“That is the most difficult type to communicate with. What makes it worse is that you don’t even leave a chance for any exchange of points.”

Sure I do. In fact I respond to you POINT BY POINT. Try it, you might like it. But telling me that I don’t leave a chance for exchange of points when I am responding each post, point by point, seems disengenious at best. No on is preventing you from quoting EVERYTHING I HAVE WRITTEN, point by point, and responding, point by point. You know what we call that? An “exchange of points”.

“And just because people around you don’t have the time to disassemble and fix your life long accomplishment of mess,”

You give me too much credit.

“you think you’re unique, correct and can win arguments.”

More of what I think. Here’s what I think, what I thought right then when I read that, “I think I like chocoolate. Dark Chocolate. 80% Cacao Chocolate. …..” But why let what I ACTUALLY THINK get in the way of your TELLING ME what I think.

“Intelligent dialog isn’t constructed in this manner. You need to go step by step. Point by point.”

You mean, for instance, by quoting EVERYTHING the person has said and responding to EACH POINT? I wonder, who is doing that in this “debate”?

“You need to assume that you are facing you converser in person and try to build on that. People usually get carried away when online and that is often not constructive.”

So do you suggest, that I tell them they are disgusting and I want nothing to do with them, following your example?

“Yet most importantly you need to have an honest intention and commitment to find the truth.”

Here we go again. I wonder what “TRUTH” we mean this time. Do you mean that I should value my experience? That I should listen to my gods and ancestors? That I should evalute righteousness by how gentle and kind someone is rather than how violent? What do yall think?

“The ultimate truth is not a cheap commodity”

Ah and there it is. Let me tell you what the ultimate truth is bra. The ultimate truth is that we all have different lives, experiences, needs, desires. The ultimate truth is, that all of the Almighty Gods and their demands, are not really THEIR demands. They are demands of humans that claimed to speak for them. See, it’s not the “ultimate truth” or the Supreme Being we pagans are not believing. It is those of you who tell us something different than she has told us herself. Why should a Pagan believe you when God herself has spoken to us and what you say contradicts what she said? “My law is love” says she. Your law is death and control. WHY would ANY of the several Almighty Gods need to control that which they created and instead not love them?

“and people who undermine its value might never be able to find it.”

Maybe. Or maybe, you’ll find it despite undermining it.

“No problem. Healthy debate is always good, and can be very educational and uplifting.”

I agree. It also exposes us to new ideas and sometimes changes our thinking. This can often be a good thing.

“However, being an administrator of this blog, I will delete nasty comments, and I will censor out abusive language. I’ve done it in the past, and I’ll do it in the future.”

It’s certainly your right. I also appreciate your using the word censor here. So many folks think that word only applies when the government does it and will insist if they censor, that since they are not the government, they are not censoring. They are, but they’re under no obligation not to censor in their own space. Indeed, I support such a right.

“I don’t think I need to explicitly state that comments should be “family friendly”, otherwise I would force registration to view and reply to, the comments.”

Truthfully I think kids are generally not reading these blogs. Even if they were the fair on public tv alone is far more ‘unfriendly’. I’ll trust your definition of family friendly when compared to others, since you seem to not be actually deleting comments merely for talking about [so-called] alternative lifestyles. Generally in Ubuntu I’ve found that merely saying one of my lovers is going out to dinner with one of their lovers is enough to get us poly folks blocked. They then speak as if they need to school us on not to talk sexually explicitly around children, when we’ve done no such thing. But that provides the excuse. As mentioned however, and as anyone reading can see, you’ve done not censored us.

I will say however that the incredibly vitrolic hate spewed by Bashar is anything but family friendly.

“In terms of monotheism and polytheism, technically, Mormons (of which I am one), are polytheist…This greatly separates us from the rest of theism, by a long shot.”

I would say in terms of sheer polytheism you share that in common with Polytheists in general. In terms of monotheism, you share the idea that the specific god you worship is the only one that ought to be worshipped. I understand that the Sun, Moon, Stars, Earth, Wind, Tree, River, Odin, Isis, Bridhe and others of these sort are not to be worshipped and constitute Idolatry. Thus, though I already knew about Mormon Theology, I spoke up when you mentioned the Quran’s rejection of Idolatory. For reasons mentioned already.

Indeed, many monotheists consider Mormonism Pagan, and consider your beliefs Idolatry. Many Muslims will consider the Christian Trinity, Idolatry. Many Christians will consider other Christian sects Idolatry. Many Christians will consider worship around the Kabaa Idolatrous. So Idolatry, like Piety, becomes a definition of the holder. So often it seems that THEY are idolatrous, while WE are not. This US vs THEM mentality is something we Pagans eschew, especially when it leads to violence.

And that is the one thing that does indeed make Paganism different. We acknowledge all of the Gods and Goddessses and Goddiers (genderless deities) and Goddetties (mixed gender deites). But individually we can give preference to any specific one we want. The monotheists’ lack of belief in our deities makes them not exist less at all.

In any case thanks for providing a forum to discuss these things. Considering the hateful way we see some speaking, outright calling human beings disgusting, it is a wonder, as I have mentioned several times, that the usual suspects are holding fast their tongues. So having a place to expose the false claims made, is a nice thing.

Kind Regards,
Aoirthoir

The real ‘shameful’ language is calling attempts to reach out to you ‘tropes’. Although I don’t compromise my Islam, it is normal that in interfaith dialogue conversers try to find common ground in addition to clarifying their fundamental beliefs in the hope that this might spark some interest for the other party. I often engage in such dialogue and it mostly ends with a courteous ‘nice talking to you’. In your case you started by an ‘out of context’ whining about being marginalized for you paganism and sexuality knowing that the likely readers of such a blog entry [involving Islam] perceive such issues as silly and perverse respectively (and we, including many many christians, are entitled to our opinion as much as you are). I even find the claim of marginalization as absurd. It is normal that people distance themselves from others whom behave in a repulsive disgusting manner. Isn’t one entitled to avoid what he sees as wicked and unclean. These ‘others’ interpret this as being marginalized. It is simply an issue of different perspectives. Your perceive them according to your own personal reasons as being violent and unjustly controlling and they perceive you according to their reasons as blasphemous and impure. In spite of that, no one replied expressing their real view of your faith nor your claimed sexual behavior. This, if you ever noticed, is indicative of the good manners of the readers. Afterwhich, in your avalanche of words, you started implicating Islam for your misfortunes (again, from your perspective) when it is your abnormalities that is to blame (our perspective). I hope I’m clarifying a point here. But later, you take a step further and start defining Islam and translating verses according to your preferences which in an academic debate would make you look like a clown not because you can’t have an opinion but because it’s meaningless and can block efforts to reach conclusions when there are people with an opposing view around (whom you’re talking about). At that point I stepped in to clarify the ‘official’ Islamic understanding of a couple of concepts that you mentioned and I really didn’t mean offend or sound crude but it is in my interest that a true version of Islam is maintained. I even ended my post with a kind wish that no two decent humans would differ about. Yet in your ignorance, arrogance and disrespect you even rejected that. You then followed this by a river of bragging, whining and a plethora of baseless claims and musings in a writing style that is more suitable for a stand-up comedian or a radio talk show. You are even ‘aware’ of an audience and address your ‘readers’. You see this is indicative of your purpose of posting here. Most likely you like typing and probably have nothing else, of value, to do. You haven’t got the slightest interest in dialog, communication or understanding at any level. That is why reaching a conclusion or a minute agreement with you is extremely difficult or maybe even impossible. This is ultimately clear from your writings. This is the real “shaming language”. Me and several of my friends, on the other hand, came here coz we were amazed by this blog entry in which a ‘Mormon’ faithfully attempts to understand our religion unaffected by the media, his cultural norms and even his own religion which is unaccepted, as a faith, in Islam as he probably knows. To us, what he did was a very commendable act of patience and sincere open mindedness. This was very touching and many wanted to reach out and communicate even more. Then you came.
Moreover your claim that I didn’t address one point of your posts. How can I? You need whole books to sort out your confusion. You’re the type of person that makes a false claim then builds a whole mountain on top of it. That is the most difficult type to communicate with. What makes it worse is that you don’t even leave a chance for any exchange of points. And just because people around you don’t have the time to disassemble and fix your life long accomplishment of mess, you think you’re unique, correct and can win arguments. Intelligent dialog isn’t constructed in this manner. You need to go step by step. Point by point. You need to assume that you are facing you converser in person and try to build on that. People usually get carried away when online and that is often not constructive. Yet most importantly you need to have an honest intention and commitment to find the truth. The ultimate truth is not a cheap commodity and people who undermine its value might never be able to find it.

In terms of monotheism and polytheism, technically, Mormons (of which I am one), are polytheist. Although we worship only one god directly, we do believe that our god worships a god, and that we have the power to become gods. In other words, as a religion, we recognize that there are infinitely many gods, both before our god, and after him. This greatly separates us from the rest of theism, by a long shot.

However, frankly, I hope you don’t delete any insulting language. It is beneficial for others to realize just how deeply we are held in contempt. Maybe if they get it something might happen to change it.

Also a word to all you monotheists out there who think i am talking about you, I learned a saying a while ago “if it ain’t about you, don’t make it about you.” This is actually not as accusatory as it sounds. Basically it is a way of saying, when I say a monotheist does such and such, I am ONLY and SPECIFICALLY speaking about the monotheists that do such and such.

There are a great many monotheists, Christians, Jews, Muslims, Zorastrians and other monotheists, that simply do not commit acts of violence and a great many that object to marginalizing polyculturalists. So when I am speaking about those monoculturalists that DO those things, i don’t mean any of you that are not doing those things.

Unless I am being specifically nasty about the Irish. I probably mean every rotten thing I’ve ever said about us. Even the drinkin’ stuff .

Thanks again for allowing the freeflow of ideas even if they conflict with your own Aaron. And if you ever wish to take the step to experience among we polytheists, the same kind of thing you experienced among Muslims, let me know, I am sure we can work something out .