quote: A few days ago, Towey was engaged in a White House-sponsored online chat when he was asked whether pagan organizations should be ``given the same consideration as any other group'' that applies for federal money.
Towey then stepped on his, uh, miter by responding that he had never run into a pagan faith-based group, much less any pagan who cared about the poor.
I believe that the correct response would have been that although he had never run into a pagan faith-based group, were he to, they would be given the same consideration for federal funds as any other group. Had he said such a thing, I'm sure not as many people would have been offended, but I'm pretty sure he would still have gotten as many responses from pagan faith-based groups.
Other than that, he should have kept his yapper shut tight, not mentioning anything about never running into a pagan faith-based group. The rest of my above statement would still apply.
quote: ``Once you make it clear to any applicant that public money must go to public purposes and can't be used to promote ideology, the fringe groups lose interest,'' Towey wrote. ``Helping the poor is tough work, and only those with loving hearts seem drawn to it.''
I felt like that he said this after what he said above implies that he feels like many pagans don't have loving hearts. I'm sure that my fiancee will account that at least I have a loving heart, and I will account for him. Our room-mate, who is also pagan, will have to be accounted for by others. Perhaps the loving and cuddly chinchilla that he's raised will attest to his loving nature.
Also, I felt like his comment insinuates that were a faith-based pagan group to apply for federal funds to do good, they would be treated like a fringe group.
I'm generally not the kind of 'pagan' that gets offended by remarks about my religion very easily. As many on Hatrack can attest to, I'm the kind of person who is willing to educate people about Wicca, my brand of paganism. I make jokes constantly about it. But this kinda pushed my button.
I donate on a constant basis to whatever charity should happen to knock on my door, so long as I've heard of them, and I have faith that they are a real charity. I crochet baby blankets for Project Linus, who gives them to children in hospitals and to fire and police-departments. I give to groups that are donating funds to our local school system, and recently I donated to the Oklahoma Highway Patrol.
I found it extremely irritating that someone would make such assumptions about pagans, that they are so cold-hearted (or the warm-blooded ones are so few) that they can not band together to give to various causes. Although there are not many here in Oklahoma, I know of at least a couple of local larger 'covens' that got together and donated pet supplies to be sent to California when they were having the fires there this year.
However, the response to mishap on Jim Towey's part was somewhat heart-warming. I was pleased that so many groups sought to 'educate' both him and the White-House and let them know that there are indeed, such groups in existence.
I feel like this happening and getting in the news like it has, has let the white house know that we are also a substantial group that will be voting next year.
So I hope in the end what happened was, a little offense, some education, and no harm done.
posted
You know, this article raises an interesting prospect: a group of Satanists getting together to run a soup kitchen and spread Satanism, completely entitled to federal dollars. I'm half-tempted to try it. Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
Good idea, Tom. Unfortunately, just to be clear, since this article was about pagans, Satanism isn't really talked about. Although, I should hope that if a group of satanists wanted to start a shelter or something, I should hope that they would also, like a pagan faith based group, get the consideration as any other group would.
However, if a bunch of satanists got together and wanted to run a soup kitchen on the US Dollar, then I hope they wouldn't just be attempting to advocate Satanism, since, from what I understand, that isn't what the funds are for.
posted
I had the impression that Wiccans and Pagans were different. Wicca Thread .
Is the characterization that "Eyes Wide Shut" is like a training film in any way accurate? Out of curiosity. I didn't see it so I guess it doesn't matter, it just seemed a little flippant and in the same vein as Towey's error.
To be fair, Utah's Senator Hatch did sponsor a religious freedom bill that upheld ritual animal sacrifice. But I think that was in 1992.
Posts: 11017 | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged |
Ya know...some literature hangin' around while they're waitin' for services...maybe some motivational tapes playin' in the background...a show that just happens to be on cable... or a video.
Don't want our clients to get bored and leave. And if after a few visits, they don't become inspired... ...well, obviously we just don't click; and we don't wanna be wastin' the taxpayers when they're are so many others who may be more amenable to our ways.
Posts: 8501 | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Pooka, someone who is pagan worships more than one god. Since in Wicca, the general practice is to worship both a god and goddess (or the god and goddess), then Wiccans are pagan. However, not all pagans are of the Wiccan faith.
I'm not sure about the "Eyes Wide Shut" characterization, since I didn't see the film either. I did think that a couple of things that were said in the article sounded somewhat flippant as well, but I chose to see most of them as humorous. I'll choose to think that the comment about the movie was made in the same light.
It's easy to be flippant about a faith, or for this matter, a group of faiths, that one doesn't don't claim as their own (although I'm not absolutely certain that the author of the article was not pagan or Wiccan).
Posts: 701 | Registered: Jul 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
By that broad standard, "Mormons" are pagan. (I'm not trying to be flippant). We certainly get the "not Christian" argument a lot. We don't worship a goddess, however. We just believe that God the Father and Christ the Son (and the Holy Ghost) are three totally separate people. And, actually, we don't worship Jesus directly. And of course there is the bit that is most offensive to other Christians, our belief that we can become like God.
In that respect, what do you feel is the ultimate purpose of your observances? Is it a necessary acknowledgement of your view of the world, or is it an effort to better yourselves and improve the world?
Posts: 11017 | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
I find this offensive, too. Most pagans I've been exposed to consider "giving back" to the Universe an important part of their religious practice. If you are working magick to bring something good into your life, you pay back by bringing good into someone else's. If you are trying to bring healing to Nature, you also actively seek to do good things like participating in litter cleanups.
So whether it is on an individual or collective level, I don't see where someone gets off branding Pagans as a group who don't care about the poor.
Posts: 3141 | Registered: Apr 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
I don't beleive Mr. Towey meant to insult pagans or Wiccans in particular.
I just think his idea of a Pagan is what he was taught in bible school decades ago, they were evil idol worshiping child sacrificers who Jesus Christ lovingly sent to roast forever in hell.
He is not being mean spirited, just shallow, ignormant, and closed minded.
Posts: 11895 | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged |
quote: A few days ago, Towey was engaged in a White House-sponsored online chat when he was asked whether pagan organizations should be ``given the same consideration as any other group'' that applies for federal money.
The idea that pagans would not be considered came out of the question. Of course, we're not told whether the questioner was a pagan or what.
Posts: 11017 | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
The question certainly doesn't hold any implications to me, and I fail to see how the beliefs of the questioner have any relevance.
Posts: 15770 | Registered: Dec 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Dan, I have known for around a decade now about pagan religions; while I am not permitted to approve, I do know that many of the people who follow them are generally good and compassionate. That does not mean I have ever heard of a charity organization run by pagans--I have not, or at least it did not have a name to make it memorable.
Posts: 1041 | Registered: Feb 2002
| IP: Logged |
quote:In that respect, what do you feel is the ultimate purpose of your observances? Is it a necessary acknowledgement of your view of the world, or is it an effort to better yourselves and improve the world?
Pooka, I feel like the ultimate purpose of my observances is to honor the Lord and Lady in whatever ways that I can. If I can honor them by bettering myself and improving the world, then I will better myself and improve the world. If by honoring them in the wheel of the year (which is an observance of their appearance in winter, spring, summer, and fall-that's about the best way I can describe it without getting into all the details here), then I will hold sabbats to honor them also in that matter.
So really, I believe what I'm trying to say is that the ultimate purpose of my observances could be considered both a necessary acknowledgement of my view of the world and a way to better myself and improve the world that we all live on, in addition to whatever other ways I can find to worship and honor them (there are other ways, but I won't get into that here).
Dan, even if that is what he believed about Pagans, shouldn't he have been educated about different faiths, or been required to know about the different faiths that would ultimately be applying for federal funds?
Posts: 701 | Registered: Jul 1999
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[No No]](graemlins/nono.gif)
