Christianity's actual tenets don't resemble those of radical sects - Opinion

In keeping with my point about Christianity, here is an article published last April by the Protestant Chaplain at Syracuse University.

Christianity's actual tenets don't resemble those of radical sects - Opinion

Of Lesbians and Gay Men

You know, I hate to bring this up, but I think that men are still making more money than women. In fact, I believe the statistic is, the average woman is earning 79 cents to the average man's dollar. Now, that is better than it was, but it still is not equitable.

Now, where this is really evident, is in the LGBT community, where the average Lesbian couple is making $1.58 to the average Gay male couple's $2.00. The reason that I am bringing this up, is that I live in a neighborhood that has an unusually high percentage of LGBT people. And, in my neighborhood, most of the Gay men are doing swimmingly better than most of the Lesbian.

I don't have an answer for this. It is just something that I have been noticing.

Articles Of Faith: Media's portrayal of religion skews to the right

Here is one of my pet peeves. This article, which can be accessed by clicking the link above, is about how conservative right-wing Christians get TONS more media attention that the group that actually comprises MOST American Christians. That group is the moderate - progressive Christians.

One of the first things that I had to come to grips with when I came to work in the Chapel of this liberal Northeastern private university was that I had to throw out the prejudices that I had against Christians. The people that I now work for and with are nearly all Christians, and in this environment, it is not the "don't talk about religion" environment of a corporation. Religion is everywhere, and everyone here has to deal with it all the time.

When I first saw my job posted, I saw that it was one that I am immanently qualified for, except for the fact that it was for a Protestant ministry. Instead of just dismissing the experience out of hand, I went right to the Protestant minister and said, "Hi, I am extremely qualified for the job that you posted, but you have to know right off, I am a Lesbian Pagan."

"Fine", he responded, "we don't discriminate on the basis of religion." He didn't even mention the "Lesbian" part of my declaration, because, as I was eventually to discover, the Protestant ministry here has a very high percentage of LGBT people as active members.

Far from the being the judgmental, Bible-thumping lunatics that are normally portrayed in the media, the Christians that I am surrounded by are caring, supportive, and emotionally available. There is always food here to share, people are always willing to help, or to offer rides, or just listen when I am having a rough day. And, the best thing yet, is that everyone knows that I am a Pagan, everyone knows that I am a Lesbian, everyone knows my partner, and everyone treats us both with all the honor and respect that they would treat anyone else.

While the media has told me one thing, my own observations have told me something else entirely. It is easy to see why many LGBT people as well as many Pagans believe that there is only one kind of Christian, and that is the late Jerry Falwell. In reality, that is no more true than the belief that all Muslims are crazed suicide bombers waiting for the next opportunity to blow up a bunch of college students in a cafe.

In Praise of Severus Snape

I feel grossly under-prepared to write about anything Harry Potter, as I have only finished one of the books and seen all of the movies. However, I feel really compelled, today, to write about this. Several people on my fList have taken the Sorting Hat test that is going around, and nearly everyone tested as Gryffindor. A point that I want to bring up, though, is that ALL of the houses at Hogwarts are equally important, much like the 4 universal elements (which they do, btw, correspond to). Actually, it has come into my consciousness, that each house represents control of their element, or, perhaps, dominion over that element.

So, with that in mind, Ravenclaw represents dominion over the Intellect, (focusing on knowledge and not wasting energy on useless curiosity), Gryffindor represents dominion over Will, using that power for the greater good rather than self-service. Slytherin dominion over the Emotions, not allowing your heart to get in the way of your purpose. Hufflepuff represents dominion over the body, making sure that all of the physical needs are taken care of so that all else can function.

When thought of in that way, Sytherin becomes pretty important, doesn't it? However, sometimes control over the emotions can seem very cruel and harsh. We just recently had to put our oldest cat to sleep. At what point do you make that decision? Right after that, we were faced with a bad ear infection in another one. Where is the money going to come from for that? It didn't happen this way, but there was a possibility that we were going to have to put the other one to sleep for the greater good of all.

Snape is one of my favorite characters in HP, but this is no surprise, because "Dracula" is one of my favorite books. I find Dracula to be one of the most incredible teachers! The same goes for Snape.

In the first book, for example, Snape starts out by mocking Harry's fame. ("Harry Potter. Our new—celebrity."). He then goes on to ask question of Harry that he has had no chance to learn ("What would I get if I added powdered root of asphodel to an infusion of wormwood?", "Let's try again. Potter, where would you look if I told you to find me a bezoar?" "What is the difference, Potter, between monkshood and wolfsbane?"). Potter does not have any idea about any of these, although Hermione clearly does. Hermione studied before hand, Harry did not (not that he could have, but that is beside the point). Why does Snape berate Harry so? What has he got to gain by picking on and humiliating this one underfed boy?

He is protecting him, that is why. Hermione knows all the answers, but it doesn't matter. Her parents are dentists. No one knows her. Harry is not only famous, he is very unpopular with Voldemort, who will come after him. Harry's fame will, in no way, protect him from Voldemort. Snape is teaching Harry "life is hard and cruel and dangerous... BE PREPARED! Scary things are real, and they can do much more than just go bump in the night!). Life isn't all fluffy bunnies and lavender caches. Sometimes we really need people that are willing to be mean, or even cruel to us in order to make us strong. It brings to mind the film "Conan the Barbarian". The villain in that is called Thulsa Doom. He killed Conan's parents when he was a child, then captured Conan and sold him into slavery, where he spent his childhood pushing a millstone like a mule. Then Conan was sold to another man who turned him into a gladiator so that he spent his youth fighting for his life in a ring. Thulsa Doom is not anyone's idea of a "nice guy". However, he makes an excellent point when he says: "What is steel compared to the hand that wields it? Look at the strength in your body, the desire in your heart, I gave you this! Such a waste. Contemplate this on the tree of woe. Crucify him!"

That scene in the Sorcerers Stone is one of my favorites because I love what Snape says about Potions. I am convinced that he is actually talking about Blood, as is the kind that flows in the veins and remembers who you are. Snape says: "You are here to learn the subtle science and exact art of potion-making,..As there is little foolish wand-waving here, many of you will hardly believe this is magic. I don't expect you will really understand the beauty of the softly simmering cauldron with its shimmering fumes, the delicate power of liquids that creep through human veins, bewitching the mind, ensnaring the senses... I can teach you how to bottle fame, brew glory, even stopper death..." (He is also, of course, talking about dominion of emotion... emotions are carried in the blood as hormones).

For some reason, this line reminds of the ending line in "Blood Music" by Greg Bear, "Nothing is lost, nothing is forgotten.
It was in the blood, the flesh. And now it is forever."

So, thank you, Severus Snape, for reminding me of how some of my greatest lessons have come from the some of the harshest teachers.

Cambodia Bans Evangelism; Accuses Christians of 'Disrupting Society'

As always, click on title to see original article.

On the surface, this headline seems pretty funny. If you happen to be an Evangelical Christian, you might find it outrageous, but if you happen to be one of the rest of the majority of Americans and are of other faith (which includes everything from Pagan to Protestant), then you are probably chuckling.

Fact is, though, this is not all that extreme. In fact, I happen to work at an interfaith chapel on a private university campus, and in order to preserve the religious freedom of all of the students of the campus, there is a strict "non-proselytizing" rule. In essence, it is to prevent "disruption".

From myth to reality - meet the chimps who eat lions

To read original article, click on the title.

I forgot to mention that I am also interested in crypto-zoology and anthropology, and when the two of these things come together for me... Wow!

I am a big believer in Sasquatch. I saw a footprint when I was a kid, and I never forgot it. You know, when I was a kid, giant squid were merely legend, too.

Supposedly, all non-human hominids are extinct. What it they aren't? What would that mean? What kind of rights would they have? What would we learn from them? I think this is all very exciting.

Al-Qaida likely to attack US, intel says

As always, click on the title to see the referenced article.

I have spent a long time... many, many hours, trying to figure out what could or would be the possible benefit for "terrorist" groups to blow up innocent people, whether that be in the U.S., Iraq, Israel, or anywhere else, for that matter. Really, what are those folks trying to prove? "Do what we want or we will blow you up?" Does that make any sense? "Those people" (you decide for yourself who "those people" are) "are nothing but a bunch of violent, religious fanatics." Hardly. That logic doesn't make any sense, either.

I have finally come to a conclusion. My conclusion is, Terrorism, and, by that I mean suicide bombers, planes flown into big buildings, anything like that, is a Fund Raiser, in much the same way that some religious groups do mission/service trips.

For example, one of the way a church in this country may choose to raise funds is by doing some sort of "good work", like sending a group of people to New Orleans to help with clean up, for example. Before the actual trip takes place, the church may bring it up during collections or even by a direct mailing campaign to get people to contribute to this mission. This is how the trip is funded, and most of the money collected will probably go to the cost of the trip itself. While folks are down there working, there are pictures taken, and, usually, a minister will go with them. Then when they all get back, the pictures, which are pictures of people everyone knows from the congregation, dressed in hazmat suits shoveling muck in ruined houses, are published in the church bulletins, news letters, direct mailings, and anything else where the church can ask people for more money. This shows the people with the wallets what good work their church actually does, makes them feel good, and makes them want to be a part of that by contributing more money.

There is nothing wrong with this. This is how non-profit fundraising works, whether it is a religious organization, a charitable organization, or saving the whales. They ask their donors for money to do specific things, then they show their donors what they did, so that their donors will be more inclined to donate.

I am thinking, at this point, that we can view "al-Qaida", and similar groups, as "non-profit organizations". I think they are collecting money from donors, and then, when they pull off these big, deadly explosions and it makes lots of press, then their donors are more likely to donate again.

Now, I am not saying that blowing up people is morally the same as feeding hungry children. It is not. However, one of the Five Pillars of Islam is Zakah, or "alms-giving", and the amount given is based on the giver's wealth. So, my guess is that people who donate to terrorism see some benefit to themselves. Obviously, large numbers of very poor, oppressed, depressed people are going to feel angry at U.S. apparent affluence and conspicuous consumption. It is the rule in non-profit fundraising that the most amount of money comes from large numbers of small donations.

How about wealthy people, though? Who, among the world's wealthiest people, could benefit the most from a destabilization of the U.S. economy? This is a question that I don't have an answer for, but I would guess it has something to do with oil production. I am a religious scholar, not a macro-economist, and I will be the first to admit it.

However, I would be interested in hearing from people who ARE macro-economists. The bottom line here is this: In all things, follow the money.