I'll admit it: I am a conservative. I am not a Republican: I believe Republicans in Washington have tainted the party's ideals, and do not deserve re-election. I wish to see our Constitution returned to its original purpose; I wish to see powers returned to the states; I want less government and less governmental control in my life, and I crave fiscal responsibility.
This is not something my friends always understand. Most of them are of much more liberal leanings, and that's okay, it doesn't make them evil or any less my friends, and NO, I don't think they are deluded. Given that the Democratic party has in the past gone to some lengths to be the "party of inclusion", there are many people who feel more comfortable identifying with this political group.
Who can blame them? After all, the Republican party and its spinoff, the Tea Party, often seem to be very much the party of "religious freedom means 30 different kinds of Christians." If you're anything other than a Christian or maybe a Jew, you are nothing and no one--or worse, you are seen as downright evil.
Republicans' horrified reactions to this week's "revelation" that Delaware Tea Party candidate Christine O'Donnell "dabbled in witchcraft" as a teenager have just been one facepalm after another for me (the real horror in that 1990s interview was not what she said, but her HAIR, OMG that was, like, Mall Chick Hair...)
Let's get some things straight: O'Donnell is correct in saying that teenagers do rebellious, stupid things like "dabbling in witchcraft". I disagree with her that it was a less destructive rebellion than, say, alcohol or drug abuse, but the effects of alcohol or drug abuse are often more obvious than those of "dabbling in witchcraft". The Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary defines "dabbling" thusly: to work or involve oneself superficially or intermittently especially in a secondary activity or interest <dabbles in art> I think that in this circumstance "dabbling" might be further defined as "messing around without intent".
The popular imagination, fueled by Harry Potter and other similar publications (did you know there were others?) envisions witches casting spells, riding brooms, and making potions. The books one finds in the Occult/New Age section of your local bookstore (many of which are bogus) focus on spell-casting --which I feel is NOT something that should be tried by amateurs, rather like driving on the Schuylkill Expressway when you only have your learner's permit.
The part about the satanic altar (this was a triple facepalm moment)...well, that was just plain stupid and the whole community practicing Earth-Based Religion could have done without that association. I have already had to call the middle school principal and "explain" to him that witchcraft does not equal satanic worship. Geez, even the Harry Potter books define the battle between good and evil pretty plainly!
Some facts:
1. Most people who are "witches" (i.e., self-identify as Pagan, Wiccan, Shamanic, or as a practitioner of Earth-Based religion) do not practice spellcraft. They are cautious about such work: like many things it should be left to the Professionals.
2. Witchcraft is NOT Satanism. Satanic worshippers occupy a very specific group.
3. Witches do NOT sacrifice animals or babies or anything living. In fact, some of them are pretty wildly against such practices.
I know in my heart (and from what I've read on Facebook) that my friends are already up in arms at the Republican party's reaction to O'Donnell's admission. It looks like it's going to be "damage control" for her instead of the golden opportunity for a statement about religious freedom.
Unfortunately, I don't see the Democrats stepping up in defense of witchcraft.
Since this is an Equal Opportunity Blog (EOB) I will now turn to the rumor that the President's mother-in-law practices Santeria, and that the President is beside himself with fury.
Some facts:
1. Santeria is the Real Deal. Even the Supreme Court said so. Santeria makes everything you see in those books in the Occult/New Age section of your local bookstore look like Dick and Jane. This is Serious Shit and people often turn to it when there is dire illness in their families.
2. Santeria is an Afro-Caribbean religion: it is based on traditions brought over from East Africa by slaves and then blended with the Christianity that was imposed on these slaves by their masters. This means that as an African-American it's part of President Obama's heritage.
.
3. Just as is the case in most religions (I would say "all" but I'm not a fan of absolutes) most practitioners of Santeria are Really Good People who provide sound advice to those seeking it, and who use their connections to the spirit world to do good.
4. Santeria IS a blood religion. This means that goats, roosters and other small animals get sacrificed. Before you object, they are probably killed more humanely than that chicken you had for dinner last night. Yes, I have seen it, though I am not a practitioner.
According to the news media, we should be horrified by both of these stories--and I am, except not the way that that writers and spin doctors (gods, I love that title) want me to be. I am horrified that this has become NEWS. After all, when was the last time that you saw a headline like "OMG, NEWT GINGRICH DABBLED IN BEING A CATHOLIC!" Those of you who are Protestants will chuckle.
A person's religion should be a VERY private matter--and it should not affect one's opinion of another. These days we see more and more escalation of in-your-face religious expression: business cards with the "Jesus fish" on them; people wearing pentacles the size of dinner plates. Actually, of all of them, the practitioners of Afro-Caribbean religions are the least conspicuous: lacking fish, pentacles, burkas, yarmulkes, or other traditional dress, they blend into society, often so smoothly that their neighbors have no idea what they believe or don't believe.
The bottom line is that religion needs to be removed from politics in every way, shape and form. If people have to have a reason to vote for candidates, it should not be because of their religious preference (because we all know how THAT has worked out in the past because religion does not equal morality): it should be because of issues like governmental reform and taxes. I want to be free to practice the religion of my choice, without suffering the judgment of my peers. And it would be really nice if the candidates didn't have to worry about their past "dabblings" to the point where they have to apologize or explain how "misguided" they were, because in doing so they are offending far more people than they realize. When was the last time someone apologized for being a Baptist?
No comments:
Post a Comment