web analytics
Occasionally I wandered in where I was not wanted and gave truthful answers.
Sometimes I even did it deliberately. A little disruption now can prevent disaster later.

“Have YOU Found Jesus?” (Author Unknown)

Learn how to see. Realize that everything connects to everything else.
— Leonardo da Vinci

Obsessed with Christians

I wrote about my thinking behind the link behavior here at Technopagan Yearnings and how I made it work.


My comments on the “Billy Graham rule”

If anything can go wrong, it will — and in the most annoying manner possible.

Added to the lexicon


“Venice and the Ottoman Empire: Crash Course World History #19”


Elvis has left the building

Neo admits he's still a bit of a nerd, even after all these years


“The Crusades - Pilgrimage or Holy War?: Crash Course World History #15”


NeoNote — the American compromise

Reopening my path to the world wide web


Related to who?

Sorry about that. I wasn't going to load the new stuff until I had all the changes made.


Personally I'd be willing to live and let live with Christians.

I don't understand why any group should change their language, practices, customs or actions when the shooter was not part of the group or the community.
— NeoWayland

“We are the Pagans who have moved on”

These blog entries have been reformatted and entered into the current directories. Redirect pages have been placed in the old locations.


The Gods Do Not Vote

The Gods Do Not Vote, So Why Are You Asking Them?

Meanwhile, I see some Pagans convinced that they know how the gods vote — or would vote, if they could produce a photo ID at the polling place.

Are these the same Pagans who sneer at that subset of evangelical Christians who apparently think that Jesus is a Republican?

If you are really a polytheist, then you must accept that the gods do not vote. Their values are not always aligned with our day-to-day political values. Really, what does Aphrodite care about Colorado’s proposal to change the redistricting process or about who wins the race for Pueblo County coroner? Should I consult Hekate about my congressional candidates?
Chas S. Clifton

Elite witchcraft

This is a page from the third version of Technopagan Yearnings. There are some formatting differences. Originally published at www.neowayland.com/C1325529963/E20070412051550

Reconsidering the answer to an old post

The thing with Witch School reminded me of a comment from Juliaki on this post.

She asked "Why is elitism bad?"

I suppose it comes down to if the elitism is earned or bestowed.

When it comes to titles, Pagan titles in particular, they really don't tell me much.

"Vice President of Marketing." "Lady of the Inner Circle." "Teacher."

These titles tell nothing.

The virtue isn't in the title you see, the virtue is in the individual.

Titles draw their power from the virtue of the individual.

So what makes an elite?

The actions and choices of an individual.

We recognize elitism all the time. You go to your doctor because you trust him, not necessarily because of those initials behind his name. You call the plumber that you know will show up and fix the problem. You don't go to just any restaurant, you carefully choose.

If witchcraft were a profession, people would want to know about the individual reputation.

Not if a person was a witch or not.

If you had an English sports car, would you take it to just any mechanic? If you want a good quality towel, will you go the the closeout bin at the dollar store? If you need your taxes done, will you use your neighbor's sister's friend?

You may get exactly what you want from these places, but you have no way of knowing which will pay off and which will not. And there is no guarantee that it will pay off more than once.

Thinking about it, over the years we've assumed that there is some sort of egalitarianism in witchcraft and Pagan beliefs. There is not. Not all witches are equal. Not all Pagans are equal. Not all Pagans are witches.

Let's put in another word that is supposed to be a no-no.


Discrimination is not necessarily evil.

I don't want my Baptist relatives telling me how to practice my faith. I don't necessarily want them telling me how to practice magick either, even though some of them do exactly that, all be it in rather limited circumstances. I'm discriminating because I don't think they know enough to tell me what I need to know.

People are not all equally gifted. Certainly Pagans aren't all equally gifted. Should each be given the same consideration?

All I have got to go on is the individual reputation. And once there is someone I can trust, I am more likely to pay attention to THEIR choices than I am someone I do not know.

So should witchcraft be elite?

Why should it be any different?

Posted: Thu - April 12, 2007 at 05:15 AM


Paganism isn't a movement


NeoNote - White sage, Amerindians and virtue signalling

White sage is really not that hard to find. You need a little care when harvesting to avoid harming the plant. If you're in the right area and you don't overwater, it's fairly easy to keep in a container garden. Oh, and if you're harvesting your own, avoid polyester thread or yarn to tie the bundles, that smells terrible when burned.

I grew up next to the Diné and Hopi and near the Havasupai and a handful of other tribes. I promise that pretty much any sage ceremony from a book or a pamphlet or a website isn't anywhere near culturally appropriated, much less "authentic."

Okay, maybe I am not understanding because the stuff is all over New Mexico, Arizona, and Utah.

Maybe I'm wrong, but if it was a native supplier who was selling, how is wrong for the company to resell?

I never really have understood the whole cultural appropriation bit. Syncretism happens.

Pardon, but it's some of the First Nation folks. Some of the Diné I know are far more concerned with the abuse of corn rituals than sage rituals.

I guess what I am saying is that this strikes me as politics, a way to control other's behaviors using little-understood religions. Look at this, we're talking Native, we're talking First Nations, but these groups are absolutely not the same as the various tribes.

This was acceptable and practiced behavior a couple of days ago. No one was hurt, no one was abused, no one was demeaned. From what you yourself have said, anyone who is not Native should Stop Now. This isn't about honoring the First Nations, it's about control through guilt.

Why does your enlightenment require that I sacrifice?

Granted I haven't been able to talk to more than a handful of people in the last day or so about this issue, but most of what I got was laughter.

This is not a "bubble," I was born on the res, the Diné and Hopi are some of my friends and neighbors.

This whole thing about honoring the First Nations seems very selective. A few months back during the Dakota protests I tried to point out how the state of Utah was using legal maneuvers to steal land and money from the Ute and Diné (Navajo). That didn't rate so much as a burp, but the discussion on the protests went on and on.

Trust me, white sage is not endangered. Not even in the wild. The land is mostly desert and the plant life is not as plentiful, but it is all over the place. It's not the most common plant, but it's not rare.

That's something else we've been tiptoeing around, isn't it?

That also drags the FedGovs in. Truthfully there are some peyote users that aren't interested in the ritual.

The whole mess between the NAC and the Feds is one thing that convinced me that government and religion should be strictly separated from other. And that was when I was (briefly) a Young Teenage Republican Male. Twelve years old and I could see what a farce it was on both sides.

Well, the hunt is part of the ritual, but yeah.

==>Insert obligatory lengthy libertarian anti-drug law rant here<==

For the record, I don't even drink or otherwise imbibe. I even try to avoid aspirin.

So you can use the higher authority gambit to cite the Good Amerindians, but I am not allowed to question?

These are questions that should be asked.

Starting with the big one that almost everyone keeps tiptoeing around. Why should white sage be forbidden to anyone not of First Nations stock?

That in itself raises questions, very political questions in fact. Some tribes have taken a hard line on who is and is not a member.

Do you have to be Officially Recognized before you dare consider using white sage?

I do that when someone claims higher morality so they can control the choices and actions of others.

It's a first step.

You should see what I do with self-righteous Christians.

Pardon, but some Native Americans are upset. The (admittedly few) that I talked to just thought it was silly.

They still think the plant and the smudging ceremonies are sacred. They just think there are more important things in the World than this fuss.

Which, BTW, didn't exist a week ago.

I have a bit of a problem with lumping different tribes under one heading like First Nations or Native or Amerindian. Whenever possible, I prefer to refer to the tribe name and not the generic label. The cultures and ceremonies are different.

That being said, the handful of Diné I talked in the last couple of days thought this was silly and virtue signaling. I think they were more irritated by "whites" trying to "protect" Amerindian rituals and plants than "whites" using sage in purification rituals.

It was only a small number of people. It would be a mistake to claim their opinion is representative or that I have a greater understanding of their culture.

But that's parity again. It cuts both ways. If the people I talked to are not representative, then what about the Amerindians who complained? If my understanding is insufficient, then what about all the non-Natives who are making a fuss now?

That happens a lot.

Thomas Sowell said “When you want to help people, you tell them the truth. When you want to help yourself, you tell them what they want to hear.”

Just because it is truth doesn't mean people will listen.

NeoNotes are the selected comments that I made on other boards, in email, or in response to articles where I could not respond directly.


NeoNote — Not about paganism

Someone is pulling your strings. You'd be a fool to accept that.


NeoNotes — Defending my faith (the long one)

I hadn't heard of the "well poisoner" bit, although obviously I heard about "poisoner." There are certain bits that I don't let folks get away with, like the "unbroken matriarchal tradition" or "Never again the Burning Times"

I try to give Christians the benefit of the doubt, mainly because I expect the same. Some make it harder than others (Bob Barr). Live and let live works mostly.

Anyway, I'll go back to my books now.


Satanists are not witches, usually.

One does not like being labeled as the other.

Sort of like comparing an intramural softball team to a volunteer soup kitchen. There are similarities but there are far more differences.

And I've seen extremely energetic discussions why they aren't the same thing. I even agree with most of it, Satanism is usually more self-focused.

As far as the "eternal destination," no one This Side knows.

Which is almost certainly the point of being This Side.

Actually you don't.

You know that I don't like labels and that I prefer to live and let live. You know I think humans are mostly good, given half a chance and a few kind words.

But part of my path means I don't casually share the Names of my gods. It's part of how I honor them.

It's not your place to judge, and it certainly isn't your place to allow me anything.

It's literally between me and the Divine. Your own book teaches that.

Parity. Simple parity. You don't want your stuff questioned by me, don't try to impose it on me. Live & let live. You're not a gatekeeper no matter how hard you try.

I'd like to make this World just a little better than I found it. Where is it "written" that is wrong?

It's not complicated. It doesn't require Divine evaluation.

There you go again, trying to assume authority that was never yours.

There's nothing in that special handbook that gives Christians power over other humans.

I won't bow before your belief, just as you won't bow before mine. You can't require that of me and I can't require that of you.


Pardon, but I didn't say anything about forcing. That's not why I'm objecting.

He's disputing my beliefs because he doesn't share them. Nothing wrong with that. But then he attempts to put his beliefs over mine without logic, but faith. He'd be screaming bloody murder if I tried the same thing.

I don't allow it when the climate change crowd tries. I don't allow it when the RadFems try. And I don't allow it when certain Christians try. Not because I disagree, but because no one has the power to dictate faith.

I pointed out that no one This Side knew what the "eternal destination" was.

I pointed out that QM wants me to put his faith over mine.

"But that doesn't mean we have to stop trying to warn you."

"The only judgment he made was that God suffers you to live."

Both those were yours I think.

Pardon, but both those were taken from your replies.

"The key, however, is the eternal destination is the same…"

That was QM, above.

Absent proof, my belief is as valid as his. That was my point.

And NONE of that matters This Side, where it's up to us to Manifest the Divine in a way that hopefully makes the World a little better than we found it.

You and he are nitpicking about the afterlife when we should be focusing on the here and now.

Oh my, that is just too funny!

Just what do you think you're doing when you continually insist your beliefs apply to me when I disagree?

Oh, and while we're at it, note that I haven't said one blessed word about what I think will happen to you after This Side.

We weren't discussing invalidating, we were discussing calling something invalid.

We also had established that using your beliefs to control others is a Bad Thing™. Just in case you hadn't noticed, my criticism of Christianity is reactive and mostly directed against certain Christians.

Celebrate your beliefs and cherish your faith. All I ask is the same. Just don't demand that my beliefs and actions are bound by yours. Live and let live.

There is a difference.

You can call something invalid, but that does not invalidate it.

And yet you're still here trying to convince me.

Come down off your high horse.

This from someone who presumes that the default setting for humanity is Christianity, or at least that Christians are in the majority.

You know, one thing I haven't been able to figure out about you is why when you tell people that they should be Christian, the only reason you give is a vague threat about what "happens" to non-Christians after death.

Yes, yes, I know you're going to tell me it is not you that threatens and it is up to Christians to "warn" others.

I didn't say it was what you said, I said it was what you presumed.

Why are you so desperate for me to bow before your belief? If I didn't know better, I'd think you were threatened by my beliefs.

And of course, this discussion conveniently lets you ignore the here and now in favor of your "Christian duty."

Outside of religion, it's accepted practice to say "I disagree" and both parties move on.

However, some Christians act as if that's a full challenge.

For whatever reason, you feel you cannot allow dissent to your chosen creed. Now, the logical and respectable thing to do would be to accept that some believe differently and not "mark your territory." It would get you allies and a certain amount of leeway.

But that's not the way you're going to do it, is it?

You need to go back and read everything I've said.

No, I don't think so.

You beclown your by doing so, then whine that the other guy is doing bad things to you.

Actually what I do is show that when you can't handle the argument, you go after the person. It's amateurish and you can do better.

I'm not looking for allies.

You should be.

So you've gone from warning to leading me "around by the nose."

Except you haven't.

You still can't address the argument, you have to go after the person..

Having dealt with some incredibly silly propaganda over the years, I beg to differ.

The first step to invalidating something is to prove it wrong.

Words matter. Actions matter more. Intentions don't.

By the way, have you noticed you're focusing on my "unbelief" and the Christian reaction? Do you remember what I said a few posts back?

And NONE of that matters This Side, where it's up to us to Manifest the Divine in a way that hopefully makes the World a little better than we found it.

You and he are nitpicking about the afterlife when we should be focusing on the here and now.

Seek paradox for truth.

What you have is an either/or trap. You believe that the conditions of your faith are such that all other faiths and belief systems must be universally false. So when I say my faith tells me different, by your conditions I am declaring your faith to be Untruth.

But by the conditions of my faith. I'm just seeing things from another perspective.

What you need to ask yourself who imposed the either/or trap? Your god? Or people claiming to speak in His Name? Why should Diety be limited by a human logical construct?

It's paradox and illogic because some of the "universal" assumptions that you use aren't exactly universal.

You can mix metric and English parts, but something is probably going to come loose and fly apart.

Assume I am making a pie.

You tell me I need apples, cinnamon, nutmeg, brown sugar, cane sugar, apples that have been cored and peeled (preferably Granny Smith but others will work in a pinch)…

But I am making a key lime pie.

Then you tell me that's not a True Pie®. And it may not be from your perspective.

But from my point of view, it works just fine. It's round, it's dessert, and my guests will enjoy it.

There's not just one type of pie.

Your belief shouldn't control what I can and can not call a pie.

Who knows? Next month I may go with my grandmother's pecan pie. It's a pain to make but absolutely delicious.

My key lime pie and my pecan pie do not negate the existence of your apple pie. Your apple pie doesn't prevent me from making my key lime pie and my pecan pie. They aren't your pies so you may not wish to call them pies, but they exist for me.

You didn't state your motive, at least not all of it.

You stated your justification.

If it were really about "warning" people, you would give your warning a few times and that would be it.

You also wouldn't try to go after another's character when they disagree with you.

This is what you do.

When you can't dismiss the argument, you go after the person. When that doesn't work, you go after the person some more.

That doesn't work with me.

Simple questions.

Would you give up your faith and your beliefs for mine?

Why should I give mine up for yours?

Will it make you a better person?

Will it give you some Divine merit points?

Why should I care about some nebulous benefit that comes to you?

Live and let live.

The questions are central to this discussion. Particularly the first two.

Would you give up your faith and your beliefs for mine?

Why should I give mine up for yours?

I'm pretty sure if you think about those questions, you'll discover what "live and let live" means.

I've told you before that my faith and beliefs are at least as important to me as yours are to you.

You wouldn't stand for someone like me telling you what and how to worship.


Live and let live.

No, you are insisting that your beliefs trump mine.

I'm telling you they don't.

I never take anyone's word alone for their motives. I always include their actions.

Guess which I place more importance on.

Guess which tells me more.

He is the only reality.

You believe that, but you have no proof other than faith.

I do not believe as you do.

I have my own beliefs, they are at least as real to me as yours are to you.

I've no proof other than faith.

Live and let live.


You do in deed have "faith" but it is not faith based on a firm foundation.

As opposed to you?

Who are you to judge what is a "firm foundation?"

Why do you assume you have that power?

Go back and digest what I said earlier.

Why? Would you do that if I demanded that you do it with what I wrote?

I don't "assume" to have any power.

Again, your own words prove my point better than I could. You're here now, trying to disprove what I wrote, unleashing your "big guns." That's an awful lot of trouble to take against one man who is seriously outnumbered and hasn't really done anything except write "I disagree."

The main point I make is that there are different faiths and it's wrong to act as if Christianity controls the others.

You wouldn't stand for it if someone tried to do that to Christianity.


Live and let live.

Very simple.

Again, it's live and let live.

Not the strange rewrite that you keep pushing, but the simple idea.

I have my belief, you have yours. As long as you don't keep insisting that your belief governs mine, there's no problem.

It's your insecurity that makes this happen.

Through each of our every discussions, I've never criticized Christianity. It's always been specific followers.

Except you have.

Every single time you trotted out your afterlife threat. Every single time you've insisted that people with other faiths are bound by Christian rules. Every time you've insisted on deference for Christianity while dismissing other faiths.

Can you show how your "firm foundation" is better than mine?

In fact, let's take it one step further.

Can you give me ANYTHING except a vague threat about the afterlife to tell me what a good thing Christianity is and how it is better than my faith?

I've never seen you do that, you know. You recite plenty of afterlife threats, but never any benefits This Side.

I've never seen you do it for anyone you disagree with.

Always with the threats.

Never with the wonders.

Certainly something to think about.

You still haven't established how your "firm foundation" is better than mine.

So now we've come back to where it all began.

Your problem is that you want me to put your faith first and I tell you "no" because I have something else.

No other reason.

You can't tell me the wonders of Christianity, you can only claim that my faith is lacking because it is not Christian.

That is just sad.

ETA: Okay, that was awkwardly worded. Let's try again.

But you still can't bring yourself to say what the wonders are.


I'm not telling you how, or what, to worship. I've simply pointed out the warnings of the consequences of rejecting Christ.

Behold the contradiction.

Or the paradox if you prefer.

As I told RHW above, if there's a paradox, chances are pretty good at least one of your core assumptions is wrong.

He can claim Biblical justification all he wants, but he needs something other than "the Bible told me so." If that's all he got, then his faith is no different than mine, is it?

He may believe that it's more, but he can't control my belief. That's why he trots out "my God suffers you to live."

Instead of looking at the World and how we might make a difference, he presumes his faith gives him the power to give judgement, even as he denies the judgement is his.

And if anyone disputes it, well, it's Holy Writ, isn't it?

It certainly has very little to do with the message of the Bible.

Unfortunately this is not my first or thirteenth dance with QM, we have a history. He has in fact at different times done everything you said he hasn't done on this specific thread.

I'd still prefer live and let live. Which means not publicly insisting that the tenants of your faith control the actions of others. It also means finding a common morality without putting one religion over all others.

Is it more important that I acknowledge that "the Bible is Holy Writ," or is it more important that I agree that government mandated and funded abortion is A Really Bad Thing™?

Which is more practical?

That's the thing. You and others believe that the Bible is "Holy Writ," but that doesn't make it so.

I happen to think there are some good ideas there, but I don't think it's particularly holy.

Now we can get hung up on my "unbelief" and Christian reaction to it, or we can find things we do agree on and work from there.

Again, which is more practical?

And why do you feel compelled to speak for your God? Did he call you on the phone? Was there a registered letter?

More importantly, how does that get us closer to agreeing?

My faith and beliefs are at least as important to me as yours are to you.

"The Almighty, however, probably has a different perspective on what you believe."

Beats the usual. Most Christians just cite chapter and verse.

Nothing wrong with that PROVIDED you don't use it to try to control others.

And yes, I know Christians are supposed to spread the news. However, Christians don't appreciate it when others do it to them.

Parity. Or the Golden Rule, if you prefer.

*shrugs* Which is why I don't usually make it except under very specific circumstances.

Some Christians insist that the rules defined by their religion are universal and everyone must comply or else.

I disagree. That's usually when I'm accused of attacking Christianity.

"Neither of us have accused you of attacking anyone."

Give QM time.

"Listen to us or don't, that's your choice."

Stars above, if only it were that simple.

"But that doesn't mean we have to stop trying to warn you."

And if you only did it once each or once each per thread, that would be great.

But I didn't lie.

As for the afterlife, you have your belief and I have mine. No one This Side knows.

You were the one who took exception to that statement.

"You are your source of authority."

No, I'm not.

Perhaps what frustrates you most is that you can't denounce my faith without undermining your own. At the end of the day, we don't have anything but our faith. Mine is just as valid as yours by every "objective" measure you trot out.

Live and let live. Why is that so hard for you to accept?

My posts "reveal" that I answer to an authority different than yours.

I never claimed an "objective" standard. Truths are incredibly subjective.

How many times have I told you that a man is measured in the lives he touches?

That's not exactly about the self, is it?

Of course it is not you that threaten, it is your God. He just sits down at your keyboard and types away.

That tells me is that you don't know your God very well.

Yep, too many people are into religion for the politics.

No, you believe that the Bible is God-inspired. So do a lot of other people. That doesn't make it "objectively true." Especially since it is the most heavily edited, redacted, and revised book in history. Remarkably well preserved, but still.

What I "fessed up to" was that I didn't remember the Hebrew that I studied briefly for a few months about three decades ago. Since I don't use Hebrew regularly, that's hardly surprising.

Again, if you don't like what I have to say about the Bible, stop insisting that I am bound by it. Even Christians are extremely selective when it comes to the portions they use.

ETA: I don't think the Christian message was ever intended to be confined to dusty writings.

NeoNotes are the selected comments that I made on other boards, in email, or in response to articles where I could not respond directly.


Take care of each other

As a rough definition, measurable intelligence is the practical knowledge and skills necessary for a given set of problem solving.


No Grand Cause here

If it works for you and challenges you to be a better person, more power to you. It is not my place to question that, it's between you and the Divine.


“Here I come to save the Day”

This is a page from the third version of Technopagan Yearnings. There are some formatting differences. Originally published at www.neowayland.com/C65989237/E20060802051541

Why do some Pagans believe they are destined to save the world?

The posts on discipline and Indigo kids got me in the mood to go exploring the Pagan web again, just to see what is happening. It's getting harder and harder to do that anonymously, but I still have a few technopagan tricks up my sleeve.

Much of what I saw hasn't really changed in the last few years. There are still very few experienced Pagans who are willing to go online, at least publicly. There are definite trends towards political correctness and silencing dissent. And the most visible Pagans online aren't necessarily the ones that anyone should be listening to.

Although that doesn't just apply to Pagans. Imagine if Christians only listened to Jesse Jackson or Pat Robertson.

To me at least, the most disturbing thing is the growth of the "Pagans will save the World" theme. Save the world from what, I am not quite sure, but there are some out there who are only a few steps away from conquering in the Name of the Goddess for the Betterment of Humanity. Or at least trying.

It always worries me when I can hear the capitals in what other people say, even if it is only what they are typing on a computer screen.

I am not quite sure where this messiah complex comes from. I only know that it is there. I get frustrated when I deal with newbies. Online, my experience is "one upped" by some kid who read the "right" books and started "practicing" six whole months ago. It's times like that when I understand exactly what Oberon Ravenhart-Zell wants to do with his so-called Grey Council.

Intentionally or not, this "save the world" thing comes across as recycled Christianity. I'm not sure that is what they need, although they believe it's what they want.


And that is the rub, isn't? You can't tell them until they are ready to believe it. Even if I could, I am not sure I should stop them from tripping and falling. Although the gods know I am tempted. I understand now what the Blessed who were around me were saying when I "broke out," although I ignored them then.

I'm pretty sure that the World can take care of Herself, maybe with a little help from her Consort.

It's the rest of us I am not so sure about.

Posted: Tue - August 1, 2006 at 06:15 PM


Flake off

It always worries me when I can hear the capitals in what other people say, even if it is only what they are typing on a computer screen.

NeoNotes — Real religion

Pardon, I don't think anyone is capable of judging what is and is not a "real" religion. I can't tell you how many times certain Christians have told me that my faith isn't real.

Pauline Christianity is something completely different that what Yeshua Ben Yosef preached. Gnostic Christianity is something completely different yet again. Which is true? Who knows? Who am I to judge what happens between someone else and the Divine?

I think these are the wrong questions. Christians are much nicer when they aren't the only game around. From what little I've seen, the same applies to Muslims.

I think what matters is how we treat others, especially others who do not share our faith and culture. Ramming it down other's throat by force will cause resentment. That's where some monotheists go wrong. It's not that they have the True Faith™, its that no other faith can be allowed. Because of their Greater Understanding and enlightenment, they can break society's rule for the Greater Good. Thou shalt not dissent.

Climate change alarmists stole the game lock, stock, and barrel. It's common for some of the radical feminists too. If anything, I think it indicates a weakness in the argument. Their faith isn't strong enough, they can't convince others, so it must be forced.

Getting back to Christianity, how much would history have changed if Constantine hadn't made it the state faith? How would it have developed if it had stayed one faith among many? How much of the Official® was really about politics and controlling the populace?

Could it be that control is really the issue?

NeoNotes are the selected comments that I made on other boards, in email, or in response to articles where I could not respond directly.


“The Christians and the Pagans”

Good men don’t need rules. Today is not the day to find out why I have so many.
Doctor Who, A Good Man Goes to War

I agree entirely with this one

This is a page from the third version of Technopagan Yearnings. There are some formatting differences. Originally published at www.neowayland.com/C1982366546/E20070503172653

Wise words from a Pagan musician

We've no problem with Christians, Muslims or any other religious people provided they don't try to force their views on everyone else in the world.  We just think there are a lot more gods than just one...
     — Joe Hennon in an interview with Expatica Belgium

Hat tip Wild Hunt Blog
Cross posted to both Technopagan Yearnings & Pagan•Vigil

Posted: Thu - May 3, 2007 at 05:26 PM


NeoNotes — Somebody finally said the C word

Thinking by blogging

It's hard to find energy so I can do things.



As a pagan, I've found that 99% of my practices and worshiping consists of just going outside, sitting still, shutting up, and listening.
— AmericanCeltic

Taproot: Taboo

You're thinking of magick as cheat codes that let you get around universal rules.


Political pagans

Usually when ravens group together, it’s up on fences or power lines or rooftops



Summer begins


Revisiting writing the book

If it’s bad when the People of the Book do it, then why on Earth is it a good idea when neopagans do it?


Unsent note to a Christian

Check out the new pages at the top.


War Chant

Why bother to write if you're going to undermine everything you say?


The Pope and his Pagan Christians

I answer my email indirectly


On Christians and Pagan tolerance

Bet you thought I wasn't going to get one up today. I almost didn't.


Facing the True Believer™

Why some fail all the time and how they can start to turn it around, with a little help from Stan and Ollie



Patterns and flow


On Being Not

How important is it?


Sunfell Tech Mage Rede Nine Words Serve The Tech Mage Best Keep What Works Fix What’s Broke Ditch The Rest

A narrow slice of life, but now and again pondering American neopaganism, modern adult pagans & the World.

2019       2018       2017       2016       2015       2014       2011       2010       2009       2008       2007       2006       2005