Christians Desecrate Wiccan Religious Site at Air Force Academy

reply to post by Aeons

Hm, although you haven't explained how this action is not desecration but pointed out that wiccans don't object to the jeseses., I will ask in another way.

If I walk into a place of xtian worship and erect a goats head on a stick, would you consider that desecration ?

When I was in the Air Force I went to the Wikki area. It was really the only place one could go other than the HUGE church they built on base. I was no longer Catholic at the time and this was the only option. I really didn't care much about the Wikkan service one way or the other. I have my own beliefs and just wanted to go to a place in quiet outdoors to meditate.

However, once the cadre and the good ole boys club founf out who was going there instead of the church it was on. Ridicule and constant taunts etc...Honestly it did not bother me what they thought. If they want to remain asleep it is their choice.

I did find it quite interesting how much pressure they put on one to go to the church service though. For being a military/gov't installation whose regulations stipulate they be non-religious based it was quite obviously one-sided.

And for the posters in the beginning of the tread. PURPOSE BUILT places to worship!!! Please spare me. We had a rec center gazebo which was used and donated on a small grassy area next to asbestos impregnated buildings being torn down. While the Christians had a multi-million dollar church.

I'm sorry, but if you are complaining about 'purpose built' religious compounds with these type of comparisons there is no other description for you other than moron. Wake up and smell reality. 'The Church' is an institution deeply involved in money and politics. That goes for most of them...the Mormon church is by far no exception either.

Originally posted by pexx421
Why cant they just be reasonable? And join the christians in worshipping a cosmic zombie jew, who is is own father?

Man, I laughed out loud when I read that. Too true. We have to hear about it so much we lose perspective as to how nuts that really is.

I know the old Jesus stories, and they were Jewish parables. They were metaphorical myths, no different from Greek mythology or any other mythology if truth be told. What truth there is in them, sure as hell isn't literal.

Originally posted by LibertyLover
Research has shown that the trials were the tangled result of politics, religion, family feuds, economics and people's imaginations.

Don't forget eating ergotic rye bread causing ergotism.

For those who don't know what ergot and ergotism is....look up Albert Hoffmann and '___'.

A goat's head? Probably not. Really at that point would depend on the variety of neopagan. A vegan Pan worshipper might be very offended.

For something to be a desecration it must be on offense onto the divine. That's a pretty tall order to think one hit with an icon of Christ.

A sacred space could be erected anywhere, but I would imagine in a military setting a piece of land that you knew wasn't going to be run through by troops would be a good idea.

So as a designated space, if you went in with ill intent and spill motor oil and toxins on the ground there, THAT would probably be descretation.

An icon of the divine? No.

The intent of someone who believes that they are doing you a good turn. Still not.

Someone who masked ill intent behind pretense of God to stoke their own innner demons - that might come close to be descretation. But that can be "swept away."

[edit on 2010/2/4 by Aeons]

Originally posted by djusdjus
i do not agree with spending one public penny on any religious accommodation and I would also remove any aspect of litigation for belief systems or religions which are not founded on anything factual or tangible at all and instead are "mere beliefs".

Whether or not the government should be spending money on religions is one can of worms, but I have to say you are basically trying to make science itself into a religion here, as if it alone holds all the answers to life's questions. Even speaking logically, logic has its own limitations. There are lots of things that we just can't collectively know for sure or prove with science yet. And if someone wants to form an opinion anyway they have every right to do so.

Originally posted by Carseller4
They desecrated a religious site by placing a cross there?

Really?

Sorry but I can't stop......

I bet when the rock worshipers showed up they were very upset! "Oh my rock, someone put a cross by our group of rocks." Rock damn them!

I'm still.......

I laugh also when people put upside down crosses around churches and gravesites...great fun...

Sorry, but I cant stop laughing at the thought of the lowercase t worshippers getting all upset that someone rearranged their sticks

sticks damn them!

(hmm...nope...dont feel more clever for taking the troll bait. I think my IQ lowered a bit)

reply to post by TarzanBeta


It's a cross. At an airforce academy.

if you find a toothbrush shiv on the floor of a prison, you can reasonably guess a prisoner dropped it, right?

If you find a turd at a dog shelter, odds are it came from a dog.

If you see a cross at an airforce academy, odds are, it came from a Christian.

You don't suppose one of the Jewish cadets put it up, do you?

Christians fighting Pagans in the 21st Century?! WTF?! Hands up who thinks this is ridiculous?

In the 20th Century...space race, moon landings, sci-fi, Blade Runner and Star Wars.....who ever dreamt that medieval idiots would be squabbling over who's shrine is the best?

For anyone muttering about how it was just a cross and how the pagans are so uptight and how this is nothing like religious terrorism or extremism:

If you do not see the implicit threat in this action then you are clearly just too blinded by the glory of the cross.

The fact is that this was a clear message, especially in a military academy setting such as this. This was the christianist contingent at the academy pointing out that they can enter a sacred site and do whatever they want. If the cross were on fire, would you guys see it a little bit differently? It's got similar connotations.

It is a clear message that the views of those who choose to worship there are not accepted or even tolerated. The fact that this action will go unpunished will be a display of power for the lunatic religious right. This was a warning and a staking of territory.

Compare this to the feces storm that would ensue if a pagan even went so far as to draw a chalk pentacle on the chapel found here: www.flickr.com...

reply to post by RobertAntonWeishaupt


Bullying. It does indeed imply a threat.

Originally posted by RobertAntonWeishaupt
Compare this to the feces storm that would ensue if a pagan even went so far as to draw a chalk pentacle on the chapel found here: www.flickr.com...

I would laugh if those pagans actually started to do that.

I have read the OP, and most of the pages of comments, and felt the need to log on and comment.
First, although I do understand the offended parties, I believe we should contextualize this.
Desecration is a term I would use to describe an act where someone has posted slurs, destroyed religious artifacts, and/or maimed/killed parishioners who were engaged in their chosen religious acts.
I do not believe this is of that nature.
Is it a message? Sure.
Is it offensive to Wiccans? I am not a wiccan, so I cannot answer that.
Is it desecration? I don't think so.
It was a removable cross. It is not the same as spray painting a pentagram, more likely similar to me leaving a star of david medallion in a church pew.
The fact is, religion may be removed from society in some aspects, however, due to the nature of religion itself, it is ingrained in the very people who follow and support it.
This is, in some cases, unintentional, as they would merely reply that this is "who they are".
The wiccans, as supported by comments on this page, probably feel towards christianity like christians do towards Catholics.
Like, "What the hell, man? You believe in a Zombie son of God?" (or whatever difference you choose to pick.)
The fact remains, is that we as a society are divided into many different groups, and will not EVER have true tolerance until either no religion exists, or we are dead. (one religion would still exclude "non-believers".)
Funny, this is what so many of you on this site rail against, a "one world" anything.
There can never be tolerance, if only because there is no truly "live and let live" ability in religion.
Follow me on this.
Religion dictates certain laws, and moral obligations, that may differ from society. In order to protect society from the overwhelming burden of religion, we ask for separation from the state itself.
This, however, cannot change the world-view and life practices of the religious, correct?
I mean, we are who we are.
So here I am, a practicing (insert belief system here), which believes that (insert random "sin" here) is bad. However you, a practicing (insert belief system here), believes that (insert same "sin" here) is more than okay, and should be a part of your daily life.
Do you see the conflict? There is a request for tolerance from both sides, and these very sides contradict each other at the core!
Want a simple example? Voodoo animal sacrifices are in conflict with Kosher beliefs.
So should we allow public voodoo ceremonies, knowing it contradicts to the core what the jewish people believe?
Are they not allowed to guide their families through life without knowing that animals are suffering in slaughter? In their own towns? They can't, can they?
I can't answer that, however it does need to be addressed.
I mean, doesn't the Muslim attitude towards women make it in conflict with our equal rights in this country? With the women's liberation movement?
In order to be tolerant, we have to accept them, yet the division itself creates the same bonds that the lib movement has worked so hard to remove.
I mean, aren't catholics attacked for attempting to prevent a woman's reproductive rights? Whether it's contraceptives, or abortion, asking communities with large catholic base to contribute to the rest of that communities contraceptives and abortion rights is against there very beliefs.
Is this not intolerance?
I am merely trying to comment on this thread's assertions. Not just the OP, mind you.

We preach tolerance, but fail to realize that tolerance mostly means not tolerating the group that represents the status quo.
And yes, non-religion can be used as a religion when it comes to world-view.
Not believing in any religion, and then professing that belief to dictate your life's actions, is the same path that the religious take.

My final point?
Did you ever think that having a Wiccan area for practice might actually be against the core of other's beliefs, and THEIR view should not be dismissed, either?

reply to post by TheTruthShallFreeYou

Desecration (also called desacralization or desanctification) is the act of depriving something of its sacred character—or the disrespectful or contemptuous treatment of that which is held to be sacred by a group or individual.

en.wikipedia.org...

Desecration? Check that with a yes.

Originally posted by Carseller4
They desecrated a religious site by placing a cross there?

Really?

Sorry but I can't stop......

I bet when the rock worshipers showed up they were very upset! "Oh my rock, someone put a cross by our group of rocks." Rock damn them!

I'm still.......

Your post is the funniest I have ever read, without a doubt!

Years ago I was just bored and reading online personals and someone wrote that they were totally into rocks. To this day I don't know what that means.

Originally posted by TheTruthShallFreeYou
My final point?
Did you ever think that having a Wiccan area for practice might actually be against the core of other's beliefs, and THEIR view should not be dismissed, either?

The first amendment states that there is freedom of religion as well as freedom from religion.

Did you ever think that having a Christian area for practice might actually be against the core of other's beliefs, and THEIR view should not be dismissed either?

reply to post by Bombeni


probably that they were rock collectors and found geology interesting.

Buzz Killington strikes again!

Click here for more information.

reply to post by Nutter


That is my point. Glad you seem to be getting it.

You cannot deprive the universe of its sacred nature. No person is that powerful.

You can lend offense. A sacred space is not defiled by a sacred object.

Contempt in your heart is not something we can control. And cannot be categorized as desecration of something sacred.

Originally posted by Nutter
reply to post by TheTruthShallFreeYou

 

Desecration (also called desacralization or desanctification) is the act of depriving something of its sacred character—or the disrespectful or contemptuous treatment of that which is held to be sacred by a group or individual.

en.wikipedia.org...

Desecration? Check that with a yes.