Polyamory.com Forum  

Go Back   Polyamory.com Forum > Polyamory > Spirituality & Polyamory

Notices

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #131  
Old 08-22-2010, 09:01 AM
fleurisseur's Avatar
fleurisseur fleurisseur is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Paris, and in 4 other countries
Posts: 31
Smile 1) be happy 2) congratulations

Quote:
Originally Posted by Karma View Post
Cute. I bring arguments supported by things anyone can look up and confirm. You decide to question my judgment without any supporting arguments whatsoever....

Clever way to back out of an argument you don't have the information to defend. I think I've made my point here.
... my dear friend.. allow me to say that you (as some hundreds of people before) could not resist more than some minutes to a "debate about god", after attending some "special conferences"...

...but I am not HERE to be aggressive and to spend time (writing...) reducing to dust "some beliefs"... some "perfect demonstrations"... some "things anyone can look up and confirm" that you are quoting.

You think that you are the strongest/best one, and that I am the stupid/ignorant one?

OK, be happy with that and sleep well...
-----------------------------------


Quote:
Originally Posted by vandalin View Post
I have debated on whether to post on this topic, but after discussing with a couple Christian friends, I have come to a rather good conclusion. I am an Apatheist. I am not an Atheist who says God does not exist. I am not an Agnostic who says they don't know if God exists. I am an Apatheist who just doesn't really care if God exists and unless asked, doesn't think about it one day to the next.


So, any other Apatheists in our group?
-----------------------------------

This is excellent...

Congratulations !

The only reason I am NOT yet an Apatheist is that I discovered once that "beliefs in god" have been and are a pure catastrophe for humans...

So, from time to time, I put my energy to eradicate it in "large groups".
Very large…

One day I will “attack” the most stupid/aggressive religion on Earth…
Reply With Quote
  #132  
Old 08-22-2010, 09:02 AM
sage's Avatar
sage sage is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 625
Default

There's a lot I also like about the Jesus character but I don't see him as a mesiah.

I found quite a basic utube clip on basic paganism which was quite useful, interestingly it was on our nz poly site.

I find the costumes a bit freaky because when you look at pagan sites on the net you are often confronted with people looking very odd and I suppose I can't relate to that because I can't imagine myself looking like that.

I know polyamory was first identified via a pagan source but what is the philosophical connection, ie why are pagans more open to polyamory?
Reply With Quote
  #133  
Old 08-22-2010, 09:32 AM
Karma's Avatar
Karma Karma is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Wherever I'm needed.
Posts: 404
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by sage View Post
There's a lot I also like about the Jesus character but I don't see him as a mesiah.

I found quite a basic utube clip on basic paganism which was quite useful, interestingly it was on our nz poly site.

I find the costumes a bit freaky because when you look at pagan sites on the net you are often confronted with people looking very odd and I suppose I can't relate to that because I can't imagine myself looking like that.

I know polyamory was first identified via a pagan source but what is the philosophical connection, ie why are pagans more open to polyamory?
This is strictly a theory, but I think that the idea of monogamy is firmly rooted into the social conscience of our society due to that societies historical ties to Christian dogma, which states that you can only have one partner. (Oddly enough, I can't recall any bible passages that directly state this, I think it's kinda 'assumed' to be that way by most christians, but I could be wrong here.)

Therefore, the conscious decision many pagans make to distance themselves from the trappings of christian dogma results in many of them being far more open to the idea of polyamory as a side effect.

But I could be completely wrong here.
__________________
This is my family. It may be little, and broken, but it's still good. Yeah, still good.
Reply With Quote
  #134  
Old 08-22-2010, 09:41 AM
Karma's Avatar
Karma Karma is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Wherever I'm needed.
Posts: 404
Default

[QUOTE=sage;41189]

I find the costumes a bit freaky because when you look at pagan sites on the net you are often confronted with people looking very odd and I suppose I can't relate to that because I can't imagine myself looking like that.

QUOTE]

Oh yeah, that. Please don't think that all of us wear silly costumes all the time! Most pagans are not like that. While it's true that many of us use ritual clothing during our practices, that is generally ONLY during ritual practices, and just as many of us don't feel the need for them during ritual. It' a personal choice thing - however you feel the need to work magick or commune with the divine, is how you go about doing so.

Personally, I have no issues doing these sorts of things in jeans and a T-shirt, for the most part. I do have a sort-of ritual outfit that I wear when working with serious rites, but it's hardly a costume: A favorite pair of Tripp pants, A long sleeve black underarmor shirt, and a short-sleeve button-up shirt with a blue and black flame print on it. The outfit has sentimental value to me, and certain rites really benefit from putting my mind in the place that wearing that outfit puts it in. It's less a costume and more like clubwear, anyway

As far as costumes go, I DO have my Darkon surcoat and armor, but that has nothing to do with paganism, and everything to do with representing my unit while beating on people with sticks!! Gotta fly the family colors!!

Have I mentioned that I'm a huge dork?
__________________
This is my family. It may be little, and broken, but it's still good. Yeah, still good.
Reply With Quote
  #135  
Old 08-22-2010, 11:44 AM
Magdlyn's Avatar
Magdlyn Magdlyn is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Metro West Massachusetts
Posts: 3,691
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Karma View Post
Add to this the fact that there is DOCUMENTED, RECORDED EVIDENCE that proves the fact that injured and/or sick people who are prayed over by friends/family who truly believe in their religion, recover faster than people with the same illness/injury that recieve no prayer.
I tend to think that it's the positive attention the ill person is receiving that aids in their recovery, not the prayer, and not the diety. Lots of people who are prayed over do not recover. Lots of ships still sink in storms despite the loved ones at home praying for a miracle.

Quote:
Originally Posted by fleurisseur View Post
The only reason I am NOT yet an Apatheist is that I discovered once that "beliefs in god" have been and are a pure catastrophe for humans...
That is why some of us tend towards being drawn to gnosis rather than belief, in our spiritual practices. Experiences lead to an inner knowing, rather than blind belief or brainwashing.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Karma View Post
This is strictly a theory, but I think that the idea of monogamy is firmly rooted into the social conscience of our society due to that societies historical ties to Christian dogma, which states that you can only have one partner. (Oddly enough, I can't recall any bible passages that directly state this, I think it's kinda 'assumed' to be that way by most christians, but I could be wrong here.)
From the New Testament, attributed to Paul:

Titus 1:5-9 "The reason I left you in Crete was that you might straighten out what was left unfinished and appoint elders in every town, as I directed you. An elder must be blameless, the husband of but one wife, a man whose children believe and are not open to the charge of being wild and disobedient. Since an overseer [bishop] is entrusted with God's work, he must be blameless—not overbearing, not quick-tempered, not given to drunkenness, not violent, not pursuing dishonest gain. Rather he must be hospitable, one who loves what is good, who is self-controlled, upright, holy and disciplined. He must hold firmly to the trustworthy message as it has been taught, so that he can encourage others by sound doctrine and refute those who oppose it."

This was a direction for bishops only, but as in many religions, believers took what god said for an elite class, and applied to to the masses. I suppose the idea here was, a leader might be too busy with more than one wife, and all the children which issued from multiple wives, and have less time for devotion to the diety, and less time to oversee his religious group (ecclesia).

Quote:
Therefore, the conscious decision many pagans make to distance themselves from the trappings of christian dogma results in many of them being far more open to the idea of polyamory as a side effect.
Much of the "sex advice" in the Bible (both testaments) is irrelevant for humans 2000 or more years later.
__________________
Love withers under constraint; its very essence is liberty. It is compatible neither with envy, jealousy or fear. It is there most pure, perfect and unlimited when its votaries live in confidence, equality and unreserve. -- Shelley

me: Mags, 59, living with:
miss pixi, 37
Reply With Quote
  #136  
Old 08-22-2010, 08:23 PM
Quath Quath is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 504
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Karma View Post
Ha ha.... this is absurd. I've actually studied most of these - astrophysics being the only one I haven't studied to some degree or another - and Not a single one, or all of them combined, can "prove" that God, Allah, YHWH, or whatever other label or name you want to slap on the divine, is false. In fact, several of the 'facts' these studies teach can be used to "prove" that deity is real.
It is not about disproving that god(s) exist, but about showing there is no reason that requires for god(s) to exist. So just like someone who says that Santa Claus or Bigfoot is real, the burden of proof is on them.

Quote:
Personally, I'll take this argument one step further, and state that several of the current theories of quantum physics dovetail PERFECTLY with magickal theory that has existed since the 1800s, when the Golden Dawn was active and researching pretty much everything they could get their hands on. Examples include the Double Slit theory, Planck Time, and others.
Not really. Every time I have seen quantum theory applied to something outside of physics, it has been horribly misrepresented. There is a lot of beauty in fundamental physics, but nothing that helps out magic. (As cool as that would be.)

Quote:
Add to this the fact that there is DOCUMENTED, RECORDED EVIDENCE that proves the fact that injured and/or sick people who are prayed over by friends/family who truly believe in their religion, recover faster than people with the same illness/injury that recieve no prayer. The interesting thing here (at least to me) is that the particular religion of the person praying has absolutely no difference on the effect. In other words, it doesn't matter if the praying person is calling on God, Jesus, Allah, Mohhammad, Jehovah, or the Great Flying Spaghetti Monster, the effect is the same - faster recovery for their loved one than if they hadn't recieved prayer.
I have looked at the studies and it was shown that prayer is no better than the placebo effect. In some cases it seemed to be worse (maybe because the people thought they must be bad off to be prayed for). Prayer working for healing would be easy scientific proof for some religion. But the studies do not support this.

Quote:
Science does not determine what is and is not reality.
I agree. Science works to come up with the simpliest model that explains what is observed about reality.

Quote:
Originally Posted by vandalin
I am an Apatheist who just doesn't really care if God exists and unless asked, doesn't think about it one day to the next.
I guess I see agnostic and atheist as answering two different questions. Agnostic (or gnostic) is about what you know. Theist or atheist is about whether you believe in god(s). So you can be a agnostic theist who believes in God but knows it can't be proved 100% or a gnostic atheist who knows no gods exists.

But I know what you mean. I use to be an apathetic atheist. I think what changed me was my grandmother trying to reconvert me to Christianiy. She sent me a lot of books. I read the books and researched what was said and it sickened me. I saw so many horrible things done in the name of religion. I saw science and society suffering from dogmatism. I saw freedoms curtailed and people making themselves suffer to please what some priest says a god wants. I slowly lost my apathy.
Reply With Quote
  #137  
Old 08-23-2010, 06:35 PM
GroundedSpirit GroundedSpirit is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: New England USA
Posts: 1,231
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by sage View Post
I know polyamory was first identified via a pagan source but what is the philosophical connection, ie why are pagans more open to polyamory?
Sage,

I'd venture you have a confused cause/effect picture you're painting.

What you will likely find is that people who tend to be open minded, actively looking and aware of the connections that exist around us find things that resonate with them in both paganism and polyamory. Feeling love & affection for multiple people is, after all, a very natural part of 'human' nature. Digging deep into what that means on a practical level would seem to be a natural thing for the type of person who chooses not to live their lives with a ring through their nose - if you get my meaning.

Pointing to poly as inclined to paganism or vic versa is missing the bigger picture.

GS
Reply With Quote
  #138  
Old 08-23-2010, 07:00 PM
KelticIrishDruid KelticIrishDruid is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 10
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Karma View Post
This is strictly a theory, but I think that the idea of monogamy is firmly rooted into the social conscience of our society due to that societies historical ties to Christian dogma, which states that you can only have one partner. (Oddly enough, I can't recall any bible passages that directly state this, I think it's kinda 'assumed' to be that way by most christians, but I could be wrong here.)

Therefore, the conscious decision many pagans make to distance themselves from the trappings of christian dogma results in many of them being far more open to the idea of polyamory as a side effect.

But I could be completely wrong here.
Would have to say you are correct in some factors of your statement about Pagans being more open to poly than let say christians however it is not the complete aspect of the reason why... Pagan's are more open to the idea due to our background of clann living, where as many clann throughout time from the hunter gatherers while men would protect the clann others where hunters and alot of times hunters would not come back from a hunt, these hunters families whom had lost their providers form there families where taken in by other members of the clann, their children where raised by the group, wifes where provided for, children where fed and clothed and life went on... During these last few thousand years of mankind only the pagans have remembered their clann type life styles, and as we return t the earth we also return to the ways of life we know throughtout time work and make the clann healthy.
Reply With Quote
  #139  
Old 08-30-2010, 09:03 PM
KelticIrishDruid KelticIrishDruid is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 10
Default

Well I am druidic was raised as a druid and do my best in these modern times to live one with and of the earth. I raise my own food, including beef, chicken, lamb ect........Our gardens proved for our family as well as the local food bank. I do not drive unless there is no other way of obtaining what it needed for the farm and our family, heck we even brew our own mead, beer and wine and if me could find a place to do it legally we would make our own scotch, lol.......Poly households have been around since the beginning of time and even during the time of christian birth it was accepted as rightous for abraham took forth his wife and concubines and was considered rightous. It was only till morality came and governments whom forbid the fact of poly households did the church, ever ban them, was about the same time that catholic priests and nuns could no longer marry; and it all started from some pope whom couldn't get laid, lol.........There has never been a seperation from church and state and there never will be since no one wants to take up the cause about suppose morality.
Reply With Quote
  #140  
Old 08-31-2010, 06:44 PM
SNeacail's Avatar
SNeacail SNeacail is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Near Disneyland
Posts: 1,616
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by KelticIrishDruid View Post
It was only till morality came
I think morality was always around, but someone (or some committee) in a place of power decided to re-define what was moral and got enough religous leaders to teach it as "the Word of God" and enough people blindly followed.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 03:44 PM.