NationStates Jolt Archive

VA allows Wiccan symbols on headstones
By SCOTT BAUER, Associated Press Writer
Mon Apr 23, 12:47 PM ET

The Wiccan pentacle has been added to the list of emblems allowed in national cemeteries and on goverment-issued headstones of fallen soldiers, according to a settlement announced Monday.

A settlement between the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs and Wiccans adds the five-pointed star to the list of "emblems of belief" allowed on VA grave markers.

Eleven families nationwide are waiting for grave markers with the pentacle, said Selena Fox, a Wiccan high priestess with Circle Sanctuary in Barneveld, Wis., a plaintiff in the lawsuit.

The settlement calls for the pentacle, whose five points represent earth, air, fire, water and spirit, to be placed on grave markers within 14 days for those who have pending requests with the VA.

"I am glad this has ended in success in time to get markers for Memorial Day," Fox said.

The VA sought the settlement in the interest of the families involved and to save taxpayers the expense of further litigation, VA spokesman Matt Burns said. The agency also agreed to pay $225,000 in attorneys' fees and costs.

The pentacle has been added to 38 symbols the VA already permits on gravestones. They include commonly recognized symbols for Christianity, Buddhism, Islam and Judaism, as well as those for smaller religions such as Sufism Reoriented, Eckiankar and the Japanese faith Seicho-No-Ie.

"This settlement has forced the Bush Administration into acknowledging that there are no second class religions in America, including among our nation's veterans," said the Rev. Barry W. Lynn, director of Americans United for Separation of Church and State, which represented the Wiccans in the lawsuit.

The American Civil Liberties Union said the agreement also settles a similar lawsuit it filed last year against the VA. In that case, the ACLU represented two other Wiccan churches and three individuals.

VA-issued headstones, markers and plaques can be used in any cemetery, whether it is a national one such as Arlington or a private burial ground like that on Circle Sanctuary's property.

Wicca is a nature-based religion based on respect for the earth, nature and the cycle of the seasons. Variations of the pentacle not accepted by Wiccans have been used in horror movies as a sign of the devil.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070423/ap_on_re_us/wiccan_soldier

One of the cases came out of Nevada, very close to my hometown actually, so I'm glad it's finally been resolved. It was shameful the way that the US Government was telling families that US troops who were either KIA or veterans who died after their service was over could not have their religious beliefs on their tombstones.

Especially as the Congressmen against it were spout all sorts of insanse remarks about Satanism.

*gurk*

I've got warring sensations right now. I'm all for allowing grave markers to have symbols on them, but the ACLU was involved. That automatically downgrades the positiveness of this change.

*gurk*

I've got warring sensations right now. I'm all for allowing grave markers to have symbols on them, but the ACLU was involved. That automatically downgrades the positiveness of this change.
Let me guess, the ACLU are the ebil libruals, right?

Interesting - the Star of David is listed not as a Jewish symbol, but as a "Hebrew" symbol (as in the ancient Hebrews).

*gurk*

I've got warring sensations right now. I'm all for allowing grave markers to have symbols on them, but the ACLU was involved. That automatically downgrades the positiveness of this change.
Because we all know the ACLU never does anything positive nor helps anyone ever, that it's true purpose is to destroy civilisation as we know it and is run by hairy legged communist Lesbians who hate everything and everyone.
correct?

Two words:
GROW
UP

*gurk*

I've got warring sensations right now. I'm all for allowing grave markers to have symbols on them, but the ACLU was involved. That automatically downgrades the positiveness of this change.

yeah, what the hell are those people thinking, defending the constitution like that.

Now the Wycckyins can take their Magic"k" Ckurcys off and we can win in Iraq, hurrah.

Interesting - the Star of David is listed not as a Jewish symbol, but as a "Hebrew" symbol (as in the ancient Hebrews).
I'm still trying to figure out where the atheism symbol came from. How can nothing have a symbol?

I was wondering that too. My guess is that some atheist designed it, and asked for it to be included.

While these are VERY good news for us occultists, I feel the need to point out that wicca (as most religions) does NOT condone a HUGE part of what soldiers do.

I'm still trying to figure out where the atheism symbol came from. How can nothing have a symbol?

What is the atheism symbol, an atom?

Oh, sure, right now everyone thinks that it is fine to be inclusive and accepting of the religious beliefs of others, but what are we going to do when people start wanting their favorite symbols from the Necronomicon carved on their gravestones? It is the same slippery slope that led us from gay marriage to snake-marriage.
I hope the ACLU will be happy when we're up to our asses in Wicca Zombies.

I'll have you know that I already plan to have the Elder Sign carved on my urn.

Oh, sure, right now everyone thinks that it is fine to be inclusive and accepting of the religious beliefs of others, but what are we going to do when people start wanting their favorite symbols from the Necronomicon carved on their gravestones? It is the same slippery slope that led us from gay marriage to snake-marriage.
I hope the ACLU will be happy when we're up to our asses in Wicca Zombies.

Nope. Keep in mind who you're speaking too (Oh wait, I havn't been on this Forum long enough. Nevermind)

I'm Pro Gay Rights and Pro limited Affirmative Action.

No, it's that the ACLU leads the charge in frivolous lawsuits, wasting taxpayer money and reaping large profits for themselves. They preach "tolerance for all"-Unless you're White, Straight, Christian or Jewish, and/or Male.
It's the sheer hypocrisy that bothers me most.

While these are VERY good news for us occultists, I feel the need to point out that wicca (as most religions) does NOT condone a HUGE part of what soldiers do.

They don't necessarily need to be involved in armed conflict, right? Aren't there jobs they can do that don't revolve around shooting people or blowing things up?

What is the atheism symbol, an atom?
Yep. I would have never known that unless I looked it up on wikipedia though.

I want the 'porn star' star put on my grave marker.

Yep. I would have never known that unless I looked it up on wikipedia though.

Not surprising, really, though it leaves an opening for the "DAAA Science is a religion" people.

yeah, what the hell are those people thinking, defending the constitution like that.


I would love to debate this with you. But I have to ask first: Do you include the Bill of Rights with the Constitution? I just ask because I once had someone scream at me that the Bill of Rights "Isn't a f***ing part of the Constitution, you goddamn a**wipe."

ADDENDUM: I'm actually NOT an attorney. I plan to get my doctorate in Organic Chemistry. I just enjoy judiciary debates.

I would love to debate this with you. But I have to ask first: Do you include the Bill of Rights with the Constitution? I just ask because I once had someone scream at me that the Bill of Rights "Isn't a f***ing part of the Constitution, you goddamn a**wipe."

He's an attorney.

Edit: Arthais, did you ever receive the email I sent you/sign up for the Diplomacy game?

I would love to debate this with you. But I have to ask first: Do you include the Bill of Rights with the Constitution? I just ask because I once had someone scream at me that the Bill of Rights "Isn't a f***ing part of the Constitution, you goddamn a**wipe."

Uhh, yeah. It's a group of amendments to the Constitution; the power to add amendments is listed in Article V of the Constitution, so they are entirely legitimate changes to it. They are as much a part of it as the articles themselves are. It's pretty basic knowledge that the Bill of Rights and all of the other amendments are totally valid parts of the Constitution.

Sounds like the person in question has a very unique interpretation of what our Constitution is. As a matter of fact, it sounds like they've never actually read it or had any experience with it before.

No, it's that the ACLU leads the charge in frivolous lawsuits, wasting taxpayer money and reaping large profits for themselves. They preach "tolerance for all"-Unless you're White, Straight, Christian or Jewish, and/or Male.
It's the sheer hypocrisy that bothers me most.
spoken like someone who gets their information on the ACLU from Fox and hasn't ever bothered to check to see exactly what the ACLU involves itself in.

I would love to debate this with you. But I have to ask first: Do you include the Bill of Rights with the Constitution? I just ask because I once had someone scream at me that the Bill of Rights "Isn't a f***ing part of the Constitution, you goddamn a**wipe."
And this has to to do with the ACLU...what exactly?
was it an ACLU representative, who was acting in their position as an ACLU representative, that screamed that at you?

They don't necessarily need to be involved in armed conflict, right? Aren't there jobs they can do that don't revolve around shooting people or blowing things up?

That much about logistics I don't know. Regardless, a victory for non-mainstream religions is a victory for me.

They preach "tolerance for all"-Unless you're White, Straight, Christian or Jewish, and/or Male.

Really? So when has the ACLU preached intolerance for any of those groups?

You realize that the ACLU has defended the worst of white straight Christian males when their rights were supposedly threatened, don't you?

Nope. Keep in mind who you're speaking too (Oh wait, I havn't been on this Forum long enough. Nevermind)

I'm Pro Gay Rights and Pro limited Affirmative Action.

No, it's that the ACLU leads the charge in frivolous lawsuits, wasting taxpayer money and reaping large profits for themselves. They preach "tolerance for all"-Unless you're White, Straight, Christian or Jewish, and/or Male.
It's the sheer hypocrisy that bothers me most.

This is a stupid thing to post, and it isn't true.

You get one point for not being from the "ACLU IS AMERICAN JEWISH CIVIL DESTRUCTION MURDER MACHINE" conspiracy klan, but lose 100 for the rest of your asinine drivel.

The one cause the ACLU won't defend is gun rights. They defend christians and muslims and jews when their constitutional rights are violated, just like they defend straight people and white people when their constitutional rights are violated.

And, from NSG's best member:

The ACLU routinely defends the free speech, free exercise of religion, and other rights of Christians, anti-abortion groups, Republicans, and conservatives.

About having former Republican Majority Leader Dick Armey as a consultant?

Conservative firebrand Bob Barr (former Republican Congressman from GA and leader of the impeachment of Bill Clinton) is a consultant. clicky (http://www.aclu.org/LesbianGayRights/LesbianGayRights.cfm?ID=15989&c=101) and clicky (http://www.aclu.org/Privacy/Privacy.cfm?ID=11449&c=39).

The ACLU has currently defending Rush Limbaugh and formerly worked for Ollie North. The ACLU has worked closely with a number of conservative groups over the years. The ACLU has cooperated frequently with the NRA.

In most of the separation of Church and State cases, major religions organizations -- including major Christian denominations -- have sided with the ACLU.

The ACLU has stood up for the rights of religious groups, including Christians on numerous occasions. They have repeatedly defended the rights of anti-abortion protesters.

There are scores upon scores of other actions in which the ACLU has defended or cooperated with Conservatives and Christian groups. Here are just a very small sample:
Following Threat of ACLU of Virginia Lawsuit, Officials to Agree Not to Ban Baptisms in Public Parks (http://www.aclu.org/ReligiousLiberty/ReligiousLiberty.cfm?ID=15897&c=141)
Iowa Civil Liberties Union Defends Right of Students to Wear Anti-Abortion T-Shirts (http://www.aclu.org/StudentsRights/StudentsRights.cfm?ID=18159&c=159) (note many other examples of defending Christians given in the artice)
Speech by James Ziglar, conservative and Bush's INS Commissioner, to the Membership Meeting of the American Civil Liberties Union (http://www.aclu.org/Conference/Conference.cfm?ID=12896&c=256)
After ACLU Intervention on Behalf of Christian Valedictorian, Michigan High School Agrees to Stop Censoring Religious Yearbook Entries (http://www.aclu.org/StudentsRights/StudentsRights.cfm?ID=15680&c=159)
ACLU of New Jersey Successfully Defends Right of Religious Expression by Jurors (http://www.aclu.org/ReligiousLiberty/ReligiousLiberty.cfm?ID=17237&c=29)
ACLU backs students on Confederate shirts (http://cnnstudentnews.cnn.com/2001/fyi/teachers.ednews/05/09/confederate.shirts.ap/)
West Virginia School Officials Violated Student’s Rights By Punishing Him Over a T-Shirt, Court Rules (http://www.aclu.org/FreeSpeech/FreeSpeech.cfm?ID=18399&c=42)
ACLU of Nebraska Defends Presbyterian Church Facing Eviction by the City of Lincoln (http://www.aclu.org/ReligiousLiberty/ReligiousLiberty.cfm?ID=16295&c=142)
Michigan Court Punishes Catholic Man for Refusing Conversion to Pentecostal Faith in Drug Rehab Program (http://www.aclu.org/ReligiousLiberty/ReligiousLiberty.cfm?ID=16138&c=142)

Here is additional evidence:
ACLU Defends California Artist After Los Angeles Orders Removal of “God Bless America” Mural (http://www.aclu.org/FreeSpeech/FreeSpeech.cfm?ID=10248&c=42)
ACLU Defends Church's Right to Run "Anti-Santa" Ads in Boston Subways (http://www.aclu.org/FreeSpeech/FreeSpeech.cfm?ID=10206&c=42)
ACLU of New Jersey Successfully Defends Republican Candidates' Right to Political Speech (http://www.aclu.org/FreeSpeech/FreeSpeech.cfm?ID=17457&c=42)
ACLU Sues to Protect Free Speech Rights of Anti-Abortion Church Group in Indiana (http://www.aclu.org/FreeSpeech/FreeSpeech.cfm?ID=16125&c=86)
In Win for Rev. Falwell (and the ACLU), Judge Rules VA Must Allow Churches to Incorporate (http://www.aclu.org/ReligiousLiberty/ReligiousLiberty.cfm?ID=10147&c=142)
ACLU Hails Plans to Sign Religious Freedom Bill into Law (http://www.aclu.org/ReligiousLiberty/ReligiousLiberty.cfm?ID=8122&c=142)
ACLU of Ohio Will Defend GOP Chairman in Political Yard Sign Case (http://www.aclu.org/FreeSpeech/FreeSpeech.cfm?ID=16843&c=42)
Connecticut Veteran Sues For Right to Commemorate Fallen War Hero on his Property (http://www.aclu.org/FreeSpeech/FreeSpeech.cfm?ID=7356&c=42)
Nevada Officials Drop Plan to License and Fingerprint Clergy (http://www.aclu.org/Privacy/Privacy.cfm?ID=7777&c=130)
ACLU of Nebraska Defends Presbyterian Church Facing Eviction by the City of Lincoln (http://www.aclu.org/ReligiousLiberty/ReligiousLiberty.cfm?ID=16295&c=142)
ACLU and 18 Texas Families Sue to Stop 'Prove Your Religion' School Uniform Policy (http://www.aclu.org/ReligiousLiberty/ReligiousLiberty.cfm?ID=7876&c=139)
ACLU Applauds Supreme Court Ruling Protecting Religious Liberty in Prisons (http://www.aclu.org/court/court.cfm?ID=18363&c=286)
Following Threat of ACLU of Virginia Lawsuit, Officials to Agree Not to Ban Baptisms in Public Parks (http://www.aclu.org/ReligiousLiberty/ReligiousLiberty.cfm?ID=15897&c=141)
ACLU of Georgia Sues City Over Arrest of Political Activist During Fourth of July Celebrations (http://www.aclu.org/FreeSpeech/FreeSpeech.cfm?ID=15870&c=86)
ACLU of Nevada Asks Court to End Ban of Book Critical of the IRS (http://www.aclu.org/FreeSpeech/FreeSpeech.cfm?ID=12525&c=83)
ACLU of New Jersey Successfully Defends Right of Religious Expression by Jurors (http://www.aclu.org/ReligiousLiberty/ReligiousLiberty.cfm?ID=17237&c=29)
ACLU of Pennsylvania Supports Congregation's Fight for Religious Freedom (http://www.aclu.org/ReligiousLiberty/ReligiousLiberty.cfm?ID=9298&c=141)
Iowa Civil Liberties Union Defends Right of Students to Wear Anti-Abortion T-Shirts (http://www.aclu.org/StudentsRights/StudentsRights.cfm?ID=18159&c=159)
ACLU Says Texas Police Violated Art Gallery Owner’s Freedom of Expression - Police Forced Artist to Cover Classical Image of Nude ‘Eve’ (http://www.aclu.org/FreeSpeech/FreeSpeech.cfm?ID=17297&c=83)
After ACLU Intervention on Behalf of Christian Valedictorian, Michigan High School Agrees to Stop Censoring Religious Yearbook Entries (http://www.aclu.org/StudentsRights/StudentsRights.cfm?ID=15680&c=159)
Last-Minute ACLU Appeal Allows Exiled Cubane Activist To Take His Anti-Castro Message to the Skies (http://www.aclu.org/FreeSpeech/FreeSpeech.cfm?ID=7143&c=86)
Pennsylvania Superior Court Rules: Amish Can Stick With Reflective Tape on Buggies (http://www.aclu.org/ReligiousLiberty/ReligiousLiberty.cfm?ID=14162&c=29)

ENOUGH ALREADY WITH THE CANARD THAT THE ACLU IS JUST LEFTIST OR ANTI-CHRISTIAN!!!! :headbang:


You claim they don't represent straight people, white people, christians and jews... so prove it. Prove none of the above cases really occurred.

Put up or shut up!

Really? So when has the ACLU preached intolerance for any of those groups?

You realize that the ACLU has defended the worst of white straight Christian males when their rights were supposedly threatened, don't you?

They defended Neo-Nazis about a quarter of a century ago, I do believe.

The irony: The Neo-Nazis had a Jewish lawyer.

No, it's that the ACLU leads the charge in frivolous lawsuits, wasting taxpayer money and reaping large profits for themselves. They preach "tolerance for all"-Unless you're White, Straight, Christian or Jewish, and/or Male.
All the suits when they represented Jews, Christians, Whites, Males, and Heterosexuals excepted of course?

You claim they don't represent straight people, white people, christians and jews... so prove it. Prove none of the above cases really occurred.

Put up or shut up!

but...but...Rush said...Rush told me on Fox...
but...

but...

What is the atheism symbol, an atom?
Evidently. A graphic representation of an atom with an A in it (Does this mean they are all secretly fans of Atom Man?).

But, given that atheism is a lack of faith and you can't really call it a chruch or denomination, how and why is there a symbol for it? :confused:

The ACLU pushes whatever agenda it wants. If it was truely fighting for our civil liberites it would fight for ALL of them and not pick and choose which ones it wants. It's just like the consitution; you can't pick and choose which parts you want to allow others to obey. Can't stomp out my freedom of religion but champion my freedom of speech.

And if the families were so bothered that the government didn't let them put some wiccan symbol on their tombstone, burry them in a private lot and buy your own damned headstone so you can put whatever the hell you want on it. Because somehow I don't think the dead person they are burrying cares much. If the government is paying for all of that, they have the right to deny and allow whatever they want on their property.

The ACLU pushes whatever agenda it wants. If it was truely fighting for our civil liberites it would fight for ALL of them and not pick and choose which ones it wants. It's just like the consitution; you can't pick and choose which parts you want to allow others to obey. Can't stomp out my freedom of religion but champion my freedom of speech.

And if the families were so bothered that the government didn't let them put some wiccan symbol on their tombstone, burry them in a private lot and buy your own damned headstone so you can put whatever the hell you want on it. Because somehow I don't think the dead person they are burrying cares much. If the government is paying for all of that, they have the right to deny and allow whatever they want on their property.

Well, the ACLU focuses largely on the first Amendment, and other groups focus on others. They don't try to stomp out others, they just don't have the resources to fight for them all.

Also, they don't stomp on your freedom of religion. Where in the Nine hells did you get that idea?

And the government has a duty to uphold towards the Constitution. They DON'T get to pick and choose what is considered "Good Religion" from "Bad Religion".

You are oblivious towards the government, aren't you?

The ACLU pushes whatever agenda it wants. If it was truely fighting for our civil liberites it would fight for ALL of them and not pick and choose which ones it wants. It's just like the consitution; you can't pick and choose which parts you want to allow others to obey. Can't stomp out my freedom of religion but champion my freedom of speech.
1. See the nice post above about the ACLU defending religious freedoms no matter who or what.

And if the families were so bothered that the government didn't let them put some wiccan symbol on their tombstone, burry them in a private lot and buy your own damned headstone so you can put whatever the hell you want on it. Because somehow I don't think the dead person they are burrying cares much. If the government is paying for all of that, they have the right to deny and allow whatever they want on their property.
2. See the first amendment and the notion that the Government does not have the right to pick and choose amoung which religions it happens to like in order to honor fallen troops.

Evidently. A graphic representation of an atom with an A in it (Does this mean they are all secretly fans of Atom Man?).

But, given that atheism is a lack of faith and you can't really call it a chruch or denomination, how and why is there a symbol for it? :confused:

The Atom symbol with one broken orbit is the official symbol chosen by the American Atheists Association, when it was founded, to be an international symbol for Atheism in general. The broken orbit forms an "A", for Atheism, and is also an acknowledgement that as Atheists we do not know everything and there are things beyond our ken.

The small letter in the middle of the symbol is the nation designator. Currently, American Atheists uses the A for American, though there is a push to change it to U for United States.

American Atheists website: http://www.atheists.org/

The Atom symbol with one broken orbit is the official symbol chosen by the American Atheists Association, when it was founded, to be an international symbol for Atheism in general. The broken orbit forms an "A", for Atheism, and is also an acknowledgement that as Atheists we do not know everything and there are things beyond our ken.

The small letter in the middle of the symbol is the nation designator. Currently, American Atheists uses the A for American, though there is a push to change it to U for United States.

American Atheists website: http://www.atheists.org/
Ok, that's where it comes from, but athemism isn't a relgion so I'm still unclear how it can be considered a symbol acceptable for this.

Well, the ACLU focuses largely on the first Amendment

Not exclusively.

We just hear more about their First Amendment cases, because the Religious Right makes a big deal out of it whenever separation of church and state is actually enforced.

Let me guess, the ACLU are the ebil libruals, right?


Responding like that won't win you any arguments. You can do better.

Responding like that won't win you any arguments. You can do better.
It's usually what the anti-ACLU rants around here come to though.

Ok, that's where it comes from, but athemism isn't a relgion so I'm still unclear how it can be considered a symbol acceptable for this.

Why, shouldn't we get a symbol? We all do have the same religious position in common, after all.

Why, shouldn't we get a symbol? We all do have the same religious position in common, after all.
Hmm... Ok, I'm gonna split my argument here for a second because for part 1 I see no reason why you guys can't have a symbol; however, how can atheism be said to be a religious position? To borrow a sig, isn't that like saying someone's hair color is bald?

The other reason I am in askance of the symbol is, while I'm sure the AA is a nice enough group, I doubt that they represent ALL atheis out there (Unlike the Cross being a universally accepted symbol of Christians), so why should their symbol be used?

Not exclusively.

We just hear more about their First Amendment cases, because the Religious Right makes a big deal out of it whenever separation of church and state is actually enforced.

Well true. However, they do seem to take a very large portion of their cases on the First Amendment.

Not saying exclusively, it's just that there seems to be far more opportunity for First Amendment breaches than others.

Hmm... Ok, I'm gonna split my argument here for a second because for part 1 I see no reason why you guys can't have a symbol; however, how can atheism be said to be a religious position? To borrow a sig, isn't that like saying someone's hair color is bald?

Our philosophical position on religion (which is often a philosophical topic) is that there is no God, afterlife or supernatural. It's a definite position, not a refusal to answer the question, which would be a failure to take a position.

The other reason I am in askance of the symbol is, while I'm sure the AA is a nice enough group, I doubt that they represent ALL atheis out there (Unlike the Cross being a universally accepted symbol of Christians), so why should their symbol be used?

We need one, and it's on offer. It may not be universally used, but then, for a long time the cross wasn't universally used for Christianity either; the Fish symbol well predates it (from the miracle of the Loaves and Fishes), and was more universally popular for a long time.

American Atheists is the single largest Atheist group in the US. We might as well use their symbol until a better one comes along.

Let me guess, the ACLU are the ebil libruals, right?

The ACLU are the "ebil" idiots who will support any extreme nutcase position as long as it gets them publicity.

Occasionally, as in this case, they get it right. It doesn't happen often enough to justify their existence, though.

spoken like someone who gets their information on the ACLU from Fox and hasn't ever bothered to check to see exactly what the ACLU involves itself in.


And this has to to do with the ACLU...what exactly?
was it an ACLU representative, who was acting in their position as an ACLU representative, that screamed that at you?

*Sigh* That's the problem with siding against the ACLU. Everyone assumes you're a completely indoctrinated idiot with no mind of his own.

I don't deny that the ACLU has done some good things. However, recent lawsuits undertaken by them are simply ludicrous. Almsot as ludicrous as Sheryl Crowe asking for federal legislation limiting people to one sheet of toilet paper each time they go to the Bathroom. :rolleyes:

As for the second part, I was trying to make sure that I didn't run into another psycho who was convinced that the Bill of Rights+Amendments weren't part of the Constitution before I started debating anything with him/her.


ADDENDUM: Huh, seems that my 'submit reply' didn't happen. Oh well, more responses later.

Huzzah!
This is great news! Soldiers should have whatever the want put on their tombstone, its the least they deserve.

They don't necessarily need to be involved in armed conflict, right? Aren't there jobs they can do that don't revolve around shooting people or blowing things up?

Like driving those supply trucks... That must be the most dangerousnon-combat job there.

The ACLU are the "ebil" idiots who will support any extreme nutcase position as long as it gets them publicity.

And your proof of this is....?

Our philosophical position on religion (which is often a philosophical topic) is that there is no God, afterlife or supernatural. It's a definite position, not a refusal to answer the question, which would be a failure to take a position.
But it cannot be said to be a religion, which is the point of the symbol.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070423/ap_on_re_us/wiccan_soldier

One of the cases came out of Nevada, very close to my hometown actually, so I'm glad it's finally been resolved. It was shameful the way that the US Government was telling families that US troops who were either KIA or veterans who died after their service was over could not have their religious beliefs on their tombstones.

Especially as the Congressmen against it were spout all sorts of insanse remarks about Satanism.

Read about this already, but "A settlement between the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs and Wiccans adds the five-pointed star to the list of "emblems of belief" allowed on VA grave markers"...
...what the f*ck? Shouldn't ALL religious symbols be allowed on graves in a country that prides its self on a constitution that says the government must not interfere with religion?

Ah what am I talking about? Bush is randomly ignoring the constitution and the US citizens are letting it happen. Good luck trying to get your rights WHEN you become a dictatorship like Zimbabwe... you're gonna need it.

But it cannot be said to be a religion, which is the point of the symbol.

No, it's not a religion. But the same can be said of Daoism and some forms of Buddhism (which are better consdered as philosophical positions), and they have symbols.

Now the Wycckyins can take their Magic"k" Ckurcys off and we can win in Iraq, hurrah.

Because Lord and Lady forbid we acknowledge the fact that they're serving our country and dying in uniform.

Just Quickly:

Athiests kind of need a symbol the way you're kind of supposed to right N/A. Its a sign to say, no sign goes here.

The ACLU do a good job curbing over zealous censorship on both sides of the divide, and i would find it hard to believe that such a non-centrally structured disperate organisation could form a cohesive enough national strategy to "just be in it for the publicity" and further, if all your actions are done to increase your publicity, what cause, in the end, and you garnering publicity for. The ACLU don't somehow gain money or power the more people know about them.

And lastly, i'm torn on this news story between a desire to see equality in government and the armed forces, and my hatred and contempt for Wicca.

And lastly, i'm torn on this news story between a desire to see equality in government and the armed forces, and my hatred and contempt for Wicca.

Why hatred and contempt, if you don't mind my asking? I went from Wicca to a kind of footloose non denominational pagan because I find Wicca too... ritualized. And too big on the whole hierarchy within the group thing. It's just too organized. Give me disorganized religion any day!

Why hatred and contempt, if you don't mind my asking? I went from Wicca to a kind of footloose non denominational pagan because I find Wicca too... ritualized. And too big on the whole hierarchy within the group thing. It's just too organized. Give me disorganized religion any day!

It's one of those things, Wicca just annoys me so much, with all the people running around being so ernest about mystical gibberish barely half a century old. I wouldn't discriminate against someone who believes in it, but i don't even pretend to have any respect for it.

Why hatred and contempt, if you don't mind my asking? I went from Wicca to a kind of footloose non denominational pagan because I find Wicca too... ritualized. And too big on the whole hierarchy within the group thing. It's just too organized. Give me disorganized religion any day!

Discordia FTW! Hail Eris!

It's one of those things, Wicca just annoys me so much, with all the people running around being so ernest about mystical gibberish barely half a century old. I wouldn't discriminate against someone who believe in it, but i don't even pretend to have any respect for it.

Hey, that mystical gibberish is from the Dawn of Time! I know because my family have been Witches since before then! We were witches in Atlantis! So I'm better than you! :rolleyes: Yes, I have indeed met these folks.

Discordia FTW! Hail Eris!

Hail! Hail! Disorganized Discordia forever!

Hail! Hail! Disorganized Discordia forever!

Huh? what? something not quite right about that!:eek:

principiadiscordia.com (http://www.principiadiscordia.com) poee.co.uk (http://poee.co.uk) ummm... Can't think of any other Discordian sites off the top of my head, but these are both good starters.

Heh so I guess you didn't get it then?

But it cannot be said to be a religion, which is the point of the symbol.

What would you propose they have on the grave instead?

principiadiscordia.com (http://www.principiadiscordia.com) poee.co.uk (http://poee.co.uk) ummm... Can't think of any other Discordian sites off the top of my head, but these are both good starters.

EDIT: And kind of the whole point of Discordia is disorganization.

Or is it?


DUN DUN DUN

Huh? what? something not quite right about that!:eek:

principiadiscordia.com (http://www.principiadiscordia.com) poee.co.uk (http://poee.co.uk) ummm... Can't think of any other Discordian sites off the top of my head, but these are both good starters.

EDIT: And kind of the whole point of Discordia is disorganization.

*Sigh* That's the problem with siding against the ACLU. Everyone assumes you're a completely indoctrinated idiot with no mind of his own.

I don't deny that the ACLU has done some good things. However, recent lawsuits undertaken by them are simply ludicrous. Almsot as ludicrous as Sheryl Crowe asking for federal legislation limiting people to one sheet of toilet paper each time they go to the Bathroom. :rolleyes:



Sheryl Crowe's silliness asside (especially as it is irrelevant), I hear this sort of argument frequently. So, just for the record, can you list any of these "ludicrous" lawsuits that they have undertaken?

Or is this just the regurgitation of some talking point you've picked up from the knee-jerk anti-ACLU crowd?

I mean, you waded in on the subject by denigrating this decision - despite your admission that it is the correct one - for no other reason than the ACLU worked on the case.

As if, even if you were correct about the ACLU, it somehow rendered the decision less worthy.

Methinks your knee-jerk reactionism is saddly misplaced.

It's one of those things, Wicca just annoys me so much, with all the people running around being so ernest about mystical gibberish barely half a century old. I wouldn't discriminate against someone who believes in it, but i don't even pretend to have any respect for it.

Yeah. That sort of weird freakiness deserves nothing but contempt. When I lived in Ireland my mother tried to get into this crazy cult they have there. They were into all sorts of screwed up stuff. Symbolic cannibalism, blood-drinking, zombie-worship. You've probably heard of them. Roman Catholics?

It's one of those things, Wicca just annoys me so much, with all the people running around being so ernest about mystical gibberish barely half a century old. I wouldn't discriminate against someone who believes in it, but i don't even pretend to have any respect for it.

So age is what makes a religion valid then?

So we should scrap all the Protestant Christian religions in favor of Catholicism and Eastern Orthodoxy because they're just a couple of hundred years old instead of a couple of thousand. And I guess we should scrap Christianity in favor of Judaism, because Judaism has a couple of thousand years on Christianity. But then I suppose we should scrap that in favor of animistic ancestor-worship. We've had that since before recorded time.

Novelty is what makes all religion earnest. Go talk to someone who converted to their current religion a couple of years ago. They're more devout than anyone who was born into it.

By the same token, if you're the child of the child of the child of the child of someone who was born into it, well you've become pretty blase about the whole thing. In all likelihood, the only reason you call yourself a Christian is because you're not "devout" enough to join atheism, and it's just easier to call yourself a Christian, despite the fact that you like war, the death penalty, and upper-class tax cuts.

Oh, sure, right now everyone thinks that it is fine to be inclusive and accepting of the religious beliefs of others, but what are we going to do when people start wanting their favorite symbols from the Necronomicon carved on their gravestones? It is the same slippery slope that led us from gay marriage to snake-marriage.
I hope the ACLU will be happy when we're up to our asses in Wicca Zombies.

Hey! Zombies are people too! Or at least they were. :)

This is a stupid thing to post, and it isn't true.

You get one point for not being from the "ACLU IS AMERICAN JEWISH CIVIL DESTRUCTION MURDER MACHINE" conspiracy klan, but lose 100 for the rest of your asinine drivel.

The one cause the ACLU won't defend is gun rights. They defend christians and muslims and jews when their constitutional rights are violated, just like they defend straight people and white people when their constitutional rights are violated.

And, from NSG's best member:




You claim they don't represent straight people, white people, christians and jews... so prove it. Prove none of the above cases really occurred.

Put up or shut up!


AAAHHH!!! :eek:

FACTS!!!

That's cheating. :p

"We don't discriminate against the living-impaired." A necro gang banger, in one of the best WitchCraft campaigns ever. Run by my husband.

Gaahhhhh get away with ya, and ya role playin' kid corrupting ways ya!:eek:

AAAHHH!!! :eek:

FACTS!!!

That's cheating. :p

Right. Better alert the mods; any threads with actual facts in them are automatically locked.

Of course, nobody ever bothers to read the posts with facts in them, so it's not a big deal anyway...

Hey! Zombies are people too! Or at least they were. :)

"We don't discriminate against the living-impaired." A necro gang banger, in one of the best WitchCraft campaigns ever. Run by my husband.

"We don't discriminate against the living-impaired." A necro gang banger, in one of the best WitchCraft campaigns ever. Run by my husband.

Witchcraft? Can't say I've ever heard of that system. What's it like?

No bloody idea, but since the marker is for religious purposes I'm just kinda getting caught on the notion that a group of people who have no religion have, what is in effect here, a religious symbol for their graves.

Umm that does seem kinda odd. Then can we say for certian that remeberance for our dead is a religous thing?

No bloody idea, but since the marker is for religious purposes I'm just kinda getting caught on the notion that a group of people who have no religion have, what is in effect here, a religious symbol for their graves.

I guess it's the grave equivilant of N/A.

That'd actually be pretty cool to have on your grave.


Born: N/A
Died: Tomorrow

What would you propose they have on the grave instead?
No bloody idea, but since the marker is for religious purposes I'm just kinda getting caught on the notion that a group of people who have no religion have, what is in effect here, a religious symbol for their graves.

Witchcraft? Can't say I've ever heard of that system. What's it like?

UniSystem! Linky (http://edenstudios.net). It's great, plus they had the Buffy license for awhile. Thus, Cinematic UniSystem, which is a lot of fun, too.

UniSystem! Linky (http://edenstudios.net). It's great, plus they had the Buffy license for awhile. Thus, Cinematic UniSystem, which is a lot of fun, too.

Nifty. Our group sort of alternates between Deadlands (wild west with magic), Spycraft, and I've been trying to get them into Cthulhu (though I've met a frustrating amount of resistance).

I'll have to check this system out, though.

Right. Better alert the mods; any threads with actual facts in them are automatically locked.

Of course, nobody ever bothers to read the posts with facts in them, so it's not a big deal anyway...

What posts? :confused:


;)

Nifty. Our group sort of alternates between Deadlands (wild west with magic), Spycraft, and I've been trying to get them into Cthulhu (though I've met a frustrating amount of resistance).

I'll have to check this system out, though.

Deadlands! I love deadlands. Played in a group once that had several regulars, one was in a car accident and cut her tongue. So she and the GM (her sister) put their heads together and came up with a mime who did magic. Said mime had less common sense than your average apple, and her dog was smarter than her. That session was a lot of fun. The next week, we were all full of stories of how crazy her mime was, and she accused us of lying! She thought we made the whole thing up, until the GM showed her the character sheet. Turns out, she was taking a lot of painkillers.

Spycraft was fun, tho d20 just annoys the hell out of me. Cthulu, I just hate. I like to play a character for more than a few sessions before they go batshit crazy.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070423/ap_on_re_us/wiccan_soldier

One of the cases came out of Nevada, very close to my hometown actually, so I'm glad it's finally been resolved. It was shameful the way that the US Government was telling families that US troops who were either KIA or veterans who died after their service was over could not have their religious beliefs on their tombstones.

Especially as the Congressmen against it were spout all sorts of insanse remarks about Satanism.

I really thought that the US army already recognized Wicca..I would swear my friend said they provided a Wiccan Chaplain service...or had a Wicca Soldier lead some Wiccan service...or maybe they just didnt stop him.

Whatever.

Good for Wiccans.

I am Baptist so I am supposed to be really disgusted by this...so booooo...

There I fulfilled my obligation to complain.

Personally if a guy dies for his country or serves his counrty and earns his military burial he should be able to have headstone of whatever the hell he wants(as long as it is not cost prohibitive and fits in the theme of the cememtary) in my opinion a Wiccan Star fits just fine.

I know some fecking whackos are going cause problems though.

My symbol is a taco sitting between a pair of muddy iron balls. I'll expect my last wishes to be carried out after I'm gone. :cool:

It's one of those things, Wicca just annoys me so much, with all the people running around being so ernest about mystical gibberish barely half a century old. I wouldn't discriminate against someone who believes in it, but i don't even pretend to have any respect for it.

So... it's because it's not "old" enough? Did you even study Gardner to see if he was coherent? Which means Christianity was "gibberish" at 50 AD too? What's so "right" about a sky faerie and so "wrong" about an impersonal goddess figure?

The ACLU pushes whatever agenda it wants. If it was truely fighting for our civil liberites it would fight for ALL of them and not pick and choose which ones it wants. It's just like the consitution; you can't pick and choose which parts you want to allow others to obey. Can't stomp out my freedom of religion but champion my freedom of speech.

And if the families were so bothered that the government didn't let them put some wiccan symbol on their tombstone, burry them in a private lot and buy your own damned headstone so you can put whatever the hell you want on it. Because somehow I don't think the dead person they are burrying cares much. If the government is paying for all of that, they have the right to deny and allow whatever they want on their property.
Um, No.

No branch, arm, agency or entity of the US government has the right to deny any US citizen rights guaranteed by the US Constitution, including the right to religious freedom. Period.

The US military, including the VA, is a government entity and bound by US laws. Period.

If the US military is going to provide cemeteries for US military personnel, then they MUST respect the religious burial customs of ALL those personnel, not just the ones that follow religions that you think are okay. Period.

So your suggestion that some of the soldiers who served this nation honorably, and their grieving families, can just go whistle up their own asses if they don't want a cross (or whatever other symbol you think is okay) on their tombstones is not one that the VA should be espousing. And with this settlement, the VA has finally realized that.

The ACLU has also defended the rights of White Supremecists, Black Militants, Homosexuals, blah blah.

I often dont like the causes the ACLU takes up, or how they butt in on mundane stupidity...but they do stand up for anyone who asks who is having their rights stepped on.

No bloody idea, but since the marker is for religious purposes I'm just kinda getting caught on the notion that a group of people who have no religion have, what is in effect here, a religious symbol for their graves.
Let me help you get unstuck. It's not a religious symbol. It's an "emblem of belief." That can easily include the belief that there is no god.

Remembrance of the dead is usually religious but is not necessarily so. For instance, the Washington Monument is a remembrance of a dead man, but it's not a religious marker. If you tour very old cemeteries, you will often see many tombstones that are engraved like mad but have no religious images or text on them.

The real purpose of grave markers is to remember the individual who died, so what is important is that the marker reflect that individual and tell us something about him or her. Since for some people, identifying their religious/spiritual belief system is very important, then it is important that that be reflected on their gravemarker. So atheists who want to be remembered as atheists should have the right to have that noted on their markers.

So... it's because it's not "old" enough? Did you even study Gardner to see if he was coherent? Which means Christianity was "gibberish" at 50 AD too? What's so "right" about a sky faerie and so "wrong" about an impersonal goddess figure?

Ahhh leave him alone, he has already said that he wont discriminate agianst any Wiccan, yet he holds no respect for the system of belief.

I have no respect for Christianity, but I don't rail against Christians.(okay I do against some, but they bloody deserve it)

The ACLU has also defended the rights of White Supremecists, Black Militants, Homosexuals, blah blah.

I often dont like the causes the ACLU takes up, or how they butt in on mundane stupidity...but they do stand up for anyone who asks who is having their rights stepped on.
My take on the ACLU controversy is that anyone who dislikes any cause they have ever represented in any legal action will denounce them as "leftist" or "anti" whatever or "out of control" in some way. But when those complainers' rights are in danger, guess who they are all too happy to see show up to defend them? And then later, it's all "Wow, I can't believe they got this one right."

Who in their right bloody mind would say that the bill of rights is not part of the constitution?

It is, I suppose, not part of the ORIGINAL constitution, but really that's neither here nor there.

So... it's because it's not "old" enough? Did you even study Gardner to see if he was coherent? Which means Christianity was "gibberish" at 50 AD too? What's so "right" about a sky faerie and so "wrong" about an impersonal goddess figure?

I think it'smore the people who insist it is older then the hill sinstead of admiting it was born in the 50's that, make it less palatable. Gardner didn't he steal a lot of his ideas from Alestair Crowley, I belive he did, umm yep he did.

Go on cite me the Wiccan rede if ya will.


Heheh I just realised I have replied twice top the same post, ahhh well these things happen.

So age is what makes a religion valid then?

So we should scrap all the Protestant Christian religions in favor of Catholicism and Eastern Orthodoxy because they're just a couple of hundred years old instead of a couple of thousand. And I guess we should scrap Christianity in favor of Judaism, because Judaism has a couple of thousand years on Christianity. But then I suppose we should scrap that in favor of animistic ancestor-worship. We've had that since before recorded time.

Novelty is what makes all religion earnest. Go talk to someone who converted to their current religion a couple of years ago. They're more devout than anyone who was born into it.

By the same token, if you're the child of the child of the child of the child of someone who was born into it, well you've become pretty blase about the whole thing. In all likelihood, the only reason you call yourself a Christian is because you're not "devout" enough to join atheism, and it's just easier to call yourself a Christian, despite the fact that you like war, the death penalty, and upper-class tax cuts.

Why is christianity a respectable religion ? Because of its wealth of followers and its roots comfortably lost in the mists of time. There's none of the embarassing buisness of actually having to think about why you believe what, and if anyone tries to talk to you about inconvieniant historical innaccuries in the bible you can just 'it was a long time ago, we don't have perfect records' and pretend the debate is over.
With a new religion, the issue of its creation reveals all too plainly the unsavoury issue of what the basis for the tenants of belief are. Why a godess? Rose lines, who came up with them? Upside down pentagram, and indeed the pentagram istelf, what is the basis of faith? Did some god come down at tell them, i think we'd remember a heavenly miracle, they're all too rare these days. Rather all we need to is look in our history books to find as we go further back, the people who unashamedly made it up. In the 60's in the 1900's the 1850's, people sat down, came up with it, and its humble and ridiculous origins are documented for all to see.

And then, in this day and age, people continue about their live confidently spouting such nonesense as ancient mystical truthes, that far from being reveered by our backwards forefathers would have got them laughed out of town.

Its their absolute confidence in nonesense that irks me.

PS. No-one ever thought the Earth was flat, ive tried to convince several people of this and they never believe me, maybe it is a conincidence that they also fimrly believed in the power of three, and the watchtowers etc.

So... it's because it's not "old" enough? Did you even study Gardner to see if he was coherent? Which means Christianity was "gibberish" at 50 AD too? What's so "right" about a sky faerie and so "wrong" about an impersonal goddess figure?

One last thing, because apparently i'm blind and didn't see the response.

There's nothing right about the sky faerie, and i dare say if Christianity existed in 50AD as anything more than one of many jewish doomsday cults which i rather doubt, it would have seemed ridiculous then too. But this isn't really about christianity, that too has most dubious origins of a decidedly less than divine nature but the facts of the matter arnt very widely known at all. You're not taught in history class the facts of christianitys origins, where as in the case of Wicca it is such a short time ago that it should still be within memory.

OK i rambled or something.

I'm coming into the thread late, but I'll express my views on this development:

About damn time!

I think it'smore the people who insist it is older then the hill sinstead of admiting it was born in the 50's that, make it less palatable. Gardner didn't he steal a lot of his ideas from Alestair Crowley, I belive he did, umm yep he did.

Go on cite me the Wiccan rede if ya will.


Heheh I just realised I have replied twice top the same post, ahhh well these things happen.

I'm not Wiccan, but I don't have anything specific against it. If they are to be the "face" of paganism in most countries, so be it. They're a reconstruction/reinterpretation of an old religion, and we DO live in a society that places more importance on old religions, so it's not a surprise that they will try and claim it. I'm aware that Gardner had influence from Crowley.

Why is christianity a respectable religion ? Because of its wealth of followers and its roots comfortably lost in the mists of time. There's none of the embarassing buisness of actually having to think about why you believe what, and if anyone tries to talk to you about inconvieniant historical innaccuries in the bible you can just 'it was a long time ago, we don't have perfect records' and pretend the debate is over.
With a new religion, the issue of its creation reveals all too plainly the unsavoury issue of what the basis for the tenants of belief are. Why a godess? Rose lines, who came up with them? Upside down pentagram, and indeed the pentagram istelf, what is the basis of faith? Did some god come down at tell them, i think we'd remember a heavenly miracle, they're all too rare these days. Rather all we need to is look in our history books to find as we go further back, the people who unashamedly made it up. In the 60's in the 1900's the 1850's, people sat down, came up with it, and its humble and ridiculous origins are documented for all to see.

And then, in this day and age, people continue about their live confidently spouting such nonesense as ancient mystical truthes, that far from being reveered by our backwards forefathers would have got them laughed out of town.

Its their absolute confidence in nonesense that irks me.

PS. No-one ever thought the Earth was flat, ive tried to convince several people of this and they never believe me, maybe it is a conincidence that they also fimrly believed in the power of three, and the watchtowers etc.
You are irked by their confidence in nonsense, when you write such amazing nonsense yourself? :p

My friend, no disrespect, but your post makes no sense whatsoever. I'll excerpt for you the only part that seems germane to your argument at all, the only thing you mention that seems to be your idea of a good quality in a religion:

...There's none of the embarassing buisness of actually having to think...

Yeah, if your argument is that Wicca is not respected because people question its symbols, content, practices and claims, and that they only do this because it is new, I refer you to every religion thread that has ever been posted in this forum in which people have spent days and weeks attacking "respectable" old Christianity on exactly those same points.

Snip.

And why would "nothing" be more coherent? All beliefs, including "nothing", explain the same phenomena...

---Snippity---

Sometimes i say things, and my words rebel but i soldier on bravely despite their treachorous nature. Can't i at least get points for that.

I'm not Wiccan, but I don't have anything specific against it. If they are to be the "face" of paganism in most countries, so be it. They're a reconstruction/reinterpretation of an old religion, and we DO live in a society that places more importance on old religions, so it's not a surprise that they will try and claim it. I'm aware that Gardner had influence from Crowley.

Heh fair doos then!

I'm not Wiccan, but I don't have anything specific against it. If they are to be the "face" of paganism in most countries, so be it. They're a reconstruction/reinterpretation of an old religion, and we DO live in a society that places more importance on old religions, so it's not a surprise that they will try and claim it. I'm aware that Gardner had influence from Crowley.

I also am a non-Wiccan polytheist. I have little interest in the practices or claims of Wicca and about the same interest in their rituals as I have for Catholic rituals. But, I respect their beliefs and their right to them, and I have no objection to them being the public face of paganism.

I would add that I also would have equal respect for them if they wanted to call themselves an entirely new religion, rather than a reconstructed one. I don't see what difference it makes. I also am tired of people criticizing them for claiming an ancient heritage they cannot prove. I know of few religions that have not made such claims when they were new. Ever.

EDIT: In fact, some people wait until their religions are already old before trying to push their origin dates back even further. Hence some people's insistence that some form of Christianity or Islam existed since time immorial and was the original form of all religion. Yep, it seems there is no expiration date for nonsense.

My take on the ACLU controversy is that anyone who dislikes any cause they have ever represented in any legal action will denounce them as "leftist" or "anti" whatever or "out of control" in some way. But when those complainers' rights are in danger, guess who they are all too happy to see show up to defend them? And then later, it's all "Wow, I can't believe they got this one right."

I think I can, with slight modification, post something I posted not too long ago.

Silly Muravyets, don't you know that the ACLU is a purely anti-christian organization who seeks to promote only the views of the minorities? whenever the ACLU takes a case and tries to defend something that isn't clearly and directly supported by the plain words of the constitution then this is nothing more than pure liberal judicial activism.

Unless of course you agree with the ruling, then it's just good judgement, of course.

But if you don't it's legal activism, pandering to minorities, and a deep plot to overthrow christianity, and therefore, obviously wrong.

Even if you don't have a law degree what so ever. If you ever think the ACLU is wrong, then the ACLU is wrong, and a bunch of damned dirty liberal activists.

I would add that I also would have equal respect for them if they wanted to call themselves an entirely new religion, rather than a reconstructed one. I don't see what difference it makes. I also am tired of people criticizing them for claiming an ancient heritage they cannot prove. I know of few religions that have not made such claims when they were new. Ever.

True. You and I, and others, have equal respect regardless of the age of a given religion. However, the same doesn't happen with most people.

Sometimes i say things, and my words rebel but i soldier on bravely despite their treachorous nature. Can't i at least get points for that.
No. Welcome to NSG World where every word counts. Forever. :p

I think I can, with slight modification, post something I posted not too long ago.

Silly Muravyets, don't you know that the ACLU is a purely anti-christian organization who seeks to promote only the views of the minorities? whenever the ACLU takes a case and tries to defend something that isn't clearly and directly supported by the plain words of the constitution then this is nothing more than pure liberal judicial activism.

Unless of course you agree with the ruling, then it's just good judgement, of course.

But if you don't it's legal activism, pandering to minorities, and a deep plot to overthrow christianity, and therefore, obviously wrong.

Even if you don't have a law degree what so ever. If you ever think the ACLU is wrong, then the ACLU is wrong, and a bunch of damned dirty liberal activists.
Hahaha! Good one. You know, A, this post is so well suited to so many things, I think you should just print a Mad-Libs form of it. :D

No. Welcome to NSG World where every word counts. Forever. :p

And it's all there for people to referance back to untill you are really, really old! Ohhh and don't think leaving or dying gets you out of it, people remember and talk!

Hahaha! Good one. You know, A, this post is so well suited to so many things, I think you should just print a Mad-Libs form of it. :D

I was tempted to just rewrite it, but I was feeling particularly persnickity when I wrote it the first time, and i didn't think I could get the wording quite right the second time around.

True. You and I, and others, have equal respect regardless of the age of a given religion. However, the same doesn't happen with most people.
Heh, I take an even more cynical view of it. I say that most people are just plain unwilling to show respect to others. Nitpicking over the age of this or that religion is just another way of dissing. Let a person's religion be however new, it will not stop them from dissing another's religion for either being too new or too old. And if they pick the too-new option and are called out on it, they will always seek to make up some cock-and-bull nonsense about how their own religion is really much older than it looks.

I have a lot of respect for beliefs, but actually not that much for the people who hold them.

And it's all there for people to referance back to untill you are really, really old! Ohhh and don't think leaving or dying gets you out of it, people remember and talk!
Posters come and go, but hilariously dumb-ass comments are eternal. ;)

I was tempted to just rewrite it, but I was feeling particularly persnickity when I wrote it the first time, and i didn't think I could get the wording quite right the second time around.
No, definitely save it for reuse. It's perfect as is.

.......bunch of damned dirty liberal activists.


Heh this made me laugh. Not too long ago I was witness to an exchange of two opposing POV on some forum or other.

One chap was saying just the sort of thing above and the second chap was talking about how beinbg liberal means allowing each person to enjoy the freedom that one self expects to enjoy.

The mad gentleman countered that not everybody is born equeal and that some people have to be effectivly ruled, or told what to do.

The liberal man called the madman a facist, the facist took mighty umbriddge against this, and the senisble fella had to explain that if you really thought that some people could not be expected to enjoy the freedoms you yourself demand, then indeed that is the ver definition of being a facist.

Man it was a hoot!

So nowadays whenever I get called similar to the above quote, I can just say Facist! and watch what happens.

True. You and I, and others, have equal respect regardless of the age of a given religion. However, the same doesn't happen with most people.

To me, this issue isn't necessarily a matter of respect for the religion (although that is a good thing too). It is respect for the person - the veteran - and that person's family. I think I'd have trouble really respecting the belief that the FSM is real - knowing as I do that it was begun as a spoof in the first place. However, if a veteran truly believed in it, and wanted a "noodly appendage" on his tombstone, I'd absolutely support that option.

To me, this issue isn't necessarily a matter of respect for the religion (although that is a good thing too). It is respect for the person - the veteran - and that person's family. I think I'd have trouble really respecting the belief that the FSM is real - knowing as I do that it was begun as a spoof in the first place. However, if a veteran truly believed in it, and wanted a "noodly appendage" on his tombstone, I'd absolutely support that option.
There's a wonderful cemetery in Barre, Vermont, which is the site of the Rock of Ages granite quarry which has been in operation for -- oh, some amazing length of time and hence its name. Rock-cutting has been a long-time traditional trade in Barre, and the cemetery is remarkable because so many of the monuments were created by the cutters themselves for their own families and loved ones. In those monments, the crafters really let their creative visions reign.

Many immigrants who were stone-cutters and masons went to Barre throughout the 19th and 20th centuries to pursue that trade, and many of them were Italian, and many of those Italians were Roman Catholic and quite religious, too. Yet many of their monuments are not religious at all. They celebrate, instead, the individual people buried under them -- their lives, their personalities.

One of my favorites is a bas-relief portrait of the man whose grave it is smoking his pipe, with a happy and contented expression on his face. It bears his name, dates, and the title "Scultore Supremo," which means, of course, "supreme sculptor."

Another favorite monument bears only the person's name, dates, and a bas-relief carving of a comfortable armchair, which I assume was the man's favorite thing in all the world.

If those people, who labored so hard all their lives, earned the right to express themselves anyway they liked and anyway they wanted to be remembered on their tombstones, then surely the men and women who gave their lives in service to the nation should have the same right, even if within the constraints of military formalism of style.

Let me help you get unstuck. It's not a religious symbol. It's an "emblem of belief." That can easily include the belief that there is no god.
Again though, isn't that like saying bald is a hair color? Atheism is the lack of belief in a god, not the belief that there is no god (Which I think is more an agnostic position).

The real purpose of grave markers is to remember the individual who died, so what is important is that the marker reflect that individual and tell us something about him or her.
My apologies, I wasn't clear on that one. I ment the added symbol was for religious purposes, not the grave marker in and of itself.

Since for some people, identifying their religious/spiritual belief system is very important, then it is important that that be reflected on their gravemarker. So atheists who want to be remembered as atheists should have the right to have that noted on their markers.
And I think I'll just stop here because, as noted, I feel that atheists, members of the Church of the FSM, those who worship the elder gods, and everyone should be able to have whatever the want on their markers when they pass on (or what their family decrees). You're right in that it is to remember the person under the marker and so it should be left to the individual's feelings, not the US Government. I guess, if anything, my beef is how the atheism symbol is being classified by the US Government.

Again though, isn't that like saying bald is a hair color? Atheism is the lack of belief in a god, not the belief that there is no god (Which I think is more an agnostic position).

Incorrect. There are two types of atheism: Implicit and explicit atheism.

Implicit is the former of your two ideas, a lack of belief in a god.

Explicit is the belief that there is no god.


Agnosticism, by contrast, is the belief that it is impossible to know either way whether or not god(s) exist(s).

Incorrect. There are two types of atheism: Implicit and explicit atheism.

Implicit is the former of your two ideas, a lack of belief in a god.

Explicit is the belief that there is no god.


Agnosticism, by contrast, is the belief that it is impossible to know either way whether or not god(s) exist(s).
But how can you believe a nothing?

Which, in NERVUN's analogy, would be like having a hat superglued to your head when you were a kid. :D
Very, VERY painful image! :eek:

BTW, the the bald thing comes from someone's old sig. I just wish I could remember whose it was. Grave-n-Idle's maybe?

Agnosticism, by contrast, is the belief that it is impossible to know either way whether or not god(s) exist(s).

Which, in NERVUN's analogy, would be like having a hat superglued to your head when you were a kid. :D

Very, VERY painful image! :eek:

BTW, the the bald thing comes from someone's old sig. I just wish I could remember whose it was. Grave-n-Idle's maybe?

Dunno, but if I managed to make fun of it, I thank whoever it is. :p

But how can you believe a nothing?
ever used the symbol '0' when doing mathematics?
Ever looked at your bank balance and seen it read zero?
If so you'd have a specific quantity of money in that account, namely none.

ever used the symbol '0' when doing mathematics?
Ever looked at your bank balance and seen it read zero?
If so you'd have a specific quantity of money in that account, namely none.
The difference being that I don't have to believe in the zero or the lack of something. Lack of something is not a quanity of that something. I currently have no pizza, that does not mean I actually carry a quantifiable ammount of 0 pizzas with me.

I think they should allow any religous symbol except for the swastika (sorry indians)

My opinion on Wicca:

As a Jew
Wicca is an idolatrous religion. They worship multiple gods who have physical forms. QED, they are idolaters, and they can expect, if they are lucky, to spend several months in Gehenna. If they're unlucky, they get karet - they stop existing entirely.

As an American
Should any politician try to ban Wicca, he's on my death list.

Oh, sure, right now everyone thinks that it is fine to be inclusive and accepting of the religious beliefs of others, but what are we going to do when people start wanting their favorite symbols from the Necronomicon carved on their gravestones?

Um, we do it? Or did I miss that this was supposed to be a joke because it's 3:30 AM?

"We don't discriminate against the living-impaired." A necro gang banger, in one of the best WitchCraft campaigns ever. Run by my husband.

Actually he wasn't a necromancer, he was a Pariah.

But how can you believe a nothing?

You don't but you can belive that there is nothing. Easpecily when it comes to questioning the existance or not of God or Gods.

Because we cannot proove it one way or the other either stance, god is, or god is not, is essentialy a belief about the exsistance of god.

So Atheisim is very much a system of belief, the only differance between a lack of belief in God and a belife that God is not, is purly one of semantics.

Nope. Keep in mind who you're speaking too (Oh wait, I havn't been on this Forum long enough. Nevermind)

I'm Pro Gay Rights and Pro limited Affirmative Action.

No, it's that the ACLU leads the charge in frivolous lawsuits, wasting taxpayer money and reaping large profits for themselves. They preach "tolerance for all"-Unless you're White, Straight, Christian or Jewish, and/or Male.
It's the sheer hypocrisy that bothers me most.

FIRE is reporting that a committee of the University of Rhode Island (URI) Student Senate voted on Monday to derecognise the College Republicans student group.

It would seem that the College Republicans hosted a $100 "white, heterosexual American males scholarship" to protest against race-based scholarships back in November 2006. In a meeting on February 19, the Student Senate's Student Organisations Advisory and Review Committee (SOARC) prohibited the group from disbursing the money. It also demanded a public apology because the "satirical" scholarship violated URI's anti-discrimination bylaws.

The College Republicans appealed the decision, but the full Senate denied that appeal.

On March 27, the Student Senate, in a memo to the group, ruled again that they must publish an apology and stated that they authority to force them to do so. That sanction was later reduced to an “explanation” to be published in the campus newspaper and a mandatory apology to be sent to all of the students who applied for the scholarship.

College Republicans agreed to publish an explanation of its intentions but refused to publicly apologise. FIRE asked URI President Robert Carothers to intervene.

In a letter dated April 6, President Carothers instructed the Student Senate to drop its unconstitutional demand for an apology because of the First Amendment.

The SOARC committee ignored him and voted on April 16 to derecognise the College Republicans. The decision by the committee must be confirmed by the whole Student Senate on Wednesday, April 25.

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

FIRE quotes:

To URI President Robert Carothers
“URI administrators have a legal duty to step in where the Student Senate has failed and to check its attempt to trample upon students’ most basic freedom of conscience.”

“[b]y fulfilling this responsibility as a public official, you can teach the Senate leadership that they must respect the rights of URI students and help to instill in them an understanding of the full repercussions for repeatedly and recklessly defying the Constitution.”

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

It would seem that University President Carothers agrees with FIRE's argument. He told the Student Senate that its demand for an apology "does not meet consitutional standards as laid forth in the First Amendment," and directed that "you may not impose any sanctions on the College Republicans, or any other student group, that requires them to make public statements which are not their own."

Will the URI Student Senate subvert free speech?

Update 4/24/07

Rhode Island ACLU defends College Republicans in a letter to the URI Student Senate

URI Student Senate responds back to FIRE

Rhode Island ACLU cites previous examples of other groups staging "discriminatory" events without consequence. Wisconisn chapter of NOW held a "Pay Equity Bake Sale." The Feminist Majority Leadership Alliance at SFSU also held a similar bake sale. Neither suffered any retailiation. The College Republicans at Roger Williams University at Roger Williams University held an affirmative action bake sale and protests occurred, and the student senate there was being asked to curtail their activities.

Somehow I think the punishment does not fit the crime. I would believe that there are certain individuals in the URI Student Senate bent on political correctness and are loving it. I think they would not mind kicking the College Republicans out, not b/c of the whites-only scholarship, they just want to get rid of any "conservative" groups invading their liberal minds.


Wow, the ACLU defends white, straight, christian college republicans too. So who knew that the widespread idea that the ACLU is anti white and anti christian was wrong? Oh, yeah, me and every other person who actually bothers to check out what the ACLU does.

But how can you believe a nothing?

Think of it this way, if it helps. Atheists don't believe in nothing. They surely believe in some things. They believe the earth exists, that the sun exists, that water is wet, that jumping off buildings hurts, and a vast many things. Atheists do not believe in nothing. They merely believe in a reality that does not contain god.

[...] If the government is paying for all of that, they have the right to deny and allow whatever they want on their property.

You know how you can spot a poorly thought out argument of principle? Extend the application of said principle-- and an argument that starts from a broad, blanket premise like "if the government is paying for X, then..." becomes a matter of principles-- beyond just the very narrow case in question.

If the government is paying for all of that healthcare (ie. here in Canada), they have the right to deny and allow *whatever they want* on their property. So... what? They could deny treatment to-- for instance-- black people? Or Christian people? Or women? Hey, if spending the money entitles the government to make whatever discriminatory decision they want (as is the case if your argument were borne out), then anything goes. Try another one. If the government is paying to issue all of those driver's liscences, then they have the right to deny and allow whatever they want on their property. Great, so in your world the government could arbitrarily deny you a liscence for being Jewish, or blond, or not between 5'10" and 6'1". Hey, if the government's spending the money they have the right to decide what traits and characteristics are the basis for excluding you, right? That's the world you want to live in, right?

When you want to make an argument, *think* about everything that it means before you start yacking, lest you provide more proof that it should be compulsory to teach children basic logic as soon as they start school.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070423/ap_on_re_us/wiccan_soldier

One of the cases came out of Nevada, very close to my hometown actually, so I'm glad it's finally been resolved. It was shameful the way that the US Government was telling families that US troops who were either KIA or veterans who died after their service was over could not have their religious beliefs on their tombstones.

Especially as the Congressmen against it were spout all sorts of insanse remarks about Satanism.
It is good news, indeed. *bows*
:)

As much as I think Wicca is stupid as hell (and yes, I think Christianity is damn stupid too), this is a good change.

Think of it this way, if it helps. Atheists don't believe in nothing. They surely believe in some things. They believe the earth exists, that the sun exists, that water is wet, that jumping off buildings hurts, and a vast many things. Atheists do not believe in nothing. They merely believe in a reality that does not contain god.

Except for solipsist atheists. *nod*

Wow, the ACLU defends white, straight, christian college republicans too. So who knew that the widespread idea that the ACLU is anti white and anti christian was wrong? Oh, yeah, me and every other person who actually bothers to check out what the ACLU does.

DCD, for the win .... again.

I think it's appalling that the government won't let you put whatever the family wants on the tomb. If a satanist soldier wants an inverted pentagram on his tomb, he should get it. If they want the sign of the Invisible Pink Unicorn, that should be fine too.

I think it's appalling that the government won't let you put whatever the family wants on the tomb. If a satanist soldier wants an inverted pentagram on his tomb, he should get it. If they want the sign of the Invisible Pink Unicorn, that should be fine too.

I'm a satanist jew. I want an inverted star of david on my tombstone.

I'm a satanist jew. I want an inverted star of david on my tombstone.

Actually, you could turn it on its side.

I've heard the "That's Satanic!" nonsense about Pagans, Wiccan and otherwise, before. It's incorrect, of course. But what should it matter if someone WAS a Satanist and wanted a Satanic symbol on their headstone? If that is their religious belief, then what gives the government the right to discriminate against that?

Again though, isn't that like saying bald is a hair color? Atheism is the lack of belief in a god, not the belief that there is no god (Which I think is more an agnostic position).
Not quite. "Bald" is a description detail of person regarding their hair.

My apologies, I wasn't clear on that one. I ment the added symbol was for religious purposes, not the grave marker in and of itself.
The VA makes it clear. The symbol is an "emblem of belief," not a religious symbol. Therefore, just the same way "bald" can be used to describe what a person looks like in regard to hair, so "atheist" can be used to describe a person's beliefs in regard to religion.


And I think I'll just stop here because, as noted, I feel that atheists, members of the Church of the FSM, those who worship the elder gods, and everyone should be able to have whatever the want on their markers when they pass on (or what their family decrees). You're right in that it is to remember the person under the marker and so it should be left to the individual's feelings, not the US Government. I guess, if anything, my beef is how the atheism symbol is being classified by the US Government.
They are bureaucrats, and they are military bureaucrats at that. This makes them extremely limited in their thinking. Everything has to be a form with little boxes that can be checked off. Military style headstones are forms. There are sections for name, military branch, rank, war served in, dates of birth and death, and belief system, and on the reverse side, a form for non-military spouse. The form is set and, in the bureaucratic mind, paramount. No new sections will be added, so if more information must be included, it must be made to fit into the existing form with the existing number of check-boxes. Thus, the VA chooses to expand what used to be the "religion" box to the "emblem of belief" box, so that more information can be included in the same box, and they can check it off and be happy and leave real people alone.

EDIT: Oh, and before you suggest that, in filling out the form ordering the marker, they could just instruct "Use Emblem of Non-Belief #SQRZ124-H in place of Emblem of Belief," you must remember that you can't do that with forms. An Emblem of Belief box must be filled in by an emblem of belief. If you want any other kind of information, then you need a different form altogether, and that way lies madness.

Take this from a former copyeditor who once worked for a technical publisher who did O&M manuals for DoD contractors. For the Navy, for instance, there were so many specifications for how the books had to look, and they were so contradictory, that they were actually split into two different spec manuals, each over 200 pages long, and every time somebody wanted to edit something in them, they could never actually delete anything, so they just inserted new information, called a "supercedence" because it superceded whatever section of the manual it was contradicting. The supercedences were dated and there were many of them, because they could never be deleted either. And every work order we got from the Navy would instruct us on which spec book to use, or to use different sections of both books, and also which supercedences to use, for each and every book.

Now imagine that kind of insanity applied to ordering grave markers that really are carved in stone and not as easy to fix as a manuscript.

So, look, for your own sake, just learn to live with the VA checking off "atheist" under "religion." It's better for everyone that way.

One of the cases came out of Nevada, very close to my hometown actually, so I'm glad it's finally been resolved.

No, wait. You mean that in the US marks on tombstones are regulated by LAW? Ok if this means to forbid hate signs like nazi swastikas etc, but... I should be able to put whatever I want on the tomb of my late ones, I think.

Not quite. "Bald" is a description detail of person regarding their hair.


The VA makes it clear. The symbol is an "emblem of belief," not a religious symbol. Therefore, just the same way "bald" can be used to describe what a person looks like in regard to hair, so "atheist" can be used to describe a person's beliefs in regard to religion.



The analogy, as I said before, doesn't even work really. Your position that describing in the absence is a valid description of that state. Someone bald, by definition, has no hair.

Someone who is an atheist, however, by definition, is not without belief. Atheists do have belief. As I said before, atheists believe the world exists. They believe they sun exists. They believe that water is wet, and that jumping off buildings hurts.

Atheists have beliefs. They merely do not believe in a reality including god. Much like a christian does not believe in a reality including Odin. To call atheism a lack of belief because those beliefs do not contain god is calling christianity a lack of belief because those beliefs do not contain odin.

A lack of belief in ONE THING is not a lack of belief.

Wow, the ACLU defends white, straight, christian college republicans too. So who knew that the widespread idea that the ACLU is anti white and anti christian was wrong? Oh, yeah, me and every other person who actually bothers to check out what the ACLU does.
Thanks for posting this, DCD, to save me the time of having to copy-and-paste my oft-repeated post on "Specific Cases In Which The ACLU Has Defended The Rights Of Whites, Males, Christians, And White Male Christians."

It's a long post.

The analogy, as I said before, doesn't even work really. Your position that describing in the absence is a valid description of that state. Someone bald, by definition, has no hair.

Someone who is an atheist, however, by definition, is not without belief. Atheists do have belief. As I said before, atheists believe the world exists. They believe they sun exists. They believe that water is wet, and that jumping off buildings hurts.

Atheists have beliefs. They merely do not believe in a reality including god. Much like a christian does not believe in a reality including Odin. To call atheism a lack of belief because those beliefs do not contain god is calling christianity a lack of belief because those beliefs do not contain odin.

A lack of belief in ONE THING is not a lack of belief.
Whatever.

What I know is that this argument is about what the VA allows on the forms it calls gravemarkers, and the case was about them limiting what kind of information belongs in their chosen categories in a way that violates the rights of military personnel.

I also know that the gravemarkers are forms that describe a person.

And I know that, on a form that describes a person, such as a police report, if a person has no hair, the box for "hair color" will not be left blank, but will be filled in with "bald" or "n/a" or "other." Descriptive forms are supposed to provide information, so leaving a box blank is a failure to use the form properly, and that is why leaving blanks is discouraged in bureaucratic circles. The "hair color" box asks for information about hair. "Bald" pertains to hair. The bureacrat can take the opportunity to use the "hair color" box to provide information by filling it in even tho there is no hair color on the person's head.

So, I conclude that it does not matter how one defines "atheist." The section for "emblem of belief" provides information about the person's professed belief system, so even if a person denies that atheists believe in anything (which I agree, is not true), then they can still fill in "atheist" in that box because (a) it is information pertaining to belief and (b) it has an emblem.

No, wait. You mean that in the US marks on tombstones are regulated by LAW? Ok if this means to forbid hate signs like nazi swastikas etc, but... I should be able to put whatever I want on the tomb of my late ones, I think.

In the US, the Veterans Administration provides a service member's headstone. Their family gets to choose a religious symbol from a set list. A Wiccan church petitioned the VA to recognize the pentacle as a symbol for Wicca, but the VA dragged it's collective feet (while approving other symbols within weeks). The whole thing came to a head when a Wiccan was killed in Iraq/Afghanistan and his family sued the VA to get the pentacle on his headstone.

There aren't any restrictions on other headstones, AFAIK, except whatever the cemetery imposes. There could be state laws, but I'm pretty sure they'd get shot down on free speech grounds.

In the US, the Veterans Administration provides a service member's headstone. Their family gets to choose a religious symbol from a set list. A Wiccan church petitioned the VA to recognize the pentacle as a symbol for Wicca, but the VA dragged it's collective feet (while approving other symbols within weeks). The whole thing came to a head when a Wiccan was killed in Iraq/Afghanistan and his family sued the VA to get the pentacle on his headstone.

There aren't any restrictions on other headstones, AFAIK, except whatever the cemetery imposes. There could be state laws, but I'm pretty sure they'd get shot down on free speech grounds.
Question:

If somebody didn't want any of the symbols on that list, can they request to have that area of the stone left blank?

(I honestly don't know the rules about this)

No, wait. You mean that in the US marks on tombstones are regulated by LAW? Ok if this means to forbid hate signs like nazi swastikas etc, but... I should be able to put whatever I want on the tomb of my late ones, I think.
Only the military has the authority to restrict what a person's tombstone looks like in the US, because they maintain military style even in death. Military personnel who serve in wars are granted permission to be buried in a military cemetery but they are not required to do so if they don't want that style.

Now, on the civilian side, there is a relatively recent trend towards conformist, minimalist cemetery styles. This style was created by cemetery directors for their own convenience. They like flat stones that lie flush to the ground and no bushes or trees planted on graves because it is easier to mow the lawns if you don't have to steer around lots of obstacles. Many families find that, if they try to get something fancier for their dead, they will be told that they are not allowed to. The fact is, this is only true to the extent that the cemetery is private property and the owner of it is claiming the right to control what his own property looks like. But except for private property issues, he has no back-up in the law. All aspects of funerals, even secular ones (sorry NERVUN), are treated as religious expression and even private individuals have no right to interfere with another person's religious expression. So when cemetery directors and funeral directors claim that a municipality bans fancy markers and plantings on graves, that is a lie, and when they claim that local ordinances ban burying un-embalmed bodies, etc, that is also a lie. Sadly, grieving families often do not have the presence of mind to challenge such claims.

In the US, the Veterans Administration provides a service member's headstone.

Oh. Ok, then. Well, bully for the VA: about time, I'd say.

Question:

If somebody didn't want any of the symbols on that list, can they request to have that area of the stone left blank?

(I honestly don't know the rules about this)
My grandfather, a WW2 veteran, is buried, along with my grandmother, in a military cemetery in New York state. I think it's called Calgary cemetery (too lazy to look it up at the moment), and it's a very nice place. I've spent a lot of time walking about in it and examining the markers.

Many of them have the belief emblem space blank, so I would guess that if a person doesn't want anything in that space, they can just leave the space blank on the order form.

Leaving the space for the religious symbol on the tombstone blank would be the same as having "No Religious Preference" on your dog tag. As a Soldier, and a Satanist, that's what my dog tags read. I didn't (and still do not) care what gets put on my tombstone. I will be dead and beyond all caring. My family on the other hand will probably object for me if, for instance, I end up buried under the cross, or any other non-Satanic symbol.

Addendum: My wife just said "I would, and I'm a Christian"

Leaving the space for the religious symbol on the tombstone blank would be the same as having "No Religious Preference" on your dog tag. As a Soldier, and a Satanist, that's what my dog tags read. I didn't (and still do not) care what gets put on my tombstone. I will be dead and beyond all caring. My family on the other hand will probably object for me if, for instance, I end up buried under the cross, or any other non-Satanic symbol.

Addendum: My wife just said "I would, and I'm a Christian"

May I ask what sort of Satanist you are? Only curious, you know, since half my family mistakes Discordianism for Satanism...

May I ask what sort of Satanist you are? Only curious, you know, since half my family mistakes Discordianism for Satanism...

LaVeyan. I am a member of the Church of Satan. That said, I really want to look into Discordianism.

LaVeyan. I am a member of the Church of Satan. That said, I really want to look into Discordianism.

As I understand it, LaVeyan Satanism isn't so much the worship of Satan, it's more the worship of self, and the godhead within oneself, correct? poee.co.uk (http://poee.co.uk) has links to most of the Discordian holy texts. Principia Discordia and the Metaclysma Discordia are good starts.

As I understand it, LaVeyan Satanism isn't so much the worship of Satan, it's more the worship of self, and the godhead within oneself, correct? poee.co.uk (http://poee.co.uk) has links to most of the Discordian holy texts. Principia Discordia and the Metaclysma Discordia are good starts.

Essentially correct.

Thanx for the link, and in return http://churchofsatan.com has more info on Laveyan satanism. there are other forms of Satanism as well.

Essentially correct.

Thanx for the link, and in return http://churchofsatan.com has more info on Laveyan satanism. there are other forms of Satanism as well.

Oh, yeah, I'm aware of the various forms. Helps to do research when telling people you're not something... Not a huge fan of most forms, the whole worship of self thing... just doens't sit well with me. Besides, my patrons kind of picked me out. When redwulf and I were planning our wedding, my dad went to India on business. When he informed his guide/translator that his daughter was getting married his translator informed dad that we must have a statue of Ganesh. He's the Hindu god of new beginnings, the remover of all obstacles, etc. Thus, our household patron chose us. Funny how that happens, isn't it?

Oh, yeah, I'm aware of the various forms. Helps to do research when telling people you're not something... Not a huge fan of most forms, the whole worship of self thing... just doens't sit well with me. Besides, my patrons kind of picked me out. When redwulf and I were planning our wedding, my dad went to India on business. When he informed his guide/translator that his daughter was getting married his translator informed dad that we must have a statue of Ganesh. He's the Hindu god of new beginnings, the remover of all obstacles, etc. Thus, our household patron chose us. Funny how that happens, isn't it?

Aye, funny how that happens. In my case I have always been a self-centred bastard,:p so Satanism was a natural choice.

I also find it funny that so many non-christian religions get saddled with the label Satanism. So it goes.

Aye, funny how that happens. In my case I have always been a self-centred bastard,:p so Satanism was a natural choice.

I also find it funny that so many non-christian religions get saddled with the label Satanism. So it goes.

So does RPG, any sort of thing that's against "Christianity", and - quoth the Vonnegut - so it goes.

Aye, funny how that happens. In my case I have always been a self-centred bastard,:p so Satanism was a natural choice.

I also find it funny that so many non-christian religions get saddled with the label Satanism. So it goes.

The ones that get me are the christos who declare that Atheists are "satanic". They always strike me as Really Confused...

The ones that get me are the christos who declare that Atheists are "satanic". They always strike me as Really Confused...

If you don't worship the Almighty White Jehovah (and his son, White Jesus), you're obviously a Satanist! Your failure to worship anything has led you right into Satan's Web of Deception (TM)... Yeah, makes no sense to me, either.

Satan's Web of Deception (TM)...

Is it a series of tubes like the World Wide Web?

Is it a series of tubes like the World Wide Web?

More like a series of pits with fire.

Edit:I didn't realise Unitarians could have a symbol on a VA headstone. Fantastic!

More like a series of pits with fire.:p

Are they tubular? A series?

Is it a series of tubes like the World Wide Web?

No, I think it's more like an invisible spider web. That draws you deeper and deeper into the bowels of El Diablo!

Are they tubular? A series?

Series? Yes.

Tubular? Only if you're refering to Tubular Bells. The actual pits are oblong and vary in depth.

Series? Yes.

Tubular? Only if you're refering to Tubular Bells. The actual pits are oblong and vary in depth.

But... But... But the Internet's not a big truck. It's a series of tubes!

But... But... But the Internet's not a big truck. It's a series of tubes!

Facts is facts! It's admittedly a design flaw. It's why the pits are often clogged. Just last week I sent a Deception. It took a whole week to get to it's destination.

I'm still trying to figure out where the atheism symbol came from. How can nothing have a symbol?

we do... almost
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Invisible_pink_unicorn

I'm a satanist jew. I want an inverted star of david on my tombstone.

*Converts*

This symbol is too cool to pass up.

Yes, I realize an inverted star of david is the same as a normal star of david...or at least, I think it is.

*Converts*

This symbol is too cool to pass up.

Yes, I realize an inverted star of david is the same as a normal star of david...or at least, I think it is.

Mike Eisner: Yes, Ted. That was the joke.

More like a series of pits with fire.

Edit:I didn't realise Unitarians could have a symbol on a VA headstone. Fantastic!

Indeed, we do. If I was ever in the military (I probably wouldn't be, since I don't agree with some of its policies currently, and I have a bit of an authority problem), I would get it on my headstone, in the circumstance of my death.