See other Religion Articles
Title: The Nine Principles of the Goddess
Source:
Sacred Texts
URL Source: http://www.sacred-texts.com/wmn/bog/bog02.htm
Published: May 20, 2006
Author: Unknown
Post Date: 2006-05-20 02:25:01 by Pandora
Keywords: None
Views: 22040
Comments: 271
Here is an interesting philosophy. I've always liked this: The Nine Principles of the Goddess 1. I acknowledge that there is one Goddess in essence, Creatrix of all existences; Her forms are infinite, She manifests Herself in our love, and we are all Her lovers. 2. Treat all beings with reciprocity, for the Goddess lives in them as well as in us. 3. Tolerate other religions and do not compel others to join the circle of the Goddess: the Goddess will draw those to Her who are ready and hear Her call. 4. Worship Her by restoring balance to Her planet. 5. Eat mostly grains, vegetables and fruits, so that there will be enough food for all; when you eat thank the Goddess, the provider of all energy. It is not forbidden to eat animal flesh in moderation, but when you do so you must thank the animal that you eat as well. 6. In the circle of the Goddess create consensus while respecting diversity of opinion. On the path of the Goddess there are many paths. 7. In your home create a sacred space for the Goddess to please Her. Meditate on the Goddess three times a day, at rising, at noon and at sundown. 8. Sexuality is Her sacrament; enjoy this gift and bless those who you share it with love and affection. Remember that overcoming jealousy is the cause of cessation of the cycle of rebirth. 9. Announce the religion of the Goddess to the world through good works, honest words and selfless acts of beauty and love.
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
Comments (1-194) not displayed.
.
.
.
#195. To: A K A Stone (#194)
That is where you and I disagree. I think that you must have some knowledge on a subject before you comment on it or debate against it or for it.
I guess for me the bottom line is personal responsibility. These folks know what the Bible is and who Jesus is, and if they don't want to believe in him, that's their business. If they're going to hell, that's not up to me, and that's a risk that's apparently acceptable to them. It's their choice. I don't see how you're going to change anyone's mind about that.
"I woke up in the CRAZY HOUSE."
Then why are you talking on this thread?
Error of opinion may be tolerated where reason is left free to combat it - Thomas Jefferson
I was just trying to say wiccans are satanists, which they are. A lot of the debate was also on the role of the supreme court. Where do you fall on that subject.
Error of opinion may be tolerated where reason is left free to combat it - Thomas Jefferson
My goodness - you are so very full of yourself that is IS amusing! You seem to think that you are the Alpha and Omega of all Christian knowledge and truth. Pride goeth before the fall Stone... I will not bother to answer your silly question, as it does not warrant a response.
I wasn't expection one.
Error of opinion may be tolerated where reason is left free to combat it - Thomas Jefferson
Sure be a good thing yous were not expection one...
First off, Wiccans are not satanists. Those are two different things entirely. I've met a lot of Wiccans, and they're generally very nice people. I don't have anything bad to say about them. They don't believe in Satan or the Devil and they don't do any evil rites, like human or animal sacrifice. Generally they believe that you have to take responsbility for what you do and think, as it will come back at you, three times (at least). They believe in nature and worshop nature spirits and such. Satanists are basically anti-Christians, who just twist Christianity around and are really angry, screwed up people who live hedonistic and selfish lives and like to hurt others as they somehow think this gives them power from Satan. Why on earth anyone would want to be a Satanist is totally beyond me. As for the Supreme Court - well, I haven't followed this whole thread so I'm not sure what the basic argument is. We have a separation of church and state, of course. The government cannot establish any specific religion (like the Church of England). However, I see nothing wrong with the government recognizing that the overwhelming majority of people observe a certain religion or tradition and taking that into consideration for public affairs or holidays, etc. That's why we have a public holiday of Christmas - because very few Christians would be willing to work that day. It's a public, govt, recognition of a social reality. I always believe in recognizing reality.
"I woke up in the CRAZY HOUSE."
*APPLAUSE* for a well reasoned post!
That is not true. Wiccans say Jesus is not the Christ. Just like the satanists do.
Error of opinion may be tolerated where reason is left free to combat it - Thomas Jefferson
No we don't. Can you please show me that in the constitution.
Error of opinion may be tolerated where reason is left free to combat it - Thomas Jefferson
So does that make Hindus and Buddhists and Moslems satanists as well?
"I woke up in the CRAZY HOUSE."
Yep
Error of opinion may be tolerated where reason is left free to combat it - Thomas Jefferson
Okay - that was easy: Amendment I Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.
"I woke up in the CRAZY HOUSE."
They key word their is congress. Doesn't mention the state governments. The federal govt only has those powers delegated to it. So congress is to keep their hands off religion.
Error of opinion may be tolerated where reason is left free to combat it - Thomas Jefferson
Then I guess your argument is about semantics and definitions. Someone might believe that all non-Christians are going to hell, but that does not make all non-Christians Satanists. Satanists are just one sect of the vast body of non-Christians.
"I woke up in the CRAZY HOUSE."
Maybe i shouldn't call some of them satanists (wiccans deserve that title) but it is my belief that only people who accept christ will enter heaven. It is also my hope that everyone here will accept christ of their own free will.
Error of opinion may be tolerated where reason is left free to combat it - Thomas Jefferson
I thought you were discussing the federal government as you mentioned the Supreme Court. I suppose a state could establish a religion and several did during the Colonial and Post-Revolutionary days, but I really don't think considering the strength of the Federal government and ascendancy of the feds over the states, that such a thing would be allowed now. But it could be argued. I assume you're saying that states SHOULD establish an official religion, presumably Christianity? and which denomination would they pick?
"I woke up in the CRAZY HOUSE."
Pandora, some dead indian, and ferret mike, all think that the supreme court is the final arbitrator and that is constitutional. lol.
Error of opinion may be tolerated where reason is left free to combat it - Thomas Jefferson
Well, practically speaking, in this day and age, they're right. The Federal govt has assumed ascendancy over the state govts so the Federal constitution usually supercedes the various state constititions. One can argue (on a variety of topics) as to whether that should be the case, but it is the reality now. Personally I believe in vesting power in the states rather than the central govt, but one might argue that subservience to the federal constitution is one of the prices of belong to the republic. Of course, as we saw in the 1860s - no exit is allowed (which I also disagree with).
"I woke up in the CRAZY HOUSE."
I'm perfectly aware that in reality the supreme court is exercising undelegated powers. All that group could spout is read marbury vs madison. My point was that that was a usurption of power. They all seemed to think that was the was the constitution was supposed to work. I threw in a few curse words too and capitalized some stuff.
Error of opinion may be tolerated where reason is left free to combat it - Thomas Jefferson
I agree it was a usurpation of power. However, if the states want to stay in the Union, that might be part of the price to pay (subservience to the Federal constition). I believe that states should be able to secede from the Union, however, which is the way they would be able to maintain their states rights. Otherwise, asserting states rights is kind of meaningless as the Feds will always try to usurp increasing levels of power.
"I woke up in the CRAZY HOUSE."
No, you are lying to save face again. But you know that. Let's go over it for everyone else though. You originally made an unqualified claim that states had the power to establish a state religion. Pandora kicked you in the balls by posting the relevant quote that showed they did not. You then asked her to show you where the Supreme Court had the authority to make such a ruling. She did, she referenced Maybury vs Madison and told you it was explained there. It is - that is the controlling case. You refused to look at it or discuss it. You then morphed your claim to say that if the world worked the way you would like it to work, your claim regarding state religions would then be true. Pandora caught you on this and told you that you were now being silly. You were. In this current post you try to dodge this other stuff further up on the thread. The problem you face is that this stuff is all there on the thread for the whole world to see. They can judge for themselves. People would have a lot more respect for you if you had a shred of integrity. Lying for Jesus is just as ineffective as hating or cursing for Jesus.
They do, and have had them. lol your so uninformed
Error of opinion may be tolerated where reason is left free to combat it - Thomas Jefferson
She showed me no where in the constitution for that power. You are a liar. I already know what marbury vs madison was. It is a usurption. So you should be to show me where they have that power delegated to them. Not when they gave themselves undelegated power in that power grab of a decision. YOu are not being honest. You still havent found where they get lawful power from. You are with the usurpers.
Error of opinion may be tolerated where reason is left free to combat it - Thomas Jefferson
Show me where I said that liar. If it is there it shoud be real easy to do. But it is not. You are a proven liar.
Error of opinion may be tolerated where reason is left free to combat it - Thomas Jefferson
I didn't dodge anything. They did decide for themselves, christine, jethro, methinkable all agree that it was a usurption. The first amendment forbids CONGRESS....you are making stuff up to say it forbids governors. Taken with the 10th amendment(do you know what that is) the case is clear. States can have a state religion if they so desire.
Error of opinion may be tolerated where reason is left free to combat it - Thomas Jefferson
No answer huh? Didn't think so. I guess the Supreme Court really does know what they are talking about - and your unsupported statement here is pure crap.
Show me where I said that liar. See posts 63 and 78 above. Buy you know that don't you. But we might as well put them here for everyone else to see.
You are saying that if the law was the way you would like it to be, then you would be correct in your assertions. OK. Pandora was right. You are making a silly dodge to save face. It is a lot different from your first unqualified claim that the States have a right to found a state religion isn't it?
#63. To: Pandora (#60) Use google and find a case called Marbury vs. Madison Yes the first usurption. Just because it happened long ago and set a precedent doesn't mean it is the law. Get back to the root. The constitution. If a law conflicts with it, no matter what some guy in a robe( who isn't really a citizen according to THE REAL 13th AMENDMENT) tells you. Use your own mind...the words have meaning. Dont let some judge steal your rights. FUCK THE GOVERNMENT Error of opinion may be tolerated where reason is left free to combat it - Thomas Jefferson A K A Stone posted on 2006-05-21 10:53:31 ET Reply Trace Private Reply #64. To: Ferret Mike (#62) Don't yell at me with capital letters. Keep it civil. Making wrong statements louder simply does not make them right. Caps is to highlight it. It is not yelling. That is some gay aol saying. Error of opinion may be tolerated where reason is left free to combat it - Thomas Jefferson A K A Stone posted on 2006-05-21 10:53:59 ET Reply Trace Private Reply #65. To: A K A Stone (#57) Christ said he would come back to bring a sword Stone, did you ever consider founding a "Hate for Jesus" ministry? You and all the other hate filled, bigoted religions kooks could sit around and tell each other how God wanted you to torure heritics. It would be a big hit in fundie circles. Anonymous Dead Indian posted on 2006-05-21 10:55:02 ET Reply Trace Private Reply #66. To: CAPPSMADNESS (#61) So instead of allowing Him to do as He said He would, you have decided to do it for Him? So tell me, how many souls have you won for our Lord with your tactics? God said to preach the whole word...not some sugar coating of the word like saying the garden of eden is fiction. Guess what Hell and witches are in the Bible. Guess what God said they are going to hell. If you want to help someone you would inform them of it instead of letting them go to the dark side. Take a stand. Jesus said those who were luke warm would be spit out of his mouth. Me im red hot. Error of opinion may be tolerated where reason is left free to combat it - Thomas Jefferson A K A Stone posted on 2006-05-21 10:55:30 ET Reply Trace Private Reply #67. To: Anonymous Dead Indian (#65) You and all the other hate filled, bigoted religions kooks could sit around and tell each other how God wanted you to torure heritics. It would be a big hit in fundie circles. You are misrepresenting what I said. Where did I say to torture anyone. that is what Bush is for not me. Error of opinion may be tolerated where reason is left free to combat it - Thomas Jefferson A K A Stone posted on 2006-05-21 10:56:16 ET Reply Trace Private Reply #68. To: Pandora (#60) "Use google and find a case called Marbury vs. Madison. This will explain it to you. I don't have time to explain high school civics here." This guy is too much. He is assuming that the Constitution was adopted to make worse the problems maintaining the political and social cohesion of this nation the Articles of Confederation were causing in the several states. I doubt of he has the tools to understand how case law - Stare Decisis - works; never mind understand the decision you cite - Marbury vs. Madison - and why it is a cornerstone decision of the U.S. Supreme Court. Nice try though. Ferret Mike posted on 2006-05-21 10:56:36 ET Reply Trace Private Reply #69. To: Ferret Mike (#68) I doubt of he has the tools to understand how case law You are such an ass. Show me in the constitution where it says law is determined by who has the best lawyer and how some case comes out. NOW COME ON THAT IS ASSININE. Error of opinion may be tolerated where reason is left free to combat it - Thomas Jefferson A K A Stone posted on 2006-05-21 10:58:47 ET Reply Trace Private Reply #70. To: Ferret Mike (#68) So you think case law trumps the constitution. Of commie. Error of opinion may be tolerated where reason is left free to combat it - Thomas Jefferson A K A Stone posted on 2006-05-21 10:59:42 ET Reply Trace Private Reply #71. To: A K A Stone (#66) Take a stand. Jesus said those who were luke warm would be spit out of his mouth. Me im red hot. You can be red hot AND dead wrong at the same time - but I think deep down you know this. How many souls have you won for Christ? CAPPSMADNESS posted on 2006-05-21 11:00:48 ET Reply Trace Private Reply #72. To: A K A Stone (#67) Where did I say to torture anyone. that is what Bush is for not me. On this thread you seemed to delight in someone being burned at the stake. I would have to comb through threads for other instances and I don't want to waste my time doing that. But how can you be a rapture monkey and not want to hurt those who don't agree with your silly, narrow view? Doesn't this come with the territory? How does the Taliban handle disagreement? How would your theocracy handle it? How did Cotton Mather handle it? Anonymous Dead Indian posted on 2006-05-21 11:00:55 ET Reply Trace Private Reply #73. To: CAPPSMADNESS (#71) You can be red hot AND dead wrong at the same time - but I think deep down you know this. How many souls have you won for Christ? Yes you can be red hot and wrong.... I don't know how many souls I won. I thought faith came by hearing the word. How many have you won? How many have you lead astray by claiming Genesis is not true? Error of opinion may be tolerated where reason is left free to combat it - Thomas Jefferson A K A Stone posted on 2006-05-21 11:02:21 ET Reply Trace Private Reply #74. To: Anonymous Dead Indian (#72) "How did Cotton Mather handle it?" Heh, he likely believes Cotton Mather is a device invented by Eli Whitney to efficiently and quickly remove seeds from fresh picked cotton, and that the cotton gin was a judge who hung people who denied they were witches in Salem, Massachusetts. ;-) Ferret Mike posted on 2006-05-21 11:04:31 ET Reply Trace Private Reply #75. To: Anonymous Dead Indian (#72) On this thread you seemed to delight in someone being burned at the stake. I would have to comb through threads for other instances and I don't want to waste my time doing that. But how can you be a rapture monkey and not want to hurt those who don't agree with your silly, narrow view? Doesn't this come with the territory? How does the Taliban handle disagreement? How would your theocracy handle it? How did Cotton Mather handle it? I said that in times past some of these witches would have been burnt at the stake. That is a fact it happened, i neither condemed or encouraged it, i just stated a fact. Rapture monkey? I don't believe in a rapture. What people do is mix the "rapture" in with the second coming. Make two doctrines out of one. I believe in the second coming. I wouldn't believe to much propaganda against the Taliban. 911 was an inside job. Error of opinion may be tolerated where reason is left free to combat it - Thomas Jefferson A K A Stone posted on 2006-05-21 11:04:58 ET Reply Trace Private Reply #76. To: Ferret Mike (#74) Why do you hate Jesus? He gave his life freely so you could have life. Error of opinion may be tolerated where reason is left free to combat it - Thomas Jefferson A K A Stone posted on 2006-05-21 11:06:03 ET Reply Trace Private Reply #77. To: zipporah (#0) Do you think wiccans have their root in satanism? Error of opinion may be tolerated where reason is left free to combat it - Thomas Jefferson A K A Stone posted on 2006-05-21 11:06:47 ET Reply Trace Private Reply #78. To: A K A Stone (#63) The constitution. If a law conflicts with it, no matter what some guy in a robe( who isn't really a citizen according to THE REAL 13th AMENDMENT) tells you. Use your own mind...the words have meaning. Dont let some judge steal your rights. FUCK THE GOVERNMENT I told you that the US Contstitution, as it has been understood by the US Supreme Court for over a century, does not allow the states to set up a state religion. In fact, it never allowed this. I presented both the case where this interpretation is made and the case that allows the Supreme Court to make this interpretation. You are now arguing that if the United States Government went away, the States could then set up a state religion. Do you realize how silly you sound when you back track this way? Pandora posted on 2006-05-21 11:07:00 ET Reply Trace Private Reply
Error of opinion may be tolerated where reason is left free to combat it - Thomas Jefferson
OK. The constitution is the law. Didn't you know that.
Error of opinion may be tolerated where reason is left free to combat it - Thomas Jefferson
Yup. If the world was the way you wanted it to be, you would be correct here. Otherwise it looks like Pandora knows what she is talking about and she is correct. Given that we must deal with reality as it is, and not as you would prefer it to be, I will go with Pandora. Incidentally, throwing a tantrum to obscure your error just makes you look like a ninney.
In other words you can't find the power given to the supreme court by the states. In other words you can't find it in the constitution. So you just take the usurpers word for it. Find it in the constitution or it is not valid. You really aren't that bright are you.
Error of opinion may be tolerated where reason is left free to combat it - Thomas Jefferson
So is the rest of the body of law. Didn't you know that? Read Maybury vs Madison, or take civics 101 and it will be explained to you. You can't pick and chose which laws you like and you can't operate in the fatasy world in your head where everything is the way you would like it to be.
Sure I can. And so can you. We told you where to look. You are now doing is begging the question to obfuscate your error. It is a common tactic of loons when they get their asses kicked.
If the world was the way you wanted it to be, you would be correct here. Otherwise it looks like Pandora knows what she is talking about and she is correct. Given that we must deal with reality as it is, and not as you would prefer it to be, I will go with Pandora. Incidentally, throwing a tantrum to obscure your error just makes you look like a ninney. I know in reality the supremes are usurpers and have the REAL power right now to decide cases. I never argued that. Im just saying that it isn't really the law as that power was never granted them under the constitution. And that if there is any justice ALL of those decisions that they made would be struck down. Also do you know anything about the real (missing) 13th amendment>?
Error of opinion may be tolerated where reason is left free to combat it - Thomas Jefferson
So is the rest of the body of law. Didn't you know that? actually if the congress enacts a law and it isn't constitutionally based it isn't really a law and we have no obligation to follow it. Ever heard of color of law......why do they have that term if everything congress passes is the law. You need to throw out all the garbage the government propaganda schools "taught" (more like brainwahed) you into thinking.
Error of opinion may be tolerated where reason is left free to combat it - Thomas Jefferson
What you keep saying over, and over, and over, and over is that if the world was they way you wanted it to be, then you would be right. Yawn. As Pandora pointed out to you, that is a silly position. I would go one further and say you are now being idiotic.
From the supreme law of the land. You seem incabable of grasping a very simple constititional concept. If it violates the constitution it isn't a law. The lawbreakers in marbury vs madison dont have the power to replace the constitution. Only because idiots like you went along with it did it take root. You are part of the problem and not the solution.
Error of opinion may be tolerated where reason is left free to combat it - Thomas Jefferson
Comments (235 - 271) not displayed.
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
#196. To: A K A Stone (#194)
#197. To: CAPPSMADNESS (#195)
#198. To: mehitable (#196)
I guess for me the bottom line is personal responsibility. These folks know what the Bible is and who Jesus is, and if they don't want to believe in him, that's their business. If they're going to hell, that's not up to me, and that's a risk that's apparently acceptable to them. It's their choice. I don't see how you're going to change anyone's mind about that.
#199. To: A K A Stone (#197)
#200. To: CAPPSMADNESS (#199)
I will not bother to answer your silly question, as it does not warrant a response.
#201. To: A K A Stone (#200)
#202. To: A K A Stone (#198)
#203. To: mehitable (#202)
#204. To: mehitable (#202)
First off, Wiccans are not satanists. Those are two different things entirely
#205. To: mehitable (#202)
We have a separation of church and state,
#206. To: A K A Stone (#204)
#207. To: mehitable (#206)
So does that make Hindus and Buddhists and Moslems satanists as well?
#208. To: A K A Stone (#205)
#209. To: mehitable (#208)
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion,
#210. To: A K A Stone (#207)
#211. To: mehitable (#210)
Then I guess your argument is about semantics and definitions. Someone might believe that all non-Christians are going to hell, but that does not make all non-Christians Satanists. Satanists are just one sect of the vast body of non-Christians.
#212. To: A K A Stone (#209)
#213. To: mehitable (#212)
I thought you were discussing the federal government as you mentioned the Supreme Court. I suppose a state could establish a religion and several did during the Colonial and Post-Revolutionary days, but I really don't think considering the strength of the Federal government and ascendancy of the feds over the states, that such a thing would be allowed now. But it could be argued.
#214. To: A K A Stone (#213)
#215. To: mehitable (#214)
) as to whether that should be the case, but it is the reality now.
#216. To: A K A Stone (#215)
#217. To: A K A Stone (#215)
All that group could spout is read marbury vs madison. My point was that that was a usurption of power. They all seemed to think that was the was the constitution was supposed to work.
#218. To: Anonymous Dead Indian (#217)
You originally made an unqualified claim that states had the power to establish a state religion. Pandora kicked you in the balls by posting the relevant quote that showed they did not.
#219. To: Anonymous Dead Indian (#217)
You then asked her to show you where the Supreme Court had the authority to make such a ruling. She did, she referenced Maybury vs Madison and told you it was explained there. It is - that is the controlling case. You refused to look at it or discuss it.
#220. To: Anonymous Dead Indian (#217)
You then morphed your claim to say that if the world worked the way you would like it to work, your claim regarding state religions would then be true.
#221. To: Anonymous Dead Indian (#217)
In this current post you try to dodge this other stuff further up on the thread. The problem you face is that this stuff is all there on the thread for the whole world to see. They can judge for themselves.
#222. To: A K A Stone (#218)
They do, and have had them. lol your so uninformed
#223. To: A K A Stone (#220)
You then morphed your claim to say that if the world worked the way you would like it to work, your claim regarding state religions would then be true.
#224. To: A K A Stone (#221)
I didn't dodge anything. They did decide for themselves, christine, jethro, methinkable all agree that it was a usurption.
#225. To: Anonymous Dead Indian (#223)
#226. To: Anonymous Dead Indian (#224)
You are saying that if the law was the way you would like it to be, then you would be correct in your assertions.
#227. To: A K A Stone (#225)
Yes the first usurption. Just because it happened long ago and set a precedent doesn't mean it is the law.
#228. To: Anonymous Dead Indian (#222)
I guess the Supreme Court really does know what they are talking about - and your unsupported statement here is pure crap.
#229. To: A K A Stone (#226)
The constitution is the law. Didn't you know that.
#230. To: A K A Stone (#228)
In other words you can't find the power given to the supreme court by the states.
#231. To: Anonymous Dead Indian (#227)
Yup.
#232. To: Anonymous Dead Indian (#229)
The constitution is the law. Didn't you know that.
#233. To: A K A Stone (#231)
I know in reality the supremes are usurpers and have the REAL power right now to decide cases. I never argued that. Im just saying that it isn't really the law as that power was never granted them under the constitution. And that if there is any justice ALL of those decisions that they made would be struck down.
#234. To: Anonymous Dead Indian (#230)
Sure I can. And so can you. We told you where to look.
.
.
.