Saturday, July 30, 2005

Vive la Révolution!!!

Food for thought:

"What I really want to do is wipe the planet clean of the Godfather — of Christianity, Islam, Judaism, Buddhism, Hinduism, and all the rest. I'd replace Him with The Mother. But then my face gets red. I feel as if I'm just like those trapped in the Godfather: trying to start a holy war, a Crusade.

Starhawk says: "In today's world, people of good will of every religion are striving for tolerance, understanding, and sensitivity to other traditions" [quotations my own]. Who doesn't want to be one of the "good-will" guys?!

But when you know what I know — that good evidence is missing for Minoan violence[3] — and then contrast that to millennia of Godfather war, gore, and red-eyed horror, what are we to do with that knowledge?

Here's what I've decided to do: I call for a bloodless, non-violent revolution ridding the planet of God (i.e., war, famine, slavery and pain), and substituting Goddess (peace, prosperity, equality, and nonviolence). How this revolution will look to the naked eye, what form it will take I don't know. I propose only a beginning, a call to arms, a defining of purpose. I know this: Ghandi did not slip away into a corner murmuring, "Ah, the enemy is washing my people in blood, I'll go where it's safe and worship in silence."

I say, "Vive la Révolution!!!"
MORE >>>


Lisa said...

Wow, completely getting rid of any Masculine Divine? I don't know about that, lol. We'd just have to redefine God the Father, so our brothers will have a more healthy gender identity to relate to. Some sort of God the Father is neccessary, just not the way it has become... Ironically, the way Jesus spoke about God was very similar to how many view the Goddess now.

And why would you want to get rid of pain, even if you could? Pain is what we have to compare to happiness, to know we are happy. Pain is very grounding.

Athana said...

I think there's a whole lot about Jesus that's valuable and worth keeping. But if you had to choose, Jesus' personality is the personality of a woman, not a man! Think about it: love, kindness, turning the other cheek....

This is scary stuff. I'm talking about re-examining everything we've been taught in this society. I don't think God the Father is necessary. I think men would do just fine with a Mother Goddess as their supermodel. I think Jesus doesn't work because he's a contradiction to Yahweh. The two clash. They cancel each other out. And in their heart of hearts people know that Jesus is more woman than man(shock of shocks!).

I think you're right about pain. A certain amount and kind is ok. However, there's no need -- or excuse -- for the massive amounts of pain that millions of human beings on this planet suffer every day from -- do you want the list? -- hunger, starvation, rape, slavery (it's rampant on this planet!), forced prostitution, homelessness, physical abuse, sexual abuse, mental illness, and I could go on and on.

Lisa said...

Actually, Jesus's "turning the other cheek" thing is very militant!

Back in the day, a "superior" would administer an open-handed back-slap on the cheek of an "inferior," (right-handed only, as the left hand was a complete taboo.) Only social equals would use fists, so by instructing people to offer (a Roman soldier) their other cheek, this would be seen as taunting, to be acknowledged as people and equals. Interesting huh? I guess once the Roman hierarchy adopted Christianity, they de-politicized that to make Jesus look like a pansy...

While he viewed his god similarly to they way we view the Goddess now, I don't know if I'd agree with how he thought his revolution should go down! Make no mistake, he hung out with terrorists and assassins, and probably was one himself. (Crucifixion was a Roman punishment for political insurgents... Haha, there's that word "insurgent" again-- I want "Jesus was an insurgent" on a T shirt!) He advocated deceit and deception in order to topple the Roman occupation.

Anyway, that's a tangent. I think that if men had no God the Father, they'd feel just as jilted and excluded as women do without God the Mother. Why would we change the rules? Just because men have had God the Father for too long? Well, that's an emotional response, not logical. Mythos and god images were created for humanity to understand their place in this world. I think that if we were to completely disregard the Divine in masculinity and males and not represent that, well that is "Patriarchy in a skirt," and just as damaging.

Morgaine said...

I completely disagree - everyone is included in the image of the Goddess. Males are a part of that and always were. The Goddess usually has a consort who is her brother or son. There is nothing wrong with being the son of the Mother Goddess.

Lisa, you are in academia right now, so you are functioning in an intensely patriarchal system. The idea that things have to be 50-50 is antithetical to Nature. It's a patriarchal value to want symmetry. Fairness is a political value that is important in governing but not in worshipping. Nature always prefers Her own gender.That's why we are 53% of the population, not 50.

The primordial relationship is not a man and a woman, a la Adam and Eve, it is mother and child.That is what we need to remember.

Athana said...

"Why would we change the rules? Just because men have had God the Father for too long?"

No. Note this blog's preamble: "Male gods are dangerous, to men as well as women."

This is the entire point of this weblog: Male gods are deadly. They are killing us. They are the problem. They are lethal. They are the reason the human species is utterly wretched. They are the root cause. They are our downfall. They are our poison. Lisa WE HAVE ARCHAEOLOGICAL EVIDENCE THAT BEFORE THERE WERE MALE GODS the human species lived in a comparative PARADISE!!!!!