Marriage

I have been married since two days after the Goddess invented dirt. People often ask me what makes a successful marriage.  To me it is in the definition of the tradition. If you can accept your partners weaknesses with love and compassion; their strengths with love and gratitude; and give up enough ego to alternately, as the song says, be the wind beneath one another’s wings, you have found the meaning of a successful marriage.  It is a union of two souls.  It transcends rules, insurance policies, rights of inheritance or death benefits – I know these things are important, but they are of the world and perceived by the eye.  Marriage is of the spirit and perceived by the heart.

Anyone who would deny the profound comfort and solace of such a union and perception to anyone else, for any reason, is much more involved in hate then they are in love.  They are not qualified to speak to matters of the soul or of the heart.  They are not fit for leadership or for making public policy.  They lack the ability to understand the consciousness that marriage brings from truly loving and understanding another because they are barely awake.

If in one relationship you fail to find the union that is in fact marriage – laws, licenses and ceremonies aside – don’t stop looking.  It is out there.  Like the union of the Sun and of the Earth that yields the elegant beauty of the lily this is a gift from the Goddess, has nothing to do with the will of men, and is given freely to everyone.

The Drama of Gun Violence

I need to say up front that I support the 2^nd Amendment, although certainly not as is sometimes implied by lunatics on the Right as the Constitution in total.  Many of my friends, including my best and most beloved friend, are gun owners.  I understand their arguments with regard to the right to bear arms.  Well all but one – that is the idea that guns don’t kill people; people kill people.  This is the equivalent of saying instruments don’t play music; people play music.

Consider.  One of the most beautiful pieces of music ever written is Mozart’s Violin Concerto No. 5, 2^nd Movement.  Had the skilled fingers of a violinist never met the strings of the violin, Concerto No. 5 would never have been heard - since by its passive nature even Mozart’s music cannot play itself.   If the rage and volition of the Aurora shooter had never met the power and expedience of the trigger the violence in that theater would likely never have occurred. 

 Does it meet the test of reason that Joshua Bell would stand before a concert audience and hum Concerto No. 5 while his violin sits silently behind him in a chair?  Accordingly, does it meet the test of reason that the Aurora shooter could have killed or wounded all of those people with a knife or a ball bat at a remove – is that not the advantage of a  gun to inflict damage at a distance?   Moving in close enough to his targets to use a more personal means of destruction and smoke aside, wouldn’t someone or a number of some ones been able to stop him?  Wouldn’t he have known that?

Therefore asserting the passivity of the weapon is not exculpatory because it does not reckon with efficiency or the assailant’s protection.  The drama of gun violence is a symbiosis, reciprocity of aggressive action and passive reaction in which the gun co-stars.

 Support the 2^nd Amendment if you are so inclined.  I may even support it with you.  However, don’t expect me to support a simple-minded and tortured argument that insults my intelligence. 

Voter Fraud?

In considering all of the new voter registration laws in Republican held states, I am once again astounded at the Right's overwhelming need to appear illogical, if not moronic, in its assertion of excessive amounts of voter fraud in their jurisdiction - not to mention the Left's incredible gutlessness in failing to ask one salient question. If it is true that an inordinate rate of voter fraud has indeed occurred in say Texas, does it not follow that the elections of Rick Perry and his Republican compatriots in the Republican held state legislature resulted from that fraud and are, therefore, illegitimate?

The Life of a Child

I keep hearing Romney and other Republican Right wingers cracking wise about the deficit, spending and the critical need to save the government’s money. For what? For whom? Certainly not for the children of the poor that they insist be brought into the world, rape and incest notwithstanding. After birth they hold these children in such low esteem that they are willing to roll back their healthcare, kick the crap out their educational system and worse yet limit their food supply all in the name of fiscal responsibility the new mantra of morally crippled, ethically deranged anencephalics like Jeff Sessions and Virginia Foxx.


How you might ask can they put a price tag on the life of a hungry child, deciding that there can even be such a thing as too much money spent to help take care of them? Is it possible they actually believe that an economy staggering under the weight of years of greed and excess will inevitably slip into final ruin for the cost of a little child’s school lunch or the few dollars in food stamps that a struggling mother will collect to help her provide all the other meals that a child must have? Accordingly, is it possible that they truly believe that poverty is like liposuction – elective?

In light of the stingy, mean spirit, I am-the-center-of-the-living-universe mentality that pollutes our public discourse in America today, this feels punitive as if we are punishing children for the gross negligence of the vampires who brought on the worst economic collapse since the Great Depression or for the poverty, even short comings of their parents. Isn’t it bad enough that so many of us walk down the street a little faster past the homeless and hungry pretending we don’t see them? Isn’t it bad enough that some speed up behind the wheel, looking through the despair of the poor as if it didn’t exist? Must we assess penalties as well, and to the children of all people? Yet in this best country in Christendom that is exactly what the good Christian men and women in Congress, our pious leaders, are doing when they put the school lunch and food stamp programs at the top of their deficit busting, spending reduction and government savings hit list.

I am not a Christian. I am not charged with, suffering the little children to come unto Jesus. I am not instructed to care for the poor, the sick, the homeless and the hungry. No such commandments are necessary in my faith. To see need and walk away, to look into the eyes of a starving child and turn away is unthinkable in my creed. In the parlance of the three “great” religions it is sinful, forbidden – unless of course you are a masochist who wishes to incur the Karma that comes of offending the Great Crone. Thus, I am confounded at how easily these posturing, pandering, pontificating bible thumpers in the House and Senate can raise their second finger at the central doctrines of their avowed belief system.

It is unlikely that there is anyone who doesn’t know that I am an unashamed, outspoken, sometimes in-your-face Pagan. I honor my Goddess, am devout in my faith, proud of my heritage and my Witch’s path and craft. Therefore I have a right to ask; who in the hell are these people? Are they Christians or moneylenders? Are they the church and body of the crucified Christ, or are they the crucifers? Under whose authority and in whose name do they dishonor their own God and disregard one of the Holiest of Holies in all faiths – the life of a child – anybody’s child?

I have had my disagreements with President Obama on policy, substance and method – not so much since he got rid of that turd Emanuel and put the reprobate Daley in check. However, I have never doubted his goodness, his compassion or his Christian charity. Indeed, I would be pleased to call him brother Pagan.

Oh, Not Romney

To paraphrase Henry James, the credo of Romney and other vampire capitalists can be stated as follows:

"We work in the dark - we take all we can - we hide all we have. Our wealth is our passion, and our passion is our soul. The rest is the madness of greed."

This man cannot and must not be elected president!!!!!!

The Imposters

My husband has a Christian Conservative, Facebook friend, if you want to call him a friend, who persists in speaking for the Liberal community in the most preposterous and abusive terms. He is not qualified, nor does he have any right to do so. To wit: he insists that people on food stamps like their situation, and we on the Left are responsible because we consider them nothing more than animals that we have made dependent in order to promote our agenda.

I grow very tired of these plastic Christian, jumped-up-Conservatives who apparently would throw their own children under the bus just to save twenty-six cents on the income tax or to demonize the government for their genetic ineptitude in managing their lives.  After all, at anytime their children could be in need of food stamps, unemployment compensation, health care reform or any other assistance available under the social safety net they despise - precisely as many other good, hardworking people are today. I grow very tired of their angry, mean spirited and selfish god, but mostly I am tired of hearing them express their cruelty, greed, hate and lust for power as Liberal ideals by accusing us of covertly believing and benefiting from such things. Just as I am tired of having them ascribe the worship of their moral scapegoat, the Devil, to my Pagan faith.


When you hear a Christian Conservative, or any Conservative for that matter, presuming to speak for the Liberal Community they are suspiciously lying, irrational, insane or all three. They certainly are consciously or unconsciously engaged in what Jung called transference – primary platform and scheme of which is to attribute their true persona and worldview to the Liberal Left because they are too thick to know where they leave off and we began, not to mention too ashamed or afraid to own it outright.