Conservapedia - User contributions [en]

Talk:Witchcraft

2007-05-23T15:23:29Z

Ladyinred58: /* Witchcraft and the truth */

== Inquisition? ==
This article looks like it has been copied from a 15th century inquisition guidebook.

Can someone who's knowledgeable on this subject insert something on which burnings, and witchcraft in other cultures/religion, besides Medieval Christian Europe?
[[User:MiddleMan|MiddleMan]]

Middleman, I have attempted to make factual changes, however I have been accused by another contributor as adding personal bias. If you have any ideas, i'm happy to listen to them!
--[[User:Mistress|Mistress]] 21:44, 22 May 2007 (EDT)

== Witchcraft and the truth ==

I have been watching this discussion for some time now. And I must say I am really amazed at what I have seen going on. I have watched as others repeatedly tried to explain that a witch is not evil and seen them be blocked from posting again. I have also read where this site is supposed to be based on the truth. Well if that is so why are the posts from ones that are telling the truth being banned? What do you not want the truth told? A witch is NOT evil. A witch does not worship the devil. Satanists worship the devil. A witch does not even believe in the devil. A witch might believe in Baal, an underworld god or a witch might believe in Gaia, the earth or a witch might believe in Hecate. the goddes of childbirth, but you will never hear a witch say she believes in the devil. I am also amazed at the christian undertones that are raging through this discussion. Is this a decision on what witchcraft truly is? Or is it a discussion based on Christian belief? I remember reading in the bible in Matthew 7:1 Judge not lest ye be judged. It would seem to me a lot of judging and casting of the first stone is being done in this discussion. I am also sure my ip address will be blocked by the time this posts. That is a shame because this could have been a good discussion with a chance at real knowledge being shared. {{unsigned|Ladyinred58}}

:You claim that witches are not evil, and you claim that to be the truth, but all we appear to have is your word for that. On the other hand, we also have claims (in the Bible) that witchcraft ''is'' "evil" (i.e. wrong). So why should we believe you over the Bible? You are taking Matthew 7:1 out of context, by the way, as bibliosceptics typically do. [[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 10:46, 23 May 2007 (EDT)

:Actually I am far from a sceptic on the bible. As for taking Matt 7:1 out of context, I truly believe that in this context it is correct. How can any of us judge a witch to be evil unless we are truly free of evil ourselves. Doesn't Matt 7:2-5 say "2.For with what judgment ye judge, ye shall be judged: and with what measure ye mete, it shall be measured unto you. 3.And why beholdest thou the mote that is in thy brother's eye, but considerest not the beam that is in thine own eye? 4.Or how wilt thou say to thy brother, Let me cast out the mote out of thine eye; and lo, the beam is in thine own eye? 5.Thou hypocrite, cast out first the beam out of thine own eye; and then shalt thou see clearly to cast out the mote out of thy brother's
eye." Doesn't this mean that we should free ourselves from evilness before we state another
is evil?" [[User:ladyinred58|ladyinred58]] 11:26, 23 May 2007 (EDT)

User talk:SharonS

2007-05-23T15:02:39Z

Ladyinred58: /* Witchcraft */

Welcome to SharonS's talk page. Please enter any messages you have for me below.'''

'''Archives:''' [[User talk:SharonS/Archive1|1]]

==Formatting==

Excuse me, but could you fix the formatting error on this article [[American Values Club]]?? I am not sure how to.

thank you and God bless-

[[User:Truthseeker101|Truthseeker101]] 22:44, 22 May 2007 (EDT)

== Geometry terms ==

Hi there, I just noticed you have been playing with the geometry term list things, but I'm not sure where you are going with it.

Can I suggest that (like the other "term lists") they simply be removed? Categories are a much better way to group subjects on a wiki, since they are automatic. I did something like that to, I think, a musical instrument list that started from the "index" page. Example: say someone writes a nice article on a new geometry term. They would have to know, somehow, to add it to the term list. But any editor is likely to add <nowiki>[[category:geometry]]</nowiki>, which automatically adds it to the nicely alphabetized category page, and creates a link to that page as well.

The term lists may have served a function in the early days of the site, but are a redundant workaround when categories are available.

Just a thought. Oh, and PS, hope you're having a lovely Sunday! [[User:Human|Human]] 21:49, 13 May 2007 (EDT)

:I think the categories are a great idea. I keep forgetting to put them on the pages I edit! I think the indexes are necessary for some of the very broad subjects (such as the history terms). These indexes are geared towards students and are intended to help them in their studies by outlining the most important facts they need to know. Having all the terms in one category is pretty overwhelming, and the alphabetical indexes help to divide the terms into smaller chunks. Also, the Indexes are much more accessible for students who don't know much about Wikis and how to use the categories, since they are right on the side bar. I personally prefer the categories, but think we should keep the indexes for the time being. Thanks, ~ [[User:SharonS|Sharon]][[User talk:SharonS|Talk]] 21:59, 13 May 2007 (EDT)

Sorry. I will do that next time. Is there anything else I should know?[[User:Bohdan|Bohdan]]
:Thank you. I will try my best.[[User:Bohdan|Bohdan]]

==Forged Signature==

I was moving another user's comments from my user page to my talk page. That's all. [[User:Pendayho|Pendejo]] 20:25, 17 May 2007 (EDT)

== notice ==

Please direct new Sysops here: [[New Sysops Training Page]]

[[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 21:20, 17 May 2007 (EDT)

== Vandalism? ==

(Gulik2, here.) Just because you didn't LIKE the facts I posted, that doesn't make them 'vandalism'. --[[User:Gulik3|Gulik3]] 17:42, 19 May 2007 (EDT)

Three days or banned again, eh? Hey, no pressure getting in the way of doing actual RESEARCH or anything there... --[[User:Gulik3|Gulik3]] 23:53, 20 May 2007 (EDT)

:Sharon, the above idiot was blocked, for doing what he did best, which was not research (like he claimed we didn't), not edit well (wrote like Dick and Jane), and just plain stupid all over. [[User:Karajou|Karajou]] 01:22, 22 May 2007 (EDT)

== Nice new entry! ==

Sharon, terrific new entry on [[perfectly contestable markets]]!--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 10:33, 22 May 2007 (EDT)

:Thanks! We have only 46 entries left to write before we reach 10,000! ~ [[User:SharonS|Sharon]][[User talk:SharonS|Talk]] 10:35, 22 May 2007 (EDT)

:: Thanks for fixing that spelling so quickly on [[complementary inputs]]!!!--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 10:47, 22 May 2007 (EDT)

:::You're welcome. ~ [[User:SharonS|Sharon]][[User talk:SharonS|Talk]] 10:49, 22 May 2007 (EDT)

==...as jazz is to 4/4 time... ([[Abstract Expressionism]])==
I don't think that's right. 4/4 time is very common in jazz. Think of ''Basin Street Blues'' or ''St. James Infirmary.'' [http://www.musicarrangers.com/star-theory/t19.htm This page] says "Common time is 4 - 4 is the traditional time signature for ballads, rock, jazz, Latin American, Spanish paso doble and many other idioms," and [http://www.pbs.org/theblues/classroom/essays12bar.html virtually all blues] is in 4/4 time. I think even boogie-woogie (as in Mondrian's "Broadway Boogie-Woogie") is usually notated as 4/4 time, although maybe it should be 8/8.

In fact Dave Brubeck's famous 1959 album ''Time Out'' and his signature piece ''Take Five'' were so attention-getting precisely because they explored rhythms other than 4/4.

Unless I'm missing your point... [[User:Dpbsmith|Dpbsmith]] 18:23, 22 May 2007 (EDT)

:You're right. I guess it should say something more like "as jazz is to Mozart". The point is that Abstract Expressionism went drastically away from the traditions for art. ~ [[User:SharonS|Sharon]][[User talk:SharonS|Talk]] 18:30, 22 May 2007 (EDT)

Please check your email.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 18:53, 22 May 2007 (EDT)

==Witchcraft==
<<Stop filling articles with liberal bias, as you did in Witchcraft. ~ SharonTalk 10:23, 23 May 2007 (EDT)>

Are you interested in the truth or do you honestly look at the world through rose colored glasses tinted to view only what you want to see?

I typed the truth, not a bit of bias was in what I said. Nor am I a witch. I am a Druid, which you had no problem allowing Druidry to be placed under Wicca as a subsection if Wicca. Druidry is NOT a form of Wicca and never has been. Wicca is less than a hundred years old with Druidry dating back to the Hibernia and the ancient British Isles. My family had to hide for hundreds of years because of the bigotry and bias coming from Christian zealots that claimed anything that was not Christian was evil.
If you are so sure Witchcraft and its followers are evil, then why even allow anything to be written on this list. It would seem you are the self appointed list monitor and guardian of the truth. Well the truth is regardless of what you believe is that a witch is not a devil worshipper or evil. It would appear to me the bias is on your part and your denial of letting anyone else say anything that is contrary to your beliefs.

Cha tèid nì sam bith san dòrn dùinte.

Lady Caillech Beara
Druid Council of Elders
An Clare
County An Clare
Ireland

:Interestingly, I don't believe there '''is''' a "Druid Council of Elders" in Co. Clare. Unless you have perhaps just created it. Perhaps you would enlighten me :) [[User:Fox|Fox]] 10:48, 23 May 2007 (EDT)

Actually I didn't say the Druid Council of Elders was in An Clare, but merely that I am from An Clare and now live in the United States. I am actually part of the House of Keltria.

The Henge of Keltria has a complex structure. The day-to-day running of the Henge is done by a Board of Trustees, which at this time should be composed of three or more members from the membership of the Henge of Keltria elected for three years terms, and four officers: President, Vice President, Secretary and Treasurer. All but the treasurer are elected by the membership at the annual meeting.

Theological direction is provided by a Council of Elders. This council is composed of no more than nine members elected from and by the active members of the Ring of Oak. The Council of Elders can override the Board of Directors and officers in all matters pertaining to the spiritual and philosophical goals of the organization. The spokesperson of the Council of Elders is the Arch-druid, who is elected from the Council of Elders.
Groves may be created by three active members. Groves must apply to the Board of Trustees for a charter and be approved by the Council of Elders to become a Keltrian grove. A newly formed Grove is designated a “seed-grove” until the Council of Elders chooses to remove that designation after review of grove activities. Groves must meet at least once a month.

If the grove leader is a member of the Ring of Birch (or higher), then the grove may be designated as a “Birch Grove.” If the grove leader is a member of the Ring of Yew and at least two other members of the Grove are members of the Ring of Birch or higher, a grove may be designated as a “Yew Grove.” If a grove leader is a member of the Ring of Oak and at least two other members of the Grove are members of the Ring of Yew or higher, a grove may be designated as an “Oak Grove.”

Keltrian Study Groups are informal groups of people who gather to study Keltrian Druidism and regularly practice Keltrian ritual that may be formed by any member.

Hope this explains it better.

Cailli

User talk:SharonS

2007-05-23T14:42:01Z

Ladyinred58:

Welcome to SharonS's talk page. Please enter any messages you have for me below.'''

'''Archives:''' [[User talk:SharonS/Archive1|1]]

==Formatting==

Excuse me, but could you fix the formatting error on this article [[American Values Club]]?? I am not sure how to.

thank you and God bless-

[[User:Truthseeker101|Truthseeker101]] 22:44, 22 May 2007 (EDT)

== Geometry terms ==

Hi there, I just noticed you have been playing with the geometry term list things, but I'm not sure where you are going with it.

Can I suggest that (like the other "term lists") they simply be removed? Categories are a much better way to group subjects on a wiki, since they are automatic. I did something like that to, I think, a musical instrument list that started from the "index" page. Example: say someone writes a nice article on a new geometry term. They would have to know, somehow, to add it to the term list. But any editor is likely to add <nowiki>[[category:geometry]]</nowiki>, which automatically adds it to the nicely alphabetized category page, and creates a link to that page as well.

The term lists may have served a function in the early days of the site, but are a redundant workaround when categories are available.

Just a thought. Oh, and PS, hope you're having a lovely Sunday! [[User:Human|Human]] 21:49, 13 May 2007 (EDT)

:I think the categories are a great idea. I keep forgetting to put them on the pages I edit! I think the indexes are necessary for some of the very broad subjects (such as the history terms). These indexes are geared towards students and are intended to help them in their studies by outlining the most important facts they need to know. Having all the terms in one category is pretty overwhelming, and the alphabetical indexes help to divide the terms into smaller chunks. Also, the Indexes are much more accessible for students who don't know much about Wikis and how to use the categories, since they are right on the side bar. I personally prefer the categories, but think we should keep the indexes for the time being. Thanks, ~ [[User:SharonS|Sharon]][[User talk:SharonS|Talk]] 21:59, 13 May 2007 (EDT)

Sorry. I will do that next time. Is there anything else I should know?[[User:Bohdan|Bohdan]]
:Thank you. I will try my best.[[User:Bohdan|Bohdan]]

==Forged Signature==

I was moving another user's comments from my user page to my talk page. That's all. [[User:Pendayho|Pendejo]] 20:25, 17 May 2007 (EDT)

== notice ==

Please direct new Sysops here: [[New Sysops Training Page]]

[[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 21:20, 17 May 2007 (EDT)

== Vandalism? ==

(Gulik2, here.) Just because you didn't LIKE the facts I posted, that doesn't make them 'vandalism'. --[[User:Gulik3|Gulik3]] 17:42, 19 May 2007 (EDT)

Three days or banned again, eh? Hey, no pressure getting in the way of doing actual RESEARCH or anything there... --[[User:Gulik3|Gulik3]] 23:53, 20 May 2007 (EDT)

:Sharon, the above idiot was blocked, for doing what he did best, which was not research (like he claimed we didn't), not edit well (wrote like Dick and Jane), and just plain stupid all over. [[User:Karajou|Karajou]] 01:22, 22 May 2007 (EDT)

== Nice new entry! ==

Sharon, terrific new entry on [[perfectly contestable markets]]!--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 10:33, 22 May 2007 (EDT)

:Thanks! We have only 46 entries left to write before we reach 10,000! ~ [[User:SharonS|Sharon]][[User talk:SharonS|Talk]] 10:35, 22 May 2007 (EDT)

:: Thanks for fixing that spelling so quickly on [[complementary inputs]]!!!--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 10:47, 22 May 2007 (EDT)

:::You're welcome. ~ [[User:SharonS|Sharon]][[User talk:SharonS|Talk]] 10:49, 22 May 2007 (EDT)

==...as jazz is to 4/4 time... ([[Abstract Expressionism]])==
I don't think that's right. 4/4 time is very common in jazz. Think of ''Basin Street Blues'' or ''St. James Infirmary.'' [http://www.musicarrangers.com/star-theory/t19.htm This page] says "Common time is 4 - 4 is the traditional time signature for ballads, rock, jazz, Latin American, Spanish paso doble and many other idioms," and [http://www.pbs.org/theblues/classroom/essays12bar.html virtually all blues] is in 4/4 time. I think even boogie-woogie (as in Mondrian's "Broadway Boogie-Woogie") is usually notated as 4/4 time, although maybe it should be 8/8.

In fact Dave Brubeck's famous 1959 album ''Time Out'' and his signature piece ''Take Five'' were so attention-getting precisely because they explored rhythms other than 4/4.

Unless I'm missing your point... [[User:Dpbsmith|Dpbsmith]] 18:23, 22 May 2007 (EDT)

:You're right. I guess it should say something more like "as jazz is to Mozart". The point is that Abstract Expressionism went drastically away from the traditions for art. ~ [[User:SharonS|Sharon]][[User talk:SharonS|Talk]] 18:30, 22 May 2007 (EDT)

Please check your email.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 18:53, 22 May 2007 (EDT)

<<Stop filling articles with liberal bias, as you did in Witchcraft. ~ SharonTalk 10:23, 23 May 2007 (EDT)>

Are you interested in the truth or do you honestly look at the world through rose colored glasses tinted to view only what you want to see?

I typed the truth, not a bit of bias was in what I said. Nor am I a witch. I am a Druid, which you had no problem allowing Druidry to be placed under Wicca as a subsection if Wicca. Druidry is NOT a form of Wicca and never has been. Wicca is less than a hundred years old with Druidry dating back to the Hibernia and the ancient British Isles. My family had to hide for hundreds of years because of the bigotry and bias coming from Christian zealots that claimed anything that was not Christian was evil.
If you are so sure Witchcraft and its followers are evil, then why even allow anything to be written on this list. It would seem you are the self appointed list monitor and guardian of the truth. Well the truth is regardless of what you believe is that a witch is not a devil worshipper or evil. It would appear to me the bias is on your part and your denial of letting anyone else say anything that is contrary to your beliefs.

Cha tèid nì sam bith san dòrn dùinte.

Lady Caillech Beara
Druid Council of Elders
An Clare
County An Clare
Ireland

Witchcraft

2007-05-23T14:20:44Z

Ladyinred58:

Witchcraft is the use of alleged supernatural or magical powers. A witch is a practitioner of witchcraft. While the term "witchcraft" can have positive or negative connotations depending on cultural context (for instance, in post-Christian European cultures it has historically been associated with evil and the Devil), most contemporary people who self-identify as witches see it as beneficent and morally positive. The majority of people identified as practitioners of witchcraft in history were women. Likewise, in myth the stereotype is female. The term witch is typically feminine, masculine equivalents include wizard, sorcerer, warlock[1] and magician.

Practices and beliefs that have been termed "witchcraft" do not constitute a single identifiable religion, since they are found in a wide variety of cultures, both present and historical; however these beliefs do generally involve religious elements dealing with spirits or deities, the afterlife, magic and ritual. Witchcraft is generally characterised by its use of magic.

Sometimes witchcraft is used to refer, broadly, to the practice of indigenous magic, and has a connotation similar to shamanism. Depending on the values of the community, witchcraft in this sense may be regarded with varying degrees of respect or suspicion, or with ambivalence, being neither intrinsically good nor evil. Members of some religions have applied the term witchcraft in a pejorative sense to refer to all magical or ritual practices other than those sanctioned by their own doctrines - although this has become less common, at least in the Western world. According to some religious doctrines, all forms of magic are labelled witchcraft, and are either proscribed or treated as superstitious. Such religions consider their own ritual practices to be not at all magical, but rather simply variations of prayer.

"Witchcraft" is also used to refer, narrowly, to the practice of magic in an exclusively inimical sense. If the community accepts magical practice in general, then there is typically a clear separation between witches (in this sense) and the terms used to describe legitimate practitioners.

Talk:Witchcraft

2007-05-23T14:19:24Z

Ladyinred58:

I have been watching this discussion for some time now. And I must say I am really amazed at what I have seen going on. I have watched as others repeatedly tried to explain that a witch is not evil and seen them be blocked from posting again. I have also read where this site is supposed to be based on the truth. Well if that is so why are the posts from ones that are telling the truth being banned? What do you not want the truth told? A witch is NOT evil. A witch does not worship the devil. Satanists worship the devil. A witch does not even believe in the devil. A witch might believe in Baal, an underworld god or a witch might believe in Gaia, the earth or a witch might believe in Hecate. the goddes of childbirth, but you will never hear a witch say she believes in the devil. I am also amazed at the christian undertones that are raging through this discussion. Is this a decision on what witchcraft truly is? Or is it a discussion based on Christian belief? I remember reading in the bible in Matthew 7:1 Judge not lest ye be judged. It would seem to me a lot of judging and casting of the first stone is being done in this discussion. I am also sure my ip address will be blocked by the time this posts. That is a shame because this could have been a good discussion with a chance at real knowledge being shared.

Witchcraft

2007-05-23T14:18:27Z

Ladyinred58:

Witchcraft

2007-05-23T14:17:30Z

Ladyinred58:

Druid

2007-05-23T14:16:20Z

Ladyinred58: New page: Druidry is the native spiritual tradition of the islands of Britain. Evolving over millennia since the first post-glacial settlers, it is sacred relationship between the individual and the...

Druidry is the native spiritual tradition of the islands of Britain. Evolving over millennia since the first post-glacial settlers, it is sacred relationship between the individual and the spirits of nature, the landscape and the ancestors. Its ethics are based on honour - profound respect - for life itself, its practice based on the quest for wisdom through inspired relationship with spirit and the expression of truth through living fully and in a sacred manner, in beauty and with conscious creativity.