I do know a lot of patriotic Pagans who are able to substitute "In Goddess we trust" and "One country under Goddess" in their hearts and minds. I also know a lot of Republican Pagans. There are enough Pagans in the military & soldiers with Pagan families who support them.

Not to say that most patriotic or Republican Pagans fit into this mold, but I've also met homophobic, right-to-life and racist Pagans.

Funny ol' world, isn't it?

There are gods & goddesses of war, conflict & struggle. The Celtic & Norse were a war like people. So I don't understand the question "Why?"

Struggle & conflict are as much a part of nature as everything else. You only need to look at nature to see this. Especially in the animal kingdom. Death has a mind of her own.

I believe war helps a little on over population. Natures way of thinning out the human herd that is way out of control already. I don't believe war is a bad thing, just what the wars are about and who is running the show.

In the old stories there were many warriors who walk the path of war as a spiritual journey. Many who through blood and trial found something and put away their swords to become holy men/women in the wilds.

I think most Healers & Peace Makers have a hard time understanding the Warriors Path as most Warriors haver a hard time understanding the fanaticism of the Peace Makers & Healers.

But our armies are a joke. It is filled with Self Righteous Right Wing Christians & trigger happy gun toking ignorant racist rednecks. Most Pagans who join believe in actually defending their country and really don't do it for the money & corrupt politics. Good example, Sadaam really was a evil man who needed to be remove but Bush's and his cronies motives were/are self serving. The army's soldiers out number its Warriors unfortunely. If Hitler had been allow to continue unchecked you may not exist right now to post to this board.

It is interesting to notice that the population of peace makers flourish in free countries with strong militaries but are killed in countries controlled by dictactors & military regimes. our government is corrupt I know but so is ever single other government on the planet. But I'll take our government over Sadaam, the Taliban or Hitlers Third Reich that could have happened anyday. The true warriors in our military (and I'm assuming thats mainly the pagan ones) are there to defend your right to protest their existance. Kinda a paradox there. Our freedom was fought and won not peacefully gained around a council table. We still be ruled by the British Crown had we not fought.

War is not a pretty thing and I don't like it anymore than you but sometimes its necessary and I understand its place in the larger picture of Nature. Our Gods & Nature are not all Peace, Love & Granola. Nature can be just as violent as it can be peaceful. Without struggle there can be no growth. Still water goes stagnant. We are part of Nature (even though folks say we aren't anymore) and cannot rise above its Laws. So I look at it as we are in a Universal storm. One day it may break.

There have always been wars even before the Monotheistic religions came on the scene so the whole "patriarchy" arguement is kinda mute. There was no Peaceful Golden Age in the past and may be a very long time in the future coming.

A anarchist friend of mine once said, "Anarchy would work in a perfect world. Unfortunely we are not in a perfect world."

I like to replace "Anarchy" with peoples fantasy vision of "Peace" into that quote. I believe peace will one day come but it ain't going to happen by telling everyone to put down their guns.

I believe it will happen when the wole human species hits what I call the "Geronimo stage" in their evolutional journey. They will just get tired of fighting and put down their swords on their own.

Most Warriors eventually hit the "Geronimo stage" and become Holy Men/Women. But that is just one warrior at a time.

lets not forget it also pays the bills, provides decent benefits for family members and can contribute a great deal to personal discipline. If one is needing a relieable career,one might do worse.

I kinda think that bringing up the ancient Celts and Vikings in this context is somewhat disingenous. I mean there are all sorts of practices of ancient pagans we'd regard as abhorrent - human sacrifice being the most obvious - and no one in their right mind would try to justify such actions occurring in modern times by saying "But that's the way they did it 1500 years ago!"

Now clearly there are all types of pagans, but I think Sienna is referring to pagans of the wiccan/reclaiming bent (who I strongly suspect represent the majority of modern pagans) who claim to hold life and nature sacred, and to oppose the monotheistic patriarchal system that's been fucking up our world so badly for so long. I would agree that there is a real contradiction between those values and those of the American military, and a pagan joining the military is seriously compromising what they claim to believe in. Let's face it, except for a brief moment after 9/11 when it seemed that the U.S. was actually acomplishing something worthwhile in Afghanistan, none of our wars, police actions, or nasty little covert operatins have been about defending America since WW2. You could make a case for the need to defend South Korea from the North, but that's about it.

On the other hand, I think the same thing can be said for Christians - joining the modern military flies in the face of their supposed belief system too.

not entirely on topic, but I thought this might make an interesting contribution

news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/progr...7142182.stm

I think being a soldier is an honorable profession - and throughout human history it has been necessary for communities to find ways to defend themselves from attacks. Those who come to the defense of their community should be honored.

That being said we should be clear about a couple of things. The only reason why "community A" needs soldiers to defend it is because of the threat of attack from the soldiers of "community B". On average, any given soldier at any given time is just as likely to be involved in unjustified aggression against another community as to be involved in justified defense of his or her own community.

And even when soldiers do provide legitimate defense - this defense is only effective against external threats. Soldiers only "defend our freedom" in a very limited sense. The military, as an institution, is often involved very directly and brutally in stomping out freedom. The Red Army, for example, successfully defended the Soviet Union from foreign threats - but also served to prop up a dictatorship at home. The US Army has also not historically been an ally of "freedom" at home.

Long before I was aware of Pagan with a capital 'P' (let alone Wicca) I just kind of knew I was not the soldier type. If I had to defend myself (and mine) with nothing but my cunning, teeth, nails, and magic, that might be another story, but I've always known this about myself.

I think people can construct an argument against it, but for every point you've made, I think a soldier suited kind of person could bring up a different one in their favor.

Most modern war is much more impersonal and devastating then it was in former times. But I see that nonetheless, this very much might appeal (or be the most attractive option) to those who are warrior types. Unfortunately, from what I have learned so far in my life, it looks like the chances to shine as a noble and honorable warrior in the soldier-structured US military are few. Their ad campaign appeals to the warrior in many, but it is soldiers that it is built upon.

As to how a person's personal religion or path intersects with that? I dunno so much on an all-encompassing answer. Supposing most of them are Judeo-Christian (an assumption based on the general population of the US), there is much in their religion that leans against war-killing-harming; and yet, they are there. I think it is y up to each person and who they are, what they think (about politics or killing). Some may reconcile, rationalize, or justify it for or against the teachings of their religion. Since Paganism is a pretty wide variety of paths that can include many deities for different people, I can see that there actually might be a spiritual intersection with the military for a few. Though opinions on the inclusion of eastern religions in Paganism (or finding companionship in them) differ, the Bhagavad Gita was an interesting read to me as a Pagan of a non-combative stripe.

Unfortunately, I think there are also just many impressionable or young people who sign up and learn the hard way that the military and/or war is not what they wanted it to be or at all suited to them.

Shine

what other way is there to valhalla?

You do know that not all Pagans believe the same things right? That there are MANY different pagan traditions in the world? And that more than a few pagan traditions are not by ANY stretch of the imagination pacifistic?

I apologize if that sounds combative. But I'm genuinely surprised by the question, because it implies some very silly assumptions about what it means to be pagan.

Pagan does NOT equate to being an environmentalist. Yes, it's a given that _some_ Pagan traditions embrace 'green' living and that _many_ Pagans are environmentalists. But it is by NO MEANS a defining characteristic of Paganism.

It's also EXTREMELY fallacious to suggest that humanitarianism is a defining characteristic of Paganism. Again, some Pagan traditions include humanitarian beliefs into their doctrine, but hardly all. And Pagans are JUST as capable of being meanspirited assholes as are Christians, Muslims, and Jews.

Historically, most pagan religions were _quite_ warlike. That more religious traditions--Pagan AND Abrahamic--tend to incline more toward peace and civility today is a mark of the evolution of _human_ thought, not _religious_ philosophy.

Ok this debate is beginning to get heated, so I'll warn everyone now. Keep it a debate. No name calling or personal attacks. As long as it stays a debate it can get as heated as one wants without any name calling. That includes comments like "You are Ignorant" or You are stupid, etc....

I don't want to have to boot anyone from the tribe.

On the subject of Sienna's wording;

"Why would a pagan (of any flavor) choose to volunteer in the military? War is the biggest polluter and has a huge impact on planetary environment. Not only that, but humanitarian ideals of pagans,"

that did sound more like a statement of disbelief and kinda made it sound like you expected all these Pagans to share a common belief.

But on the other hand in all fairness, Sienna did say; "from my perspective," which is the same thing as saying "in her opinion", so Sienna was not saying it as though its fact.

I must admit that I get miffed also when those who follow the dominate (more like the most populated) Tradition try to define Paganism for all of us. As I said in the past, folks should be more specific when expressing certain beliefs and not use blanket statements like "Its a Pagan belief that".. Paganism really isn't a belief. More its a umbrella term for a group of beliefs. I have been shying away from the term Pagan because its such a hot misused term that starts way to many arguements. When I'm talking about beliefs I will define it by saying something like "The Druidic beliefs" or "The Wiccan beliefs" etc... I even tend to shy away from the term Shamanism because the term has been so misused as well. Though shamanism is a belief, it still has way too broad and wide array of different types that one should define even when using that term. Native American Shamanism is a whole lot different than say African, Celtic or Australian Aboriginal Shamanism. Then there are the people of Siberia & Mongolia where the term came from. They actually called their priest Shamans.

The other thing that bothers me is how the root meaning of the word Pagan has been changed. It originally came from the Latin word Paganus and was a term used by the pre-christian Romans when referring to the country Italian Gauls. It was meant as a insult and basically meant Hick. In the early days, Modern Pagans adopted it cause well the country folks weren't willing to give up their Nature religions to be like the city Romans, so the early Neo-Pagans decided Pagans were anyone who followed a Earth centered spiritual Path.. Later the Christians picked it up from the Romans and decided the country folks were evil and it evolved to anyone who didn't accept their Jesus and worship other gods were Pagans. Along came a bunch of New Age wackos who couldn't seem to get accepted into the spiritual communities. Early Neo-Pagans where the most tolerant so kinda took the New Agers under their wings. The New Agers decided they wanted to be Pagans but in order for that to be accepted they needed to find a way around the original "Earth/Nature Centered Spiritual Path" definition. They decided they like the Christians definition and if reworded just right, Wah La! They are Pagans! Anyone who don't follow a Monotheistic Religion. LOL What gets me is how many Pagans today define themselves by what they aren't. Back when I was young if you asked a Pagan what was Paganism. They tell you it was a group of traditions & religions that followed a Earth/Nature Center Belief system. Today if you ask most Pagans what is Paganism they almost everytime say, "Oh its anyone who doesn't follow a Monotheistic Belief system. So the Christians have through the New Agers defined what the word Pagans means for us. *Shakes head*.

Its funny that the defintion found in most dictionaries of the word Pagan is a Christian defintion of it. Yet Pagans will quote these dictionaries in forums as though its a difintion we came up for ourselves. LOL Might as well start quoting the Bible.

Interesting interview I recently heard was with Emma Restall Orr, Joint Chief Druid of the British Druid Order; Kate West, a Wiccan High Priestess of the Hearth of Hecate and Richard Thomas, an Anglican priest discuss modern Paganism. Emma subtley makes comments about how the Wiccans are Christianizing the Old Ways by making all the Gods One God & all the Goddesses One Goddess. Dualism is the first step to Monotheism. One only has to look at the Judaic Tradition to see that. The Semetic people were originally Polytheistic and believed in many Gods. Then came along Yahweh & Asherah, the Shekinah his beloved consort. Somewhere along the way the Semetic people went from Polytheistic to Duelistic, then finally dumping the Goddess all together and became Monotheistic.

Anyway listen to this great interview. Its a ram file so just so you know.
www.bbc.co.uk/religion/re...ond_0311.ram

Also here is a great video interview with Philip Carr-Gomm who has been the Chief Archdruid of O.B.O.D. for over 19 years. Notice how he never uses the term Pagan and never once defines Druidry by what it is not. Instead of using the term Pagan he continuely uses the term Nature Base Spirituality.

www.youtube.com/watch

But this is all just my opinion. I know nothing. I'm just a humble Druid serving the Gods as best I can. ;-)