e·vis·cer·ate v., e·vis·cer·at·ed, e·vis·cer·at·ing, e·vis·cer·ates
v., tr.
1. To remove the entrails of; disembowel.
2. To take away a vital or essential part of:
a compromise that eviscerated the proposed bill.
3. Medicine:
a. To remove the contents of (an organ).
b. To remove an organ, such as an eye, from (a patient).
v. intr. Medicine:
To protrude through a wound or surgical incision.
(from a href="http://dictionary.reference.com/">Dictionary.com
Some random trimmings from an older list that the other org in town runs...
We were working on a mission statement last year. Several messages were sent back and forth on this list, codifying points. Finally, I collated them all, went through them, wrote out everything, and then posted this:
from Mon, 03 Sep 2001:
"Made some small changes.
"The [other org] is a collective of individuals on earth-centered pagan paths, working together to provide networking connections and hosting facilities to the northwest pagan community. We provide a network of outreach, communication and education to build and strengthen the pagan community, and expand pagan awareness to the world community at large. All are welcome to attend hosted rituals, advertise on our
website or write to us for further information. We welcome all who are sincere, regardless of age, gender, sexual orientation, race, national or cultural origin or spiritual path."
The only problem with adding 'spiritual path' in the non-discrimination clause is that there are some, not to use the word but, negative (errrk!) paths out there. How embracing of difference do we all want to be? (Like, I'm all for having Setian members but some are bothered by that; some people think Satanists are harmless and others think they're dangerous wackos; that kind of thing.)
This was answered by [A] the same day:
The only problem with adding 'spiritual path' in the non-discrimination clause is that there are some, not to use the word but, negative (errrk!) paths out there. How embracing of difference do we all want to be? (Like, I'm all for having Setian members but some are bothered > by that; some people think Satanists are harmless and others think they're dangerous wackos; that kind of thing.)
Ummm...... (Raises hand.) I have a problem with Satanists/Setian members. The *very* instant that the word got out that there are Satanists/Setian members
in the [other org], then the *entire* town would be on our backs. I'm all for "love everyone", but we would loose [sic] ALL business sponsors for fear of being "shunned" by the shopping public and bad publicity. Also, I do believe Satanists/Setians fall into the "hate group" category and that would disqualify the [other org] for Federal grants and such. We would also have a much harder time trying to get people to show up for future Festival of All Paths. I honestly don't believe they fall into the "life affirming, earth based religion" category either. I do view them as Magickally harmless, but some of their ideals are harmful to anyone around them. Since satan is a Christian belief (and not something I believe in) .... I believe it would be equivalent to hanging a big bulls-eye on us for *any* fanatical or fundamentalist organization to attack. (Lowers hand.)
I answered:
Tue, 04 Sep 2001 16:22:57 -0700 (PDT)
The Dark Lords controversy :)
Quoting [A]:
Ummm...... (Raises hand.) I have a problem with Satanists/Setian members.
Okay. Valid concern, but catch this perception: I have Setian friends. And having said friends has made me very leery of instant diagnoses, so to speak.
Also, I do believe Satanists/Setians fall into the "hate group" category and that would disqualify the [other org] for Federal grants and such.
I don't know about Setians being a formally recognized governmental hate group. The breakdown goes thus: Satanists work from a Christian background and mindset, and we get slammed for Satanists being pagan. Setians work entirely from a pagan mindset, and most Christians, let alone most pagans, don't even know who they are and what they do. They are *not* Satanists, generally non-violent, and very intelligent, by and large.
Yes, I do know Michael Aquino's background, and yes, he's kind of a scary guy. But I'm talking general outside assumptions here.
We would also have a much harder time trying to get people to show up for future [festivals].
It's very true. I think you're right there. I was going for the line more of, do we want any gonzo in a striped robe to show up, no matter how personally whacked they are, or are we really trying for come-one-come-all paganism?
I do view them as Magickally harmless, but some of their ideals are harmful to anyone around them. Since satan is a Christian belief [ ... ]
Again I have to make the point that Satanists are Christian, Setians are not. Setians are Egyptian ritual and ceremonial magicians, and have no Christian ties or leanings.
[...] I believe it would be equivalent to hanging a big bulls-eye on us for *any* fanatical or fundamentalist organization to attack. (Lowers hand.)
Which is why I brought the point up. Comments, questions, anyone?
[J] responded on Tues, 4 Sept 2001:
Re: The Dark Lords Controversy
There seemed to be a bit of conflict regarding whether [the other org's] membership should be extended to either of the two groups in question, or whether we should allow their entrance to the festival.
As far as membership goes, Satanists by design of their beliefs, are not eligible for membership. Setians, however, are pagan by design, and should they seek membership, and are willing to abide our code of membership, should be allowed to join. As for [the local pagan festival], I feel the same should apply. All are required to abide by the rules we establish anyway....and protection of these rules is what we have a Dragon Committee
for.
In addition, that while I can understand the position that [A] has regarding public opinion,
I must say that membership details are all confidential, and we need not advertise how many members we have on what path. Should they choose to hold a table/class at [the local pagan festival], we should not hold ourselves responsible for censoring other pagan groups' activities (again provided they do not violate member/Festival agreements). It may be difficult to endure speculation or enmity directed at Setians and our inclusion of them in our group, however, how many pagans escape such discrimination. We, of all, should understand what misinformation and prejudice can cause, and avoid to do such ourselves. It is our goal to educate, understand, and enlighten...not conform.
[U] responded on Wed, 05 Sep 2001:
I see. A spider's web as part of the NPC logo may cause us problems if somebody accidently associates it with [a pagan group in another state]. Instead of say, the www. Or maybe the Fates, Norns, Athena, etc. But including Satanists (which a large majority of the general population already associate with Paganism), or Setians (which a large majority of the general population seems to associate w/Satanism--Set=Satan) is OK?
Personally, I do not consider Satanists to be pagan. Setians are pagan. It wouldn't make sense to include Satanists under any circumstance. Setians, even tho [sic]they are pagan, wouldn't be a good idea to include.
They don't fit the basic concept of 'positive' pagan groups that we are trying to network. We could do a set of links to 'left hand path' groups but anything beyond that would risk offending some of the groups we are trying to network with. And we risk scaring
off potential members or worse, attract some 'odd' potential members.
Isn't it nice to know that, by and large, pagan groups are just as bigoted, stupid, clueless and scared as all the other religious groups out there? All other groups of people period??
'Cos I gotta tell you, it doesn't thrill me that we're supposed to be so 'tolerant' of the unusual and so 'understanding' of each other and how, when we break it down to basics, NO ONE wants to stand up and say, yeah, c'mon over, have some coffee, fellow outcast....Hypocrites. Hypocrites all.
Write me.
Go onto the next one, if you like. Or you could go back to Blood & Coffee and forget the whole thing. Up to you.
Background provided by:
