Dastardly Divisive Doublespeak

So Halstead, not content with bombarding VeiledWitch is going after Sarenth Odinsson now. Well, I happen to agree with Sareth: if you do not believe in Gods, then fundamentally you cannot be said to hold anything “sacred.” It’s simple linguistics.

The word ‘sacred’, from the Latin ‘sacer’ specifically means ‘belonging to the Gods.’ No Gods; nothing sacred. It’s bad enough he wants to remove the Gods from Paganism, but now from vocabulary words too? Atheist, please.

In case Latin is too high brow for him (though he claims to be an attorney, so I would think this type of linguistic analysis would not be above his pay grade), Collins English Dictionary defines it as exclusively devoted to a deity or to some religious ceremony or use; holy; consecrated.

Random House dictionary says:

adjective

  1. devoted or dedicated to a deity or to some religious purpose; consecrated.

2. entitled to veneration or religious respect by association with divinity or divine things; holy.

3.pertaining to or connected with religion (opposed to secular or profane ).

Other definitions do mention “regarded as being worthy of reverence,” but they are not primary definitions. First and foremost the word itself implies connection to a Deity.

Halstead seems to be getting increasingly desperate and his arguments increasingly insipid. He’s going after some of the most vulnerable in our community and we need to support each other. Attempts at intimidation and Orwellian twisting of terms will not work.

1514621_897156790331863_2120770488505068022_n

Advertisements

Posted on October 29, 2015, in Polytheism and tagged , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink. 9 Comments.

  1. I’m not going to look at anything he writes any longer…there’s no point, and too few spoons and braincells and seconds to waste any more with him.

    I’d advise, in the spirit of the “truce” i suggested, that we all ignore him entirely from now on; he won’t ignore us, but every second we take away from our lives to spend on someone as utterly adversarial to all we say as him is time we take away from doing honor to the Beings that we do hold to be sacred.

    (I know, it’s against every warrior- and satirist- and virtuous conduct bone in some of our bodies to keep ignoring his incessant attacks, but I think it will do all of our sanities, blood pressures, and devotional lives a great service if we just stop it now. The more we acknowledge that he has any sway in the discourse, the more we invest in a discourse that is never going to acknowledge or accommodate us as legitimate.)

    Liked by 2 people

    • there will never be truce, PSVL. You do what you want, but one doesn’t make truce with poison. certainly not when those Gods and spirits we so adore and venerate are seeing Their traditions attacked. NEVER. He is nothing. BUT, once something — any idea– is committed to print, brought into being, it has life and influence. I will never stop calling shit like this out for that reason and that alone. There will NEVER be room for truce in this. Many things can be compromised on but not service to the Gods. not ever.

      Liked by 3 people

  2. James "TwoSnakes" Stovall

    He is a troll, if he had value I don’t see it. Logic, history, linguistics and prescident won’t away him.

    Like

  3. I wanted to make sure I wasn’t being biased, so I asked each of my religious studies professors. Unanimously, these PhD-wielding men declared that what Halstead is preaching is not a religion (due to the lack of deities…which, academically, means it’s not a religion), what he is preaching is a PHILOSOPHY, and because he enjoys the trappings of religion and is likely afraid of the stigma that just calling yourself an atheist has, he pretends to be Pagan.

    As one professor put it: “He can believe whatever he wants, but academia has already defined “religion” and that ain’t it.”

    Liked by 3 people

  4. Even the definition, “regarded as being worthy of reverence,” begs the question of how does one determine that something is worthy of reverence, and what “reverence” even is. Still sounds pretty religious to me.

    Like

  5. thetinfoilhatsociety

    OOOHHHH. He’s a LAWYER. That explains a LOT. NOW I get the whole double speak and twisting of words and not-quite-logical arguments that try to take one down the garden path (and shove one into the bushes at the end). I completely knew in my gut that he KNEW better than the logical fallacies he was engaging in but he isn’t old enough to have participated in actual critical thinking in high school, so I couldn’t figure him out. Now it’s clear.

    Like

  6. I think you miss the point of my response to Halstead’s use of the term sacred. It’s not a matter of belief to say that to hold one sacred the Gods have to be in that equation somewhere; it’s a matter of linguistics and etymology. it’s what the word friggin’ MEANS.

    Liked by 1 person

  1. Pingback: An Open Letter to John Halstead | The Sinking Roots

  2. Pingback: Here’s My Issue: Addressing Key Questions from “An Open Letter to John Halstead” | The Sinking Roots

%d bloggers like this: