The war against St. Patrick's Day

Am I the first to bring it up?

I am shocked and appalled. "They" have turned this into a drinking and merriment secular holiday (probably a fair amount of sodomization and baby killing thrown in).

Where is the silent prayer and remembrance of this saint who...uh...what did he do? Drive snakes out of Ireland something like that?

What will the war on Halloween be like this year? and on Arbor Day?

by "Christians" who have nothing more to worry about.

Actually, the Irish do think that Americans are disrespectful of one of history's more significant people. Drunkeness and stupid jokes are indeed part of the war on intelligence.

on a conspiracy by the sodomozing, baby killing liberal elite.

There's been a huge controversy this year over what to eat today since it's a Friday during lent and also St. Patrick's Day. To head off riots and protests the Pope has appeased Catholic Irishmen by granting permission to eat corned beef and cabbage today.

How can he do that? I've always been told if I ate meat on a Friday during lent I'd go to hell. I'm so confused. :crazy:

(yes, this is sarcasm, being Irish and a lapsed Catholic). ;-)

Back then it was any Friday. I was @12. I stayed up all night in total fear, scared I was going to die and burn, burn, burn in hell FOREVER. And finally I fell asleep. When I woke up I was still alive and not burning in hell. So the next week I 'accidently' had another burger on a
Friday. The slippery slope was greased with greasy burgers.
But i now have a suspicion that my burger eating escapades have somehow helped bring on this hell-on-earth known as Bushco.

Was in junior high and had a burger for lunch unknowingly - didn't realize it was Friday until after I had eaten it. I experienced a horrible feeling of dread and terror; waited to see if I'd be struck by lightning and prayed that night that to be forgiven. I never did it again though - at least not until I became an adult and loosened the constraints of Catholicism. Then I became a vegeterian, so I'm not sure what that means......

:hi:

the PUBLIC school cafeteria wouldn't even give you the OPTION of meat on Fridays, whether you were Catholic or not (I wasn't). Fish sticks ONLY.

We snuck out of school and walked to the Wendy's about a block away for lunch; otherwise I wouldn't have had a choice either. :hi:

Lots of fish sticks.

more than one thing, and in districts with a significant Catholic enrollment, it's easier to make fishsticks, which basically everyone will eat, than to have a third of your kids no eat lunch because you served sloppy joes.

I suppose "they" will enjoy this little incitement... :eyes:

to have an orgy of drinking as if Irish culture is all about that, and that those shamrocks are associated with demons in the form of short guys with corn pipes who live at the end of the rainbow rather than accepting the shamrock as Christ's promise of redemption to the Irish people, that wearing green is just a costume for the day and not a symbolic nod to the deep spiritual meaning of the day commemorating the Saint who preserved Ireland with Christianity by driving out the heathen Druid 'snakes.'



:P

...Ethnic Folk Hero of Your Choice Day, everyone!

snakes can't swim to islands, now can they?

Pádraig converted Ireland to Christianity, leading the people to cease their worship of abominable pagan "gods" such as Crom Cruach to whom parents sacrificed one third of their children each November 1.

Think for just a second - If the Irish sacrificed one third of their children every year, how long would it be before the irish went extinct? Probably less than a decade, right? After all despite some anti-Irish propoganda of the turn of the century, the Irish still need 9 months to grow a genetic potato.

It's telling that sites such as Wikipedia, answers.com, and even "specialized" sites such as The Lodge of Herne all reference Encylopedia Mythica's article on Crom Cruagh word-for word. Much like wikipedia, Encyclopedia Mythica uses submissions for its info. A hell of a lot of the site's submissions are corrupted, threadbare, rambling, or just plain wrong. A lot of what is "collected" about Crom Cruach is exclusively the intellectual creation of Robert E. Howard - Conan worshipped "Crom", and Howard went out of his way to make his world primitive and barbaric.

If you think that's bad, try to filter Robert E. Howard out of research on the Cluithi (Picts). His psycho ramblings provide the basis for many 60% of "common knowledge" about these people.

Then we tack on Jack Chick and his funny papers and their insistance that Samhain is a druid-god who demanded mass sacrafice... Stir all this BS together and you get Crom Cruagh, the samhain cannibal god, devourer of children.

In all reality, "Crom Cruagh" was a sort of altar / focal point set on a hill in Ulster for solar worship. This stone was, in fact, gone by the time Patrick arrived on the scene, but the name of the hill and its ceremonial importance remained. Whether it was patrick himself or later historians who mistook the place name of "Crom Cruagh" for a god's name, I can't begin to guess, however.

I'm impressed, thanks for the background.

And welcome to DU!

You are indeed correct, and a lot of BS comes out about all the pre-Christian religious practices from all over Europe. Not to mention that Human Sacrifice, for the Celts, was haphazard at best, a few willing volunteers, more or less, and sometimes captured enemies. Even then, it never reached the scale of Vlad Dracula "The Impaler" or the tortures and religiously sanctioned murders that were condoned by both the Catholic Church during the Inquisition, or Protestants when the Burnings of accused "Witches" or the burning of Jewish villages and ghettos after the Black Death occured. All sacrificed to the Christian God, given that, the condemnations of pagan practices seems, at best, hypocritical.

Its virtually all sources of information on the web, including reference.com, pantheon.org, thinkquest.org, timelessmyths.com, sacred-texts.com, etc.

Just google "Crom Cruach" and every hit describes this "Crom Cruach" the same way I did.

It's not like this description of Crom Cruach is appearing on "anti-pagan" sites. The Lodge of Herne calls itself "a place for pagan men."

The name "Crom Cruach" apparently means "bloody bent one" and the place where this idol was located was called "Magh Slecht" which some of these sites say means "plain of slaughter" (others say it means "plain of adoration").

You didn't provide any links or cites. Are there any sources for your information that this Crom Cruach was not an idol to which the people sacrificed children?

is a bastion of reliable historical and religious knowledge. I mean, that's how I do all *my* research for papers and presentations and whatnot - I just Google it and hit the "I'm feeling lucky" button! Whatever comes up first, it must be right!

I get all my medical, financial and personal information that way.


I just found JEEBUS !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I just read their account, this is what they say about sacrifices:

In the Four Masters is this version--"Crom Cruach stood near a river called Gathard, and St. Patrick erected a church near at Domhnachmor." Then they added, "According to Dinnsenchus (the geographer), this was the principal idol of all the colonies that settled in Ireland, from the earliest period to the time of St. Patrick, and they were wont to offer to it the firstlings of animals, and other offerings."

http://www.sacred-texts.com/pag/idr/idr20.htm

No mention of children.

This is from the 2nd link Google coughs up:

Some writers believe that animal and possibly even human sacrifices were made to this God. There is no definite evidence to either prove or disprove this theory. The christian saint Patrick is cited as having destroyed the idols and the worship of the idols in his time, one story has him hitting the stone with his crozier and knocking it over. Obviously he felt it was a threat to his beliefs. However as has been stated above the stones were already old and covered up by the time of Patrick so these stories are probably anecdotal.

http://www.shee-eire.com/Magic&Mythology/Gods&Goddess/Celtic/Gods/Crom-Cruaich/Page1.htm

So, it's obviously not "every hit" that turns up the child sacrifice claim. As for the rest, it does seem that some 90% of the rest are cribbing from the same couple of sources, with near identical texts.

While I haven't seen definitive refutations (nor have I seen any historical cites to back up the claims either), that most of them repeat the ludicrous claim of yearly sacrifices of 1/3 of the children doesn't instill trust in the quality of their research.

When will some people learn that we can also do searches on topics?

Great work, charlie!

Anytime you want to help the skeptics debunk pseudoscience, check us out.

:hi:

Zeb would be on surer footing if he'd stayed away from the infant holocaust bit, a provable claim of human sacrifice is bad enough. But, as with so many hagiographies of venerated religious figures, wild embellishment is never enough. It can be argued that St Paddy bettered the lot of Eire by bringing Christianity to the heathens, but it's not necessary to believe he dispatched a ravenous eater of children with a single smote of his stick.

how some people classify pagan beliefs as "mythology" but practically have kittens when anyone questions the stories in the christian bible?

I certainly hope not. So I don't think I would be offending anyone if I offered my opinion: that Crom Cruach was a demon, who did demand human sacrifices from the people. I don't know if St. Patrick smote him with the Jesus-staff or not, but it seems very plausible to me that a demon would behave in this manner. I am not the only one who believes Crom Cruach was a demon. Plenty of others think so too. Even the Catholic Encylopedia refers to Crom Cruach as a "demon-idol."

One doesn't have to worship Crom Cruach to abhor religious bigotry.

of all people.

Why is that?

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

I can see why that would bother you.

I'm just another human being trying to get along in this crazy world.

I have no problem with people of faith, unless and until they start trying to force others to obey their gods.

You refuse to admit religious fundamentalists have seized control of our government, hell, you actually claim that fundamentalism is on the downside.

You use right wing sources and talking points, you try to use science to back up the bible, you insult and dismiss atheists and you repeatedly inform us that according to your god, we're going to burn in hell for all eternity.

Do you really have to wonder why your liberal stance is suspect?

Maybe not in the short-term, but look at where we are today vs. 50 years ago, or 100 years ago. See why I don't think we are in danger of becoming a theocratic country? The trend is markedly away from Christian theocracy, in this country and elsewhere in the world.

I don't know what sources and talking points you are referring to. I usually just do google searches if I need to find a link to something.

I am somehow to blame for using science to back up the Bible? Why should that bother you?

I don't mean to insult atheists. If I have insulted you, I apologize. As for being insulting and dismissive toward those with different viewpoints, physician, heal thyself!

http://www.cnn.com/2005/POLITICS/05/24/stem.cells/
http://www.nea.org/vouchers/index.html
http://www.holysmoke.org/kansas.htm
http://democrats.reform.house.gov/features/politics_and_science/index.htm
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2006/01/20060131-2.html
http://www.cnn.com/2005/LAW/03/24/cassel.schiavo/index.html
http://www.journalnow.com/servlet/Satellite?pagename=WSJ%2FMGArticle%2FWSJ_BasicArticle&c=MGArticle&cid=1137834803927&path=!nationworld&s=
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2003/11/images/20031105-1_p35410-21-515h.html


I could go on but I need to throw up after having to revisit those issues.

I will reiterate: if you're a fundamentalist you ARE my enemy.

says that religious fundamentalism is coming back in a big way, esp. in the United States. It's a backlash against the social policies of the 1960's. If by "short-term" Zeb means on a geological perspective of time...then I'd have to agree - after all, Christianity has only been around for about the blink of an eye.

They installed this pResident who appointed their backers to important positions, the SCOTUS is packed, the Senate majority has successfully neutered the Dems, filibustering is no longer an option, there is nothing standing in their way.

The attack on Roe v Wade is just the beginning.

They've been given a blank check.

But I guess it's nothing to worry about if you're white, male, straight, christian and not poor.

:evilgrin: Christians "liberate," Jews "infiltrate!" :sarcasm: (lest some poor soul not get that I am being a smart-ass.)

I know what you mean, but 'infiltrate' makes it sound like the got into office on the "down-low." The fundies and those who are supported by them make no bones about their religion or their religious views. Hell, some of them even use it (religion) in their campaigns!

The attack on RvW began the day after it passed, it has just gained more momentum (it is the perfect 'wedge' issue).

They don't have a "blank check," it's in the mail! :)

However, you are quite correct that if you are an American who is "white, male, straight, christian and not poor" then, the favor of the government shines upon you.

Fancy meeting you here!

I guess I used the term infiltrate because I was thinking of how "surprised" some idiots are.

We've been warning people about this for years.

Of course by "we" I mean all of the non-white, non-male, non-straight, non-christian and poor folks.

I know what you meant, I was teasing ya! :)

However, it is pretty amazing how many people really don't see the "writing on the wall," as it were.

You are talking to some who lives in Oklahoma, where political promos often have shots of the candidate at church (never seen one emerging from a Mosque, Synagogue, or a sky-clad Sabbat). I even saw an ad here for a "Tanning Salon" that promotes a good Christian atmosphere?! :wtf:?!?! I mean, what are they saying..."Love Jesus? Look like He did, with a nice golden tan!" Do they make you say a prayer before tanning? "Now I lay me down to tan. I pray the Lord, my skin to fan. If I should bake before I wake, I pray the Lord my skin not flake?"

The road ahead of us is long, but we have no choice but to travel.

(Unrelated: When will your journal have the "best of BMUS?" As Fat Tony, of The Simpsons says: "you crack me up so consistently!")

It's on a thread that will probably be moved here eventually so I guess it can't hurt to post the link

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=364&topic_id=698218&mesg_id=698568\


Oh, I saw your new baby, he's beautiful.
I don't know many people who have more four legged, feathered and scaled friends than me, but you guys left me in the dust.

And when I get the stomach to confront the best/worse of BMUS, I'll work on that journal. (I scare me sometimes)

That is so funny and very disturbing at the same time! It's that kind of mindless "devotion" that chills me to the bone!

Thanks for the compliment on Voodoo (that's his name). He has already been spoiled ROTTEN by my partner..thank G-d will never have children! I'd have to be the "bad" parent! Tonight, Voodoo was crying because he was in his pen, and my partner took him out because "he (my partner) felt guilty!" Although, the 'baby' was in his pen because he pottied in the wrong place. Voodoo is only 9 weeks old. And don't feel 'bad' about being left in the dust...we leave some pet stores in the dust. I am surprised our landlord hasn't tossed us...not that will matter soon (check your PM).

I look forward to your journal, because your posts place a second crack in my ass! (Get it? "Because you crack my ass up?" I already have one...you just make more! :))

I'd want to come back as one of your babies. :hug:

Heh heh, this isn't the first time I've been compared to a person's posterior, although your comparison is much nicer!

The Nazi narrative was that Jews had infiltrated the society. Let us never again allow political factionalism or expedience lead to the persecution of people on the basis of their religious faith.

if the Catholic Encyclopeda says it's a demon idol, who am I to argue? :eyes:

McGovern site does get the name right - the name "Crom cruagh" means, essentially "crooked hill".

As for being offended, no of course not - I hold some pretty not-nice views of your God, so why should it bother me if you hold some directed at another person's? :) Blind adherance to what your religion tells you about another religion is a messy thing, however.

OK, as a pagan, I'm surprisingly NOT OFFENDED by your characterization of this particular deity, some are good, others bad, others literally don't give a fuck. Of course, there are things wrong, for example the primary idol to Crom Cruach sank into the ground before St. Patrick ever set foot on the Isle. Also, the characterization of this particular God makes me think that his was a religion that was rather short lived, for obvious reasons, and also small to begin with. While he may be characterized as a MAJOR God, he was never considered a nice one, and most people in Ireland had many other Gods and Goddesses to worship that didn't have such demands placed on them. Most people are still human, after all, regardless of the religion. Now, whether Crom Cruach was an actual demon of the fallen angel variety in Christian Mythology, I do not know, possible, but I never heard of such a thing in the Bible outside of the Book of Tobit, that any fallen angel manifests themselves on Earth so strongly as to take up what Christians term false worship. In the Bible they are NOT demigods, but rather extensions of Yahweh's Will, literally, look at some of their names, like, for example "Messenger of God", or Gabriel as we know him.

You are right, that one website sacred-texts.com is not explicit about what the "other offerings" were, but it confirms that "As Magh-Sleacht meant field of slaughter, many supposed sacrifices were offered to the idol." While there is no explicit mention of sacrificing human children, the description is consistent with that practice, which is confirmd by so many other sources.

The second website does mention human sacrifices. It just downplays them by saying there is no definite evidence to either prove or disprove them.

Then there are all of the other websites, which describe the awful practice.

Just calling the claims of the other websites "ludicrous" certainly does not suffice as a refutation.

I don't know why it should be so surprising that the Celts would be practicing human sacrifice around 400 A.D. Heck, the pagan Mayans and Aztecs were still doing it hundreds of years later.

You're tapdancing and handwaving again. I read plenty of those "other websites" and like I said, the bulk of them are either rephrasing or copy-and-pastes from a common source(s) -- without scholarly cites to back them up. The second site does mention "human sacrifices" and it doesn't "downplay" anything, it makes an unqualified assertion that there is no evidence. You can rightly choose to dismiss it, but being the 2nd link returned by Google, it undercuts your notion that "every hit" confirms your claim. As does sacred-texts.com, which you wrongly cited as supportive. And gee, I'd guess that if they knew that the "other offerings" were children, they'd have no problem saying so.

I didn't even attempt to counter claims of "human" sacrifice, you know that, it was the wanton slaughter of children I contested.

I wasn't "calling the claims" of other sites ludicrous, I was ridiculing a single claim. Tigernmas introduced Crom Cruach worship at around 1500 BC. St Paddy ended it around 500 AD. So, the Isle endured 2000 years of 1/3 of their children killed yearly without becoming an empty windblown rock? Pshaw, tell me another one.

"I don't know why it should be so surprising that the Celts would be practicing human sacrifice...

I've seen you do this often enough, so I'll give you a piece of advice. Don't let your ardent advocacy stuff words into other people's mouths and take issue with things they didn't say. It makes you look stupid and can make people angry.

Human sacrifice is undisputed. Whether it was actually 1/3 of the children every year is what you doubt. I understand.

And neither contention on the child-sacrifice issue (that it happened or that it didn't) has any "scholarly cites" to back it up -- at least none that either of us has found on the web. You just argue that it couldn't have been 1/3 of the kids every year, or there would be none left.

You may be right, but I don't think it necessarily follows that if 1/3 of the children are killed each year, the population dies out and Ireland becomes a windblown rock. If the population of children declined as a result of these sacrifices, then the number of children sacrificed the next year would decline also. You would never get down to zero children. Plus you have the birth rate replenishing the population. I just don't see it as entirely impossible. But you could be right.

Infant and child mortality is already prodigious. Killing 1/3 of what's left of your future field and livestock hands with only a year's time (scarcely more than a single birth cycle) for replenishment, will shortly lead to diminishing returns, not just in population, but foods and goods for sustenance.

"If the population of children declined as a result of these sacrifices, then the number of children sacrificed the next year would decline also."

Um, yeah. And the year after, etc. The pool of living children dwindle too.

Let it go, it's impossible, unless the famed luck of the Irish is greater than anyone imagined.

Never mind how much of Christianity comes from its precursor religions--which were, of course, pagan. A savior resurrected? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mithraism#Similarities_to_Christianity">Mithrans had that--crazed pagans that they were. Putting Christmas in December? Well, yeah, it's got to coincide with the Roman http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saturnalia#Saturnalia.27s_relation_to_Christmas">Saturnalia, so all those evil pagans won't mind converting--never mind that the "historical" Jesus more than likely wasn't actually born in December.

:crazy:

Like this one:


Or this one:



Not to mention other holidays that Christian adopted for they're own practice, like the fertility festival of Eostre, in addition to Lent, and many, many other practices and beliefs as well.

is that he was Welsh, or as they were known at the time, 'British'. :evilgrin:

Some of my best friends are druids, and amongst them he's considered more of a villain than a hero.
:dilemma:

on edit: Should've read on beyond the first post, this was obviously covered more than adequately by others!