Post by NFA on Sept 18, 2023 6:53:01 GMT 8
September 17, 2023
VIDEO: 21st-century neo-paganism is worse than the original
VIDEO: 21st-century neo-paganism is worse than the original
By Andrea Widburg
Starting more than a decade ago, I began writing posts at my own site about the fact that leftism represents a return to paganism. That’s so obvious that increasing numbers of people are pointing it out, too. Whether it’s abortion (human sacrifice), climate change (Gaia worship), the LGBTQ+ movement (ritualized sex), or a host of other modern behaviors, we are replicating humankind’s pagan past.
At its most obvious level, of course, this represents an in-your-face rejection of the Biblical tradition that underlies the West and, especially, underlies America. No matter how much leftists like to babble about how the Founding Fathers were influenced by Islam and Native American social or religious ideas, they weren’t. These men all came from the 18th-century British intellectual tradition, which was a fusion of Old and New Testament ideas and the decidedly Western Enlightenment.
If you reject the Bible, you’re rejecting America’s foundation. Moreover, if you reject the Bible in favor of this neo-paganism, and then use the state to force neo-paganism into public institutions (abortion, LGBTQ+, climate worship, etc.), you’re flying in the face of the First Amendment: “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof…”
In sum, neo-paganism is real; it attacks the West’s foundations and, by extension, America’s, too; and its political enforcement in America’s institutions violates the First Amendment. It’s bad all around.
At its most obvious level, of course, this represents an in-your-face rejection of the Biblical tradition that underlies the West and, especially, underlies America. No matter how much leftists like to babble about how the Founding Fathers were influenced by Islam and Native American social or religious ideas, they weren’t. These men all came from the 18th-century British intellectual tradition, which was a fusion of Old and New Testament ideas and the decidedly Western Enlightenment.
If you reject the Bible, you’re rejecting America’s foundation. Moreover, if you reject the Bible in favor of this neo-paganism, and then use the state to force neo-paganism into public institutions (abortion, LGBTQ+, climate worship, etc.), you’re flying in the face of the First Amendment: “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof…”
In sum, neo-paganism is real; it attacks the West’s foundations and, by extension, America’s, too; and its political enforcement in America’s institutions violates the First Amendment. It’s bad all around.
However, having mulled this matter for more than a decade, it occurred to me that we’re not just seeing an un-American reversion to paganism. Quite amazingly, the left has managed to go beyond paganism and create something that’s actually worse than the ancient pagan practices the modern world thought it had finally abandoned.
This is a complex idea that I put into a speech that I gave to a small group. I was then going to write it up but realized that doing so would take more time, energy, and space than I have. Therefore, I turned the speech into a video podcast. If you’re at all interested in seeing how we in America aren’t just returning to paganism but are, in fact, worse than the pagans, set aside an hour (maybe while cleaning the house, exercising, or walking the dog) to see if I can persuade you with my argument:
This is a complex idea that I put into a speech that I gave to a small group. I was then going to write it up but realized that doing so would take more time, energy, and space than I have. Therefore, I turned the speech into a video podcast. If you’re at all interested in seeing how we in America aren’t just returning to paganism but are, in fact, worse than the pagans, set aside an hour (maybe while cleaning the house, exercising, or walking the dog) to see if I can persuade you with my argument: