Welcome to Gaia! ::

Do we lack it because we are a large group that is broken up into many different paths and ideas? Because we don't have rules like the 10 Commandments?

I feel this position is still a misrepresentation of the position I am making.

I do not feel individual pagans lack morality for simply being pagan, instead I feel that most of us, having left mainstream religions to become pagan do not benefit from a common moral code, nor are we guaranteed to be exposed to one for simply being pagan.

If we are Christian, there is a high probability that we will be exposed to the Golden Rule and the Law of Love, and likely morals from the Old Testament. If Jewish, we are likely to be exposed to the Laws of Moses, and also the writings of other Jewish figures, including Psalmists who highlight moral behavior in their passages, what makes for a good man or woman. Within Islam the Koran highlights what it believes is moral behavior. Regardless of how these writings are misrepresented or how accurate they are, or applicable to modern society, there is at least a communal sense of morality and a book people may turn to in order to see what is expected in their society.

I feel that pagans, by virtue of having hundreds of religions which are not always interrelated, we have no community expectations of a set moral code. I know members of Astru who rely on the Havamal, or the Nine Noble Virtues or the work of Odinist Priests, or the Eddas as parables. I know of Greek Pagans who rely on the Delphic Maxims, others who have a completely different set of maxims, still others who could not tell you what a maxim is, but they are very devout to Apollo.

The following is nothing more than a personal belief: I feel morality is shaped in three ways. On a social level, we develop morals that will protect the community and continue to protect our resources and our ability to further our existence as an individual and as a family unit. On an individual level, we develop a sense of morality that is about equality and fairness. On a spiritual level, we develop a sense of morality that stems from a Divine Truth. These are methods of experiencing morality, not moral codes in themselves, and even then, they have layers or stages in each style that look very differently from the other stages in the same style.

Below is a commentary on a portion of morality. It deals with privilege, what it is, how it works and why it is a moral issue.

When words hurt others and perpetuates a system wherein people are considered better than another group is this a moral thing?
I would hope that using reason, if we could articulate and demonstrate that the term is a hurtful derogatory phrase, we would honor requests to respect those boundaries.

Such boundaries are about respect- if respect is to be received, it must also be given, at the end of the day, I do not feel any of us truly wants to hurt another person, but when boundaries are crossed, people do get hurt.

Privilege structures aren't something most of us are taught. In school, we are taught that to use specific words is wrong. Slurs that address ethnic minorities are very commonly discussed as part of our history. We are also often taught about sexism. When we see this pattern we are taught, we know how to react- that to degrade another person, on a one on one basis, or as a society is "wrong". But I feel we aren't taught about how to recognize social patterns that are used to raise people up, or other social patterns that are used to hold people down.

There are words that aren't thought of as ethnic slurs and are part of our common vocabulary. There are words that are slurs against people with mental and physical illnesses or disabilities. There are slurs against people who belong to certain nations or religions, different age groups, economic prosperity or lack thereof, gender, sex, orientation and creed.

I feel intent can mitigate the instance, but it doesn't undo the harm that comes from attitudes born of a society that devalues people. Accidents happen. In the case of privilege, language and slurs, there are slurs that are so common that we do not think of them as slurs. I feel this is a sign of how deeply ingrained these attitudes are, not that it is proof these attitudes do not exist.

I feel in my parents era, that someone could have just as easily said that it was closed minded for a person to ask that we not use ethnic slurs against blacks, or Italians, or Catholics.

This is a good site about Ableism and Language

I feel that any slur, a word that has a history of degrading other people, by marking them as "less than", should not be so common and accepted that it contributes to the power structures that harm people.

While I feel there have been good points made, I also feel my position has been misrepresented.
The following is not my position:
That using the slurs makes someone a bad person.
That using the slurs means that they intended to be hurtful.
That the popular use of the word removes, destroys, undoes or otherwise negates the harm the word does.
That it is the intent or interpretation that has anything to do with what I am speaking of.

Instead, this is my position:

I feel there are larger social and psychological structures here. These structures have been persisting for so many generations that attitudes are ingrained in the language and our way of thinking. These attitudes change slowly over time when people find the way these structures effect people unacceptable. These structures include systems that promote some, granting them unspoken, unwritten social benefits while causing those who do not meet the requirements to not have an even playing field in the eyes of their cultural peers. In the past, this has manifested in ways that we can easily understand. Paying someone less for the same job done by another because of their gender or the color of their skin is wrong. Denying someone freedom for these reasons is wrong. In our day, these examples aren't seen as often- especially in countries like the United States. I feel it is much more subtle these days. Instead of an employer hanging a sign that asks for white applicants only, an ethnic name on an application is discarded, and a name like John is kept. It is even possible that the employer didn't make this a cognitive choice. That they read a name like Tyrone and looked through the application, on an unconscious level seeking flaws- reasons to disqualify that application. I feel these aren't always choices, things we are aware of, but instead are unconscious biases that are a result of a culture that teaches different is dangerous. I also feel this isn't always about culture, but instead a form of instinct that is designed, on a primal level, to keep us safe by surrounding us with the familiar.

I feel the way we change, like the way we have changed, is to examine why and how these behaviors crop up, and then to make changes, small and large, to undo the patterns.

I have provided other links on Ableism.
I ask that you take the time to read these series of Checklists, and the article on Privilege. I feel it is important to understand privilege first, to those ends, please read the following carefully. I feel it is important to allow it to "sink in".

One sign that there is resistance to actually hearing the message would be any internal chatter. If you hear yourself saying "I'm not privileged" or "This isn't what's going on" or "I don't mean it that way", please take a step back, remember that this isn't something any of us have done- this is a product of history, and that we can change the effects privilege can have on our society by exploring it.

The term "privilege" can be misleading for those first coming into contact with it - it is not the extras in life, but the things we can't get rid of even if we try, like the colour of our skin, our gender, the socio-economic class we're raised as part of. The expectations and assumptions that come with being born white, upper middle class, and female, for instance *cough*, have meant that I can charm my way out of a traffic ticket, no-one automatically assumes I'm shoplifting when I go into a store, and it was expected that I would go to college and do well in life. Here's a more comprehensive list of the various privileges we do and do not have - it's worth reading the ones you don't have to get a feel for the ones you do.

From Laurel's Livejournal.

At the bottom of the post she has a list of checklists I mentioned above.
Male Privilege
White Privilege
Straight Privilege
Cissexual Privilege
Able Privilege
Body Type Privilege
Class Privilege

I understand this is a lot of reading, and a great deal of information to wrap our heads around. I feel I am still learning myself and I have been studying this for years.

Please, in order to ensure that you understand what I am saying, and not misrepresent my positions, please read them all the way through with an open mind.

I think the best part of being Pagan is I get to break free from traditional society and make my own path. I treat others with a level of respect, and if it is returned I am happy. If someone's a total b***h I pray for them because I know karma can be just around the corner waiting for them [and me!]

Yeah, I used karma. If there a specific word for that idea in the Pagan path, because I don't know if I'm using the correct term.

I feel a common moral code is a benefit to the communities that keep it because it allows for social support and communal empathy in striving for a moral behavior. While this is only as good as the morals in question, the sense of community and a common understanding of morality and the support this shared understanding provides is beneficial in helping people overcome personal short comings.


I feel you are placing words in my mouth. I am not suggesting that all pagans should have a common moral code, instead I am merely observing that we do not, and as a result, we do not share in the benefits thereof.

Yes. I also feel that this means examining if there is more to the positions of those who use titles we do not wish them to, which would include exploring why some people with the same authority as those who oppose the use of the title, allow or encourage it's wider use and the conditions they place on it's adoption.

Perhaps I do, but I feel I have a moral responsibility not to silently stand by when others are being harmed.

Aleister on morality and law:

“Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the Law”

“Ordinary morality is only for ordinary people.”

“Modern morality and manners suppress all natural instincts, keep people ignorant of the facts of nature and make them fighting drunk on bogey tales.”

With me and morality. It goes like this here. If it is someone I do not know personally. I don't really care about them. I do however find their opinions interesting sometimes. Which is what fuels my love of discussion.

I have a firm belief that no matter the personal thoughts you hold on someone. You should at least be civil and semi polite until given good reason to act otherwise.

I do not start darker things unless someone crosses the line. For instance, general malicious or ill will to my gf. And I am most CERTAINLY not going to play very nice at all. If you try to hurt my friends or family. Do not expect me to be nice. I refuse to be at that point.

I believe in being neutral until given reason otherwise. I do believe in karma but I also believe if you don't stand up for what is important to you, then karma does not help you out as much because you are a pushover and no longer cares about what happens. Which is like giving karma a free slate imo

Well, we certainly can't account for Aleister's humanity in ritual. He was a strange man, which is a bad word to use I know. Anyone have an appropriate substitute? confused

I have always had a sort of prejudice against Crowley, because my ex was into the dark arts and he was really into Crowley's work. So, I've tried to learn more about him but could never get that into it. I know not everything he did was bad and he did do a lot for the pagan community but as you all have said not all of it was good.