From: oispeggy@ubvmsd.cc.buffalo.edu (Peggy Brown)
Newsgroups: alt.pagan
Subject: Breeding/Religion (was giving up and moving on) (was WomenvsMen)
Date: 7 Nov 92 18:35:00 GMT
Organization: University at Buffalo
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41


>>Humans are mammals and breeding is a natural mammal-thing to do.
>>Females especially often feel a need to do this.

>Yeah: We did kinda notice this...:-)

>>The philosophies you cite, and your attitude, all sound reminiscent
>>of the religious-poo-poo that condemns sex.

>Hmm. Peggy - did you ever stop to figure out WHY maybe all these
>religions condemn sex?

>Possible reasons:

The main reason is religions (western religions anyway, I don't know 
about eastern ones) do not approve of animal instincts.  They attempt 
to control, sublimate, snuff-out animal instincts.  Except for 
breathing.  Religion does not seem to have a problem with breathing.

>        1/. Birth control by societal pressure

Morality.  Who is going to raise and support the child is a valid 
concern, but often its an interest in who "did it" with whom, 
whether a child resulted or not.
> 
>        2/. The amount of TIME spent on raising children. Basically
>        THAT becomes the Great Work for 99% of parents. Josh is right
>        (and offensive as usual :-) sigh). If you want to explore the
>        various avenues of spirituality, you may find kids arte like
>        an anchor. Great for keeping you in the same place - but that
>        may not be what you want.

The "various avenues of spirituality" were mainly devised by men, 
so I don't consider them to be necessarily the only ways for me.  
They're only little sign-posts anyway.  Everyone still has to 
find their on way.

I think your attitude (and josh's) is strongly influenced by 
patriarchal, xtian views.  (Fighting words, I know.)  That stuff 
permeates our culture to the point where we don't even notice it, 
so I don't think anyone is immune.  

IMO its all a matter of how you look at it.  If you consider 
children to be an anchor, they'll be an anchor.  If you consider 
them to be an opportunity to progress in the great work, then 
that is what you'll find.  We all have limitations and demands 
(jobs, relationships, health problems, society).  Thinking of 
these as opportunities for self development, rather than as 
setbacks, can lead to powerful initiations.

>I think that is what lies behind the Xtian attitudes to sex/children
>etc. Either you are being a Good Parent, or you have a larger
>'Family' as a priest you take care of your flock etc.

I disagree.  I think the main "why" behind xtian attitudes toward 
sex and children is power.  By controlling their animal 
instincts, especially sex, priests were able to be superior to 
other people and worthy of being intermediary between god and 
"the flock."  This gave the church control over people (women, 
children and non-priests), and made people dependent on the 
church.  Why choose this route?  Because it was a drastic 
change from how the pre-xtian society behaved.  Sexuality became 
evil; the old lusty gods and goddesses fell; and the new virgin, 
celibate gods and goddesses were emulated.  Women became the 
scape-goats for mens' inability to control their sexual urges, 
and were cast as inferior and sinful.  Society changed, or 
evolved to reflect this, with women being treated as chattel, and 
losing inheritance and personal rights.

>>It would be nice if someone wrote some positive magick-oriented
>>things about breeding. I've not yet found any.
> 
>Try Dion Fortune.

Which book specifically?  The best book I've found so far is The 
Serpent and the Goddess: Women, Religion and Power in Celtic 
Ireland, by Mary Condren.  It goes into some specifics on 
breeding, though not as much as I'd like.  Its well-researched 
and includes many supporting quotes from medieval religious documents.
(Yet, I somehow can't imagine Leo reading feminist revisionist 
herstory.):)

>>I'll never understand why the experts seem to feel you must give up the
>>ordinary to reach something higher.
> 
>When I was 20 I was became worried that I would not have enough time
>in my life to do everything I wanted.

"DO"

>When I was 30 I became worried that there would not be enough time in
>my life to do even ONE thing I wanted.

"DO"

>When I was 40 I realised
> 
>        (a) I was corrrect in my assesment of the predicament
>        (b) Worrying made it worse.
> 
>I think the experts are right: you have to give up am unimaginable
>amount of things - in fact you have to give up EVERYTHING in order
>to attain ANYTHING. Not being satisfied with what you've got is what
>makes people want to be magickians or priests or whatever. 

So the best approach is to give up everything and be a hermit or 
ascetic?  I disagree.  You're overly concerned about doing.  
Sound just like an engineer.:)  Remember Don Juan and not-doing?  

Doing and challenges can be a powerful trigger, but only when 
deliberately used that way.  It all comes down to attitude, 
purpose, will.  Doesn't matter so much *what* you do, and 
powerful triggers might vary somewhat from person to person.  
For me breeding and raising a child is a powerful trigger.  I 
don't care that its not an historically approved of method for 
spiritual development. Ptttttttttttttttttttttthhh!

>Tricking
>oneself into letting go of desires etc. is just part of the process
>:-)

Once again, sounds like remnants of xtian patriarchal attitudes.  
"What shall I give up for Lent this year?"  Tricking oneself into 
letting go of desires doesn't really get rid of them.  It raises 
them to a higher level of importance than they had in the first 
place.  Sometimes it also submerges them, causing a lot of tension.  
Then people blow it and eat the *entire* bag of cookies, get stinking 
drunk, and sleep with anyone just to get laid.

I think its healthier and more fun to indulge oneself regularly, but 
not to excess.  

If god were a well-hung hot fudge sunday, I wouldn't have so much 
trouble with xtianity.:)

- Peggy -