Comment on Weekly Spell Corner V by dA-pagans
(I apologize in advance for the long post; I had more to say than I initially thought.)
I think if one does sacrifice an animal, one should also show respect to that animal. It doesn't seem right to me if one takes an animal's life without permission and gives it to a deity without apologizing or thanking it. I think we Pagans do that a lot to plants too; sure, we appreciate that they're good for smudging, incense, potion ingredients, and whatnot, but we're looking at the plant more for how we can use it, and it becomes more of a tool than a life. I guess what I mean is that when we offer or sacrifice even living things to a deity, we tend to focus all of our respect on the deity and forget to honor the offering/sacrifice as well. Try to step back a moment and consider what went into that offering/sacrifice (it helps if you're a biology freak like me) and appreciate it for what it is before giving it away. You can do that for meals too.
I think some of the stigma on animal sacrifice in our society came from the push for animal welfare; sacrifice is (perhaps stereotypically) seen as abuse or cruelty. Animal sacrifice is actually still legal in the United States, but since Paganism is still fighting for its First Amendment rights, people (read: cops) probably won't be okay if they find out you cut chickens' throats. Yes, sacrificial animals are almost always raised in a more humane way and killed more quickly than slaughterhouse animals, but in many cases, someone's first reaction to animal sacrifice will be negative. The word "sacrifice" is kind of a dirty word nowadays.
On a side note about the Rede: That's the question for Wiccans, isn't it? How far do you take the phrase "Harm none"? It's impossible to take it literally because of an economic principle called scarcity: there are limited resources to fill an unlimited demand. Since you ate an apple, someone else will not be able to eat that apple. There is no way to live without harming something, and suicide would not only harm you, but it would also harm the lice, bacteria, and other microscopic organisms that live on and in you. "Harm none" might make one think, "I shouldn't eat animals," but by that logic, one might then think, "I shouldn't eat plants." One isn't just harming that animal or plant, one is also harming some other living thing that might need that animal/plant. I too would like to hear from some Wiccans about this.
Also, do Wiccans feel guilty if they kill a spider or a bug, accidentally or otherwise? Do they use hand sanitizer or disinfecting wipes and consider that they're killing who knows how many millions or more of bacteria, viruses, etc.? Again, "Harm none" cannot be taken literally, I know, but I want to know how far some Wiccans take it.
I think if one does sacrifice an animal, one should also show respect to that animal. It doesn't seem right to me if one takes an animal's life without permission and gives it to a deity without apologizing or thanking it. I think we Pagans do that a lot to plants too; sure, we appreciate that they're good for smudging, incense, potion ingredients, and whatnot, but we're looking at the plant more for how we can use it, and it becomes more of a tool than a life. I guess what I mean is that when we offer or sacrifice even living things to a deity, we tend to focus all of our respect on the deity and forget to honor the offering/sacrifice as well. Try to step back a moment and consider what went into that offering/sacrifice (it helps if you're a biology freak like me) and appreciate it for what it is before giving it away. You can do that for meals too.
I think some of the stigma on animal sacrifice in our society came from the push for animal welfare; sacrifice is (perhaps stereotypically) seen as abuse or cruelty. Animal sacrifice is actually still legal in the United States, but since Paganism is still fighting for its First Amendment rights, people (read: cops) probably won't be okay if they find out you cut chickens' throats. Yes, sacrificial animals are almost always raised in a more humane way and killed more quickly than slaughterhouse animals, but in many cases, someone's first reaction to animal sacrifice will be negative. The word "sacrifice" is kind of a dirty word nowadays.
On a side note about the Rede: That's the question for Wiccans, isn't it? How far do you take the phrase "Harm none"? It's impossible to take it literally because of an economic principle called scarcity: there are limited resources to fill an unlimited demand. Since you ate an apple, someone else will not be able to eat that apple. There is no way to live without harming something, and suicide would not only harm you, but it would also harm the lice, bacteria, and other microscopic organisms that live on and in you. "Harm none" might make one think, "I shouldn't eat animals," but by that logic, one might then think, "I shouldn't eat plants." One isn't just harming that animal or plant, one is also harming some other living thing that might need that animal/plant. I too would like to hear from some Wiccans about this.
Also, do Wiccans feel guilty if they kill a spider or a bug, accidentally or otherwise? Do they use hand sanitizer or disinfecting wipes and consider that they're killing who knows how many millions or more of bacteria, viruses, etc.? Again, "Harm none" cannot be taken literally, I know, but I want to know how far some Wiccans take it.
I agree with you. People don't seem to understand what the word "Sacrifice" actually means anymore and they turn it into a huge evil thing when it is not. Literally a 5 second search on Google gave me these two top answers - [link] and this:
sac·ri·fice
noun
1. the offering of animal, plant, or human life or of some material possession to a deity, as in propitiation or homage.
2. the person, animal, or thing so offered.
3. the surrender or destruction of something prized or desirable for the sake of something considered as having a higher or more pressing claim.
4. the thing so surrendered or devoted.
5. a loss incurred in selling something below its value.
6. Also called sacrifice bunt, sacrifice hit . Baseball . a bunt made when there are fewer than two players out, not resulting in a double play, that advances the base runner nearest home without an error being committed if there is an attempt to put the runner out, and that results in either the batter's being put out at first base, reaching first on an error made in the attempt for the put-out, or being safe because of an attempt to put out another runner.
7. to make a sacrifice or offering of.
8. to surrender or give up, or permit injury or disadvantage to, for the sake of something else.
9. to dispose of (goods, property, etc.) regardless of profit.
10. Baseball . to cause the advance of (a base runner) by a sacrifice.
sac·ri·fice
noun
1. the offering of animal, plant, or human life or of some material possession to a deity, as in propitiation or homage.
2. the person, animal, or thing so offered.
3. the surrender or destruction of something prized or desirable for the sake of something considered as having a higher or more pressing claim.
4. the thing so surrendered or devoted.
5. a loss incurred in selling something below its value.
6. Also called sacrifice bunt, sacrifice hit . Baseball . a bunt made when there are fewer than two players out, not resulting in a double play, that advances the base runner nearest home without an error being committed if there is an attempt to put the runner out, and that results in either the batter's being put out at first base, reaching first on an error made in the attempt for the put-out, or being safe because of an attempt to put out another runner.
7. to make a sacrifice or offering of.
8. to surrender or give up, or permit injury or disadvantage to, for the sake of something else.
9. to dispose of (goods, property, etc.) regardless of profit.
10. Baseball . to cause the advance of (a base runner) by a sacrifice.
I also think the very original meaning literally meant anything burned on an altar...
Thus the first four entries in the definition I posted. **smiles**
Some of the things you mentioned here are some of the exact reasons why I stopped practicing Wicca and totally left the religion behind 4 years ago. The ethics are (to me) completely illogical and impossible to follow, much like Biblical ethics. There are too many interpretations that can be made for the system to have meaning. Obviously, if you're a British Traditional Wiccan, this probably is not a problem for you, but I've never met two American Wiccans, of whatever tradition or solitary, that agree on what the Rede means and how it should be applied to daily life. It can cause a lot of disharmony, both in the greater community, and within yourself.
About animal sacrifice, anyone who is seriously practicing it does so because of the respect they hold for that animal. That's why any occasion warranting such an event comes with a huge feast. Commemorating the seriousness of that event, thanking the animal, consuming the animal. If anything, it's more respectful that an animal is killed and eaten in this way than killed to "just serve the purpose" of everyday eating, as =EternalxRequiem said below.
But I do want to clarify about my own views -- I am very passionate about animal welfare, I'm in veterinary school right now, and I've been raised respecting animals my entire life. I don't think it's wrong to eat meat, but I cannot understand how someone could have a problem with an animal being killed for sacrifice, then eaten, but not have a problem with factory farming. You're right, Northwind, sacrifice has become a dirty word, and that's a terrible trend. It used to be such a sacred act of community, nourishment, and respect for the animal and ultimately the Gods. Now it's something that is treated shamefully. It makes me very sad.
(But just to note, animal sacrifice isn't illegal -- one only needs to get the correct slaughter permit. As long as you have a slaughter permit, it doesn't matter legally what your reason for slaughter is. This is why Greek Orthodox Christians can slaughter their own lamb for Easter, why Vodou practitioners can slaughter roosters, etc. As far as I know, this is the case in each state, just with differences in how to get the permit, things like that.)
About animal sacrifice, anyone who is seriously practicing it does so because of the respect they hold for that animal. That's why any occasion warranting such an event comes with a huge feast. Commemorating the seriousness of that event, thanking the animal, consuming the animal. If anything, it's more respectful that an animal is killed and eaten in this way than killed to "just serve the purpose" of everyday eating, as =EternalxRequiem said below.
But I do want to clarify about my own views -- I am very passionate about animal welfare, I'm in veterinary school right now, and I've been raised respecting animals my entire life. I don't think it's wrong to eat meat, but I cannot understand how someone could have a problem with an animal being killed for sacrifice, then eaten, but not have a problem with factory farming. You're right, Northwind, sacrifice has become a dirty word, and that's a terrible trend. It used to be such a sacred act of community, nourishment, and respect for the animal and ultimately the Gods. Now it's something that is treated shamefully. It makes me very sad.
(But just to note, animal sacrifice isn't illegal -- one only needs to get the correct slaughter permit. As long as you have a slaughter permit, it doesn't matter legally what your reason for slaughter is. This is why Greek Orthodox Christians can slaughter their own lamb for Easter, why Vodou practitioners can slaughter roosters, etc. As far as I know, this is the case in each state, just with differences in how to get the permit, things like that.)
As I think I've told you before, I haven't been Pagan for very long. I wasn't raised with religion, so I've had to do a lot of my own thinking and learning, and I still am learning a lot every day. But in my case, once a skeptic, always a skeptic, so I haven't been able to follow any one already-existing tradition. I don't begrudge people who are Wiccan, but I can't be Wiccan because some of those ideas just don't work for me.
I am also a big supporter of animal welfare. I just think it's ridiculous that people will criticize animal sacrifice, but not stop and think about slaughterhouses. I think some people (even me sometimes) are put off when groups like PETA throw the worst images they can find in their faces, but at least those groups are trying to address a problem about which many people are ignorant.
I am also a big supporter of animal welfare. I just think it's ridiculous that people will criticize animal sacrifice, but not stop and think about slaughterhouses. I think some people (even me sometimes) are put off when groups like PETA throw the worst images they can find in their faces, but at least those groups are trying to address a problem about which many people are ignorant.
I also wasn't raised religiously at all, so I had a lot of work to do for myself regarding theology when I first "started out" being Pagan. We've probably had some similar experiences already.
The (not) great thing about PETA is they aren't an animal welfare group, they're an animal rights group, and those are totally different things. PETA, HSUS, ALF and other groups are completely against what they call the exploitation of animals in every way. This not only means they are against eating meat and medical/cosmetics testing on animals, but they are also against animals used in entertainment, animals kept as pets, and even the use of service dogs for the blind. They believe that no contact what-so-ever should occur between humans and animals.
Animal welfare groups, on the other hand, such as the ASPCA, devote their efforts to promoting the humane treatment of animals in all situations. They fund building shelter, create education programs, and many other things that benefit both humans and animals. They aren't perfect, but they're getting the job done. If people really want to help animals, they need to be supporting welfare groups, not rights groups.
The (not) great thing about PETA is they aren't an animal welfare group, they're an animal rights group, and those are totally different things. PETA, HSUS, ALF and other groups are completely against what they call the exploitation of animals in every way. This not only means they are against eating meat and medical/cosmetics testing on animals, but they are also against animals used in entertainment, animals kept as pets, and even the use of service dogs for the blind. They believe that no contact what-so-ever should occur between humans and animals.
Animal welfare groups, on the other hand, such as the ASPCA, devote their efforts to promoting the humane treatment of animals in all situations. They fund building shelter, create education programs, and many other things that benefit both humans and animals. They aren't perfect, but they're getting the job done. If people really want to help animals, they need to be supporting welfare groups, not rights groups.
Oh, ok. I hadn't thought of that difference. This is why I like talking to you; you help me see things from different perspectives and make sure that what I'm talking about is what I actually mean to say. Anyway, welfare and rights still overlap to an extent, and at least these groups are trying. It's a work in progress, and the first step to fixing a problem is increasing awareness.
Something else about PETA and HSUS, is that since they are 100% against pet-ownership, they euthanize 90%+ of the animals that come into their shelters each year. They think it is better for the animal to be dead than to be "exploited" by humans who would want to make it their pet. And I'm talking about just regular cats and dogs -- not wild animals or exotics.