Pagans and sexuality - Page 2

[Lillitu]

hmmm. i find pagans that value male-female reproductive relations over other ones puzzling. i am glad to be in a trad that is not so limiting in my theology or experience.

the goddess/creator that you talk about, champagneblossom, created all kinds of people and is responsible for sex in all its forms. i don't think procreative sex is any more sacred than pleasure sex. sex is sacred, regardless of if it creates a child, or who is involved. if anything, sex for its own sake could be considered more sacred in a pagan context, at least my pagan context!

sex is the connective tissue that binds us all. love in all its forms is sacred and should be valued and cherished. and any religion that states or implies otherwise (pagan, christian, what have you) is preaching morals (external code we must obey) over ethics (people being adults and determining what is right in context) and is controlling and not worthy of following, imho. i searched long and hard to find a tradition that values sex and love, period.

i value my body's ability to procreate. after all, i lovingly concieved a child on Beltane with a male partner. but i have had and will have female partners again. and i am very religious. kudos to cherry hill for taking a stand on prop 8.

[Lillitu]

ooh, one more thing. the gods/goddesses have no gender as we know it. we assign them these things so we can wrap our brains around them better.

but the whole polarity thing is a limitation - a human limitation - and is NOT how the universe is set up or works at all. it makes things easier for a human to understand, at least for a while. but then you run into roadblocks to understanding. it limits your worldview and closes you off to all of creation.

ooh- and one more thing- just fyi to one of the posters, not all Radical Faeries are male, nor are they all homosexual/bisexual males. i enjoyed a genderful sexualityful Beltane at Nomenus sanctuary this year, and concieved a baby there! i identify as female and was born that way. lol! lotsa people of all ages, genders, and sexualities were in attendance.

[KateDavies45]

Originally Posted by Shabbers 

*shakes head*

I've never heard anything that Truly-In-Love, Het, Procreative Sexxors was More Sacred than any other kind. At least not in Pagan groups...

"All acts of love and pleasure are My rituals," ne? It might be sacred in a different way, or to a different one of Her Aspects, but I've never heard of any sort of pyramid of sexual sanctity.

This is probably both irreverent and irrelevant but I can't help but get a mental picture now of a food pyramid of sex, you know, like the food pyramid posters they put up in elementary schools, only for grown ups lol.

[Wolfcat]

I think -- and it will be controversial, and it may anger a lot of people, including the OP, but I'm not meaning it as an insult, just a statement of fact, so to speak -- I think that the idea that many Pagans have of the hetero-sexual, God & Goddess, creating life sex is a carry-over from the puritanical Christian concepts that dominate our world.

Now that is NOT to say that only Christians believe this, or that all Christians believe this, or that Christians were the first (or last) to believe in such a manner. In fact, there is strong historical argument that the Christian church actually picked it up from Pagan Rome. I only call it a puritanical Christian concept because that is what most people will understand.

I do, however, find it very interesting that the OP got the idea of a homogenous, non-hetero-erotic belief system from a notice merely stating the acceptance of sacred sexuality in all forms. But then, what people read between the lines usually says a lot more about THEIR own person then it does about the one making statements.

And, if I have to make a stand, my stand is this: ALL acts of love and pleasure are Her ritual.

[JMJ]

Originally Posted by Wolfcat 

I think -- and it will be controversial, and it may anger a lot of people, including the OP, but I'm not meaning it as an insult, just a statement of fact, so to speak -- I think that the idea that many Pagans have of the hetero-sexual, God & Goddess, creating life sex is a carry-over from the puritanical Christian concepts that dominate our world.

Now that is NOT to say that only Christians believe this, or that all Christians believe this, or that Christians were the first (or last) to believe in such a manner. In fact, there is strong historical argument that the Christian church actually picked it up from Pagan Rome. I only call it a puritanical Christian concept because that is what most people will understand.

As a Christian, I'm surprised by this statement.  Christians do not believe at all that life was created by sex between anyone besides the parents of the individual conceived.  Christians believe in one God, neither male nor female though generally referred to in the masculine, who created life from nothing.  The Biblical description involves forming Adam from the dust of the Earth.  The continuing creation of new lives comes generally from sex between a man and a woman and the power of God, but God is not a sexual being in the way that the Pagan gods and goddesses are often viewed as being.  The closest thing to Christianity with this idea that I am aware of is in the LDS (Mormon) faith, which believes in a Heavenly Father and Mother who conceived us all sexually as spirit children before we were conceived bodily from our Earthly parents.  This is, however, a point of divergence from traditional Christianity and part of what causes many Christians to view the LDS faith as not monotheistic.

Then my question is, what does define a Pagan?  It seems to me that Paganism incorporates a whole lot, and where do the boundaries lie for those who consider themselves Pagan?  Traditional Christianity seems to define it as anyone who is not Christian (or Jewish).  Reading and listening to history, it seems to refer to the traditional religion of any culture that believed in polytheism.  It seems that historically speaking, this polytheism (and/or ancestor worship in some considerations) seems to be the defining characteristic of Paganism, and to the credit of Christians at the time of the founding of Christianity, Christianity and Judaism were the only belief systems around that were not polytheistic, so if you weren't Christian or Jewish, you were probably Pagan.  Besides this polytheism, is there anything that defines Paganism in general, as opposed to specific groups within paganism?  It seems that there would be a huge range of beliefs that an individual person could hold and still be Pagan, including the set of beliefs defined by the OP.

[Wolfcat]

Quote:

Originally Posted by JMJ 

As a Christian, I'm surprised by this statement.  Christians do not believe at all that life was created by sex between anyone besides the parents of the individual conceived.  Christians believe in one God, neither male nor female though generally referred to in the masculine, who created life from nothing.

I was not saying the creation of the world was by sex. I'm saying that Christians put emphasis on the kind of sex that creates life (ie, heterosex).  It is the whole sex is for procreation idea. I also specified that not all Christians believe in this.
 

Originally Posted by JMJ 

Then my question is, what does define a Pagan?  It seems to me that Paganism incorporates a whole lot, and where do the boundaries lie for those who consider themselves Pagan?  Traditional Christianity seems to define it as anyone who is not Christian (or Jewish).  Reading and listening to history, it seems to refer to the traditional religion of any culture that believed in polytheism.  It seems that historically speaking, this polytheism (and/or ancestor worship in some considerations) seems to be the defining characteristic of Paganism, and to the credit of Christians at the time of the founding of Christianity, Christianity and Judaism were the only belief systems around that were not polytheistic, so if you weren't Christian or Jewish, you were probably Pagan.  Besides this polytheism, is there anything that defines Paganism in general, as opposed to specific groups within paganism?  It seems that there would be a huge range of beliefs that an individual person could hold and still be Pagan, including the set of beliefs defined by the OP.

Yes, "Pagan" is an umbrella term that is frequently a different definition from person to person. Most Pagans agree that it covers all religions, not including the "Big Five" (Christian, Jewish, Muslim, Buddhist, Hindu), though the last of those is often thrown into Paganism. Buddhism is sometimes thrown in. Some Pagans do not consider themselves to be Pagans. It's kinda like Catholics and Christianity. Some say it is, some say it ain't, no one is really right or wrong.

As a Pagan, I can say with all certainty that the boundaries are defined by each individual. We don't really have a great big defining thing. That is really our defining thing... This includes polytheism... not all Pagans are polytheists.

Oh, and make no mistake, Judeo-Christian beliefs were NOT the first or only religion to believe in only one deity. There were the Sumerians, Babylonians, Egyptians...

[rhianna813]

While I do think that the God and Goddess are viewed as sacred masculine and feminine, as polarities that create the universe, and revered in a sacred marriage union (Great Rite/ dagger/cup). That is still all very symbolic.

I do think that most pagan traditions and beliefs also honor the idea that the sacred masculine and feminine live equally in both/all genders. In Thelemic traditions it is prominently mentioned and symbolized in a yin/yang way using black (with a bit of white) and white (with a bit of black) pillars in their rituals.

It is no shock that we live in a hetero centric world and hetero relationships are valued and supported. Hetero sex physically creates life. But I think when taking it to the spiritual plane, there is great value in recognizing the polarity lives in each person and sacred rites can be expressed by all forms of love, by all people.

Also, taking it literally that only a male/female in a commited relationship, engaging in sexual intercourse for procreation as the highest form of sacred sexuality… also leaves out those who cannot procreate due to infertility issues. Taking the symbolic to a literal level, where spirituality is concerned; tends to narrow the field of who is worthy of worship. I think it is awesome to believe and practice what you want on a personal level. If I am enjoying procreational sex with my husband and having a physical and spiritual experience of it – more power to me. But that does not mean the gay couple down the street cannot do the same.

Regarding the message sent by CHS. I think they are being fairly broad in their message (especially since usng the word Pagan is really broad), hoping to show acceptance in all expressions of sexuality. That is what I think they meant by “embrace” and they were certainly representing their own group, not every person or group who identifies as Pagan.