| Atheism |
Most atheists will happily describe why they think Christianity is nonsense, and some will go off on Islam or (more rarely) Judaism as well. This is understandable, since Christians, particularly in this country, make up the majority of religious believers, and are a lot more likely than Jews or Muslims to be proselytizing, and challenging atheists' rights to be free of religion.
You rarely see anyone criticizing paganism, though. It's not "politically correct." And after all, pagans are usually fighting with the same folks who give atheists a hard time: fundamentalist Christians. And there is a perception that pagans are freethinking, open-minded folks, unlike most religious followers.
Hah. Religion is religion, and True Believers of any stripe are equally illogical and potentially dangerous. The low incidence of pagan fanatics is solely due to the low incidence of pagans. I have met a number of pagans that I can only describe as "pagan fundies," though. Just as fanatical, narrow-minded, and self-righteous as any Christian fundamentalist, they are very fond of screeching about the "burning times" and how evil and depraved Christianity is.
There is no doubt in my mind that were paganism to become a major institutionalized religion, with political and economic power comparable to that of the major world religions, they would breed fanatics and fundamentalists in the same proportion that any other religion does . . . and that given time and opportunity, pagans would prove just as likely to burn, crucify and otherwise oppress non-believers as the medieval Christian bogey-men to whom they are so fond of referring. Give them the instruments of power, and they'd abuse it. There is nothing morally superior about paganism, nothing "pure" about their religion. They can deny being responsible for any Inquisitions or Crusades only because they don't happen to have had any governments under their sway for the last couple of thousand years.
Look at India, though, or Tibet, for an example of what paganism can do. Some Hindus might resent the label "pagan" (though others accept it), but Hinduism certainly has many polytheistic elements in common with Western-style paganism. Likewise, Tibetan Buddhism has become a folk-religion that in many respects resembles polytheism more than it does traditional Buddhism. And in both India and Tibet, one can find fundamentalist religious fanatics preaching intolerance of non-believers.
Let me be clear: I think pagans have a right to their religion, just as Christians and Jews and Muslims and everyone else does. I'm not "bashing pagans."
But I'm not willing to give them a free pass, either. If religion and belief in the supernatural is a foolish idea in general (and I think it is), then that definitely applies to paganism. My ideal world is one in which people don't have any more need for religions or belief in imaginary beings, and that applies just as much to pagans and their gods as it does to Christians and their God.
Yeah, I think pagans worship imaginary beings. Why should I put any more credence in Odin or Pan or various personifications of Mother Earth and other anthropomorphized natural forces than I do in Yahweh/Allah? No, I can't disprove the existence of Odin or Pan any more than I can disprove the existence of the Judeo-Christian god. But if I say I don't believe in that god, pagans will approve. If I say I don't believe in their gods, pagans get upset.
Look, we know why the ancients worshipped gods. They used gods to explain natural forces when they didn't have science, and they also used their gods as metaphors for social and moral quandaries. That's all well and good. The ancients were, to put it bluntly, scientifically ignorant and technologically primitive. Which is not at all the same thing as stupid, but they didn't have the tools we have to figure out the way the universe works, or to develop and maintain advanced social structures. They had to make do with primitive religion; what's our excuse?
Now, I like mythology as much as the next guy. But who really believes in these myths today? I am aware that few modern pagans believe in Thor as a literal Viking warrior carrying a literal hammer who rides a literal chariot pulled by literal goats. They portray their gods as "spiritual beings" representing various archetypes or representations of human nature, natural forces, etc. This is how the absurdity of a Tolkien-based pagan circle was explained to me: no, of course they don't think that Tolkien's Middle Earth mythology is literally true, but neo-pagans believe that they can focus on whatever image is appropriate for their needs and work magic through entreaties to these spirits.
Yeah, whatever.
I will of course be accused of being close-minded, since I am completely dismissing the possibility that any of these gods might, in fact, be real. Well, I can't think of a single logical inconsistency used to discredit belief in the monotheistic Supreme Being or the accuracy of the Bible that doesn't also apply to polytheistic deities and their myths/holy writings. I've noticed pagans are generally quite willing to go along with arguments against the Judeo-Christian worldview, as if the same arguments don't also apply to their religion.
Pagans sometimes speak of "secret knowledge," and how "dangerous" spells can be when misused, or how one shouldn't call on certain powers. Why aren't they just as frightened by Christian warnings of a vengeful Creator? Inasmuch as the mind affects the body, sure, I believe that a strong negative attitude can affect the person who harbors it, and can also affect how he relates to other people. But I don't believe that anyone can do me supernatural harm with a "magic spell" any more than a Christian can do me harm by pronouncing me damned. And I don't believe I can do any harm to myself by performing a magical spell and "calling on dangerous beings" any more than I can do harm to myself by mocking God or invoking Satan. (Of course I would do none of these things -- why should I call on, mock, or invoke imaginary beings? And I don't generally make a practice of showing deliberate disrespect to other peoples' religions.) But I find it highly ironic that pagans fret about how "dangerous" their spells and gods can be, but laugh at the prayers of monotheists and the "threat" posed by their Deity.
Let's face it -- most pagans chose a religion that would torque their parents. They grew up with staid, old-fashioned Christianity, and wanted to be cool and rebellious. Put another way, paganism is a great way to play that game beloved by geeks, "Freak the Mundanes."
Are there pagans who are sincere about their faith, and have even done some honest-to-gods research on it? (And no, reading a few books by Starhawk or Isis Moonshadow or whoever off the "New Age" shelf at Barnes & Noble does not count as "research.") Sure. A few. But most -- especially the practitioners of "neopaganism," essentially a wholly-fabricated post-modern religion with elements of ancient mythology shellacked on for flavoring -- picked a "religion" that basically fits their immature, intellectually lazy worldview, makes few or no demands in terms of actually modifying their behavior and beliefs, and lets them continue to play "Freak the mundanes" (or "Piss off the old man"). Small wonder neopaganism is so popular with anarcho-libertarians (about whom I will write another rant in due time).
To be honest, I respect the traditional religions more than I respect paganism. At least Judaism, Christianity, and Islam have inspired genuine intellectual inquiry and research (interspersed though it may be with ignorance and anti-intellectualism, depending on the time period), and have made significant cultural contributions. Of course, they are also guilty of suppressing a lot of knowledge, and contributing significantly to cultural backwardness. Just as paganism isn't guilty of as much evil by virtue of being a marginal, minority religion, so it also can't be blamed for not having made as many contributions.
But until pagans sponsor accredited seminaries, hospitals, and universities, and produce some genuine philosophers and theologians, I will continue to regard it as largely a "fad" religion appealing mostly to disaffected geeks, and not to be taken any more seriously than tarot cards, crystals, psychics, UFO cults, and the rest of the ludicrous New Age fringe.