The "Thou Shalt Nots...." Issue - Again

Back in January 2014 I wrote about an issue involving the display of a Ten Commandments monument in the grounds of the Oklahoma State Capitol, and an associated request from another body to erect a different monument in the grounds. Things have moved on a tad since then. Oklahoma's Supreme Court has ruled that the Ten Commandments monument be removed from the Capitol grounds.

The Court Has Ruled: Remove The Monument

The Oklahoman [newspaper] editorial board has weighed in on the Ten Commandments monument controversy with a tortuous and illogical argument that the state should now repeal its constitution..........................
Since then the conservative crowd in Oklahoma has been in a complete meltdown, suggesting everything from repealing the constitution to impeaching the judges who made the decision. Both Oklahoma Attorney General Scott Pruitt and Gov. Mary Fallin have publicly pledged their support for keeping the monument at the Capitol. One lawmaker has even made the claim that the ruling “could even lead to churches, synagogues, mosques and other buildings used for religious purposes being unable to receive police and fire protection as they would be directly or indirectly benefiting from public monies.”

Freedom of religion (any religion) is supposed to be one of the USA's most treasured rights. I don't see how this squares with emphasis on just one religion: Christianity. An American citizen of any faith, other than Christianity, or an agnostic or atheist (which I am, depending on the day), could be feeling very much an outsider when all emphasis, all the time is on Christianity. This doesn't seem to me to be in the spirit of the Bill of Rights. How can it be morally right to place a monument to some Christian Bible verses in the grounds of a government building, from which a state government supposedly represents all Oklahomans, of every religious shade, as well as those who are non-religious, equally?

As I've written before, more than once, whenever Oklahoma is in the news, it's always for something embarrassing or tragic. In this case it's the former - I'm at least thankful for that.

Chasing the Rabbit...2016 to First Century AD

Down another internet rabbit-hole I tumbled yesterday. At the rabbit-hole's entrance, a piece by Eric Zuesse at Smirking Chimp: America's Aristocrats Declare Victory Against the Public; They War Now Mainly Against One-Another. A good piece, but offering dismal prospects for 2016's General Election.

Curious about the author, an investigative historian, I searched briefly and found information about one of his books, CHRIST'S VENTRILOQUISTS: The Event that Created Christianity.

Hmmm that sounds interesting, but probably far too dense in detail for this reader's internet addled ADD infected brain. It seems that Mr Zuesse has discovered that St Paul was not exactly what some of us might have expected: a true messenger carrying the teachings of Jesus Christ ever farther afield. Instead he might have been something rather more sinister, a twister of Jesus' teachings to suit his own, and his successors', purposes of...what? Control, I guess.

Never suspecting I'd be tumbling deeper down that same rabbit-hole, I next clicked to one of my regular net-stops, Cannonfire, only to see, to my surprise, Mr Cannon writing about Jesus and Christianity too: Not THIS shit again: "Jesus never existed..."

There's no direct link between Zuesse's writings and Cannon's, other than the religious aspect between adjacent rabbit-hole stops - which kind of shook me. Am I meant to think on these things? I wonder!

I like to keep things as simple as possible, so came to the conclusion, some time ago, that the man we call Jesus Christ emerged in the Middle East as a teacher of what we might today consider "left-wing" ideals, set against those of the then ruling Roman Empire - a rather nasty crew by all accounts. Stories about the teacher have been told and embroidered, maybe even twisted somewhat over the centuries. Jesus the teacher could well have taken his ideas from earlier wise men and legendary teachers similar to himself. Eric Zuesse's book could be a detailed and well-researched historical journey along a similar theme. The Roman Catholic church, it seems to me, has always been very far away from what I understood to be Christ's teachings. Same applies to fundamentalist evangelical churches in the USA. Best to say no more, this particular rabbit-hole could become very, very dark!

NEXT RIGHT TURN...?

Once upon a time I lived in a land where judges or justices were not supposed to be, overtly, members of a political party, or particular religion. Maybe you did too. They did not talk publicly about their religion or political views. Their job was applying the law, interpreting the law even-handedly, whatever the political flavour of the nation's government happened to be at the time. Judges or justices were appointed for their excellent record, their wide experience and their intellectual brilliance. Nobody even knew, for sure, their political leanings. Their decisions were almost always clear, trusted and highly respected, even when there was room for some disagreement. In the USA, though, the Supreme Court is politicized and religion-led, which seems to me to be at root of all recent problems with their rulings, as well as their apparent inability to write clear, concise decisions.

While I have no respect for Hobby Lobby and the Green Family who created and incorporated it, and my respect for the Supreme Court of the United States is dwindling rapidly, I am surprised (perhaps ought not to be), at some early misunderstandings appearing as a result of the SCOTUS ruling in the Hobby Lobby case. Threads of outrage, making some points with which I agree wholeheartedly, but some which were quite incorrect, have been all over the net this week. As usual in the USA everything becomes hyper-hyperbolic.

Again, I hate to say anything even vaguely in favour of Hobby Lobby or SCOTUS, but facts are facts. Hobby Lobby and the Green family are not objecting to contributing towards all contraceptive methods. What Hobby Lobby will not cover are the four contraceptive methods listed below. These, Hobby Lobby owners fear, are abortifacients - they believe that these methods are "tantamount to abortion because they can prevent embryos from implanting in the womb". Most commenters say they are mistaken. The four methods to which Hobby Lobby owners object:

Plan B (“The Morning After Pill”)
Ella (a similar type of “emergency contraception”)
Copper Intra-Uterine Device
IUD with progestin

(How odd, then, that Hobby Lobby's healthcare plan pre-2012, pre- the Affordable Care Act, included the first two of those 4 items.)

Other forms of contraception are still covered, for instance:

Male condoms
Female condoms
Diaphragms with spermicide
Sponges with spermicide
Cervical caps with spermicide
Spermicide alone
Birth-control pills with estrogen and progestin (“Combined Pill)
Birth-control pills with progestin alone (“The Mini Pill)
Birth control pills (extended/continuous use)
Contraceptive patches
Contraceptive rings
Progestin injections
Implantable rods
Vasectomies
Female sterilization surgeries
Female sterilization implants.

But wait.....that was in relation to Hobby Lobby's case. The Supreme court, the next day, 1 July, confirmed that its decision a day earlier extending religious rights to closely held corporations applies broadly to the contraceptive coverage requirement in the new health care law, not just to the handful of methods the justices considered in their ruling. (See HERE)

The justices did not comment in leaving in place lower court rulings in favor of businesses that object to covering all 20 methods of government-approved contraception.

Oklahoma-based Hobby Lobby Inc. and a Pennsylvania furniture maker won their court challenges Monday in which they refused to pay for two emergency contraceptive pills and two intrauterine devices.

Tuesday's orders apply to companies owned by Catholics who oppose all contraception. Cases involving Colorado-based Hercules Industries Inc., Illinois-based Korte & Luitjohan Contractors Inc. and Indiana-based Grote Industries Inc. were awaiting action pending resolution of the Hobby Lobby case.

They are among roughly 50 lawsuits from profit-seeking corporations that object to the contraceptive coverage requirement in their health plans for employees. Contraception is among a range of preventive services that must be included in the health plans, at no extra cost to workers.

The justices also ordered lower courts that ruled in favor of the Obama administration to reconsider those decisions in light of Monday's 5-4 decision.

Saying anything at all in SCOTUS' favour is now impossible. The whole caboodle is blatantly against Separation of Church and State. Christian groups are being allowed to dictate to their employees on matters which should be immune to outside interference. Some see this as a "slippery slope" - actually I think we're already half-way down that slope and gaining speed. Family planning clinics being closed down, "Christian" employers dictating to their female employees on matters of birth control; several new abortion restrictions also became law this week in at least five states (detail HERE). A road sign in the near distance says:
Handmaid's Tale & Theocracy NEXT RIGHT TURN!

The most significant factor is that this recent ruling of SCOTUS grants corporations religious freedom, along with the "person hood" they already enjoy. What next?

Atheism Alive & Well in Oklahoma & Prayer or Mind Power

CNN anchor Wolf Blitzer interviewing Moore tornado survivor Rebecca Vitsmun, mother of a 19 month-old son :

"Well, you’re blessed. Brian, your husband, is blessed. Anders (your son) is blessed,” Blitzer said. “We’re happy you’re here. You guys did a great job. I guess you gotta thank the Lord, right? Do you thank the Lord for that split-second decision?"



"I-I-I’m," then she laughed, "I’m actually an atheist."

"Oh, you are? All right," Blitzer said with a chuckle. "But you made the right call."

"Yup – we are here," she said, laughing again. "And, you know, I don’t blame anybody for thanking the Lord."

"Of course not," Blitzer responded.

CNN's Video of the exchange can be found all over the net, I'll not include it yet again here.

I thank Blitzer for ham-fistedly and unintentionally providing a nice reminder, on national TV, that the people of Oklahoma aren't all bible-thumpers, and at least one isn't shy of saying so on camera, and retaining poise and grace in so doing.

Wolf Blitzer did show himself in a less flattering light. He must have held the perception that all Okies conform to stereotype. That's a perception I came across many times as I scanned threads of comment relating to the Moore tornado. I added my own comment in a couple of places, pointing out that we're not all the same, didn't all vote for the two horrendous Oklahoma senators, Inhofe and Coburn, are not all church-goers, or Republicans or even Democrats - writing these words is a socialist and atheist who happens to live in Oklahoma.

On a loosely related matter: while I'm not religious, I have often wondered what is at the heart of the concept of prayer. If the minds of huge masses of people were all to be focused upon a single "wish" or "direction", perhaps the combined power of mass minds could have some kind of effect on reality/events. It's something we do not yet know, something that hasn't ever been adequately tested or investigated, but I wouldn't totally discount the notion. So, if I were ever to find myself in a life-threatening position, along with many others, I might concentrate my mind very pointedly on thoughts and hopes of survival, my own and that of all others, while the religious would be doing what they call "praying". The only difference would be that my own faith would be in some unknown physical or mental power that might possibly reside within ourselves, while they would be calling on action by an overall deity.

East-West, Left-Right, Lotus-Rose

Have you ever wondered why the world - or rather its peoples - seem more divided on an east/west basis than north/south? In philosophy, religion, right/left politics, left brain/right brain for instance. Sun rises in the east and sets in the west - the axis of our home planet, is that somehow involved? Our eyes, ears, limbs, internal organs are set in a left/right east/west arrangement too. I notice that today, 8th May, is White Lotus Day, a celebration day of the Theosophists. Symbolism of the lotus is interesting, one of several strands of Eastern philosophy and an example of the east/west cultural divide.

From Wikipedia:

White Lotus Day is a celebration that encourages meditation about the metaphor of the lotus. The lotus is born under the mud, growing through the water to achieve the surface, and therefore the air and the light of sun. This growth is identified with man's life, born in earth but desiring the elevation to the air; representing his middle stage between animals and the ultimate reality. The seeds of lotus contain (even before they germinate) perfectly formed leaves, a miniature shape of what they would become. This flower is often present in eastern religions.....

In Buddhism the lotus is seen as a sign of purity, it is associated with beauty in Hinduism, and with the Sun in Egyptology. (More HERE)

Lotus symbolism based in Eastern philosophy and religion was used by an American poet, Vachel Lindsay in The Wedding of the Lotus and the Rose written to mark the opening of the Panama Canal in 1914. For poet Lindsay this promised the union of the best of western and eastern cultures and philosophies. (Click on poem to enlarge image)

Lindsay saw the western rose as symbolizing an active, dynamic spirit, while the eastern lotus symbolized a passive but contemplative spirit. Franklin K. Lane, Secretary of the Interior in President Wilson's cabinet, distributed this poem to Congress on the opening day of the Panama Exposition. (See HERE and HERE).

An earlier, British, poet Rudyard Kipling recorded his thoughts on the east-west divide in The Ballad of East and West, first published in 1889:

Oh, East is East and West is West, and never the twain shall meet,
Till Earth and Sky stand presently at God's great Judgment Seat;
But there is neither East nor West, Border, nor Breed, nor Birth,
When two strong men stand face to face, though they come from the ends of the earth!

Logically, I guess it'd be likely for world cultural divisions to follow a more east/west divide than north/south because the southern hemisphere didn't become as quickly settled from the north, or as industrialised and heavily populated at the same rate as in east/west development, which arose after humans (as far as we know) originated in either the East Africa region or in what we now call the Middle East. Both those regions could be seen as sitting on the cusp of east/west. Sigh....that's probably not as logical as I think it is, but it's all I can come up with!

Asian and other eastern societies were far more culturally and economically advanced than those in the west during the first millennium, but western nations moved ahead rapidly, and now it's the the east playing catch-up, likely soon to be on a winning streak. It's always east/west though, never north/south.....or so it seems. But Buddah said:

In the sky, there is no distinction of east and west; people create distinctions out of their own minds and then believe them to be true.

BELIEF AND BEYOND

Belief is the psychological state in which an individual holds a proposition or premise to be true.

Long and scholarly dissertations on the topic of belief can, and have been written by those far better equipped than I am to do so. The subject has come up in a couple of movies I've watched recently though. A blog post on that level might just be within my scope. Before I get to the two films, I coincidentally came across an article at Salon the other day about five religious leaders who have lost their belief and have become outspoken atheists. That article led me to recall reading of an astrologer who, when interviewed for Garry Phillipson's book Astrology in the Year Zero (2000) described his feelings when retreating from his professional capacity, due to loss of belief. (See HERE) It does appear, however, that much later on the astrologer in question, David Hamblin, did decide to give astrology another spin - see his website HERE. Another lapsed astrologer was mentioned in a post of mine in February 2011: Rudolf Smit.

It would seem that any belief, however strongly held, is capable of being reversed. Conversely any disbelief, however strong, is capable of being transformed into belief. That is at the the crux of the two movies I've mentioned: K-PAX (2001) and The Man from Earth (2007). K-PAX was adapted from a novel by Gene Brewer; The Man from Earth has a screenplay co-written by science fiction novelist Jerome Bixby (his last piece of writing before he died, in fact.)

In K-PAX a psychiatric patient, after claiming he is an extraterrestrial from the planet 'K-PAX', 1,000 light years away in the Lyra constellation. His name is prot (uncapitalized and rhyming with "goat"). He is committed to the Psychiatric Institute of Manhattan. There, psychiatrist Dr. Mark Powell attempts to cure him of his apparent delusions. However, prot shows himself able to provide cogent answers to questions about himself, K-PAX his home planet and its civilization. Dr. Powell introduces him to a group of astrophysicists, to whom prot displays a level of knowledge that leaves them aghast. Prot also exhibits easy influence over the other patients at the Institute. They each come to believe that he is indeed from K-PAX. Prot, who claims to have journeyed to Earth by means of "light-travel", explains that he can take one person with him when he instantaneously returns on a pre-selected date.

That brief synopsis based on Wiki's page is all I'll add, so as not to spoil the movie should anyone who reads this wish to see it. The film leaves one still wondering, should the characters have believed; would I, could I, have believed his amazing story?

The same question came up after watching The Man from Earth. This is a wordier, more deeply thought-provoking film than K-PAX, but in much the same "ballpark". Here a group of university academics gather in a country cabin to say farewell to a colleague (John Oldman) who has unexpectedly decided to up-sticks and move on. The cabin is the only setting we see, scenes moving only from a single room and fireside to just outside the door once or twice. The film was very quickly and cheaply made, but is certainly none the worse for that. It could quite easily be performed on stage, and has been.

Again, so as not to spoil things for others, only a brief synopsis: some lines from Wiki:

As John's colleagues continue to pressure him for the reason for his departure, John slowly, and somewhat reluctantly, reveals that he is a prehistoric "caveman" who has lived for more than 14 millennia and that he relocates every 10 years to keep others from realizing that he does not age. He begins his story under the guise of a possible science-fiction story, but he eventually stops speaking in hypotheticals and begins answering questions from a first-person perspective. His colleagues refuse to believe his story. John continues his tale, stating that he was once a Sumerian for 2000 years, then a Babylonian under Hammurabi, then a disciple of Gautama Buddha. He claims to have known Christopher Columbus, Van Gogh (he owns a painting which was a gift from the artist), and other famous historical figures. John's colleagues question his story according to their specialties: Harry, the biologist, discusses the possibility of a human living for so long. Art, the archaeologist, questions John about events in prehistory; he exclaims that John's answers, though correct, could have come from any textbook, to which John points out the nature of knowledge, as he can only put his memories together with modern science after he learnt the new ideas with the rest of humanity. When the discussion turns to the topic of religion, John mentions that he is not a follower of a particular religion; though he does not necessarily believe in an omnipotent God, he does not discount the possibility of such a being's existence................................

No more!

So, was K-PAX's prot really a delusional psychiatric patient with a savant-like level of knowledge, or.........? What about John Oldman? He, being a university professor had plenty of brain power, sufficient to answer all queries about a 14,000 year life span, and deflect any confrontational argument. He had a certain charisma too, gentle yet persuasive, never bombastic. What could his motive have been to so deceive his friends? Was he simply, what in today's parlance might be termed, "an attention whore"? He didn't come across that way - but do they ever?

I particularly enjoyed the part of the conversation relating to religion, but can say no more about that without revealing too much.

Though I could find myself wishing otherwise, it has to be kept in mind that this was all pure fiction. Both authors had nifty, if frustrating, endings up their sleeves too.

I'll say thank you, here, to commenter "DC" for recommending The Man from Earth to me in a comment a short time ago. I enjoyed the movie a lot, shall probably watch it again.

Separation of Church and American Idol

American Idol is a "guilty pleasure" of mine. The show began its 12th season a few weeks ago. We watched last night's episode and something I've been noticing more and more during the last two seasons was especially prominent: a definite increase in the mention of God, praying, being "blessed" etc. by contestants. Last night even longtime judge Randy Jackson was heard to utter, "Everyone should pray more - prayer works!" I think I'll start a campaign for - SEPARATION OF CHURCH AND AMERICAN IDOL !

Look, religion is personal, we, the TV audience, do not want to know if a contestant "prayed on which song to choose" or "prayed for guidance", or "feels blessed to be here" etc.etc. Are they pandering to the bible-belt audience? Are they trying a bit of one-upmanship, each trying to be more God-fearing than the previous contestant?

Last night's show was all female, tonight's will be all male - I shall count the references to prayer and God and being blessed. Perhaps the guys will be less likely to parade their religious practices on air. I hope so.

Ritual Sacrifice ~~ Agonalia

A note at Wikipedia's page for today, 9 January mentions that in Roman times the date would have marked the first Agonalia or Agonia. This is an obscure archaic religious observance celebrated in ancient Rome several times a year, in honor of various divinities. Ancient calendars indicate that it was celebrated regularly on January 9, May 21, and December 11. The object of this festival was a disputed point among the ancients themselves. The offering sacrificed to the guardian gods of the state was a ram.

Sacrifice. Which hapless early human culture first dreamed up that concept? Or was it one of those mysterious practices which cropped up all over the inhabited areas of the globe more or less concurrently?

The practice of ritual sacrifice can be traced further back than Roman and Greek civilisations. Ancient cultures of South America, Scandinavia, Britain, the Middle East all show evidence of ritual sacrifice having been part of their way of life. Appeasing or cajoling "the gods" would seem to have been the point of it all. The spilling of blood, whether animal or human, was powerfully symbolic - fresh blood had the mysterious, even magical, ingredient signifying life itself. Blood, then,was the highest offering possible. This idea of blood being a magical entity was carried through also by early practitioners of magick.

Gods who need appeasing or cajoling though? How did that idea arise? Perhaps due to the rigours of climate: droughts when water became hard to find, hurricanes, gales, floods, scorching heat, deep snow, heavy frosts all could interfere with primitive routines and the need to find food and shelter. For some reason the early human brain decided that all their various travails must be the doings of some unseen hand, belonging to some unseen being - who had better be appeased and cajoled if life were to continue in their neck of the woods.

That was all once upon a time stuff - in the 20th/21st century:

"And the people bowed and prayed
To the neon god they made........" (Paul Simon)

"The Lord's Work"? Hobby Lobby? Really?

During my first couple of years in the USA one of my favourite places to look around, when out shopping, was the Hobby Lobby store in a nearby city. Over recent years I've become disenchanted with the store. Their merchandise has seemed increasingly shoddy, over-priced and less imaginative than it once was - and now almost all of it is made in Chinese sweatshops. We now make a point of looking for alternative outlets when in search of art materials, decor, frames, holiday items etc.

Now I read that Hobby Lobby - (for any passing reader unaware of this company, it's a privately held retail chain of arts and crafts and general decor stores based in Oklahoma City) is bringing a lawsuit against the "contraceptive mandate" i.e. health insurance coverage for employees that covers emergency contraceptives (morning after pill and anything similar). Hobby Lobby has some 13,600 employees in 41 states.

The lawsuit, against U.S. Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius regarding The Affordable Care Act, opposes the mandate that a wide range of preventative health-care services, including birth control, be offered to women without out-of-pocket expenses. The suit lists Hobby Lobby, Mardel Inc. and family members of company founder David Green as the plaintiffs. Plaintiffs state that requirements of the Act would violate their religious beliefs. CEO David Green has said "We simply cannot abandon our religious beliefs to comply with this mandate. Hobby Lobby has always been a tool of the Lord's work, but now our faith is being challenged by the federal government."

I'll be very interested to discover how this lawsuit is eventually resolved.

My own views, for what they're worth, are that, whether or not one agrees with a law of the land, it remains the law and must be adhered to. Religious proclivities are not involved in the laws of the USA, as I understand it, other than the fact that freedom of religion is protected by the Constitution. Freedom of religion means exactly what it says. CEOs such as Mr Green who profess to being good Christians can lead their lives in whatever way they wish, within the laws of the land. So can everyone else, whether of Christian belief or any other belief, or of no belief at all.

The Affordable Care Act outlined what should be included as part of a health insurance plan. An American for profit company is obligated to follow US law.

Employees of Hobby Lobby, or those employees covered by the company's health insurance scheme - which might well be a small proportion considering the number of part-time employees - take up employment with the company agreeing to the level of pay, which has embedded within it healthcare insurance coverage. That is part of what they are paid in return for their daily work in making profits for the company. The insurance coverage is not something benignly bestowed upon them by their employer - it's part of their wage for the work they do. As such it does not include the right of the employers to make medical-related decisions for their employees.

The employers would not, in any case, be "paying for the morning after pill", the main thorn in Mr. Green's side (or so he proclaims), the insurance company would be paying for it. The employer pays, as part of the full-time employees' recompense for the work they do, to have their medical needs covered; involvement in employees' healthcare stops right there - any further meddling could be seen as discrimination.

As a side issue: why, if Mr Green and his family are against supporting anything related, however vaguely, to abortion, and are intent in "doing the Lord's work" does their company sell so much merchandise made in China? Over 13 million abortions a year are carried out in China, including both forced and elective operations. Of course to take that into account would mean a hefty drop in profits for Hobby Lobby - wouldn't it? In China and other third-world countries from which his company's merchandise comes, people have little resembling human rights. Merchandise sold by Hobby Lobby stores is manufactured in "sweat shop" conditions. The company makes vast profit from the work of those paid a pittance and working in terrible conditions. Which Christian priciple is Mr Green and Co. following when deciding the source of their merchandise?

Religion and Astrology

The illustration below comes from "The Best of the Illustrated National Astrological Journal, 1933 - 1935" (compilation pubd.1978). It's an old volume I bought sometime ago while on our travels.

There's a network of copyrights surrounding the contents of the volume, articles from magazines. The book itself is copyrighted, and the illustration below is marked "copyrighted to Manly P. Hall", yet is also marked "redrawn from
Lenoir's La Franche-Maconnerie".

Before proceeding:

Any copyrighted material on these pages is included as "fair use", for the purpose of study, review or critical analysis only, and will be removed at the request of copyright owner(s).

The Lenoir mentioned above is French art historian and archaeologist Alexandre Lenoir (1761-1839) who attempted in his 1814 publication La Franche-Maconnerie to establish the doctrine of the direct descent of Freemasonry from the ancient Mysteries, and especially from the Egyptian. The illustration must be part of Lenoir's attempt to make his point, I guess. The artist who re-drew the illustration from Lenoir's publication isn't named, perhaps Manly P. Hall copied it himself? (The link is to an earlier post about him).

The illustration accompanied an article by Manly P. Hall: Astrology as a Religion. I don't see that as being at all a desirable proposition, though interesting enough to ponder upon. M.P. Hall finishes his piece with the following paragraph:

Ancient astrologers were wiser than their modern imitators, for they were in possession of a secret doctrine relating to the mysteries of the constellations. If this doctrine could be re-established it would go far to clarify the all-too- complicated issues of modern life, as well as re-elevate astrology to its true position of dignity as the cornerstone of the house of human learning. Pagan and Christian alike are united by astrology, for all faiths - with the possible exception of a few primitive forms - are astrological in origin. This fact alone should develop tolerance in matters of religion and incline us to study the sacred science of the stars and learn the inner import of their revelations.

For easier reading I've copy-typed, and re-spaced, the explanation included with the illustration.

"Zodiacal Symbols in World Religions"

"At the left of the plate stands Mohammed, holding aloft pages from the Koran, his left foot upon an image which he has over thrown.

Behind Mohammed the Celestial Bull - signifying the constellation of Taurus - opens the "Egg of the Year" with his horns.

At the lower right is a bas-relief of the Persion Sun God, Mithras, in an attitude signifying the conquest of the sun over the Celestial Bull at the ancient vernal equinox.

In the center stands the High Priest of Israel, his right arm encircling the base of the seven-branched candlestick - the Mosaic symbol of the Planetary Governors of the world.

To his right is the statue of the golden calf and to his left the robed figures of the Greek mystics bearing a tripod in which burns the sacrificial fire.

Behind the bull Apis, crowned with the lunar globe, and Father Nile, bearing the horn of plenty and pouring the waters of life from his urn, loom the Pyramids - the great Egyptian temples of initiation.

In the clouds at the left is the seated figure of Jupiter Ammon, brandishing a flaming thunderbolt and horned to signify that he partakes of the attributes of the zodiacal ram.

In the heavens appears the mystery of the Apocalypse. The four creatures of Ezekiel's Vision surround an altar upon which is the Book of Seven Seals and the Lamb of God. At the upper left is the band of the zodiac. The constellations of Taurus, Aries and Pisces represent the stellar influences which - according to the ancients - descending upon the earth, are responsible for the establishment of the religious and philosophical institutions herein set forth."

(Note: Unless I'm missing something he didn't mention the topmost figures, which I take to be the Virgin Mary and the angel Gabriel.)

Manly P. Hall wrote: "....all faiths - with the possible exception of a few primitive forms - are astrological in origin". That's a thought upon which to chew for a while!

"Imagine No Religion" (in Politics)

In astrology, Jupiter-ruled Sagittarius and 9th House connect to religion, politics and philosophy. It's a great pity that ancient astrologers saw religion and politics as being so closely linked. I suppose that, at root, the mental and philosophical roots of religion and politics could be said to arise from similar ground, and this is why there are common astrological links. Sagittarius also links to ethics, foreign cultures, travel, international affairs, and how the individual relates to the "big picture", the world, and to a higher power, leading to its representation of belief systems and faith. Sagittarian optimism and idealism links to expansion, and progress, while its shadow side brings in a pompous preaching element, personified as a zealot trying to "save" or convert with his "truth".
(Illustration: The card Principle from Oracle of the Radiant Sun deck, the ninth card in the suit of Jupiter, The Suit of Gain.)


I, possibly mistakenly, see politics as more the province of Saturn and Capricorn. Laws, a major aspect of politics, are indeed the province of Saturn, but "The Church" as an institution, and "The State" as an entity connect to Capricorn, so the "terrible two" are entwined yet again.

Are religion and politics the same as church and state?

Religious belief, or lack of it, has nothing at all to do with the ability to run a country, which is, or ought to be, the prime aim of politics. We might as well be guided by the colour of someone's eyes, or whether they wear briefs, boxers or neither, as be guided by their religious persuasions. Religion, atheisim, or anything between is an intimate, purely personal matter which should have nothing whatsoever to do with politics. This applies in the USA, especially, because its Constitution allows freedom of religion -any religion, or indeed non-religion. Conversely there ought not to be any interference by religious bodies, of whatever persuasion, into politics.

The Establishment Clause is the first of several pronouncements in the First Amendment to the United States Constitution, stating:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion

This is supplemented by Article 6 of the Constitution that says:

The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the Members of the several State Legislatures, and all executive and judicial Officers, both of the United States and of the several States, shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation, to support this Constitution; but no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States.

These two declarations indicate the direction in which the country should travel. Separation, setting religion and government apart, supposedly guaranteeing fair and equal treatment to all citizens, whatever their religious beliefs or lack of them.

It's not working though.

In the USA religious establishments are allowed to function as tax free entities. Public money goes to schools run by religious organisations, and as loans to pay for students (who are not schooled well in the sciences)to attend colleges run by religious organisations. God is on USA money, and part of the Pledge of Allegiance; Oaths in courts of law are taken on a Holy book; there are prayers at the inauguration of a president; "God bless America" is intoned after every State of the Union address. Why?

And what about "The Family" and the "C Street House"? (See Wikipedia HERE).
Also an article at Salon: Sex and Power Inside "The C Street House". A clip from that piece follows:

But Family men are more than hypocritical. They’re followers of a political religion that embraces elitism, disdains democracy, and pursues power for its members the better to “advance the Kingdom.” They say they’re working for Jesus, but their Christ is a power-hungry, inside-the-Beltway savior not many churchgoers would recognize. Sexual peccadilloes aside, the Family acts today like the most powerful lobby in America that isn’t registered as a lobby — and is thus immune from the scrutiny attending the other powerful organizations like Big Pharma and Big Insurance that exert pressure on public policy.

The Family likes to call itself a “Christian Mafia,” but it began 74 years ago as an anti-New Deal coalition of businessmen convinced that organized labor was under the sway of Satan. The Great Depression, they believed, was a punishment from God for what they viewed as FDR’s socialism. The Family’s goal was the “consecration” of America to God, first through the repeal of New Deal reforms, then through the aggressive expansion of American power during the Cold War. They called this a “Worldwide Spiritual Offensive,” but in Washington, it amounted to the nation’s first fundamentalist lobby.

In both presidential election campaigns I've experienced religion has been touted again and again by candidates - on both sides of the (in my opinion fictional) divide. Religious views, it should be noted, of one religious faction only, are becoming increasingly, and aggressively, forced into political debate and argument.

If the Constitution were working it'd be equally possible for a Christian, Muslim, Pagan or atheist to be president of the USA, and to wield political power in lesser positions too. In theory it is possible. In practice not so much. Maybe it will work in practice, eventually - in say another 500 or so years if, in the meantime, we don't blow ourselves to smithereens or cause the Earth to dispose of us dramatically, as the parasites we have become.

From what I've gleaned, by reading and talking to my husband, things were not always this bad in the US. Perhaps 9/11, then the so-called "War on Terror" against Islamic factions, and several years of a general feeling of financial insecurity have all fired up more intense levels of religiosity among Christian fundamentalists in the US.

I wasn't a fan of the late Christopher Hitchens, but I do hope he rests in peace. He was right in this quote of his:

“How dismal it is to see present day Americans yearning for the very orthodoxy that their country was founded to escape.”

Weekend Warning ~ Dominionism ~ Theocracy ~ New Apostolic Reformation. (No astrology)

Each passing reader will have to decide for themself whether what follows is some kind of conspiracy theory, a report of just another sect of whackos embracing the most outlandish version of Christianity it's possible to concoct - or something in the wings which ought to be understood and taken seriously. Any reader who might immediately settle for either of the first two conclusions, though, should recall how ordinary German people, back in the 1930s would never, even in their wildest nighmares, have believed what actually did come to pass in their country between 1939 and 1945.

The quotes below are from an article at "God Discussion" dated 13 July 2011:
Christian 7 Mountains Dominionism Unleashed: The 300, Perry and the Presidency

A heretical sect has risen in America, and it's stepping onto the political stage.

Dominionism is the belief that Christians must literally reclaim planet Earth from Satan and hold it like an occupying army until Christ's return. This twisted theology targets seven "mountains", or spheres of influence, that must be taken: Church, Family, Education, Arts and Entertainment, Business, Media, and, of course, Government............

Regardless of the nuances of their respective theologies, the endgame is the same: Everyone must conform to their form of Christianity. Mormons, Buddhists, Hindus, Muslims, Catholics, atheists, agnostics, the “spiritual but not religious” and everyone else not “the right kind of Christian” are expelled from the kingdom.
.......

At the core of all of this is something called the Lausanne Movement.
It was started by Billy Graham in 1974 with the Congress on World Evangelization held in Lausanne, Switzerland. A year later, two of the Lausanne conference leaders — the late Bill Bright, founder of Campus Crusade and Loren Cunningham, founder of Youth With a Mission — announced the Seven Mountains Mandate.......................

At the Cape Town conference, a mission statement was formulated that envisioned a worldwide domination of the seven cultural mountains. Earlier this month, the Lausanne mission announced that it had formulated its 10-year plan to achieve its objectives. Those objectives, generally include:

There will be no wall of separation, as government would be based on absolute "biblical truth" and no pluralism.

The workplace will become an evangelistic mission field.

The media will be saturated with "the biblical worldview."

There will be an increasing Christian message in arts, music, movies, plays and other forms of entertainment.

Science, technology, and healthcare will embrace "biblical truths." Healthcare will embrace "the sanctity of human life;" i.e., no termination of pregnancies and no assisted suicide.

Christians are encouraged to attend or teach at secular universities in order to influence them with "biblical truth." Christ-centered schooling is honored as a form of academic excellence.

Everyday conversation and culture will be filled with the Christian viewpoint, where Christ is the truth of the universe and the center of all human life.

Writing for Religion Dispatches, journalist Sarah Posner noted on July 7 that there had been approximately 80 religious leaders gathered in Texas in June for a closed-door meeting to determine their strategy in defeating President Obama in 2012.
...................................Members of the Lausanne Movement, The Oak Initiative, the Perry prayer partners, and the Christian leaders meeting behind closed doors have not named a specific candidate. While their chosen candidate is not known, it is becoming more clear that they are working closely together to dominate the government mountain.

They have now.....named a specific candidate, I mean: Rick Perry! With maybe a second-string in Ms Bachmann?

This "movement", if that's what it is, latest name = New Apostolic Reformation (NAR) has been growing and maturing slowly for decades. There's no possible way that it could ever simply take over in a country as diverse as the USA. But "softly, softly, catchee monkey" - at some advantageous point when a large slice of the population is disaffected and disillusioned by government as it stands, there could be a "Bingo!" moment. In a few years' time we might be wondering: "What happened? Why couldn't we see what was going on right under our noses?"

There are, I hope, some pointers against that scenario coming to pass. The Powers That Be, the guys behind the corporations, that legendary 1% who more or less own the USA, would probably object strongly to any coup d'état by Dominionists, unless that is, they or some fairly strong faction of the 1% were in league with 'em. That is the key.

See also blog: God's Own Party?.....also article on same topic HERE.

Here Amy Goodman interviews ex-evangelical Frank Schaeffer

NOTE: Science fiction, or as some call it, speculative fiction, came up with stories of theocracy in the USA years ago - two well-known examples are, from 1985 Margaret Atwood's The Handmaid's Tale, and long before that Revolt in 2100 by Robert Heinlein (1953).

Astrology & Religion.....headache time!

One of our local newspapers, on Christmas day, carried a major piece in the "Religion" section headed "Pastor: God wrote gospel in the stars". The piece was written by Jacob Russell and contains plentiful quotes from said Pastor -one Ron DuPont.

The article begins:

"For hundreds of years, religious scholars have debated the legitimacy of the Gospel in the Stars -a belief that God used the constellations as a primitive way to tell his redemptive story, prior to the writings of the books of the Bible - but there could be no debate, according to a local pastor who said the Bible supports the theory.......he believes that the purity of the Gospel in the Stars was perverted with Adam's sin and the fall of man.

........The constellations, he said, continue to tell the same story as they did in the beginning of time.....it begins with Virgo, or the virgin, which fulfilled the prophecy by bearing Immanuel; and ends with Leo or the lion, symbolizing the Lion of the Tribe of Judah and the Messiah's consummated victory over the serpent......If you follow the arrow out of the bow of the Archer (Sagittarius), it goes acrosss the sky, into the heart of the scorpion (Scorpio)"........ He said there is a fine line between astronomy, the scientific study of celestial creations, and astrology, which is using the warped knowledge of the position of those objects for wisdom and guidance to empower themselves. "All scriptures condemn astrology" DuPont said..........."

Condemn astrology? Of course. Anything that threatened to contradict or supersede what they feed to their flock has always to be condemned. They fear losing control - and, of course, income!

A brief Google search throws up conflicting ideas of even the origin of the word zodiac:

Novareinna.com

The word "Zodiac" comes from the Greek zoad, which means "the way" or "the path." According to many Christian scholars, God depicted his story and his promise of salvation within the stars

Wikipedia

The term zodiac derives from Latin zōdiacus, which in its turn comes from the Greek ζῳδιακὸς κύκλος (zōdiakos kuklos), meaning "circle of animals", derived from ζώδιον (zōdion), the diminutive of ζῶον (zōon) "animal". The name is motivated by the fact that half of the signs of the classical Greek zodiac are represented as animals (besides two mythological hybrids).

Sigh.....Give someone a diagram of the zodiac and its symbols and they'll find a way to bend it, shape it to fit any number of connotations. In my view astrology's version manages to make a reasonable amount of sense. But even astrological doctrine can, at times, stretch it, try too hard and come up with stuff that isn't really and truly there (my own opinion).

Local people will read that piece in our newspaper, take IT as gospel truth without so much as a critical thought entering their heads - and there lies the shame of it all.

I feel a headache coming on. Note to self: In future avoid reading such articles, or in fact such newspapers, for they are filled with prejudice of every kind, opposing views are never expressed these days, on any topic, for the balanced consideration of readers.

IS ISLAM A THREAT ONE SHOULD FEAR?

GUEST POST by GIAN PAUL

The Arabs, mostly all Muslims, have a close connection with astrology. It's they who brought it back to the Christian world during the Middle Ages, when most of Spain was under their control and the Vatican had banned astrology from being permitted - except, it is reported, for the secret use of some of the Popes. (This, I guess, is one of the reasons the Vatican's Library is hermetically closed to outsiders).
(Illustration (left) = Blue Mosque in Istanbul)


Islam has a precise starting date: July 16, of the year 622. At Sundown (18 hours 44') at Medina. Mohammed had then had to flee from the violent opponents to his ideas in his home town of Mecca ("Prophet in his own land..."). At Medina where he had just arrived, on July 16, after a New Moon 3 days before had just passed, the Moon's crescent was becoming visible in the early night sky. And thus the crescent Moon turned out to be the symbol most Islamic nations carry in their national flags. This was the exact moment when Islam was "born". (Right = Flag of Turkey)






Permitted question: Here we have the first beginning of a major religion where the starting moment is precisely known; are we presented here with an astrological "gift"? (Rather then some obscure manipulation of dates as with the beginnings of Christianity).

An interpretation of Islam's horoscope is very revealing in terms of what this latest major world-religion represents. A stellium of 3 planets, Moon/Uranus/Neptune, opposed by Jupiter is the main "axis" of this map. Neptune and Uranus, in Virgo, opposite Jupiter in Pisces, the sign and main symbol of the Christian Era! Reinforced by the crescent Moon, a guaranee for a lot of "emotional spark" to develop between these two religions. An almost precise trine between Mars (in Virgo) and Pluto (in Aries) also indicates that if there will be conflict, it will be rather fierce (Mars) and fundamental (Pluto).
(Right = Flag of Pakistan)

Since ever the two religions have been fighting either to conquer the other's lands, or to try to get them back (the Crusades, aiming at taking back Jerusalem and the Holy Lands). The Suez Canal, Oil, and of course, Israel...

Some are intrigued, others proud and grateful that the bulk of the world's oil reserves are found in the Islamic Middle East. Allah's special gift to his followers, they say. Without that, the Arabs would not have been able to take the rest of the world hostage at various not so distant occasions. There were repeated conflicts around oil in the last 50 years, some costly wars in the Middle East, attentats by Al Queida and their allies in the USA, Britain, Iraq, India (Kashmir), Somalia, Yemen etc.

(Below map of Middle East taken from http://www.thedossier.ukonline.co.uk/maps_charts.htm)




But Islamic militancy also is to be found in behavioral patterns: head-scarfs and Mosques in provocative places, anathemas pronounced against writers (Salman Rushdie) or humorists depicting Mohammad, to cite the most controversial events.

Islam is by no means a united religion. There are the Sunni, the Shiite, the Druze etc. Often secular power and Islam (remember Saddam?), the Iranian Clerics, Khadafi in Libya etc. make particular alliances - and can be strange bedfellows. Oil has tended to unite them - and combined with that the existence of Israel at their doorstep. Or what unites them ideologically is foremost Israel and the equivocal role the Vatican has always been playing in the Orient.

There are however places in the world other then the West which are under much more serious threat of being "islamisized" than we are: the Philippines, much of Africa, part of India, Russia beyond the Urals, China in some sectors. Islam can be said to be a religion of "no fear" and expanding as no other. The Koran promises special rewards to whom dies for its faith. There is a better world promised in the beyond for all Muslims in general and more so even for the martyrs. This, for the simple-minded, stigmatized by some fanatic, can rapidly turn them into suicide-bombers or Taliban-type, fearless fighters.

What is going wrong in Afghanistan and Pakistan? Egypt's President Mubarak, a moderate Muslim, said years ago to Bush father and son that military intervention in the Islamic world by the West will never bring any results. Fight (and even catch) Bin Laden (left), another 300 will appear! It's a "Pandora's Box". And Mubarak knows his world. Egypt is under permanent internal threat of Islamic fanatics. So are Pakistan, Indonesia, to mention the most populated.

The problem of the Taliban, extreme "believers and fierce fighters" is that by opposing them they become fiercer. If left alone they will fall back into fighting each other. And so with the Iranians and the Iraqis. Providing the West can stop mixing up oil and "fighting for so-called democracy" (which few Muslims care for), an easier relation between these forces could probably be found.

For this Israel should be convinced (why not by threatening them with the withdrawal of unconditional support?) to play it's full part in de-fusing the powder keg (even nuclear) on which the whole of the Middle East + India/Pakistan are now sitting. And this once and for all. But as long as Israeli leaders can say in public that the US Government (Obama) is "easy to deal with", this can only help the Muslim fanatics in their argument that the USA is against Islam. Obama knows that, so he tried to establish some bridge in his ill-fated Cairo speech which as an only result earned him a much ridiculed Nobel price. Now exactly one year ago. Any results? It's not words that are needed. It's the West which should leave others alone and, as unfortunately now needed, has to learn to better control its frontiers. (Left: Bust of Golda Meir in New York)

The horoscope of Islam's beginnings is an inescapable fact. It can't be changed. What is possible is to take into consideration the inherent tension points, mentioned at the beginning of this post. And act accordingly, not by "patronizing" as the West is terribly inclined to do with others in this world.

Labels: Don't Know

I think there must be a streak of masochism in me. I took an on-line test on religious beliefs some time ago, lots of searching questions were posed. Conclusion from my results: "secular humanist". I promptly forgot all about it, but the memory re-surfaced the other day and I started researching secular humanism.

That test has been inaccurate in my case. Secular humanists reject astrology as vehemently as Richard Dawkins does. In fact, from a list of "celeb" secular humanists I note his name is among them. Well now, to paraphrase Groucho Marx - I wouldn't join any club who would have him as a member!

New cults of unreason as well as bizarre paranormal and occult beliefs, such as belief in astrology, reincarnation, and the mysterious power of alleged psychics, are growing in many Western societies. These disturbing developments follow in the wake of the emergence in the earlier part of the twentieth century of intolerant messianic and totalitarian quasi religious movements, such as fascism and communism. These religious activists not only are responsible for much of the terror and violence in the world today but stand in the way of solutions to the world's most serious problems. (From A Secular Humanist Declaration).

Elsewhere it is stated:

"We are always open to the discovery of new possibilities and phenomena in nature"

Huh? Not from where I'm standing! That's just plain laughable!

I wandered on through Google inputting humanism/atheism/astrology and found myself on some very antagonistic ground. Atheists don't give astrology even a smidgin of credence, in fact they seem to be saying it's not possible (or very difficult) to be both atheist and astrologer. A couple of message boards underlined the fact that I'm quickly becoming an outcast of society because I believe there is value in (some parts of) astrology, though its source is still to be discovered. (See this discussion)

So, am I a pagan or neo-pagan then? No, not really. I don't believe in the traditional God but neither do I believe in other deities. I believe that ancient deities were a way to explain the inexplicable to The Great Unwashed of the past. I believe man is simply a force of Nature, along with his fellow creatures of Earth. If there is a God or god, it's Nature itself - the mathematics and physics of Nature. I don't think that's paganism.

What am I?
Don't know.
Does it matter?
Don't know.
Do I need a label?
Don't know.
Perhaps "Outcast" would fit the bill though!

SYMBOLOGY & ADAM LAMBERT

Symbolism seems to be following me around just now, I'm coming across mentions of it every whichway I turn. Synchronicity is at work!

Yesterday, an article by John Hammelton, "The Power of the Symbol" appeared in Astro Dispatch. This dealt with symbolism in astrology.

On Thursday evening we saw the movie "Angels & Demons" in which Tom Hanks plays symbologist Robert Langdon. The movie's theme dealt with ancient religious symbology.



A comment made in an American Idol blog (mjsbigblog) by the writer of another blog: "The Fat Lady Sings" dealt with cultural symbology. I realise that not everyone was as invested in American Idol as I and many others in the USA, but the point made by this writer is significant, whether you watched American Idol or not. The comment impressed me so much, I'm copying it in full, below.

In a strange way the cultural symbolism The Fat Lady Sings talks about links both the astrological and religious symbology, to which my attention was recently drawn.

The comment, copied here, written by The Fat Lady sings:

"After a great deal of thought on the subject - there’s something I’d really like to say about what the symbolism of an Adam (Lambert) win would have been. Symbols bear great societal importance. We rely on them as a species to convey connectivity; how we think and feel. Words become unnecessary. Communication with a glance. We are visual creatures after all. Adam represented the outré – society’s margins – a place he’d occupied most of his young life. He was the fat kid in school – into the arts. Oddball, unusual – definitely not mainstream. He was castigated for it – as all who march to that different drummer often are. Just watch his graduation video. There he is – that incredible voice soaring to heaven – and when the camera pans across the stage or into the audience – you see his classmates talking behind their hands, pointing and snickering. Adam was a joke.

So here he is, 10 years later – a fabulous creature of his own design. That glorious voice honed to perfection. He was ready. But America was still in high school, still snickering behind their hands. Elect the gay kid class president? Not on your life! But more than that – more than rejecting someone so beautiful he made your heart ache – underlying the rejection was a truck load of fear. Why? Because Adam was a symbol; a great rainbow flag announcing America had changed. If Adam Lambert had won American Idol in spite of being gay and Jewish – then others who existed on society’s margins might try and step forward into the light as well. And we’d be forced to reckon with them – to take them seriously. That’s why this was important – why it went beyond one supremely talented performer. Adam Lambert would have won for all the disenfranchised. There’s your symbol. America’s first openly gay Idol.

And Adam’s win would have been a legitimate one – not manufactured as some kind of comfit or an appeasement to silence loud voices. The man’s madly talented – a true superstar. Now I’m not saying Kris Allen isn’t talented, or that under other circumstances (such as an Adamless Idol) wouldn’t deserve the win. He is; truly - he just doesn’t compare to Adam. No one on that stage did. Adam was and is in a class by himself. So his not winning (despite all that talent), points to other things – especially when you look at all the fear-driven hysteria of the last few days. I’m not saying Bill O’Reilly’s hit piece was solely responsible; but when you couple it with all the other anti-gay, heavily political folderol that accompanied it – a pattern emerges. I live in the south. In my area - some local DJ’s exhorted listeners to not vote for the gay guy. Seriously. They didn’t even mention Kris by name – just hated on Adam. Ever since his ‘Ring of Fire’ performance – Adam has been regularly dissed on local radio. From what I’ve heard – a few local churches spoke out against him as well. Danny Gokey’s pastor wasn’t the only preacher to bring religion into the mix. As many people voted against Adam as for Kris.

So Adam’s loss is devastating for a multiplicity of reasons. He really deserved that win. Not just for his fans – but because it would have stood for something. In a way - Adam represented anyone who felt disenfranchised. That’s added an extra layer of unhappiness over the whole thing. He lost for reasons other than singing. I cannot tell you how sad that makes me feel. And please understand I am not intending to diminish Kris in any way. As I said before - any other year his talent would have been formidable. But Adam’s special. He really is all that and a bag of chips. Why did other issues have to contaminate the voting? Such a pity……"

The astrological significance here, I see as coming from the USA's natal Sun in Cancer (born on 4 July). The zodiac sign of Cancer symbolises nurturing, homely, motherly instincts - all apple pie and sentimental cuddles. Is it surprising that the majority of those people in the USA who enjoy American Idol would prefer a singer who offers Kris Allen's safe, sentimental, non-controversial kind of music? Or that of 3rd runner-up Danny Gokey in similar vein?(I suspect that Danny's former voters flocked to Kris at the final). This strongly Cancerian symbolism is part of the homeland, part of the environment. Kris has Sun in Cancer and Danny has Sun in Taurus, so it follows that both are much more nearly in tune with US symbolism than Adam, his Aquarius Sun, and left-field but mesmerising style. Aquarius in the zodiacal circle is quincunx Cancer, symbolically that is a scratchy, irritable aspect - exactly the effect Adam seems to have had on a sizeable proportion of US voters.

So there is astrological symbolism here. Religious symbolism in this context could be seen as relating to the conservative religious-right's anti-Adam attitudes which could also have featured in Tuesday night's voting.

Adam Lambert will find more universal acceptance outside of the USA, away from its pervading Cancerian atmosphere - in other words he'll be an international star. Recalling my own words from a post dated 31 March 2009:

"Whether he'll be 2009's American Idol, I will not guess. I will guess, though, that Adam Lambert will be a familiar name by the time Uranus enters Aries, and transits near his natal Moon in around 2 to 3 years'time."

I'd now amend "familiar" to "internationally famous", and make that a prediction.

Many thanks to The Fat Lady Sings blog for the use of your eloquent comment.

Something Jupiter/Neptune-ish

Transiting Jupiter and Neptune are now close enough (2 degrees) to be considered conjoined. Jupiter represents religion, among other things. Neptune relates, among other things,to imagination.

Last night I had a kind of Jupiter/Neptune-ish experience watching an old movie, dating from 1988. I'd bought the VCR for a dollar in a junk shop while on our recent trip: "The Seventh Sign", with Demi Moore. Moore is very pregnant in the movie. Incidentally there's a scene where she appears naked. This synchronistically reminded me of Friday's post about photographer Annie Leiobovitz, I'd used one of her famous photographs displaying Demi in all her pregnant glory.

The theme of this movie is apocalypse and Bible horror. Having been made in the 80s its references and flavour were somewhat different from current movies on a similar theme. It's not a preachy film, by any means, I've seen many worse - and recently! One thing in the movie had me feeling almost goosebumpy. Towards the end, Demi's character askes if there is any way the world can be saved - the answer - "HOPE". Remember those 2008 election posters ? (Wink).

My main reason for scribbling about this today is that the movie caused me to do little research to satisfy curiosity about sonething mentioned in the movie: "The Guf". The seventh sign of the coming "End" was said to be when The Guf is empty of souls and a baby is born dead. Turns out that this wasn't a concept invented for the movie as I suspected - here's what Wikipedia has to say:

In Jewish mysticism, the Chamber of Guf (or Guph or even Gup) (Hebrew for "body" or "corpse") also called the Otzar (Hebrew for "treasury") is the Hall of Souls, located in the Seventh Heaven. Every human soul is held to emanate from the Guf. The Talmud teaches that the Messiah will not come until the Guf is emptied of all its souls (Yevamot 62a).

The mystic significance of the Guf is that each person is important and has a unique role which only he, with his unique soul, can fulfill. Even a newborn baby brings the Messiah closer simply by being born.

In keeping with other Jewish legends that envision souls as bird-like, the Guf is sometimes described as a columbarium, or birdhouse. Folklore says sparrows can see the soul's descent and this explains their joyous chirping.

The peculiar idiom of describing the treasury of souls as a "body" may be connected to the mythic tradition of Adam Kadmon, the primordial man. Adam Kadmon, God's "original intention" for humanity, was a supernal being, androgynous and macro-cosmic (co-equal in size with the universe). When this Adam sinned, humanity was demoted to the flesh and blood, bifurcated and mortal creatures we are now. According to Kabbalah, every human soul is just a fragment (or fragments) cycling out of the great "world-soul" of Adam Kadmon. Hence, every human soul comes from the "guf [of Adam Kadmon].

Interesting! I live and learn. I like that legend, and - it does fit nicely with the Jupiter/Neptune conjunction above us at present.

By the way, the world does, narrowly, avoid apocalypse at the end of this movie - and all because of HOPE!