Controversy Over Blood Sacrifice

[Quetzal]

Re: Controversy over Blood Sacrifice

You are only giving your opinions without supporting facts, what you say is not fact, science has many "studies" but it has not produced the hard facts that vegan-ism is healthier.

If its just your opinion, why do you continue to use unsupported "findings" to try to "sway" us to your side? Underneath your words you continue to imply that you "hate" any consumption of or harming of animals, and that what we are all doing is "wrong" even if you wont' say it outloud.

I'm not trying to sway you, I'm trying to explain my point of view. EVERYTHING I've said is from my point of view, they're facts from my point of view. What about this am I not explaining properly?
Of course I hate meat consumption and harming of animals, and of course I think it's wrong. It's your right to disagree, but does that mean I should just keep my mouth shut and my opinion to myself?

[Vigdisdotter]

Re: Controversy over Blood Sacrifice

Because that is your opinion of what a sacrifice is, based on your perspective.

And what the dictionary says the word means.

You still haven't answered my question though I've asked three times.

Again, everything I've said is my opinion, not an attempt to tell you what to do. If you can't see it as such, and refuse to be civil, don't reply to me.

Disagreeing with you and calling you on your claims and evasions in no way lacks civility.

You realize that this the third time you've been the pot calling the kettle black, right?

- - - Updated - - -

I guess I don't express myself as other would prefer but that doesn't make my opinion any less valid than yours.

Of course, when you're speaking for yourself and your practice. The issue is that you made a statement as universal fact, when it is neither universal nor fact.

[Unus Mundus]

Re: Controversy over Blood Sacrifice

I'm not trying to sway you, I'm trying to explain my point of view. EVERYTHING I've said is from my point of view, they're facts from my point of view. What about this am I not explaining properly?
Of course I hate meat consumption and harming of animals, and of course I think it's wrong. It's your right to disagree, but does that mean I should just keep my mouth shut and my opinion to myself?

Of course you shouldn't shut up and keep it to yourself, but at the same time, when you speak, expect others to disagree with you, and call you out on things. Its just as much my right to go after you about it, as it is your right to go after me about it.

You are ignoring our questions, and we have not become uncivil (as you said we were being before), in fact, you are the one being uncivil ignoring our questions and asking why "we just aren't getting what you are explaining" in terms of you telling us "its just opinion." Well ok, its opinion, that doesn't matter. Opinions are out there to be shot down, it isn't a sacred holy institution saying "your opinion is super valid because its your's." In philosophy, you call bullshit on other people's opinions, you don't just go "yeah yeah, that's fine, believe what you want." In the end, we still must RESPECT each others right to have said opinions, and not see any personal injuries being made against us, but instead see it as an attempt to work towards finding some sort of "truth."

[Yazichestvo]

Re: Controversy over Blood Sacrifice

In the context of a ritual feast, I think it's fine. Many "animal sacrifice" traditions are just that; an animal is killed, and all or most of it is eaten. Others may waste a certain amount of meat, but from an animal with no other foreseeable fate than to be slaughtered. I mostly just offer libations, but I recognize that pouring out something nutritious like milk, in effect, really isn't all that different. In fact, it's more wasteful than a sacrifice in which all of the meat is consumed.

Of course, if you're a vegetarian arguing whether it's EVER alright to kill any animal that feels emotion, regardless of sentience, then that's a valid debate. I disagree, but that's consistent at least. Basically, sacrifice extends to anything that can be considered a person's property. Human sacrifice is wrong, because humans cannot be property. Animal sacrifice is only wrong if animals cannot be property.

That said, few people today can really raise an animal and humanely slaughter and cook it anyway. I think other offerings, such as mead or beer, are more suitable for most of us. I have to admit, while I don't condemn animal sacrifice, I find other offerings preferable.

[Rae'ya]

Re: Controversy over Blood Sacrifice

I guess I don't express myself as other would prefer but that doesn't make my opinion any less valid than yours. I still say it is the most sacred blood. And you may say it is not. That is the beauty of of this wonderful forum... people may say and express many diverse ideals and it is up to each individual what they wish to take on board. I have seen posts on forums I think are not aligned with my own ideals/beliefs but I don't mind that the person posting has full belief in their comment. It is really lovely when I see someone feeling passionate about their beliefs. As I do about mine. Now... back to the original subject...

No one is disputing the validity of your opinion. Just whether it is your opinion or universal fact. The thing is that you should qualify any opinion or personal statements with 'I believe' or 'My thoughts are' or 'I think' or something along those lines. The line where you say "I still say it is the most sacred blood" should read "I still say it is the most sacred blood to me" or "I think it is the most sacred blood". I respect other people's opinions, but I reserve the right to challenge inaccurate generalisations.

I have also known of people using roadkill for offerings to their Gods, and although it is something I would never do. I wonder if others would see that as disrespectful or unclean?

Roadkill... I don't think that's much of a sacrifice, unless you count the distaste over collecting it. I don't think there is anything inherently unclean about it though. Roadkill can be collected hygienically and processed for parts in ways that make it clean. Rot and deterioration are another part of the cycle of life as far as I'm concerned, and are not something that I shun or discount just because it's distasteful.

And at the end of the day, if a deity wanted roadkill then it's a perfectly legitimate offering to make to them. I image that a rotting carcass would be a very good offering to certain chthonic deities.

However, if a deity wanted an animal sacrifice killed by your own hand... I don't think roadkill will qualify in that situation.

And running something over is NOT a humane way to kill it. So sacrificing an animal by hitting it with your car is not what I would count as a respectful animal sacrifice.

[Rick]

Re: Controversy over Blood Sacrifice

Grew up on a farm. Wrung many a chicken's neck. Butchered a few hogs, and butchered a steer every year after it fattened (mid-wifed many a calf, too). Yes, we OWNED the livestock, fed them, doctored them when sick or injured, chased them back through the fence when they got out on the road or in the neighbor's wheat, ie: were RESPONSIBLE for them. The animals were assets of the farm, just like the tractor. When you own livestock, killing one of them is a sacrifice, even if you're going to eat it. It's not a lead-pipe cinch it'll be replaced.

I have no problem with sacrificing animals to the gods. I don't have a problem taking the life or giving the offering.

As to human sacrifice, I used to know a group of Heathens that went to the state pen and stood outside and raised a horn to Odin when prisoners were executed, since executions used to be dedicated to Old One Eye. I've no problem with that, either.

[Rae'ya]

Re: Controversy over Blood Sacrifice

As to human sacrifice, I used to know a group of Heathens that went to the state pen and stood outside and raised a horn to Odin when prisoners were executed, since executions used to be dedicated to Old One Eye. I've no problem with that, either.

We don't have the death penalty here, so that's not something I've ever thought about. It's a very interesting concept though.

[Auseklis]

Re: Controversy over Blood Sacrifice

General question on the current topic: Why would deities that once required human sacrifice change to animal sacrifice along with the laws of modern times? Would deities care about human created law and send out telepathic messages for a change in their sacrifice needs?

[Rae'ya]

Re: Controversy over Blood Sacrifice

General question on the current topic: Why would deities that once required human sacrifice change to animal sacrifice along with the laws of modern times? Would deities care about human created law and send out telepathic messages for a change in their sacrifice needs?

I've heard that there are some deities who still ask for human sacrifice.

But in general I put it down to the fact that I believe deities are capable of growth and evolution, and that they recognise that the human social climate has changed. I think they are willing to compromise on historical offerings based on modern resources and morals.

But I would also like to point out that humanity does actually still practice human sacrifice of a sort. Perhaps we don't kill a virile young man each year to ensure the fertility of the crops, but we send people to their potential deaths for the betterment and protection of society. Anyone who is in the military, law enforcement, the SES, the fire department, and other lines of work are putting their lives at risk every day to protect the rest of us. I think that is a form of human sacrifice.

[Auseklis]

Re: Controversy over Blood Sacrifice

I've heard that there are some deities who still ask for human sacrifice.

But in general I put it down to the fact that I believe deities are capable of growth and evolution, and that they recognise that the human social climate has changed. I think they are willing to compromise on historical offerings based on modern resources and morals.

But I would also like to point out that humanity does actually still practice human sacrifice of a sort. Perhaps we don't kill a virile young man each year to ensure the fertility of the crops, but we send people to their potential deaths for the betterment and protection of society. Anyone who is in the military, law enforcement, the SES, the fire department, and other lines of work are putting their lives at risk every day to protect the rest of us. I think that is a form of human sacrifice.

I wouldn't imagine that deities would change their requirements for the sake of humanity.
Human sacrifice is still prevalent in parts of the world such as India, Papua New Guinea, Russia, Africa and even in some 'civilized countries'... does this mean their deities still ask them to sacrifice humans? If so, why haven't they evolved? To me it seems that people evolve their 'version' of sacrifice because if they don't they will go to jail regardless of what the deity originally required.

[Rae'ya]

Re: Controversy over Blood Sacrifice

I wouldn't imagine that deities would change their requirements for the sake of humanity.

If they are deriving power from it then why not? You could argue that a deity who is unwilling to change their requirements for the sake of humanity will lose followers. Perhaps they are not willing to do that and so they compromise in order to retain followers who will continue to make offerings to them. Perhaps a compromised offering is better than no offering at all.

Human sacrifice is still prevalent in parts of the world such as India, Papua New Guinea, Russia, Africa and even in some 'civilized countries'... does this mean their deities still ask them to sacrifice humans? If so, why haven't they evolved? To me it seems that people evolve their 'version' of sacrifice because if they don't they will go to jail regardless of what the deity originally required.

Because human sacrifice is still acceptable in those cultures. Why would a deity compromise on a sacrifice that is still within it's followers means to obtain and offer up? But for the average Australian, sacrificing a human is illegal and will get you thrown in jail. And you can hardly continue to make sacrifices to your deity in jail, can you?

I think it's up to the deity as to what sacrifice will be accepted. Some deities will accept libations of food and drink. Some wont. Some demand animal sacrifice. Some don't. Some demand whatever it is that is difficult for you to give. Some would demand an animal sacrifice of me but maybe not of you... purely because I have the skills and means and attitude to do it, but perhaps you don't. So a different sacrifice is asked of you.

Sacrifice is a special kind of offering... it is specifically one that involves the giving up of something that is important or valuable to a person. It's up to each individual person to decide where the boundaries of acceptable sacrifice lay. And it's up to the deities to decide which boundaries they accept. It's entirely possible that a person refusing to make animal sacrifice could exclude them from the attention of a particular deity, or at least limit their interaction. It's also possible that acceptable sacrifice is a shifting boundary... as with my example about animal sacrifice being within my means but not yours. A $50 bottle of whiskey may be the perfect sacrifice for someone who doesn't earn much. But from a millionaire I'm sure the deities would ask for the $500 bottle of whiskey.

[Rick]

Re: Controversy over Blood Sacrifice

I wouldn't imagine that deities would change their requirements for the sake of humanity.
Human sacrifice is still prevalent in parts of the world such as India, Papua New Guinea, Russia, Africa and even in some 'civilized countries'... does this mean their deities still ask them to sacrifice humans? If so, why haven't they evolved? To me it seems that people evolve their 'version' of sacrifice because if they don't they will go to jail regardless of what the deity originally required.

In the Sagas, Odin took entire armies as his sacrifice. So, if any deity wants human sacrifices, do you really think he/she won't get them?

[Rae'ya]

Re: Controversy over Blood Sacrifice

Also, just to clarify... when I said that I believe deities grow and evolve, that's not in some sort of linear civilization=evolution thing. That's not how I see evolution, nor growth. Evolution is simply changing to meet the challenges of changing environments. I don't believe humanity is the peak of evolution. And current Western civilisation is not somehow more evolved than anyone else. I don't think deities evolve to meet our expectations... but they may evolve (or devolve) their expectations of us, and therefore the nature of our interaction with them evolves (or devolves). Anything that changes could be said to be evolving, but that does not carry in it some inherent quality of getting bigger and better and more civilised or more Western.

Edited for spelling error.

[Auseklis]

Re: Controversy over Blood Sacrifice

Sacrifice is a special kind of offering... it is specifically one that involves the giving up of something that is important or valuable to a person. It's up to each individual person to decide where the boundaries of acceptable sacrifice lay. And it's up to the deities to decide which boundaries they accept. It's entirely possible that a person refusing to make animal sacrifice could exclude them from the attention of a particular deity, or at least limit their interaction. It's also possible that acceptable sacrifice is a shifting boundary... as with my example about animal sacrifice being within my means but not yours. A $50 bottle of whiskey may be the perfect sacrifice for someone who doesn't earn much. But from a millionaire I'm sure the deities would ask for the $500 bottle of whiskey.

Yes I think people decide what they want to sacrifice more than a deity asking for a certain sacrifice. No matter how much a deity asked for animal blood of the person doesn't want to do it they will not. Or if they do not want to give up the $500 bottle of whiskey they won't do that either.

On a personal level I have no issues with the big demands of sacrifice required on my behalf in this life. I don't have any attachments as such when it comes to that but I guess some do.

[Rae'ya]

Re: Controversy over Blood Sacrifice

Yes I think people decide what they want to sacrifice more than a deity asking for a certain sacrifice. No matter how much a deity asked for animal blood of the person doesn't want to do it they will not. Or if they do not want to give up the $500 bottle of whiskey they won't do that either.

Yes but I think the deity then has the option to refuse the offering and not give their aid in return.

You can offer me a tin can, but that doesn't mean I have to take it.