Happy Halloween!

Happy Halloween, All Hallow's Eve, Samhain, happy early Day of the Dead, All Saint's Day, All Souls Day, etc., whatever you celebrate! I hope that all of you that celebrate something at this time of year, whether it be for secular, religious/spiritual, or cultural reasons, have a great holiday! Have fun, be safe, and eat lots of candy! Post a comment letting me know what you dressed up as (if you did) and what you did to celebrate. Stay spooky, everyone.

Quiz: Which religion should you belong to?

I haven't really posted this weekend due to having a Halloween party that needed lots of last minute preparations and then I needed a day to recover, so I'm just going to make a quick and easy post and put off some of the longer ones I had planned for a bit.

I don't know how much weight I would put into their validity, but I took two online quizzes about religion and the results are in!

The first quiz I took was the Christian Denomination Selector. The list of options it tested for as well as my percentages for each are listed below:


Unitarian Universalism (100%)  
Episcopal/Anglican Church (94%)  
Liberal Quakerism (87%)  
Evangelical Lutheran Church (80%)  
Unity Church (80%)  
Eastern Orthodox Church (75%)  
Methodist/Wesleyan Church (73%)  
Seventh-Day Adventist (73%)  
Roman Catholic Church (67%)  
Lutheran Church-Missouri Synod (62%)  
Mormonism (60%)  
Presbyterian Church USA (56%)  
Assemblies of God (55%)  
Church of Christ (55%)  
Mennonite Brethren (55%)  
Orthodox Quakerism (55%)  
Southern Baptist (55%)  
Free Will Baptist (45%)  
Presbyterian Church in America/Orthodox Presbyterian Church (38%)  
Reformed Baptist (38%)  
Reformed Churches (38%)  
International Church of Christ (36%)  
United Pentecostal Church (36%)  
Jehovah's Witness (0%)

Honestly, I'm not that surprised that Unitarian Universalism came up first with 100%. In fact, it asked for a prediction that wouldn't affect your score and I predicted that I would match most closely with UU. However, I am a bit surprised at how many Protestant denominations came up before both Catholic and Orthodox.

The next quiz I took was Spirit Belief System Selector. This one took into account most of the world's major religions whereas the first one only looked at Christian denominations (although arguments could certainly be made that UU is NOT a "Christian denomination" but rather a pluralist church with Christian roots). My results are below:

 1. Liberal Quakers - Religious Society of Friends (100%)
2. Unitarian Universalism (100%)
3. Neo-Pagan (84%)
4. New Age (77%)
5. Orthodox Quaker - Religious Society of Friends (75%)
6. Mainline - Liberal Christian Protestants (75%)
7. Taoism (72%)
8. Mahayana Buddhism (67%)
9. Reform Judaism (65%)
10. Secular Humanism (62%)
11. New Thought (60%)
12. Jainism (59%)
13. Sikhism (57%)
14. Christian Science Church of Christ, Scientist (51%)
15. Hinduism (50%)
16. Theravada Buddhism (48%)
17. Scientology (47%)
18. Islam (46%)
19. Bahai (45%)
20. Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints (Mormons) (43%)
21. Orthodox Judaism (40%)
22. Seventh Day Adventist (33%)
23. Non-theist (32%)
24. Jehovahs Witness (27%)
25. Mainline - Conservative Christian Protestant (27%)
26. Eastern Orthodox (26%)
27. Roman Catholic (26%)

Once again, I'm not surprised that UU came up 100%. However, I wasn't expecting Liberal Quakers Religious Society of Friends to come in at number one. In fact, I'm not even entirely sure what that is. I'm also extremely surprised that Catholicism came in dead last. I honestly disagree.

If any of you decide to take either quiz or find a better quiz, let me know your results in the comments!

Sects of Christianity and Comparison with other Abrahamic Religions: Views on Idolatry and Iconoclasm

What is idolatry and how is it defined by different religions from a theological viewpoint? Put simply, idolatry is the worship of idols. According to the Bible, worshiping "graven images" (as in the example of the golden calf) is forbidden. Some also expand the definition to include worship of other people besides God (which makes sense, someone might say a celebrity is their "idol" but they don't usually mean they actually worship them).

History lesson time: Do you know what some of the main causes were which lead to the Great Schism (the split between the Church in the East and West, causing it to form the Roman Catholic and Eastern/Greek/Byzantine Orthodox churches)? Two of them were idolatry and iconoclasm, which is using religious icons depicting Christ or other religious figures. Ironically, at that point, it was the Roman Catholic Church that had a problem with the iconoclasm in the East whereas the Byzantines were defending the use of religious imagery and statues. Later on and today, many Protestant denominations have a problem with the Roman Catholic Church's supposed idolatry and iconoclasm.

A few years ago I had a conversation with a Protestant friend about idolatry and the veneration of Mary in the Catholic Church which I was reminded about today because of a post I saw online. Apparently, many Protestants have an issue with what they perceive to be idolatry in the Catholic Church. The main concerns I've heard are that 1. Catholics pray directly to Mary which is a form of worship that should be reserved only for God, 2. Catholics pray directly to the Saints and Angels, again a form of worship which should only be reserved for God, 3. The idea of venerating certain dead Catholics as "saints" goes against the Bible, 4. The Church hierarchy and role given to the Pope goes against the Bible and makes him an idol, and 5. Many of the stories and feast days regarding saints and icons of Mary are based on earlier pagan traditions.

I can understand their cause for concern. Perhaps, if I too viewed religion as "you can only ever acknowledge this one deity and pray to him alone or you'll go to hell," I'd view it the same way. However, as I'm sure you can tell by now, those aren't my views. I also don't think that's what Catholics are doing anyway. Catholics look to Mary, the Saints, and the Angels, as those who are in heaven and who have the access to and trust of God, and therefore they should be looked up to as examples and can intervene on our behalf.

I'm going to use the example of Mary here since that's what the discussion with my friend was mostly about. One of the most well known and common Catholic ways to venerate Mary would be the Rosary. The Rosary starts with the Apostle's Creed, a creed stating that they believe in one God and Jesus is the son of God and God himself, followed by the Our Father, again a prayer directly to God. These prayers are stated before any of the many Hail Mary prayers begin. Then let's take a look at the Hail Mary. "Hail Mary, full of grace, the Lord is with thee." Simply stating that she is full of grace, as Christians believe God's grace is a gift to us all, and that the Lord is with her, not the same thing as her. "Blessed art thou among women and blessed is the fruit of thy womb, Jesus." There's biblical evidence for her being blessed among women, chosen by God, and acknowledging here that she is the mother of God's human person of Jesus. The phrase "among women" again reiterates that she is a woman, just like us. She may be blessed among women, but she is still a woman, not a goddess. "Holy Mary, Mother of God, pray for us sinners, now and at the hour of our death." Again, referring to her as the mother of God, not god herself, and asking her to "pray for us" rather than praying to her. After each decade of Hail Mary prayers, you follow with the Fatima prayer directly to Jesus, "Oh my Jesus, forgive us our sins, save us from the fires of hell, and lead all souls to heaven, especially those in most need of your mercy." and the Glory Be, which gives glory to the Trinity alone. Finally, at the end of the Rosary, you say the Hail Holy Queen, which again asks Mary to pray for us so that we can be made worthy of the promises of Christ. The Hail Mary is the prayer said most often during the Rosary by far, because saying the Rosary is asking Mary to intervene on our behalf. However, every mystery revolves around the life of Jesus and that is what we are supposed to me contemplating and meditating on during the Rosary. So while I personally don't even see it as a problem if we were "worshiping" Mary, I still do not in anyway believe that's what Catholics are doing when they say the Rosary. They aren't so much praying to her as they are talking to her and asking her to pray to God on our behalf and chanting a repetitive mantra to aid in their meditations on Jesus.

Then, to get back to the issue of iconoclasm, Catholics and Orthodox believers are no longer facing such accusations from each other or other Christians in great numbers. Even Protestants get involved in a fair amount of images today, although it was a bigger issue for earlier Protestants and certain denominations. However, other branches of the Abrahamic religions' family tree feel quite differently about it. For one example, let's look at Islam. Muslims are not supposed to have any images whatsoever of Allah or Muhammad. Meanwhile, in nearly all sects of Christianity you can find crucifixes with the image of Jesus on them or pictures of Jesus being spread around or hung in the house. With Roman Catholicism and Eastern Orthodoxy, the vast amount of famous paintings and sculptures are far greater, but nearly all Christians are involved in iconoclasm to some degree. With Judaism, you can't even speak or write the full name of God. And of course, neither Islam nor Judaism accept the doctrine of the Trinity, viewing it as polytheistic and blasphemous.

I can't sit here and honestly say that I don't think any of these other religions have a point or that the Roman Catholic Church doesn't occasionally cross a line when it comes to idolatry. For example, it always seemed like idolatry to me whenever the priest calls up his parishioners to kiss the cross during Holy Week at the end of Lent. The crucifix that hangs in a church is not really Jesus and kissing it definitely feels like a throwback to worshiping the golden calf. It's a man made object meant to decorate a church. It may represent God, but it isn't God itself. Why would Catholic priests encourage people to come up and kiss it?

Overall, however, I don't have any problem whatsoever with people praying to more than one deity or praying to those who have died, yet were shown to be the greatest followers of God. It's even less controversial when the prayers are actually just talking to those people and asking them for guidance or to pray to God themselves. I don't think that praying to Mary, the saints, and the angels, or asking them to pray on our behalf is idolatry and I don't think that having religious images is the same thing as worshiping those images, therefore making it different than true iconoclasm. There's only one thing that I can think of where the Catholic church seems to actually blur those lines and that is the kissing of the cross. Other than that one example, I seem to be standing again with the Catholic church here, at least on this one individual issue.

image source

Religious Reading

I want to read the sacred texts from many different religions to better educate myself on them and to better form my own views and opinions. It's specifically important to me to read the Bible since I was raised Catholic and biblical ideas shape so much of western civilization and continue to influence our society today, especially in the United States. However, they tend to be long, ancient, and difficult reads, making them hard to tackle.

So far I've completed the Torah, which is the first part of the Jewish Tanakh and the Christian Old Testament of the Bible, consisting of five books: Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, and Deuteronomy. That was easy enough to get through. I continued reading after that and am now stuck about a third of the way through the Old Testament and haven't had enough time to read more in nearly a year. Yet the Bible remains permanently on my "to read" list (or I suppose my "currently reading" list would be more accurate) and I haven't let go of my goal of someday finishing it. I think I've made significant progress! According to Goodreads, I'm over 20% of the way through the Bible. It may have taken me three years or so, but I put a nice dent in it.

Unfortunately, I haven't had much opportunity to read many other original texts. As far as eastern spiritual, philosophical, and religious traditions go, I've read the Tao Te Ching by Lao Tzu, a central text to Taoism. I've also read many ancient mythological/religious/spiritual texts including ones from ancient Mesopotamian, Greek, Roman, Egyptian, and Norse religions. I've studied a fair bit of other religions, but only through reading sections of their primary texts and secondary sources, not by reading their primary texts in their entirety.

I want to compile a To Read List made up of entirely books that are spirituality/religious based, but also more specifically, a To Read List of the actual sacred texts themselves. As I read each item on the list, I'm going to try to compile my thoughts here on this blog.

What I will say right now is that I find the Old Testament very interesting from a historical perspective. I LOVE LOVE LOVE ancient history. I was a History and Classics double major (Classics meaning Classical Civilizations, so focused primarily on Rome and Greece but also included some Egyptian, Mesopotamian, and Medieval stuff as well). I love learning about Canaanite and Hebrew mythology, cultures, and society, as well as that of their neighbors in Mesopotamia and Egypt.

You can learn so much about life then from the Bible. Everyone's so busy arguing about whether the theological aspects of the Bible are true or not, that they don't focus on the educational historical aspect. And god forbid when I do bring it up, they say something asinine like "oh yeah, I'm sure it's historically accurate and they really fit every animal on earth on one boat." No, assholes, that's not what I'm talking about. That particular story of Noah's Ark is no more historically accurate than the story of the flood myth in the Epic of Gilgamesh and Atrahasis, because both are myths. However, WE CAN LEARN FROM MYTHS. We can learn about the fears, values, and beliefs of the people who believed them, we can learn about their society and culture. The myth of Noah's Ark was Hebrew, but it originally came from Mesopotamia and the flood myth in the Epic of Gilgamesh and Atrahasis, although some changes were made when the Hebrews adopted it. The Sumerian version had the gods destroy mankind because of the noise they made, whereas the biblical version saw God destroy mankind because of their evil ways. These are two vastly different ways to view the gods they worshiped. One destroyed their own creation due to being annoyed at them and viewing them as an inconvenience. The other destroyed them due to regret over creating beings who could be so evil. This suggests to me that Sumerians viewed their gods and religion in a much different way than Hebrews viewed Yahweh. And why did the myth focus on a flood? Perhaps that's not readily evident if you only look at the biblical version of the myth, therefore causing people still to this day to search for some evidence of a widespread flood throughout the Mediterranean region or worldwide flooding to back up the myth, but if you look at the Sumerian version one major thing sticks out to me. Sumer was located in a floodplain in between the Tigris and Euphrates rivers. Floods happened often, could destroy their homes and crops if they were too severe, and could literally cost them their lives. Floods were something they feared if the flooding got too bad, but living in a river valley was necessary for their agrarian society and the earliest civilizations. The rivers provided them with their very livelihoods, but as with anything in nature, could also just as quickly take their lives away. They probably also wanted an explanation for why the flooding happened, so of course they looked to the gods, as all societies did at this time. It makes sense that they would think if the gods were going to take out their wrath on them, that they would do it with a flood. In fact, a vicious flood probably did happen in Sumer at one point or another that caused widespread destruction in their early civilization, therefore causing the myth. Perhaps since the Hebrews didn't experience this constant dread, they were able to view their god as more benevolent (at least by a little bit, there are certainly many not-so-benevolent things in the Old Testament, and wiping out all of mankind counts as one of them).

I also had the opportunity to participate in an archaeological excavation in Israel at a site that was in use during the Roman, Byzantine, and Crusader eras, which was originally a small town which sprung up around a polytheistic Roman temple dedicated to a goddess. There were many Hebrew and Canaanite sites nearby which had already been excavated that I had the opportunity to visit. It was amazing to me to be able to see in person some of the things and places I read about in the Bible.

However, all of that being said, I felt that the Tao Te Ching was more spiritually enriching. The parts of the Bible that I read honestly feel more like a primary source historical text, written from the perspective of people who were there at the time and therefore held the beliefs that they held (which of course, that's what it is, I'm just saying that's all it feels like, it doesn't feel like a spiritual guide). It felt like reading Livy's History of Rome, with the exception of Genesis, which felt more similar to something like Hesiod's Theogony and Works and Days. It definitely felt like a religious and historical text, completely with the theological aspects, but not so much how I view spirituality. Perhaps that's because the Tao Te Ching is more philosophical in nature. I'm not sure, but I'll see if I feel differently after reading more of the Bible.

Stay tuned for future reviews!
Image source

Practicing what I preach...

Everyone, more or less, wants to think of themselves as being a good person. Whether we define that by religious standards, legal standards, philosophical standards, or by some other set of morals, we all want to view ourselves as good people and will even go so far as to make excuses for our immoral decisions when we know we aren't being as good as we could be. I've been living that way for a long time.

There are certain ways I view myself. I consider myself to be a spiritual person. I consider the morality part of faith to be more important than the theological aspects. I try to be the type of person who helps out other people, through occasional volunteering, donating to charities, and being the first person to offer assistance when someone needs help. I call myself a feminist. I read books and do research into environmentalism, animal rights, and human rights issues.

However, whether I like to admit it or not, I know I make a lot of decisions that don't align with the way I view myself or the person I want to be. I want to be the type of person who would never intentionally do something that could hurt another person, especially those I consider friends or family. I want to be a loyal person who would never betray the people close to me. I don't want to be the person who is always in the center of drama, gossip, rumors, and arguments. I don't want to lie, cheat, or otherwise be dishonest and hurtful to others. I don't want to be the type of person who talks about people behind their backs, judges them for things I've done, or makes fun of them. As a feminist, I want to strive for solidarity with other women and I don't want to ever pit myself against other women. As an environmentalist, I want to take an active role in recycling and leaving a smaller carbon footprint. As a human rights activist, I don't want anyone to view me as someone "safe" to vent to about their racist, homophobic, sexist, xenophobic, or religious prejudice views. I want to be the person who is brave enough to stand up to them when they do. As someone who loves animals, I want to lead the way for compassionately caring for companion animals and humane treatment for farm animals. I'd like to even go so far as being vegetarian or vegan someday. I want to be the type of person who goes out of my way to care for the poor, the sick, the elderly, the needy, and children. There are many things I'd like to do and certain things I strive to be, yet I continuously fall short of the mark and make excuses for my own immoral behavior in order to live with myself. For quite awhile now, all these things that I know I shouldn't do are exactly what I've been doing.

Starting today, I want to start making some very serious changes in my life. How can I talk about spirituality, faith, feminism, and morals while living a completely immoral life? I'm a hypocrite. I've known that for a long time but didn't want to acknowledge it.

I don't want to get into details about some of the things I've done that I'm not proud of. This blog isn't a confessional, it's a public forum, and my failings are no one's business but my own. However, I am making a promise to myself and making that promise public that starting today I will be actively making a change. From now on, I will think before I speak and act. I will contemplate my decisions before I make them. I will take the time to ask myself, "if I do this/say this/choose this, can anyone get hurt?" If someone else tries to drag me into something that's immoral, I will stand up and say "I don't agree with you and I don't want to be involved in this." I might not be able to change other people's minds, but I can let them know without any uncertainty that I do not encourage their beliefs or behaviors.

It's time to make a change and start being the person I want to be.

Let's Talk About Sex- 20 Questions!

If you grew up in a religious household, especially if your family's religion is one of the Abrahamic faiths, you likely equated sexuality to sinfulness. Unfortunately, many of us still view it that way, even if our concept of religion and sin has changed. My definition of a "sin" and your definition of a "sin" might be different and both of our views might be different than either of the religions we grew up with. So let's explore that for a moment. When I define sin for myself today, I don't view it the same as the Catholic church. I view it as something that goes against the Divine, that goes against my own well being or the well being of someone else, or something that is intentionally harmful. That being said, let's look at some of the things that religion does, or alternatively does not, view as a sin when it comes to sexuality and explore our own opinions on the topics.

Important Note: For the purpose of this post, look at the word sin as "morally and spiritually wrong" when I discuss my views on it. Do not use your religion's definition of sin.

Disclaimer: I'm discussing MY OPINIONS and giving different ways for us to explore these topics together. I'm not making blanket statements about what's right or wrong. You must decide for yourself.

Warning: The topics and language used in this post are for adults only and will contain sexual content. Despite this blog being mostly family friendly, this post is NSFW. 

1. Is premarital sex a sin?

In my opinion, absolutely not. Here are the questions I ask myself: Does it hurt anyone? Does it hurt me or my partner? Is it a way for you to show love for the person you're with? Is it enjoyable, safe, consensual? Would it be unwise to rush into marriage with the person or are you unable to marry them even if you wanted to? Are you responsible about it? Do you feel ready? I feel like sex is a very personal decision and only you can know if you're ready or if you should have sex with a certain person. I don't think that it's a bad thing to have sex before marriage. In fact, I lost my virginity a good eight and a half years before I got married and I don't regret it nor do I feel any guilt about it whatsoever. I have nothing to feel guilty for. I was ready and I made the choice that was right for me.

2. Is extramarital sex a sin? 

Yeah. Most of the time at least. Unless you have some kind of arrangement where you're both okay with an open marriage or want to have a threesome or something, but even then, even if the other person agrees, it can often still hurt or cause jealousy. And what of the other person? Will they be lead on? If it hurts yourself or another person, then in my opinion, it's immoral. Does that make you a bad person if you have extramarital sex? No, not necessarily. Good people can certainly do some not so good things. We all mess up from time to time. We just have to make amends and strive to do better. 

3. Are same-sex relations a sin? What about same sex marriage?

Absolutely not. I firmly believe that our sexual orientation is a natural part of who we are. It's something that we're born with. We can't change or choose whether we are straight, gay, or bi. The Divine made us that way and we are perfect the way we are. We should choose to live our lives as the truest version of ourselves, the way we were created to be. Look at it this way: if God made you gay, what right does anyone else have to say God's wrong? Being in love with someone of the same sex doesn't hurt anyone. However, forcing or coercing people into relationships with people of the opposite sex when they aren't attracted to them hurts both parties. Forcing people who love each other to be apart hurts both parties. Teaching people that the way they naturally are is somehow immoral, gross, weird, or otherwise wrong is extremely harmful to them and can cause mental illness, lifelong emotional issues, and suicide. In my opinion, being homophobic is a sin. Being gay or bi is not. 

4. Are familial sexual/romantic relationships a sin?

This is a tough one. Most of the time when people are in relationships with or engage in sexual activities with a family member it's because they were arranged marriages to a cousin or uncle, historically done to keep bloodlines pure, done in a culture where incest is defined differently (where only immediate family counts), or most often in modern Western civilization, it's because an older family member is raping a younger family member. I'd say that in the vast majority of cases, it's a sin (for the older relative or man who is forcing or coercing a younger relative or woman into it, not for the person who feels they have no choice or who are forced into it). In the rare cases where two family members are of the same age range and have an equal amount of power and choice in the situation but honestly feel attracted to each other, well...I guess it's a gray area. I might not consider it a sin in that scenario, but I feel like those scenarios are rare and usually a result of being raised badly/having a bad family.

5. Is sexual activities with a minor a sin?

Yep. That's my opinion. If you're having sex with someone who is prepubescent and you aren't prepubescent yourself, it's definitely, hands down, no matter what, a sin. Period, end of discussion. You're a child molester, you're a rapist, and you're a terrible person. Especially if you're actually an adult. If you were both children at the time, that is a really tragic situation. Usually that's the result of bad parenting, lack of supervision, and exposure to things you shouldn't have been exposed to. Often it's the result of one child coercing the other into it (especially if one is older). Depending on how old the other child was or how the situation played out, whether or not I would view it as a sin on their part would vary. However, if you were taken advantage of as a child, you absolutely did not do anything wrong. If you're a teenager having sex with another teenager and you're both minors, I think it depends on the situation. If you're within two years of each other, even if one of you is an adult, I think it's mostly okay. A 19 and 17 year old, an 18 and 16 year old, a 17 and 15 year old, a 16 and 14 year old, even a 15 and 13 year old, doesn't seem THAT messed up. However, even a teenager shouldn't be dating someone who isn't a teenager yet (unless it's like 13 and 12, just a one year difference, but 13 and 11 would be inappropriate). Someone in their twenties shouldn't be dating a minor (20 and 17 is too distant for my taste, but 21 and 18 is fine even though it's the same amount of years). Even if you're both teenagers and both minors, more than two years seems a bit much. For example, a 13 and 16 year old, in my opinion, shouldn't be dating, same with 14 and 17, or 15 and 18. When I was 16 I dated a 19 year old and my parents were very concerned. At the time I didn't see anything wrong with it. As an adult looking back, I absolutely understand. At nineteen he had been graduated for a year, had his own apartment, had his own car, worked full time, etc. At sixteen, I was in the summer in between my sophomore and junior years and didn't even have a license yet. A three year difference when you're teenagers is much bigger than a three year difference in your twenties. You grow up fast and are at vastly different levels of maturity. During that same time frame, one of my friends, also sixteen, was dating someone in his late twenties. What he was doing was absolutely 100% wrong in my eyes. She was trying to figure out whether or not it was technically legal or if he could get in trouble, but whether or not it was technically legal doesn't matter to me. It's still morally wrong. He was still taking advantage of her even though she thought she loved him. Another friend of mine was only 16 and making out with a 40 year old married man with children. He again was absolutely taking advantage of her, hurting his wife, and just all around being terrible. That's a sin. However, a friend of mine started dating a 15 year old when she was 16. At 18, he was only 17. Technically she was an adult and he was a minor but I don't see anything wrong with that. I don't think that's a sin. 

6. Is sexual relations with an animal a sin?

Yes, absolutely, 100%. You're terrible. An animal having sex with another animal is part of nature. They have their own ways of showing consent and unfortunately sometimes rape each other. However, an animal being forced into sex with a person has no way of consenting by human standards. Even if the animal somehow actually seems to like it, they can't actually give verbal consent. In my eyes, anything short of an actual "yes" in human sexuality is non-consensual. Most of the time, the animal doesn't even seem to like it. Most of the time it causes physical pain. Pain and lack of consent are both hurting another creature. Definitely a sin. 

7. Is pornography a sin?

Unpopular opinion time, but yes. Absolutely. Let me explain. Some of the people who are acting in porn genuinely like their jobs. They choose to do it of their own free will, they enjoy doing it, the people who work with them respect them, they respect the people they work with, it's a safe environment, and they mostly aren't promoting things that would hurt anyone else. Sure, it exists. It's rare, but it happens. However, the vast majority of cases are not like this. That scenario is mostly a myth that society buys into because it's what we want to believe. In reality, much of the porn industry works hand in hand with the sex trafficking industry. Many of the people in porn are literally forced to be there. They are being raped. Many of the "barely legal" pornos aren't legal at all. They're minors pretending to be 18 year olds who are pretending to be underage. The child pornography industry is also huge and goes hand in hand with the adult industry. What about the people who choose to do it, you ask? Well, many of them agree to specific acts, only certain scenes, or put certain actors on their blacklist. After the agreements are made, the scenes get changed. If they don't do it, they're labeled hard to deal with, makes it harder for them to get more jobs, they lose pay, and sometimes, they are just outright forced into it anyway. Many porn actresses have come forward with stories of being raped on set or having their limits disrespected. STDs run rampant due to being told they aren't allowed to use protection. Drug use is rampant due to it being hard to handle the scenes and lifestyle without them. Some of the acts in porn have gotten so extreme and brutal that women's bodies are literally being permanently damaged due to the stuff they are being required to participate in (such as double anal, double penetration, extreme bdsm, etc.). Many people who do porn do so because they feel they have no other options, especially once they get started. Whenever you watch porn, there is no way for you to be absolutely sure that the person you're watching A. is the age the porn claims they are B. is not a victim of sex trafficking C. wasn't being raped or coerced into it and had all of their limits respected, was fully consenting D. was sober and clean from drugs and therefore able to give consent E. wasn't harmed during filming. There is no way for you as a viewer to be able to tell for sure. Even the porn videos that have the actors say at the beginning that they consent or porn actors who say off camera or on their blogs that they consent have come out later and say that there were times when they were forced, coerced, badly hurt, under the influence, etc. or that they got started in porn underage. Even if it seems like a homemade film a couple decided to make and release together, there is no way for you to know for sure that it wasn't "revenge porn" (one partner decided to secretly share it after a break up). Aside from all of this, the porn industry has normalized painful sex acts and made men more likely to insist upon them and coerce women into it and has desensitized viewers to rape and abuse. I can provide links to many studies and statistics proving what I'm saying. Porn is rape on tape. Porn is a sin.

8. Is supporting the sex industry a sin?

Yes, and for a lot of the same reasons that porn is. When you hire a prostitute, you have no way of knowing for sure whether she is forced to be there, whether or not she's a victim of sex trafficking, whether or not she's only doing it because she's homeless and needs to survive, whether or not she's under the influence and able to give consent, or whether or not she's a minor. You have no way to tell for sure that she is a legal adult doing it of her own free will because she enjoys it. Consent should be freely given and because the person actually wants to do it. If they fear for their survival if they don't, then it's not true consent. Buying sex is rape. Buying sex is a sin.

9. Is being a prostitute a sin?

No. Many do it because they are forced to or coerced into it or do it for survival. Many do it because they feel they have no other choice. Even if they do it of their own free will and love their jobs, it's still not a sin in my eyes. However, those that do it completely of their own free will when they could just as easily do something else and then speak up in defense of the sex industry are committing a sin in my eyes because they are selfishly ignoring all the others who don't love their jobs and speaking over them to make the sex industry look harmless.

10. Is masturbation a sin?

No. It's completely normal, safe, and healthy to explore your own body and experience pleasure. It doesn't involve anyone else and it doesn't hurt anyone else. How can it be a sin to touch your own body? It's yours. Your genitals are part of who you are. You have every right to masturbate and shouldn't feel guilty for it. 

11. Are non-traditional sex acts and/or sodomy a sin? (oral, anal, period sex, bdsm, etc.)

This is a hard one to answer. I don't believe oral is a sin, but I believe in healthy relationships it should go both ways and no one should be pressured into it. I don't believe anal is a sin, but again, only if both people genuinely enjoy it and want to do it. If one person is being pressured into doing something that they don't like doing or that hurts them, then the person pressuring them is committing a sin. I don't think period sex is a sin and I don't think periods are unclean in any way. They are natural and should be viewed as such. BDSM on the other hand...that's a gray area for me. For the submissives or bottoms, I don't view it as a sin. However, for the dominants, for anyone who violently and intentionally hurts another person, for anyone who gets off on the pain of another person, for anyone who controls another person, I absolutely consider what they are doing to be sinning. I view bdsm relationships to be abusive relationships. I view the dominants as abusers and the submissives as victims. Before you say "safe, sane, and consensual," just remember that I've seen how quickly it can go from safe to people literally dying from being choked. Remember that I have seen how quickly it can go from sane to people allowing their partners to permanently disfigure their bodies. Remember that even in abusive relationships people can consent to stay in them for various reasons but that doesn't make it any less abusive. People who self-harm consent to cutting themselves, people with eating disorders consent to starving themselves, people who kill themselves consent to suicide, minors consent to statutory rape, and sometimes victims consent to stay with their abusers. Consent alone does not make it a healthy relationship. Don't get me wrong here, I'm not saying it's a sin to give a slap on the ass or have rough sex where you push your willing partner against the wall to kiss them or to spice things up with a pair of fuzzy handcuffs. If my considering it immoral and abusive genuinely confuses you, you probably haven't been exposed to the ugly side of bdsm that I've been exposed to and whatever minor thing you're doing probably doesn't count as a sin in my eyes. 

12. Is rape a sin? How do you define rape?

Absolutely. Rape is one of the biggest sins you can commit. Rape is anything other than enthusiastic, willing, freely given consent between two people of age who are not under the influence, asleep, or otherwise in a state of mind to give consent and who are on equal ground without fear of saying no because of the power the other holds and who both have full knowledge of what is happening. What does that mean? If she's asleep, it's rape. If he's your student, it's rape (not talking college courses here, that's gray area though because of the risk of feeling coerced due to grades). If you have to beg her and plead because she doesn't want to, it's rape. If she agrees if you use a condom but then you intentionally secretly slip it off, it's rape. If you have to blackmail him, it's rape. If she's your slave, it's rape. Biblical times didn't consider that rape, but they should have. Just because the Bible doesn't say it's rape doesn't mean it's not rape. All rape is a sin.  

13. Is polygamy/polyamory a sin?

Another gray area. Technically, I suppose if everyone is fully willing, loves each other, and they don't feel any jealousy, then it wouldn't be. However, once again, that's rarely the case in reality. In fact, despite polyamory becoming more common in Western, liberal, sex-positive circles, it happens most often in Muslim and Mormon communities. In those cases, it's always one man to several wives, strictly heterosexual (meaning the wives aren't together), and the decision is fully left up to the man. This can absolutely cause pain and jealousy for the wives or leave them feeling like replaceable property who are unequal to their husbands. If it hurts another person, I generally consider it immoral. In the vast majority of cases, I'd consider it a sin, no matter what your religion says about it. 

14. Is birth control a sin? If so, what kinds of birth control are sinful?

I don't consider any form of birth control to be immoral or a sin. It's your body, your choice, and you should do what you need to in order to be responsible and safe. Taking medication isn't a sin.

15. Is emergency contraception a sin?

No. It's also not the same thing as abortion and doesn't work in the same way as the abortion pill does. The morning-after-pill will not terminate an existing pregnancy (pregnancy here being defined as a fertilized egg which has attached to the uterine wall, which is the scientific definition). It works primarily by preventing the fertilization of the egg in the first place but also by preventing fertilized eggs attaching to the uterine wall. 

16. Is abortion a sin? Are there certain scenarios when it is or isn't?

Ah, here we go, a nice controversial one to discuss to really get everyone pissed off. Let's start with the obvious. I absolutely 100% do not consider abortion to be a sin if the mother's life or health is at risk or if the fetus will likely die and only live a short painful life and/or be extremely disfigured. I believe it is the woman's choice. That means that if she chooses to carry the pregnancy to term despite the risks, her choice should be respected. It doesn't make her selfish to bring a child into the world just because the child may have "something wrong" with it. In the cases of rape and incest, I also believe it should be the woman's choice. I know someone who said he believes rape should always result in abortion and doesn't think women should ever choose to carry it to term. Again, I think her choice should be respected no matter what. So what of abortions where lives and health aren't at risk either for the mother or the fetus and where rape and incest play no factor? Well, I believe that early term abortion is okay. Late term abortion without good reason is what I do have a problem with. However, it's not even legal to have a late term abortion without a good reason and it's very rare for anyone to actually want one. Most of the time, late term abortions are performed on wanted pregnancies where something went wrong or they found out about a medical condition or risk late in the pregnancy. Very often, these are life and death cases. Therefore, I support them. For me personally, I would only consider it if A. it was very early on, absolutely no later than the first trimester, and likely only if it was in the first six weeks before the first heartbeat and brain activity or B. if my health or life was at risk or my child's life or health were at risk or there was something terribly wrong with it to the point where it would be cruel to give birth to it. So do I personally consider it a sin outside of the two scenarios where I would personally have one? Well...to be honest, yeah, I kind of do. However, I'm still pro-choice. I believe it's the woman's right to choose and if she happens to choose something that I consider a sin, it's still her body and her right to do so. If it turns out that it is a sin and she has to pay for it later, that's on her. If it turns out its not, then no harm done. Either way, we have to make our own choices and live with them. I wish nothing but the best for her. Abortion should be safe, legal, and accessible. We have the right to our own bodies. Even in Christian theology, we were given free will and what we do with it is up to us. If we go against God's word, that's on us too. I don't know if Christianity is the right way or not, I'm just saying that even as far as that goes, that's not necessarily a good argument against it. Even if it is technically murder, it's still someone doing something to their own bodies and I do view it differently than murder done to another person who isn't living in their body. A comparable situation to abortion wouldn't be someone outright murdering someone else, but someone refusing to allow another person to use their body to live, so such as refusing to donate their kidney to someone who needs a kidney transplant, refusing to donate part of their liver to someone who needs it, or refusing to agree to be an organ donor after death. However, most people are okay with those scenarios, don't consider them murder, and don't view them in the same light as abortion at all. For me, on the other hand, I do consider those a sin as well, which is why I'm currently going through the steps to see if I can donate my kidney to a family member. But once again, I believe it should be up to the individual's choice regardless of my personal belief of it being a sin not to do it. I know someone whose religion tells them it's a sin to sign up as an organ donor. He has one belief on whether or not organ donation or refusal to donate is a sin and I have the opposite belief. From a legal standpoint, I think he should have the right to full bodily autonomy no matter what and regardless of me not agreeing with him. 

17. Is IVF a sin?

There are two main arguments that I hear against IVF. One is that doing that is unnatural because you aren't allowing God to decide if and when you should be pregnant. I think that argument's nonsense. Are you going to refuse medical treatment because it interferes with God's plan on if you should live or die? Certainly not. You trust that if God exists he/she/it/they likely created people to become doctors to help care for you. Same for IVF. The other argument I hear is that sometimes they will implant more fertilized eggs that can successfully attach and be carried to term and that therefore it's "abortion" because you implant more in the hopes that at least one takes and take the risk that the others will not. However, I don't even consider it abortion that early on (if it doesn't attach) and certainly not a sin (even if it does).

18. Is having unnatural childbirth a sin?

In the past, the Catholic Church has considered it immoral and sinful to help ease the pain of childbirth and some still consider it as such (although very few extremists do now) because pain in childbirth for all future generations of women was part of God's punishment to Eve. I don't even consider the story of Adam and Eve in the Garden of Eden to be a true and historically accurate story. I believe it's a myth and that's what it was always intended to be. I believe it was written to teach something, to explain things, a creation myth like any other. The fact that there are people who would actively try to make childbirth as painful as possible because of this myth literally makes me feel nauseous and causes me to lose faith in humanity. The second argument I've heard is that using an epidural can cause risk to the baby and therefore it's selfish to do so. I disagree. It carries some minor risks, sure, but I don't think it outweighs the benefits and I certainly don't think it makes women selfish to use an epidural. I plan to use one if/when I ever have kids. It's certainly not a sin. 

19. Is marrying outside of your religion a sin?

No. You should marry who you love and who you want to marry as long as it's a healthy relationship. The only thing I worry about is that if two people have vastly different views on religion that it could cause fighting later on or one person may feel pressured to convert or give up their own practices. Things like this must be discussed thoroughly in advance, as well as how children will be raised if you have any. Communication and mutual respect is key!

20. Does a legal only marriage not done in a church count or is it living in sin?

I think it counts and I don't consider it a sin, but then again, I don't consider living with your partner outside of marriage as a sin either. If no one is getting hurt, I don't see the problem. 

If you have any more questions you'd like me to answer or if you want to discuss your opinions on these topics, just leave a comment!

Sects of Christianity: Protestant and Catholic views on Salvation and Predestination

I'd like to do a series of posts on theological comparisons between various sects of Christianity (as well as other series comparing the Abrahamic faiths, and comparing world religions in general). For starters, the simplest thing for me to focus on would be some of the big differences between Catholicism and Protestantism. I was raised Catholic and therefore am the most familiar with it, however living in the U.S. means that I have grown up around a variety of Protestant churches and believers. My family never seemed to view Protestants as that much different from us. When I was a child they allowed me to attend a Bible summer camp at a Church of the Nazarene with my friend, my sister's first husband was Lutheran and while there were occasional comments from both families about that, overall they approved since he was still Christian, one of my closest friends and a few of my cousins were raised Presbyterian (although most of my friends were raised Catholic and most of my town was made up of Catholics), and my mother had nothing bad to say about me attending a young adult discussion group for a non-denominational Christian Protestant Church (the church is tied to the Assemblies of God but the discussion group was open to any young Christian who was interested). At one point, my mother even expressed a desire to me to start looking into other churches as she felt disconnected to Catholicism, although she never went through with it. Due to all of this, I always had trouble understanding what the differences were between them until I received formal education on the topics.

To be clear, I understand that "Protestant" is a very broad title and not all Protestant faiths are the same. Protestants can include everything from Anglicans/Episcopalians, Presbyterians, Lutherans, Baptists, etc. to many newer churches as well. I realize that not all of them hold the same beliefs and I don't claim to know the differences between every single religion that falls under Christian Protestantism, nor do I even know every denomination. I'm no expert on the topic and I don't claim to be. However, I have studied the Protestant Reformation and some of the more common issues that caused Protestants to split from the Catholic Church initially. I want to focus on two of the differences I studied here.

The first thing I'd like to focus on is the idea of salvation. One of the primary differences between Catholicism and Protestantism (at least the denominations I'm familiar with that initially split off) is whether Christians are saved by works (Catholic) or saved by grace (Protestant). This concept boils down essentially to the question "do we get to heaven from doing good works or do we get to heaven solely by faith in Christ who offers the faithful salvation?" Catholics tend to believe that doing good deeds is what "buys" your way into heaven. You have to commit to not sinning and confessing if you do. This is why even the Pope recently said that atheists who are good people can still get into heaven, although this is absolutely a more modern Catholic teaching. The medieval Church also believed in selling "indulgences" which Luther had a major problem with and which the Church stopped doing during the Counter Reformation in order to stop losing followers by going along with some of what Protestants wanted. The idea behind indulgences was that someone could give money to the church in order to absolve their sins. I certainly agree with Luther on that front. Wealth can't buy salvation. I'm not even entirely sure I agree with the Christian concepts of salvation and the afterlife anymore, but I do know the Bible makes it clear that Jesus said it was difficult for the wealthy to get into heaven and advised people to give up all their wealth to follow him. Christianity started as a religion for the poor and the oppressed. However, I can understand the reasoning behind "giving to the Church" being an act of "good works," but I don't think that having more money means someone is a better person. I also don't agree that giving money to the Church is that important, especially when that money could be used to feed your family or donate to charity. I certainly don't think any human being has the right or authority to literally sell forgiveness of sins on God's behalf. So on the topic of indulgences, I certainly side more with the views of Martin Luther that helped spark the Protestant Reformation.

However, I do think there is something to be said for "saved by works". In my view, that means living a good life, doing good to others, helping other people, caring for God's creation, following the words of Jesus, etc. So literally doing "good works," not buying forgiveness. Indulgences is not an act of "good works" in my view. On the opposite side, you have "saved by grace" which means that as long as you believe in Christ you will go to heaven and if you don't accept Christ you will go to hell. I'm sorry, but I don't agree with that view at all. I'm sure it's evident by now considering I have a pluralist blog, but I truly believe that if there is a heaven there is more than one path to get there. No one religion can be completely true while all the others are completely false. I can't imagine that if Jesus was truly God and was waiting at the gates of heaven that he would turn away a non-Christian person who lived a genuinely good and selfless life of loving their neighbor and helping others while letting in others who were lucky enough to be raised Christian who didn't do nearly as many good works and who didn't love their non-Christian neighbors. That view of Jesus and heaven doesn't make sense to me. I know that according to the Bible, Jesus said the only way to the Father was through him, but I think that can apply to anyone who lives as a good person the way Jesus advised, even if they didn't believe Jesus was the son of God. What of the people who never heard of Jesus or who were raised to believe their family's religion was the right one?

This is the type of question that led me to believe in religious pluralism. I can't believe that an all-knowing, all-powerful, and all-good deity exists that would allow some people to be born and raised into a different religion than the one who worships them in a society that preaches that religion is the only true one or that would allow people to be born who never heard of Jesus, and with that knowledge of that person's upbringing would use their power to then damn that person to an eternity of hell anyway for not accepting Christ as their savior, and still somehow be considered a "good" deity. Of course, those issues are also brought up often in theology, philosophy, and religious ethics with "the problem of evil." The idea that many of the things that go on in this world happen while a deity who is supposedly all powerful, all knowing, and entirely good exists is something that many people can't understand. It's what leads many to atheism or agnosticism. It's what drives the conversation around the concept of "free will" and how that plays into the "problem of evil." That topic could be a post entirely on its own, so I will try not to get off topic here. However, my view on those questions does lead me to believe that faith in Christ alone and therefore Christ's gift of grace to his followers alone cannot be the only way to salvation.

Which leads me to the next topic of discussion: predestination. You can probably already guess that I don't agree with it. I've heard contradicting things actually, that some Protestants still believe in it but most don't anymore, but I don't know how true that is. The idea behind the Protestant belief of predestination is that God has already determined which souls are destined to be saved and which are destined to eternal damnation, before the person is even born. God makes the decision based on who will likely respond well to God's teachings and therefore follow God and accept his grace and salvation, where everyone else is destined to be damned before taking their first breath. It's honestly the most horrible thing I've ever heard. I thought God was supposed to be loving? Isn't God supposed to give us a chance?

At the end of the day, I believe that if there is a God and if there is a heaven, it would be open to everyone, as long as they're a good person. Being a good person means a result of our own choices, not something that was determined before we were born or based on what society and place we were born into and therefore which religion we were raised with. Therefore, I honestly can't say I agree with the ideas behind the concepts of "saved by grace" or predestination. Nothing against Protestants, and I realize that not all Protestants still fully believe in all of this, but other than indulgences which are now a thing of the past, I side more with the Catholic Church on these issues. Although ultimately, my views don't align completely with the Catholic Church either, they certainly align more with Catholicism than Protestantism.

Prayer of Saint Francis of Assisi

This is a Christian prayer but it's not one of the ones I grew up with. In fact, I was an adult before I heard it, but I think it's beautiful. One of the great things about it is that it's so universal. It's mainly about what we should all strive for if we want to live spiritual lives. If you practice a different religion, have different beliefs, or even if you don't believe in any sort of higher power, I think it can just be slightly tweaked (perhaps just change out a few words) for you to use it too. You could view it as a prayer, a spell, a poem, or even a mantra for meditation and self-inspiration. It focuses more on being a good person with inner peace than anything else. In my mind, that's what our spirituality should focus on, rather than which deity or method of worship is the "right" one. All spiritual paths have more in common with each other than people believe. I'm going to try to live by these words as best I can.

Lord, make me an instrument of thy peace!

That where there is hatred, I may bring love.

That where there is wrong, I may bring the spirit of forgiveness.

That where there is discord, I may bring harmony.

That where there is error, I may bring truth.

That where there is doubt, I may bring faith.

That where there is despair, I may bring hope.

That where there are shadows, I may bring light.

That where there is sadness, I may bring joy.

Lord, grant that I may seek rather to comfort, than to be comforted.

To understand, than to be understood.

To love, than to be loved.

For it is by self-forgetting that one finds.

It is by forgiving that one is forgiven.

It is by dying that one awakens to Eternal Life.

Happy Hauntings!

As promised in a previous post, I'd like to discuss beliefs on ghosts and the afterlife. I figured since we're in the Halloween season now it would be the perfect time to bring it up!

Everyone has different ideas about what they believe happens after you die and I've realized that individual people's beliefs don't always match up to their religion or lack thereof. For example, I know atheists who believe in ghosts or believe that if they talk to their loved ones they can still hear them, but they don't believe in god or any kind of divine entity or creator. I know Christians who believe in reincarnation or who doubt the possibility of an afterlife at all. It's very interesting to me that when it comes to ideas about ghosts and the afterlife, even people who normally subscribe to one particular religion tend to hold different beliefs than what their religion tells them is "right".

I've always sort of believed in ghosts, probably because my mother also believed in ghosts and raised me to believe in them as well. In fact, for awhile I was convinced that the house I grew up in might have been haunted due to some weird experiences I've had there. I've also known quite a few people who have been absolutely convinced that they have seen, talked to, felt, or otherwise came in contact with a ghost. One incident that always stuck out to me was when my aunt claimed she saw my grandmother's ghost talk to her while she was in the hospital. My aunt had just been in a horrific car accident and she said that she saw my grandmother (her mother) and that my grandmother told her "not yet". She said once she heard her say that she knew that she was going to survive and she did, but the word "yet" seemed ominous both to her and to the rest of us. A month later after surviving the initial crash my aunt died from a blood clot caused by one of the surgeries she had to have following the car accident. My whole family became convinced that perhaps somehow my grandmother was able to buy her some extra time or knew that she had a limited amount of time left but wouldn't die right away. This wasn't the only incident like this that I've heard of, in fact, I know many people who have similar stories. All of this served to back up my beliefs in ghosts, but for awhile I went through a period of being a skeptic and I suppose I still sort of place myself in that category. It's hard to believe in something when you haven't seen it with your own two eyes.

This desire to "see it to believe it" led me to decide to go ghost hunting with a few friends of mine. We went to a place that once served as a home for the elderly, the mentally ill, and the poor, but has since closed down. Many people claim it's haunted and my friends have gone there multiple times with equipment like video cameras, k2 meter, laser grid, radio scanner/spirit box, etc. and have said they saw ghosts and talked to them. So this past spring I decided to go with them. It was an absolutely amazing experience. Two of my friends saw the arm of a ghost that looked like a shadow reach out into a hallway, two felt a presence behind them and the spot where it was got significantly colder, and we seemed to be communicating with a few of them using the spirit box. There was one hallway where reportedly both a rape and a suicide happened and when we were sitting in that hallway everyone in our group said they could feel a horrible presence, myself included. I can't even begin to describe it. It was hard to breathe, I felt nervous, scared, anxious, a weight on my chest, the feeling that we weren't alone, and a feeling of absolute dread. I started to feel nauseated even. It was one of the worst feelings ever and it was the only place I'd ever felt like that. I kept hearing noises that could potentially be explained, but just didn't seem normal to me. The rest of the place didn't feel like that at all, it felt fine, like as though if it were haunted, they were "friendly ghosts" but that hallway was pure dread, negativity, and fear. I still somewhat consider myself to be a skeptic, but that hallway alone sort of makes me classify myself as a believer, because something was absolutely not right.

The only time I ever felt anything even slightly like that hallway was when I visited my grandparents' house after they had moved out. We rented out their house after they moved in with my uncle and one of the tenants had a friend who worked in construction whom my dad hired to help remodel the house. After a bad breakup and a period of depression, he hung himself while working on my grandparents' house. After that, the whole house seemed to have a bad vibe to it. I can't explain it, but it didn't feel like home the way it did before. The room he killed himself in especially felt cold and "off". However, even that was no where near as bad as that hallway. Nothing I've ever experienced in my entire life ever felt like that hallway. It was terrifying.

My mom actually has a few experiences with ghosts and even demons, so she claims, but I'd like to make a separate post on that dedicated specifically to myths and beliefs about demons. For now I'd like to pose the question to all of you: Do you believe in ghosts? If so, have you ever had any experiences with ghosts? Let me know in the comments!

P.S. I hope everyone is having a great Halloween season! I'm going to an amusement park with my best friend tonight for their Halloween "fright nights" which means roller coasters and haunted houses all night long! I'm so excited! Oh, and happy Friday the 13th too!

Chosen Families

Warning: This post is long, nerdy, and sappy. So move along if you don't want to read that. But if you've ever found yourself in the position where you've been abused or disowned by your family or had family issues so badly that you lose your connection to some of your relatives, it just might be the post for you. Also, it's more of a mental health and relationships type of post, but I feel like focusing on that stuff is good for your soul and figuring out how you define those types of things is connected to spirituality, however loosely.

Society warns us not to put too much time into consuming entertainment media. We can read articles of professionals lamenting the amount of time the average person spends on the internet or watching television. We ironically read articles on the internet and shared on our facebook feeds of baby boomers complaining about how much time millennials spend on their smart phones or on social media. To be honest, that has always been hilarious to me. Who are you to judge? You're right here too doing the same thing. However, I can agree that all things are best in moderation. More importantly, if we are going to consume media, we shouldn't do so while absent-minded and bored, we should think critically about the media we consume and view it as a mirror of society. We can stare mindlessly at the television or we can learn from it. We can be inspired by it. That's the path I choose. So I'd like to spend a few minutes discussing some of the media I enjoy and how it has affected my view on life.

Growing up, my favorite television show was Roseanne. It always reminded me of my own family, with loud, out-spoken women, loving yet frequently arguing family members, all struggling to get by financially who don't quite have their life together. It's simultaneously relatable and hilarious, which makes it unsurprising to me that it was one of the most successful sitcoms of all time. Of course, that show focused on a typical family unit: married parents, a biological sister and mother of the sitcom mom, and the married couple's three biological children. Marriage is part of the typical family unit, so when Mark and David both eventually married into the family, they became part of the traditional family unit in that way. However, David joined the family long before he officially and legally became a member. Roseanne let him live with them when she saw how verbally, mentally, and emotionally abusive his own mother was. She allowed him to stay there even when Darlene, his girlfriend and their daughter, broke up with him and moved away from home herself. He became a chosen member of their family and as much their son as any of their biological children.

Another one of my all time favorite television series is Buffy the Vampire Slayer. There have been many academic papers and books written about this show and it's huge cultural impact on our society, so much that the field even has it's own name, "Buffy Studies," and has had it's own academic journal compiling the writings. This show has certainly affected my views in many ways, including my views on feminism and spirituality/faith. One concept from Buffy which has been focused on quite frequently has been the idea of "chosen families" evident in the series, as well as in many other of Whedon's works and other television series in the same genre.

The main character, Buffy Summers, has a biological family, of course. She has her mother Joyce Summers whom she loves dearly. Their relationship hasn't always been perfect, what with Joyce kicking Buffy out of their house in season two, a decision which she immediately regrets, and with leaving her daughter alone on some holidays, such as Thanksgiving in season four. Buffy also fears that her parents' divorce may be partially her fault and it is undeniable that their need to relocate was due to events that happened after she was first called to be the Slayer. However, her mother was both a part of her biological family and her chosen family. Their bond was strong and loving, as the bond between parent and child should be. Her relationship with her father was no where near as tight and in later seasons of the show he was only mentioned, never seen, as he didn't even make it to his former wife's funeral. Buffy's little sister Dawn is an unusual case, in some ways her biological sister but in other ways, not true family at all. She was created out of Buffy's dna and all memories of her were fabricated, but as far as Buffy was concerned, she was family and fully her sister.

However, Buffy's family was far larger than that. Buffy's family was a chosen family, made up of her friend Willow, whose own biological family was only seen once, Xander, whose biological family was shown to be quite dysfunctional, and her watcher Giles, who fulfilled the role of father-figure in their lives. Their romantic partners eventually also joined their "family" to varying degrees, including Cordelia, Anya, Tara, Angel, and Spike. This concept of chosen families was mentioned outright in an episode where Tara's biological and abusive family came to force her to leave with them and her new friends stopped them from doing so, claiming she was already with her family by being with them. After Buffy died in the season five finale, Dawn's primary caregivers included Willow and her girlfriend Tara who had moved into the Summers' house, Giles who remained a father-figure, Xander and Anya who babysat and drove her to school, and Spike, the vampire who looked after her and babysat her as her own personal bodyguard. Dawn was only a minor, yet was fully being taken care of by a "family" which consisted of no biological family. None of them were legally bound to care for her, yet all joined together as her chosen family to do so anyway. Even after breaking up with Willow, Tara remained a large part of Dawn's life. They chose each other as family and their bond was just as strong if not much stronger than their bonds with their biological family.

This theme of "chosen families" continued into the Buffy spinoff series Angel as well. Angel, Cordelia, Wesley, Gunn, Fred, and Lorne all formed a chosen family together and all acted as family toward Angel's biological son, Connor. Their relationships with each other had ups and downs and wasn't always great, but the same is true for biological families. Often, people view biological family has the people you have to love, but consider friendships to be different and drop them if there starts to be problems. However, this wasn't the case in Angel and it's not the case in my real life either. At the end of the day, their love for each other and their bond was undeniable and lasted until the end. This theme continues into some of Whedon's other works as well, such as the tragically short-lived sci-fi space western series Firefly and it's follow up film Serenity. The crew of the spaceship Serenity were very much a team of misfits thrown together primarily by circumstance but who formed a family out of each other. This chosen family included the captain, veteran, rebel, and criminal Malcolm Reynolds, his best friend Zoe who served alongside him in the military and who became his first mate on his ship, her husband Wash who served as the ship's pilot, Kaylee, a young woman who worked as the ship's mechanic, Jayne, a man who served as the gun-and-muscle of the group but who was sometimes lacking in morals and intelligence, and Inara, a companion (high class escort legally working as part of a guild or union) who rented a shuttle on the ship. They were joined by three passengers during the pilot episode: the aging preacher Shepherd Book, Simon Tam, a highly educated young man from a well-off family, and his insane, genius sister with special abilities, River Tam, both of whom were fugitives.

The crew and passengers of Serenity formed a chosen family of misfit criminals fighting against a corrupt regime, a theme certainly not uncommon in fantasy, science fiction, and other related genres of television, and found throughout several of my favorite shows. This same setup is seen in the science fiction/space travel television series Farscape, produced by the Jim Henson Company. John Crichton, a human from modern-day Earth (modern for that time anyway, the show aired in the late 90s-early 00s) and astronaut who found himself shot through a wormhole to a distant part of the universe and pulled onto a living spaceship full of prisoners-turned-fugitives running from a corrupt government who would form a chosen family with each other. This setup is also seen in the historical fiction television series Robin Hood which aired from 2006-2009 on BBC, which followed the legendary Robin Hood and his gang, or chosen family (known as his merry men in the original legends), made up of outlaws who found themselves in that situation almost entirely based on being in the wrong place at the wrong time, but who decided to join together both for their own survival and their desire to be heroes for others. Even in shows like Smallville, which doesn't resemble that same setup at all, the idea of chosen families can be found when the Kents literally find a stray alien child in a field who needed a home and took him in as their adopted son, when they symbolically adopted a few of his friends into their family, including Pete whom was trusted with his secret origins and abilities fairly early on and Lex whom did not have a functional family or good parental role models of his own. In later seasons, Clark's best friend Chloe becomes his chosen family, with them becoming closer to each other than most of their actual family members, and by the series' end with his upcoming marriage to her cousin will finally become officially family. Even after Clark has the opportunity to meet some of his real biological family, he still remains closer to his adopted family and his chosen family member Chloe than his actual family members. When Chloe's friend and classmate Lana moves in with her and her father, Chloe adds her onto a family tree homework assignment as her "sister" despite them not being biologically related or related through marriage, to show that she views her as part of her family, the family she chose.

This theme of chosen families is seen across various forms of fiction including television series, movies (such as Guardians of the Galaxy for one recent example that I can think of), literature, theater, etc. and it is absolutely something that we can learn from and be inspired by in our own lives. I was raised to view this as normal growing up. My grandmother's best friend was a woman who worked with my grandfather and who was around the same age as her eldest son (my uncle). She was Italian, just as my grandparents were, and an immigrant who had much in common with my family. However, she had no biological family in the States. My grandmother fully and completely brought them into our family as chosen family members. She always told me she viewed that woman as not only a friend, but as the daughter she never had. She babysat and treated the woman's children as her own grandchildren and I grew up viewing them more as cousins than friends of the family. They were invited to spend every holiday and birthday with us and her daughter, who was the same age as my sister, even had her own bedroom at my grandmother's house which eventually got passed down to me. When I became best friends with one of my grandmother's neighbors, she started to view that girl and her sister as her own grandchildren and extensions of our family. When one of my mother's best friends needed a place to stay, she moved in and lived on our couch for months (we didn't have any spare rooms or beds). When one of my best friends needed a place to stay in high school, my mother invited her to live with us and she did stay for about a week. When my family was going through a very rough time with medical issues, my best friend's family offered to take care of me. They took me to school every day, I went to her grandmother's house after school every day, and then to her parents' house until my father could pick me up at night. They were the ones who ensured my homework got done, they were the ones who fed me dinner, they were the ones who watched after me. And now, they view me a part of their family just as my parents view their daughter, my best friend, as part of ours. My husband and I share a best friend who lived with us around the time we got married. Even when he lost his job and could no longer afford rent, we picked up the slack and he continued living with us. I view his children as my own family and will always do whatever I can to help them and care for them. When his youngest child was born and we visited them in the hospital, a nurse came in and he introduced us to the nurse as "the aunt and uncle" despite us not "officially" being family.

The fiction I consume has always reflected my real life in this way. Our families are not just the people we are biologically or legally related to, they are also just as much made up of the people we choose and the people who choose us. In my eyes, my family does not include some of my actual relatives. There are some who have never seemed to genuinely care about me and so they aren't part of my chosen family. Instead, my chosen family, the people I recognize as family, is made up of a select few of my actual relatives and a select few best friends. I wouldn't have it any other way. I would do anything for these people and I know they would do the same for me. These are the relationships that I care about nurturing. The relationships I have with some of my actual relatives are so distant or toxic that I know they aren't worth it. My relatives (I won't even call them family, they're just people I'm unfortunately related to) include a cousin who tried to kill my aunt and my sister, a grandfather who abused my grandmother so badly that he thought he killed her and left her for dead (both of those relatives are dead now), and a cousin who molested me as a child and regularly violently attacked his brother. Just because I'm related to them doesn't make them my family. My sister's biological father was a rapist who threatened to murder her as a baby. Being her biological father didn't make him her dad. I have some blood relatives who are or were absolutely amazing people who are part of my chosen family as well as my biological family and who I would always choose, even if we weren't related. I don't mean for this post to sound anti-biological family, because it isn't. The person I was closest to in the world was a biological family member. All I'm saying is sometimes our relatives are wonderful people, but sometimes they're the worst people you can imagine. If you're stuck with some of the latter, you don't have to recognize them as family if you don't want to. If you have friends that are way better, consider yourself blessed, and go right ahead considering them family instead. Doing so will improve your mental health and spiritual well being. In my eyes, my chosen family is my real family and I'm so grateful for every single one of them, whether they're my actual relatives or not. We might not get to choose our relatives, but we can choose who we love, and in that way, we can absolutely choose who we call family.

Honoring the Dead

In most religions and even secular society, we tend to have some sort of funeral service when a loved one dies. I've been to some very traditional funerals, the typical Catholic viewing-mass-burial-wake combo, and to some slightly less traditional ones, such as a memorial service where everyone was invited to gather around the ashes of the deceased, talk among each other about how they knew the deceased, and then finally the immediate family made a few brief speeches and led a quick prayer followed by a lunch buffet. These rituals are more for the living than for the dead, they are to give us a sense of closure, and I believe that they help quite a bit with the grieving process despite the fact that most people claim that they "hate funerals."

For some of us, the grieving process and need for closure extends far beyond the week of the death. In my family we visit the graves of our loved ones for years or even decades to come to deliver wreaths, flags, plant flowers, etc. Most of my family members are buried in the same cemetery, all buried in the ground where we can put wreaths or plant flowers right over their graves. However, on my dad's side of the family, mausoleums are the preferred method of burial. Both of my grandparents are buried in a mausoleum in a very high plot that I can't even reach and my uncle was cremated and placed in a mausoleum plot in the same cemetery.

This makes it very difficult for me to be able to mourn them in the way that I'm used to. With my other family members, I can bring them a wreath or some flowers and it feels like I'm honoring them, I'm doing something special for them and bringing them an offering of sorts, and it helps me to feel connected to them. I realize that this is more for my benefit than for theirs, but it really helps me to do so. I'm at a loss for ways to honor my loved ones in mausoleums which is especially hard on me since the people I was always closest to were my grandparents and they are the ones that are the most difficult to honor after their deaths.

I've been trying to come up with some new ways to honor the dead that I can use with them and it seems like the perfect time to explore these further since we are entering October. October is of course the height of the Halloween season, a holiday which focuses on the veil between the living and the dead. Across different religions and cultures this time of year is a time to honor the dead. In Catholicism, the day after Halloween is All Saints Day, a day to honor the most holy of people who have gone before us, and the day after that is All Souls Day, a day to honor and pray for all our dead. In Mexican culture, the Day of the Dead festivities go from October 31st to November 2nd where they bring offerings to their loved ones' graves and pray for them (among other festivities). In many neo-pagan and wiccan faiths, the holiday of Samhain falls on Halloween and food is set aside for our ancestors, rituals are done to honor the dead, and the thinning of the veil between the living and the dead is recognized. Honoring the dead is a major part of many different spiritual and religious traditions and is also a very important part of our spirituality and mental health as the living who were left behind. I hope to draw on many of the paths I've studied for inspiration on ways to honor my grandparents.

Things I've come up with:

• Going to the mausoleum and silently praying the Rosary while standing in front of my grandparents' graves (they were Catholic so regardless of my personal religious beliefs, it seems like a good practice to honor them) and then quietly talking to them or silently talking to them in my head and hoping they can somehow hear me.
• Buying purple flowers, my grandmother's absolute favorite, but placing them on my table at home instead of bringing them to the cemetery where I have no where to put them. This way, I'm still going out and buying them for her to honor her and can go purchase them on important dates such as on her birthday. Whenever I see them sitting on my table I can think of her and remember how happy they would have made her.
• Starting a garden where I could plant purple flowers and tend to them regularly as a way to honor her.
• Starting a garden where I could plant some food necessary to make some of her recipes. So for example, planting tomatoes so I could use her sauce recipes to make it completely from scratch (yes, she was Italian, so her sauce recipe was a big deal). 
• Setting up an ancestor altar in my house to honor them. I could use a small surface to set up a picture of them, perhaps set out a few things that belonged to them such as the necklace my grandmother wore everyday, I could set up a vase of purple flowers, and a candle to light when I say a prayer for them or talk to them. 
• Getting a memorial tattoo. I've thought about this one quite a bit and I know exactly what I would want to get if I go through with it.
• Doing things that would honor them or that they liked doing. For example, I want to read my grandfather's favorite books, I want to try to improve my Italian and become fluent in it because that was their first language, and I want to visit Italy someday to see the places where they grew up, where they got married, etc. 
• Making and eating one of their favorite meals, especially if it was something that my grandmother used to make for me.
• Donating to a charity in their honor, especially if it's one that would have helped them while they were alive, for example an Alzheimer's research organization. 

I might try doing some of these things this month and I plan on continuing to look for new and different ways to honor them as well. What rituals and practices do you use to honor your loved ones who have passed away?

New family member!

I'm falling behind on updates for my blog, but for good reason! Yesterday I adopted another dog from the local shelter! She's our second dog and close in age to our first dog. Brooklyn is six years old and Ginger, our new addition, is eight. She's shy, kind of scared, but very sweet. We're not sure exactly what she is, but we believe she may be a mix of Chihuahua, Dachshund, and Corgi. She kind of looks like a little fox. We met her last weekend at the shelter, spent the week preparing for her arrival, spent a small fortune at Petsmart, and welcomed her into our home and our family yesterday. So far she's adjusting well to the change, as is her "brother" Brooklyn. Then tomorrow my husband and I celebrate our one year wedding anniversary! We've been together for over nine years total. I'm so grateful for our perfect little family! I can't wait until we're financially stable enough to bring human children into our family too.

Welcome, Ginger!