Druid

http://www.ryeandbattleobserver.co.uk/509/...show.3504604.jp

Are they being resonable or just being killjoys?

Sad to say, I think the druid has a point or two. I don't think the stunt itself is particularly offensive, just dim-witted; but concerns for the safety of the site and for the local (and more than local, if televised) perception of the druids are pretty valid.

I agree. There's already too much misunderstanding about these beliefs, and that's by the few who care enough to pay attention in the first place. Fair treatment by the media may be too much to expect as well. More importantly, the preservation of important archeological sites is a responsibility shared by all irrespective of belief.

There are many modernist Druids that have the attitude that Instant Druidry is possible. In the ancient times it took 20 years to master the arts. I have studied Herbal healing, Poetry, Berhons Law, Divination (several Disciplines) Pathwork, and Fith-fath (second sight). I was not allowed by my teachers to claim to be a Druid until I learned all this and many of the old tales and has a working knowledge of the Celtic Pantheon. So find "stunts" like that offensive to the truth

while i find nothing wrong with anyone who wants to study the old ways and become a druid that site to me just makes me sick. that is something stuiped and should never be done. i think someone looking for his 5 minutes of fame and doesnt care what kind of lable he puts on a group of people. this is how people are misinformed and get the idea that druids think nothing but sex sex sex and then when there is a group that wants to meet and they take the study to heart you'll find a bunch of other people protesting near by calling them perverts and sex addicts. in the end you reap what you sow and i know that guy will get what he deserves in the end. to all the faithful and true i tip my hat to you and wish i had your courage to follow something i have a interest in.

Well said, I greet you as a free person.

It is most unfortunate that first the Romans, then the Roman church, and later the Anglo-Normans were so successful in destroying so much of the knowledge possessed by the Druids, and that the resulting lack of knowledge about their belief systems and teachings continue to be the source of much misunderstanding.

Whether you believe in Christianity, Islam, Judeaism. or Druidism. they are all superstition, a means of controlling Human behaviour. There are no Gods, no Spirits, or Faires to appease or placate. There is merely the Universe and this world and its inhabitants are a mere "Mote in the Eye of that Universe".

Camac.

Camac, I hope that your unbelief works for you and makes you happy. If so it is good. As for me my belief helps give me contentment. But in the end you have no more proof that you are right, than I have. That is why it is called belief. If we had concrete proof it would not be belief, for not believing what is proven would be foolish. Try jumping from a 30 story building to disprove the proven laws of gravity.

Jumping of a building is a perfect example of belief in gravity, which is based on fact.
Now I don’t know a lot about being a Druid, although I do believe that a lot of it…is based on natural “Real Events” that occur on this planet, due to it action through out time and the universe. Based on that alone, I would be inclined to be a Druid, rather then to follow all those other so called religions out there. That are based on belief alone.
I’m sorry, but I want proof, nothing else will do.

Some things are beyond the finite understanding and have to be accepted based on the things we have received from the ancestors. Either way as a Druid I am not as dogmatic as some other faiths that say theirs is the only right belief. After all can you prove/disprove from any records the existence of anything beyond the grave? I think not. however people for as long as can be remembered have speculated as to what happens when we die. And even beyond. To think that in the infinite span of time we humans are here for but a twinkling of an eye, then die to be no more is to me not logical. However if that be the case I will accept that at the time of death. For now I prefer to believe there is more.

The only problem with this is that the person who's obligated to provide a proof is the one making an assertion, not the doubter of it. A doubter of an hypothesis is simply stating there's insufficient evidence to support a theological conclusion and thus believes it to be untrue. Lack of belief is not something someone is obliged to prove - the original assertion is.

The silliness about some people's belief about atheists - just to use an example - is that atheism is a belief that has no more substantial proof than belief in God, when in actuality atheism is a denial of a set of asserted beliefs, with the contention that neither corroboration nor proof exists to sustain them. If I contend that Little Red Riding Hood is the word of God and you said there's nothing that exists to support that contention, on whom would lie the burden of proof?

Although Camac is making some specific ascertions, his main statement is to doubt the truth of the religions he specified, and its to that aspect of his post that I refer. I agree with you that there's no arguing with belief and am delighted to see someone who realizes the difference between a belief and a truth, including their own, because it means there's an open mind at work. Thank you for that. There's far too much certainty about many beliefs in the world, particularly religious ones.

Though this concept came out after Ancient times I believe even the Earliest Druids would have confirmed, "Minds are like parachutes, they work best when open." Incidentally much of what is written about the Druids of old is from Roman or Greek sources,the Romans painted the Druids as being Priests, the Greeks referred to us as Philosophers, I believe the Greeks were more correct in their concept. And always remember that Religion is made by man for the needs of man in a particular era, Philosophy grows and evolves with time.