Sunday, May 30, 2010

No Fats, No Fems...No PPE?

I was told today by a pretty new Rioter that a tweet I sent out today while I was at my gym's pool went against the principles of Project Pagan Enough. The tweet in question reads a little something like this:

Eeek!!! Overly hairy man alert!!! Begone gym pool blasphemer!!!

And here I thought, for a tiny moment, I was joking. Before I discuss the finer points of the dichotomy of taste and tolerance, I'd like to discuss the finer points of a gym pool. Nay, a gym pool in the suburbs of one of the largest cities in America that is known to be a men's fashion capitol.

Manscaping. Is. Everywhere. From eyebrows to waxing to Nair to backs to fronts, from top to bottom, manscaping is everywhere. When you're around a community pool, you get all shapes, sizes, and levels of fur. However, around a ritzy gym in the suburbs of Chicago, you get overly tanned, overly worked out, overly waxed guys sitting around staring at one another. It reminds me of a scene from Eat, Pray, Love in which the author describes a scene from Bali - a party.

At the party, a lot of people got dressed up in their best clothes, and then sat around staring at one another. Nobody danced or did anything other than sit around and watch. That's kind of what it's like at the gym pool. Guys work out really hard 10 months out of the year so they can spend 2 months of Chicago summer walking around in their most attractive swimsuit, baring all of their year's hard work. None of the guys really swim or dive or do laps. They just sit there being hot.

A big hairy guy sort of sticks out. Thus the 'blasphemer' comment. I'm not saying the guy can't be there. I'm not saying hairy people are bad or less than or not fit to be seen in public. I'm making a joke about a guy showing up amidst a sea of steroids and hair removal products in all his unworked out, unmanscaped glory.

It's funny. It's a joke. Let's all find that bridge we built a while back and get right on over it.

But this brings up a really important point: the difference between tolerance and taste. The Rioter said that this is "basic discrimination," and likened my comment to "ginger hate" and nudist colonies kicking people out who they deem unsexy. The email that I received went on to compare my comment with the hypocrisy pagans accuse the Christian Church of having.

Normally, one would get a bit defensive and say brash things. I'm not that kind of Rioter. I would just like to make a simple distinction:


  1. Taste (in this instance) means "a particular liking for certain flavors" or more appropriately "a person's tendency to like and dislike certain things." 
  2. Tolerance means "the ability or willingness to tolerate something, in particular the existence of opinions or behaviors that one does not necessarily agree with."

This is a matter of taste, not a matter of tolerance. Well, actually it was a matter of observation and humor, but that point has been made. When I talk in Project Pagan Enough about treating others with respect and tolerance despite their physical appearance, I mean that. We shouldn't denigrate someone's right to call themselves pagan due to their gym body or lack thereof. However, just because I am not willing to discredit someone's religious claims due to their appearance does not mean I find them attractive. The two aren't really even in the same category, are they? 

I like tall, dark, and beefy. Tom Welling. Mario Lopez. Victor Webster. These are my tastes. It doesn't mean that I believe anybody who is tall, dark, and beefy is automatically a good person, a bad person, or a good chess player. I make no judgments about a person's character or moral standing or anything else just because of their outer shell. I have had many a relationship with guys who were not gym bunny material due to their outstanding personalities, and many a relationship based on abs alone. I prefer the first.

As far as tolerance goes, this is a much deeper beast. Tolerance deals in intentions and beliefs and passions and truths. Allowing someone to get into what makes a person a person, rather than what makes them human. The soul and not the body. Tolerance means not judging someone based on one aspect of his or her person.

An intolerant act would have been to say he is fat thus he must be lazy. Someone is black so they commit crime. Someone is Jewish, therefore they are evil. Etc. Etc. Etc.

Was my joke the most sensitive thing I could have said? No, of course not. Am I to be exceedingly sensitive all the time? Well, that wouldn't be me.

So, Rioters, I put this to you. Does my comment go against the ideas of tolerance espoused in Project Pagan Enough? Am I a hypocrite? Or, am I a bad comedian? Or, even still, am I simply expressing taste instead of tolerance?

Leave a comment, tweet @IncitingARiot, or email IncitingARiotPodcast@gmail.com.

Love and Lyte,

Fire Lyte

Friday, May 28, 2010

New Poem: beer

Hey Rioters! I haven't posted a new poem in a while. Probably because I haven't written a new poem in a while. I've had the idea for this one rummaging around in my head for a while, building up some steam. Tonight, I was laying in bed, and it came. Full force. It wouldn't let me sleep until I put it on paper, but it came so fast I almost lost it. So I typed it instead.

If you write poetry or are artistically inclined, that made sense to you. Otherwise, I'm sure I sounded weird.

Anyways, now that that's out of me, I can get back to writing the other project I have going on. Most importantly, however, I can now go to sleep without beer cans in my head.

Oh yeah, that's what the poem is about: beer cans. Sort of.

Love and Lyte,

Fire Lyte

                     beer

There’s this patch of dirt where nothing grows
under a bridge, barely a bridge, that keeps a creek
from being road.
Ground into this dirt is a beer can multiplied into
a hundred beer cans, crushed, and I see them.
The hands that crushed these beer cans, under this bridge,
in this neighborhood that
if they still did the white-picket-fence thing
would be stuck in the middle of.

The hands attached to arms and bodies of adolescents,
youth with a mission.
To experience adulthood in a bottle, in a can.
Man.
Because, that’s what it’s all about. Doing the things
you’re not supposed to do, the things that are probably
bad for you but you get to do them anyways,
because you’re an adult and adults don’t have to be
told what to do.
Because adults make the rules.

Because adults make the rules.
They don’t have bed times or homework and they
get car keys and credit cards and they get to drink
beer.
And they get to drink as much as they want.

But we - these shadows of adolescents that might
very well have been here last night - we
well feign our adulthood. We will laugh in the
face of adults, who pretend that one day
wand-waves responsibility into our tight bodies
and mushy heads, and we will take the rules
and the car keys and the beer.
And we’ll hide them under a bridge.

We might even make a fire under the bridge
near the creek
and poke at living things straining over pebbles
to get to the deeper waters just down stream.
Because we’re all trying to get to the deeper waters
just down stream, and if we get there first…well,
that will mean something.
I’m sure.

Around a fire, these shadows in broad daylight hoop
and holler and make the ruckus that should be
made by 15 year olds when trying out beer for the first time.
That should be raised when you smoke that first
rolled up grown thing.

See the ruckus is not the problem. No. The fire
dancing and the beer drinking. No. That’s not the problem
for these shadows that are the hands that are the bodies.
The problem is the dirt that got caked on the knees
of the jeans and in the folds of the skin from climbing
out of that spot under the bridge where nothing grows.

The problems only arise from the brown hands
palms precisely
indicating the climb.
These are the giveaways, see. The giveaways to those that
have made the rules requiring the space under the bridge.
The dirty pores and the breath, taste of liquor lingering,
and the smell of ash from the fire probably made.
But if we didn’t make the rules, we wouldn’t need the space.

They wouldn’t need the space.

Speculation, though, because all that is left is beer cans.
We should be building the white picket fence around this spot
under the bridge, because I’m damn sure it felt like home.

Skype with me!

Quick note, Rioters! If you Skype, or you've been thinking about getting on Skype, you can now add me to your list! I've created a special Skype account just for you Rioters! Add IncitingARiot to your buddy list, and say Hi!

I'll let you all know through Twitter when I'm available, or you can always leave me a voicemail. This is a great way to send me feedback that I can actually put into the show!

Hope to talk with you soon.

Love and Lyte,

Fire Lyte

Thursday, May 27, 2010

So Happy I Could DADT!

May 27th - The headline on USA Today (and every other major newswire):

Congress advances repeal of "Don't Ask Don't Tell"

That's right, Rioters! The House of Representatives voted (234-194) to repeal the 17-year-old law that has been the cause of around 14,000 ready and willing soldiers losing their jobs. Also today the Senate Armed Services Committee voted (16-12) to approve the same bill that would effectively repeal DADT. This means that the defense bill, which the repeal of DADT is tied to, will go to the floor of the full Senate this summer. 

While most Democrats - including the President - are supportive of the measure, some Dems and most Republicans are against it. They believe that it will be "devastating to war fighters and the combat infantrymen," as Rep. John Shimkus (Rep. - IL) said. 

A few of you Rioters have already told me the same thing: we shouldn't allow gay men and women to serve openly in the military, because it might upset some infantrymen. Sorry, folks, but if you can shoot and run and do the pushups and knock down doors and all-around get the job done, then you should be able to be a soldier. Though, admittedly, I cannot say I'm not biased, what with my being infected with The Gay and all.

I hope today marks the beginning of the swift end of Don't Ask Don't Tell. I also hope that there will be some sort of retroactive reparations made to the thousands of soldiers fired due to their respective bed buddies. 1 out of 2 won't be bad.

What do YOU think about Don't Ask Don't Tell? Leave a comment, tweet @IncitingARiot, or email IncitingARiotPodcast@gmail.com!

Love and Lyte,

Fire Lyte

Reassign Your Accent?

Arizona Seeks to Reassign Heavily Accented Teachers. That's a real headline from Fox News.

In about the strangest twist of education-related news, the Arizona Department of Education has announced they'll be auditing English classrooms to check on teachers. Nothing weird there, except that they're specifically targeting teachers who don't speak English fluently, have poor grammar, or simply have an accent.

Ok... I get the first two, but what the hell does an accent have to do with teaching? Let's see if Tom Horne, the State Superintendent of Public Instruction can explain what accents have to do with teaching English:


As you expect science teachers to know science, math teachers to know math, you expect a teacher who is teaching the kids English to know English.

All right. I agree with you there, Mr. Horne. English teachers should know English. I'm not hearing any reasoning about accents, though. Oh wait, there's more!


It's my jobs to make sure they're taught English in the most rigorous, possible way so they can learn English quickly, can compete with their peers, and succeed academically.

I'm sorry, did he say It's my jobs...? And he's wanting to kick English teachers out of their positions for bad grammar? "[Most] rigorous, possible way..." I... He.... But....

#HEADDESK

Now, I'm seriously asking here: what does someone's accent have to do with their teaching prowess? I'm legitimately interested in hearing the answer to this. Really. Anyone...? Anyone at all...

Love and Lyte,

Fire Lyte

Wednesday, May 26, 2010

Intro to Islam - Top 10 World Religions Series

This is part 2 of our look at the Top 10 World Religions. Islam boasts the 2nd largest number of adherents of any organized religion in the world. Find out the basics of this supremely controversial and hated religion below.

Love and Lyte,

Fire Lyte


If there is a more misunderstood, reviled religion than paganism it is possibly Islam. Sure, from the pagan standpoint we all would like to see Christians take a long walk off a really short pier. Well…not me, but they’re out there. We all know them. I actually recently read an article in which the writer bemoaned how people say Islam is a religion of peace, but yet he sees news articles and stories everyday of Muslims killing people.

A quick digression: One’s religion does not necessarily stop one from committing crimes. You can misinterpret scripture and dogma, twisting their true meanings until their intentions are lost. As this is a rant that could go on forever, I’ll just leave it at that. Aren’t you proud of my succinctness?

Just like with Christianity I will go over the very basics of Islam, answering the questions who, when, where, what, and how. Also like with Christianity, you may already know some of this information, but I guarantee you will not know all of it. And as we make our way down the list of religions, we’ll be learning the basics together.

First question first: Who practices Islam? A comprehensive 2009 demographic study of 232 countries and territories reported that 23% of the global population or 1.57 billion people are Muslims. Of those, 87–90% are Sunni and 10–13% are Shi'a, with a small minority belonging to other sects. Approximately 50 countries are Muslim-majority, and Arabs account for around 20% of all Muslims worldwide. The majority of Muslims live in Asia and Africa. Approximately 62% of the world's Muslims live in Asia, with over 683 million adherents in Indonesia, Pakistan, India, and Bangladesh. In the Middle East, non-Arab countries such as Turkey and Iran are the largest Muslim-majority countries; in Africa, Egypt and Nigeria have the most populous Muslim communities. According to a recent study in the United States, the People's Republic of China has the eighth highest Muslim population with up to 65.3 million individuals but other figures show only 20 million. Islam is the second largest religion after Christianity in many European countries, and is slowly catching up to that status in the Americas and Australia.

In America, specifically, estimates as of 2009 put the Muslim population at about .8% of the population, or 2.5 million people. The population of Muslims in the United States only makes up approximately.2% of the total population of Muslims worldwide.

I mentioned the terms Sunni and Shi’a as various sects of Muslims. A quick explanation of these terms is necessary. Sunni Muslims represent the largest faction of Muslims. Sunni Islam is the more traditional, orthodox Islam, supposedly practiced as Muhammad deemed. The word Sunni is derived from an Arabic word meaning ‘tradition’ or ‘habit.’ On the flip side is Shia Islam, which is the second largest denomination. Shiite Muslims still base their practices on the basic tenets of Islam, but follow the teachings of Ali. Ali was Muhammad’s first cousin and succeeded him as prophet. These names will become a bit clearer when we break down the beliefs of Islam later on.

Where and When did Islam originate? Islam originated with the prophet Muhammad. According to Muhammad, Allah - their name for God - had many prophets throughout the ages that preached various messages. 5 of these were what is known as Imams or great leaders. The first was Nuh or Noah. The second was Ibrahim or Abraham. The third was Musa or Moses. The fourth was Isa or Jesus. And Muhammad was to be the final Imam. Shiite Muslims believe that Muhammad’s cousin Ali was a 6th Imam and a subsequent prophet.

It is believed that the Qur’an states that Muhammad was to be the last prophet, a subject of obvious contention since a large portion of Muslims believe in the teachings of Ali. Muhammad was a diplomat, merchant, philosopher, orator, legislator, reformer, military general, and prophet. Supposedly, Muhammad was born in 570 AD in Mecca, was orphaned, and worked as a merchant and shepherd. Married by age 25, Muhammad became discontented with his life and retreated to a cave outside of Mecca for introspection and meditation. In that cave during the month of Ramadan - the Islamic month of fasting and prayer - Muhammad had his first divine revelation at the age of 40. Within the next three years, the prophet was preaching Islam.

Though the prophet had few followers early on, he and his followers moved to Medina to escape persecution in 622. In 632 he died, but by that time most of the Arabian peninsula had converted to Islam. He had also managed to unite the disparate tribes of Arabia into a single Muslim collective state.

Now for the big question:

What is Islam? Islam, the word, literally means ‘peace in submission to the will of God.’ Or, depending on which etymology you look at, it can mean either submission to the good will of God or simply submission to God. This is pretty much laughed at by people on all sides of the political and religious aisles. We’ll talk about that in-depth later. The core beliefs of Islam are best expressed through what is known as the 5 Pillars of Islam. They are as follows:
1. The shahadah, which is the basic creed or tenet of Islam that must be recited under an oath with the following specific statement: “I testify that there is none worthy of worship except God and I testify that Muhammad is the Messenger of God." This testament is a foundation for all other beliefs and practices in Islam. Muslims must repeat the shahadah in prayer, and non-Muslims wishing to convert to Islam are required to recite the creed.
2. Salah, or ritual prayer, which must be performed five times a day. Each salah is done facing towards the Kaaba in Mecca. Salah is intended to focus the mind on God, and is seen as a personal communication with him that expresses gratitude and worship. Salah is compulsory but flexibility in the specifics is allowed depending on circumstances. In many Muslim countries, reminders called Adhan (call to prayer) are broadcast publicly from local mosques at the appropriate times. The prayers are recited in the Arabic language, and consist of verses from the Qur'an
3. Zakat, or alms-giving. This is the practice of giving based on accumulated wealth, and is obligatory for all Muslims who can afford it. A fixed portion is spent to help the poor or needy, and also to assist the spread of Islam. The zakat is considered a religious obligation (as opposed to voluntary charity) that the well-off owe to the needy because their wealth is seen as a "trust from God's bounty". The Qur'an and the hadith also suggest a Muslim give even more as an act of voluntary alms-giving.
4. Sawm, or fasting during the month of Ramadan. Muslims must not eat or drink (among other things) from dawn to dusk during this month, and must be mindful of other sins. The fast is to encourage a feeling of nearness to God, and during it Muslims should express their gratitude for and dependence on him, atone for their past sins, and think of the needy. Sawm is not obligatory for several groups for whom it would constitute an undue burden. For others, flexibility is allowed depending on circumstances, but missed fasts usually must be made up quickly. Some Muslim groups do not fast during Ramadan, and instead have fasts at different times of the year.
5. The Hajj, which is the pilgrimage during the Islamic month of Dhu al-Hijjah in the city of Mecca. Every able-bodied Muslim who can afford it must make the pilgrimage to Mecca at least once in his or her lifetime. When the pilgrim is about ten kilometers from Mecca, he must dress in Ihram clothing, which consists of two white seamless sheets. Rituals of the Hajj include walking seven times around the Kaaba, touching the black stone if possible, walking or running seven times between Mount Safa and Mount Marwah, and symbolically stoning the Devil in Mina. The pilgrim, or the hajji, is honored in his or her community, although Islamic teachers say that the Hajj should be an expression of devotion to God instead of a means to gain social standing.

It should be noted that while Islam derives from the same doctrines that Judaism and Christianity does, Muslims do not believe in the Doctrine of Original Sin. The book Islam in Focus by Hammudah Abdalati examines all aspects of what it means to be Muslim, and he takes an in-depth look into this idea in his section on what a true Muslim believes. An excerpt:

The true Muslim believes that every person is born free from sin and all claims to
inherited virtue. He is like a blank book. When the person reaches the age of maturity
he becomes accountable for his deeds and intentions, if his development is normal and
if he is sane. Man is not only free from sin until he commits sin, but he is also free to
do things according to his plans on his own responsibility. This dual freedom:
freedom from sin and freedom to do effective things, clear the Muslim’ s conscience
from the heavy pressure of Inherited Sin. It relieves his soul and mind from the
unnecessary strains of the Doctrine of Original Sin.

Just as with other religions of the book, and religions that are a few thousand years old, Islam discusses laws that must be adhered to. Islamic law is called Sharia and is derived from two different sources: the Quran and the teachings of the prophet Muhammad. Also like any religion of the book that has laws, Islamic law covers all aspects of life from diet to ritual worship to how to give charitably and rules on marriage and divorce. Discussing Islamic law could take up a whole podcast. Rather, it could take up several podcasts. Suffice it to say, like any set of laws, their interpretation has been used for justice and the good of countless Muslim people. On the flip side, these laws have been used around the globe for the detriment of countless people. So spare me your emails about the evils of Muslim laws. A law is not necessarily evil, the person twisting its interpretation and using it to justify them doing whatever the hell they want…that’s evil. Speaking of evil…

When you hear the word terrorist, here at the end of the first decade of the new millennium, exactly whom do you see? Is it the blonde guy from the 80s who is one kick-flip away from victory? Is it the burly Russian from the 50s who just wanted to nuke everything? Is it possibly the Asian from the 70s who was killing Americans in the jungle? No. Let’s get real. You see a Middle Eastern guy. This is all due to the misappropriated, widespread usage of the term ‘Jihad.’

A Jihad is a holy war. And it’s not. Well, actually the word ‘Jihad’ literally means ‘struggle.’ Some call Jihad the 6th pillar of Islam. A jihad is thought of in two different ways: literal physical warfare and a more academic idea of struggle.

Second one first. The struggle of jihad can be considered struggling to live a moral and righteous life, a life that would please God - Allah. This makes a lot of sense if you think about it. Choosing to do the right thing is a struggle. When you’re faced with putting together a bowl of salad or unwrapping a chocolatey treat, which is the easiest choice? Which is the more fun, appealing choice? When you’re driving home after working a 10-hour shift and it’s late and the light just won’t turn green, do you run the red light? It’s easier. It’s illegal, but it’s easier. It’s easy to lie or be rude or do a host of things people shouldn’t do to one another. It’s really freaking hard to do the right thing all the time. Struggle. That’s a good word for it.

See, Islam allows for mistakes. The Quran, the Muslim Holy Book, states that you can mess up and still come back and ask for redemption and a second chance. And a 57th chance. And an innumerable number of chances, as long as you’re doing so with a pure heart about the matter. Scholars call this more spiritual form of jihad the Greater Jihad. Greater Jihad is the spiritual struggle, while Lesser Jihad talks about actual warfare. Greater Jihad - or literally the Greater Struggle - can best be summed up by the scholar Mahmoud Ayoub, "The goal of true jihad is to attain a harmony between islam (submission), iman (faith), and ihsan (righteous living)."

The Lesser Jihad deals with the famous warfare that is a favorite topic of Fox News and every other media outlet that doesn’t mind using the big stereotyping brush. Supposedly, the reason this type of jihad is called the Lesser is due to a story that Muhammad, upon return from battle, said that he was returning from the lesser jihad to the greater jihad. However, scholar David Cook writes, “In reading Muslim literature -- both contemporary and classical -- one can see that the evidence for the primacy of spiritual jihad is negligible. Today it is certain that no Muslim, writing in a non-Western language (such as Arabic, Persian, Urdu), would ever make claims that jihad is primarily nonviolent or has been superseded by the spiritual jihad. Such claims are made solely by Western scholars, primarily those who study Sufism and/or work in interfaith dialogue, and by Muslim apologists who are trying to present Islam in the most innocuous manner possible.”

I’ll let the words of Abdalati do the talking about this more physical form of jihad.

“The Qur’ an makes it clear that, whether we want it or not, war is a necessity of
existence, a fact of life, so long as there exist in the world injustice, oppression,
capricious ambitions, and arbitrary claims. This may sound strange. But is it not a
matter of historical record that humanity – from the early dawn of history up till now
– has suffered from local, civil and global wars? And is it not also a fact that, more
often than not, victorious allies settle their disputes over their gains and the status of
their defeated enemies through wars and threats of war? Even today humanity lives
under constant fear and buzzes of war over many hot spots in the world. Could God
overlook these facts of life? Or could the Qur’ an fail to deal with the matter in a
realistic and effective manner? Certainly not! And that is why Islam has recognized
war as a lawful and justifiable course for self- defense and restoration of justice,
freedom and peace. The Qur’ an says:
Fighting is prescribed for you, and you dislike it. But it is possible that you dislike a
thing, which is good for you, and that you love a thing, which is bad for you. God
knows, and you know not (2:216)
And did not God check one set of people by means of another, the earth would indeed
by full of mischief: But God is Full of bounty to all the worlds (2:251). And did not
God check one set of people by means of another, there would surely have been
pulled down monasteries, churches, synagogues and mosques in which the name of
God is commemorated in abundant measure (22:40)
Although realistic in its approach, Islam never tolerates aggression from its own side or from any other side, nor does it entertain aggressive wars or the initiation of
aggressive wars. Muslims are commanded by God not to begin hostilities, or embark
on any act of aggression, or violate any rights of others. In addition to what has been
already said in the previous chapter, some particular verses of the Qur’ an are of
significant bearing. God says:
Fight in the cause of God those who fight you, and do not transgress limits (begin not
hostility): For God loves not transgressors. And slay them wherever you catch them,
and turn them out from where they have turned you out; for tumult and oppression are
worse than slaughter; but fight them not at the Sacred Mosque, unless they (first) fight
you there; but if they fight you, slay them. Such is the reward of those who suppress
faith. But if they cease, God is Forgiving, Most Merciful. And fight them on until
there is no more persecution or oppression, and there prevail justice and faith in God;
but if they cease, let there be no hostility except to those who practice oppression
(2:190-193)
War is not an objective of Islam nor is it the normal course of Muslims. It is only the
last resort and is used under the most extraordinary circumstances when all other
measures fail.”

See, it’s not that Muslims or Islam promote war, but they do not shy away from the concept of war. I know I said I wouldn’t make comparisons between paganism and the religions we discuss, and I’m not going to, but just to help you understand… It’s like how pagans don’t shy away from the more socially deplorable notions of having sex. It is a social norm to abhor the very idea of sex outside of a monogamous union, while pagans say, “You know what, I have these urges, I have this body, I accept any and all consequences, and I’m not going to abuse the privilege, but I also acknowledge that sex is just a necessary part of being human.”

That only leaves us with how. How is Islam practiced today? Well, I think the answer to that depends on which definition of Jihad you subscribe to. Also, it depends on if you’ve been brainwashed by the awful terrorist leaders using the religion as a scapegoat to blame all of their desires for power and vengeance on, thereby absolving them of their actions. If you’re a part of the vast majority of Muslims, you are a peaceful person who errs on the side of modesty. You like your life pure and pious, and you are deeply spiritual. You struggle to do the right thing, and ask forgiveness when you slip up. You’re human. You’re basically good, and you don’t believe you have to make up for sin that supposedly happened at the dawn of man.

Let us please remember that Islam is just a religion. The Quran is just a book. It is the actions, interpretations, and views of its practitioners and interpreters that give it the bad name it currently has. There are many beautiful, practical lessons to be learned from Islam.

The Mosque and The Douche

New Yorkers are up in arms about the building of a Muslim mosque 2 blocks from the site of the Twin Towers disaster. Protestors say that it is a slap in the face of those that died and to the surviving families to build a Muslim church so close to where Islamic terrorists destroyed a building.

I recently did a podcast on Islam, and while I'm no expert I can say without hesitation that not all Muslims are evil. In fact, I could say without hesitation that the number of Muslims in the world who are terrorists in all probability make up a fraction of a percent of the total. Islam is not an evil religion.

If a black man kills your mother, do you feel you have the right to keep black people away from you forever? If a Christian kid bullies your child at school, can you have all Christians segregated into separate classrooms? One bad Muslim does not mean that all Muslims are bad. 100 terrorist Muslims does not mean that the hundreds of millions of Muslims around the world are evil.

9/11 happened. It happened and we need to get to a place in this country where we can get the hell over things. The Oklahoma City bombing happened, and somehow people have gotten over it. Columbine happened, and we've coped. But, gosh, make it about race or religion and we just can't wait to judge an entire group as though they were a physical extension or accomplice in the deplorable act.

Hey America!

GET OVER IT!

By the way, the mosque got approval. It's being built. Victory for religious freedom, much?!

In very different pop culture news: Jesse James - the now-ex-husband of Sandra Bullock - went on television last night to do his public mea culpa since the world found out he'd been sleeping around on America's Sweetheart. First off: I could care less where his tattooed man-bits have been, but something struck me about what he said.

He said part of him wanted to get caught. He wanted to get caught. If he really wanted to get caught, he would have told dear Sandy that, "Hey! I'm heading over to my mistress' house for a bit to get my freak on with the girl with the swastika on her forehead. No...not Darla, the other one. Yeah, Trixy. Do you need me to pick up some milk on the way back? Ok. See you at 6!"

I hate when people say, "I think I wanted to get caught." No you didn't. If you had, you wouldn't be sneaking around. The point of the sneaking around bit is because you don't want to get caught, because you know it's wrong. 

What do YOU think about either of these topics? Should we continue to punish a house of worship due to the fringe actions of a terrorist group? Should we give cheaters the benefit of the doubt? Leave a comment, Tweet me @IncitingARiot, or email IncitingARiotPodcast@gmail.com with your responses!

Love and Lyte,

Fire Lyte

Tuesday, May 25, 2010

Episode 31: Inciting An Islamic Riot


Episode 31 of Inciting A Riot: the Podcast is all about Islam. Hopefully, you’ll learn something new that you didn’t know, and I can dispel some of the misconceptions about Muslim beliefs.

News: Kids are getting out of jail sooner, politicians are getting off in the wrong place, and there’s something a little off about Facebook.

Word of the Day: defalcation

Gripe Department: Personal reflections on blissful ignorance, skepticism, and how I’m so boring.

Spirituality: Intro to Islam

Literature: Mars and Counting by Me!

Music: Handlebars by Flobots

Please continue to vote for the show on Podcast Alley, vote, subscribe to, and rate the show on iTunes, join the TwitterRiot by following me @IncitingARiot, enter the Swag Contest through a donation or purchase of swag through the CafePress.com swag shop, take a gander at my articles on Examiner.com, and send your questions, comments, gripes, or complaints to IncitingARiotPodcast@gmail.com

Love and Lyte,

Fire Lyte

Home Page: http://www.IncitingARiot.com

Podcast Alley: http://www.podcastalley.com/podcast_details.php?pod_id=86829

Examiner: http://www.examiner.com/x-43503-Chicago-Pagan-Activism-Examiner

iTunes: http://www.itunes.com/podcast?id=337689333

Twitter: http://twitter.com/IncitingARiot

Swag Shop: http://cafepress.com/IncitingARiot

Project Pagan Enough: http://www.incitingariot.com/p/project-pagan-enough.html

Saturday, May 22, 2010

Fatty McFatterson

Lax. I have been lax. I have been lax in a lot of ways since I had a change of employment status rather...involuntarily. I have been lax in going to the gym. I have been lax in household duties and podcast writing and dog walking.

I'm not wallowing in self-pity or anything, but I have definitely taken a liking to the sweeter sweets that exist in my refrigerator. I have been known the past few weeks to open a tub of peanut butter cookie dough, grab a spoon, and eat it. Not the whole thing, mind you, but just enough to be considered my caloric intake for the week.

I've not actually gained much weight in my sloth. About 5-6 pounds, which is probably due to the whole 'less income equals less pizza eating' thing. The onset of gloomy weather the past week or so hasn't helped my cause, either.

And, the funny thing is that every night before I go to bed, I put my hand on my slowly loosening stomach and think, 'Gosh, I really should have gone to the gym/not eaten that/blah blah blah.' And I'm not saying today that I am rededicating myself to the causes of all things healthy and tight-skinned, but I am saying I am taking notice.

What do YOU do to get motivated? With my differing retail schedule and lethargy, it's been hard to maintain some sense of habit.

Love and Lyte,

Fire Lyte

Wednesday, May 19, 2010

Facebook Founder thinks you're a 'Dumb F*ck!'

Do you use the Crackbook? Have you ever read the fine print when it comes to using said Crackbook? They own your pictures, your personal data, and pretty much anything you - or your friends, or friends of friends, or Uncle Susie's new rentboy - put on the Crackbook about you. Privacy has been a pretty huge thorn in the side of Facebook's credibility.

It's the bad thing everybody knows about, but nobody really cares about, because no other site provides the services Facebook provides with the level of visibility and usage it has.

In a truly interesting turn of events, some 2004 instant messages have surfaced from Facebook founder and CEO Mark Zuckerberg. They were between him and a buddy of his at Harvard, and they read a little something like this:

Zuck: Yeah so if you ever need info about anyone at Harvard

Zuck: Just ask.

Zuck: I have over 4,000 emails, pictures, addresses, SNS

[Redacted Friend's Name]: What? How'd you manage that one?

Zuck: People just submitted it.

Zuck: I don't know why.

Zuck: They "trust me"

Zuck: Dumb fucks.

In 2004, Zuckerberg was 19 and had just founded what would be the biggest social networking site since...well, since the last one. In 2005 your info was pretty much your own. Nobody had much access to it that you didn't want. Over the past 5 years, that information has become a matter of public record, seemingly. As of April of this year, every single thing you type, post, import, or upload to Facebook can be seen by the casual internet user - with the minor exceptions of your contact information and birthday. All your pictures, networks, wall posts, photos, likes, name, gender, profile data, and who you're friends with - all of it - can be seen by anybody perusing the internet.

And they don't even have to be a Facebook member.

Social networking sites are nice for staying connected when you're far away from friends and family. However, on the flip side, it also keeps you in touch with exes, random hook ups, and pretty much anybody else young and firm. There's a new survey out done of all the recent divorce petitions that found 1 in 5 divorces blame Facebook in some form or fashion.

We accept, follow, and connect with a lot of people on the interwebs, and not all of those people have our best interests at heart. What do YOU think about the recent Facebook developments? Leave a comment, send an email to IncitingARiotPodcast@gmail.com, or tweet me @IncitingARiot!

Love and Lyte,

Fire Lyte

Monday, May 17, 2010

Kid Criminals MIGHT Get a 2nd Chance!

Monday, the Supreme Court ruled that juveniles who commit crimes in which no one is killed can no longer be sentenced to life sentences without chance of parole.

You know that song that starts off Oh happy day! Oh happy dayyyyy.... Yeah, I'm singing that in my head right now. This has been a beef of mine for a long time. We know that people's brains, especially their frontal lobe - aka the rational decision-making portion - isn't fully formed until your early to mid-20s. Yet, we are more than willing to certify juvenile criminals as adults and throw them in a cell forever.

I have had the chance to deal with numerous youth who were facing such punishments. These kids, at the age of 13, 14, 15, 16, did terrible things: murder, rape, aggravated assault. I'm not saying these kids should go without punishment, but humans can live a really long time and are we really okay with sending a person to prison for a crime they committed when they were a child for upwards of 60, 70, or 80 years?

REALLY?!

Until Monday, that was a viable option that was actually employed here in the United States. In this 5-4 decision, the opinion of the court fell barely on the side of the children. The ruling expanded a principle the court has never endorsed outside the death penalty — that an entire class of offenders may be immune from a given form of punishment.

I always tell people who dismiss juvenile crime as a waste of the government's time and resources that a 16 year old can kill you just as dead as a 26 year old. The criminal mindset, we know through study, can take hold in the first 3-5 years of life. Sure, murder at 16 or 17 years of age could very well be an indicator that a youth is going to be a lifetime revolving figure of the court system, but it is by no means a guarantee or a hard and fast rule.

While this new law doesn't encompass murder, it does become an umbrella for all other crimes. So we no longer can punish a kid forever, because his id was a overactive and his superego hadn't had time to develop properly. However, the New York Times reports that advocates of this law may attempt to apply it as precedent for the over 2,000 current inmates that committed murder while under the age of 17.

What do YOU think about the Supreme Court's ruling? Is it fair? Is it bullshit? Let me know by leaving a comment, sending an email to IncitingARiotPodcast@gmail.com, or tweeting me @IncitingARiot!

Love and Lyte,

Fire Lyte

Redux: Sometimes it IS all about you!

Interestingly enough, I - and articles I've written - have been the subject of a few other bloggers' articles and rants in the past few weeks. Let me take a quick moment to have a surreal giggle moment. (*giggle*) Okay, I have composed myself.

This week a new article on WitchVox by Zan Fraser takes aim at my article called The Burning of Margaret Murray. My article took on the various theories that Murray came up with about the Burning Times, the figure of 9 million women killed, the idea of the Women's Holocaust, the supposed witch cults, covens of 13, the ancient Wiccans, and more. The findings in my article said that, while Murray and her contemporaries had some basis for what she said, the data was wholly misinterpreted and blown out of proportion.

The fascinating thing about this article is that while Fraser doesn't seem to disagree with my information, Zan seems to disagree with me calling the modern notion of the Burning Times - and all the cockamamy ideas accompanying it - is false.

I said that Murray was not the first person to talk about the witch hunts of Europe and the Americas, but I did say that she took the information that was there, skimmed it, and then made up her own thing. Fraser argues against this by saying that Murray wasn't the first to talk about the Burning Times, which I didn't disagree with. But, merely talking about the veracity of witch trials doesn't mean the modern interpretation and idea of the Burning Times is accurate.

Another major point that Fraser takes on is the number and gender of people persecuted and killed for being a witch.  While he concedes that 9 million is overblown by a factor of 90, Zan states that the amount should really be 100,000 dead and 200,000 jailed for being a witch. My highest estimation comes from Levack, who said that despite the recorded numbers, possibly 60,000 were killed. Fraser gets this number, and all of his facts about the amount of witches and such from one book by Anne Llewellyn Barstow. Barstow's book is an extremely sympathetic retelling of the Burning Times, never doubting for a second those that were killed were, indeed, witches and that those women were outspoken heroines.

Not to take a thing away from those that were killed, but they weren't all witches. Records tell us that very few of them probably were. In reality, desire for land, wealth, political power, etc. were the reasons behind many of the killings. Calling someone a witch was a nice neat way of relegating someone to the gallows without the messy task of proving their guilt of a physical crime.

Barstow also discounts the trials of Finland, Estonia, and Iceland as not being true witch hunts. Thus discounting the vast amounts of men who were put on trial and killed for witchcraft. Without these number, witch hunts look a lot more like a Women's Holocaust, but the problem is that you can't just wipe away numbers of dead folks. Around 25% of those killed in these trials were men. 1/4th of all killed being a different gender does not a gendered holocaust make.

Fraser's article is a good one, and makes the point that I made at the end of my article: you can still believe in the Burning Times. However, my article went one step further and said that to do so, you need to recognize you're doing it out of faith. Facts don't support the Burning Times hypothesis. And, the problem with accepting part of the Burning Times hypothesis, is that you sort of have to accept the other parts, right? You can't really believe that so large a number of women were killed without a good reason, and the best reason is the church's persecution of lesser pagan religions. Etc. Etc. Etc.

Fraser ends his article with 3 points:


  1. The Burning Times 'phenomenon' goes beyond Murray. I agree recordings came before; I disagree that the overblown nature of Murrayite theories are accurate.
  2. Barstow's numbers are correct. Umm... Nobody has an accurate number. Nobody. Barstow's 100,000 dead might even be true. It's the highest estimate I've ever heard, but who knows?
  3. It was indeed a female holocaust. I've covered this point already. The answer is no.

I challenge you. What is YOUR opinion about the Burning Times? Leave a comment, send an email to IncitingARiotPodcast@gmail.com, or tweet me @IncitingARiot! I'd love to hear from YOU!

Love and Lyte,

Fire Lyte

PS. Could you spare a quick vote over at Podcast Alley? I'd be oh so grateful!

Saturday, May 15, 2010

Once amusing. Twice #EPICFAIL!

Twice now my article on being gay and pagan has been used to directly site what's wrong with young, upstart pagans attempting to understand, learn, or otherwise create their own spiritual relationship with gender and deity.

The first time, a blogger by the name of Veles said I was using age-old gossip about Gerald Gardner to say that Wicca (and somehow, by extension, neopaganism in general) is homophobic. The interesting thing is that is seems this particular blogger read my original article all the way up until paragraph 3 and lost interest. I can understand. He had probably read several articles in the past discussing the homophobia of Gardner and became flabbergasted with what he felt was yet another in a litany of articles retreading the same subject matter.

Interestingly, Veles ended up making the exact same point I did in the article. One can make one's spiritual practice what one needs it to be, and Wicca is not the be all end all of modern pagan practice. So, go him. I should note that I attempted to send the writer of that article a message clarifying my article's position, and that it had very little to do with Gardner's supposed homophobia. He neither posted the comment, nor replied to me. I am left assuming that dissenting opinion or academic debate on the matter is not something he would indulge. Oh well. I tried.

Secondly, I see this article, written by an apparent compatriot and enormous fan of Veles. The article's writer goes by the handle Lover of Strife, a name I can get behind, what with my love of Riots and all. My article on being gay and pagan was used in addition to this similar article published the same week on WitchVox to make his point that young, upstart pagans are attempting to rework the concepts of the divine to fit our needs instead of reworking our ideologies to fit a gender-fixed duality.

Again, the writer missed the part where I'm not Wiccan, and do not fit the divine into convenient boxes of penises and vaginas. He - I'm assuming Strife is a he - then goes on to say that I am attempting to change an entire tradition to fit me, instead of the other way around. Again, though, I'm not Wiccan. I don't mind if Wiccans believe in fixed male God and fixed female Goddess, but my study and introspective analysis of the divine has not led me to that conclusion.

The common theme in these articles is that young, inexperienced 'kids' have absolutely no right to ask questions, challenge current thinking, and have any expectations whatsoever about pagan beliefs. They should fall in line and do as they're told. Oh, and everybody is Wiccan. No offense to Wiccans, and I love me some Wiccans, but I tried it; it's beautiful; I like it, but it's NOT for me.

And I think we all know my thoughts about automatically disqualifying someone's opinion due to their age.

Just this week I had a conversation with another podkin who said her first experience with me was reading the article I'd written on WitchVox about tools and not really needing them. (No, it's not who you're assuming it is.) She said she was initially pretty ticked at me, because the picture I had up on WV at the time was from when I was 22. (I just turned 24 last month.) Apparently, I looked too young to know anything. She then went on to read my other articles and got over her age bias rather quickly, and now we're friends that can laugh about it.

But, and I won't harp on an issue I've already discussed at length, this is a highly dangerous thing to do. If we want our beliefs, traditions, and practices to continue into the next generation and generations beyond, we cannot turn away the new adherents due to their zest and inexperience. Don't like what they're saying? Provide a helpful tutorial. Point them in a better direction, but don't write them off. That's how the young and new get discouraged and leave, which is tragic, because this path is a beautiful one.

And, please, would those of you that want to criticize my articles actually read them all the way through before griping? That'd be great.

This post has been brought to you by Project Pagan Enough. Can you take the pledge?

Love and Lyte,

Fire Lyte

Friday, May 14, 2010

Arizona Banning Illegal...Education?

Arizona just isn't going to catch a break from anybody any time soon. Unfortunately for them, the government of AZ has nobody to blame but the people that keep passing ludicrous legislation in the state. Tuesday, the governor of Arizona signed into law legislation banning the teaching of ethnic studies. That's right! Not only do we not want any dang Mexicans in our state, we also don't want to learn about them in history class!

Or black people.

Or Native American people.

Or, technically, any minority race.

Seriously, you've got to read this law, which can be found here. HB 2281 seeks to outlaw 4 kinds of ethnic studies:

  1. Classes that promote the overthrow of the United States government.
  2. Promote resentment toward a race or class of people.
  3. Are designed primarily for pupils or a particular ethnic group.
  4. Advocate ethnic solidarity instead of treating pupils as individuals.
Ok... I'm all for 1, but there aren't any classes that currently teach or promote overthrowing the freaking government, as that is already taken care of in other legislation. Rendering this point useless. Number 2 is fine as well. The less hostility we have, especially in these times, the better.

I'm lost as to the points of 3 & 4. 

Let me get this logic straight. Ok, so you're attempting to stop the hatred and racism going on in your state by criminalizing the teaching of minority/ethnic studies, because this kind of education will lead to wanting to overthrow the American government, promote resentment toward a race (wonder which one that is...bet it rhymes with whyte peepl), and cause solidarity between those of minority races. (And that last one is a bad thing?)

You would think the Arizona government would want to look slightly less racist these days, especially as the mayor of Phoenix has recently stated their economy is barely hanging on due to boycotts. This is the kind of legislation that doesn't make a lick of sense. Just like sex education isn't going to make kids want to have sex, learning how the white guys in the US government did some bad things to minorities over the years isn't going to cause riots in the street.

However, covering up historical facts to keep our children in the dark in order to make yourself look better...THAT might make people pissed off. Like me. I am against any governing body that would seek to keep our children in the dark about historical fact. I know our history isn't pretty, but it's our history. Unless we acknowledge the mistakes of the past, we're doomed to repeat them. 

And, not to beat the very dead horse, but Arizona is attempting to whitewash US history by not allowing students to learn about slavery, the awful things done (and still being done) to Native Americans, etc. They're attempting to forget the past. Oh look...persecution of a minority! History...repeating?

What do YOU think of the matter? Do you support removing minority studies from public schools? Are you against it? Let me know what YOU think about this important educational topic by emailing IncitingARiotPodcast@gmail.com, leaving a comment, or Tweet me @IncitingARiot!

Love and Lyte,

Fire Lyte

Wednesday, May 12, 2010

Episode 30: Inciting A Prayerful Riot

Episode 30 of Inciting A Riot: the Podcast finds us Inciting A Prayerful Riot! We’re looking at that most controversial and disputed thing you do on your knees. Well…the other thing.

News: Elena Kagan might be on the Supreme Court (and a lesbian), Oklahoma might be torturing women, Californian teens might be inciting a racial riot, and Pennsylvania…well, Pennsylvania might have just become the scariest state in the Union.

Word of the Day: Fiction

Sociology: What Would You Do? - watch this show on ABC!

Gripe Department: Naked guys/girls in the locker room that need to put a towel on.

Spirituality: Prayer.

Poetry: into life

Music: Still - Alanis Morissette

Keep the show on top at Podcast Alley by voting, subscribe through iTunes, Tweet me @IncitingARiot, join Project Pagan Enough, follow the blog, and send all your thoughts on anything you read or hear to IncitingARiotPodcast@gmail.com.

Also, I’m looking for YOUR definition of paganism, and possibly your involvement in an episode on defining paganism and the pagan community!

Big shout out to a great new podcast: Pagan Hooligans! Send them some Riotous love!

Love and Lyte,

Fire Lyte

Home Page: http://www.IncitingARiot.com

Podcast Alley: http://www.podcastalley.com/podcast_details.php?pod_id=86829

Examiner: http://www.examiner.com/x-43503-Chicago-Pagan-Activism-Examiner

iTunes: http://www.itunes.com/podcast?id=337689333

Twitter: http://twitter.com/IncitingARiot

Swag Shop: http://cafepress.com/IncitingARiot

Project Pagan Enough: http://www.incitingariot.com/p/project-pagan-enough.html

Laura Bush said WHAT about GAYS?

In about the most shocking turn of events, Laura Bush came out on the Larry King show...

As a proponent of GAY MARRIAGE! She actually is pretty proud to disagree with her husband, former President George W. Bush, on the issue. She also comes out as an advocate of Roe v. Wade, claiming that a woman's right to choose is "important."

Given how contentious many of these issues are, and how automatically we on the left like to assign blanket opposition to the right, it is important to be reminded that not everybody on the right agrees with these issues. Republican and right philosophies are simple: small government, allowing people to govern themselves as much as can be allowed, spend only was is absolutely necessary. These ideas are respectable, and I adhere to some of them, which is why I'm considered a political moderate (all things considered).

When I see clips - like the one below - it gives me such hope that we can return to a centrist, moderate government where ideas are heard and not squandered. Where people can voice dissent without following it with death threats or racist/homophobic remarks. Where assumptions are not assigned to groups as a whole based on media spin.

But, then, I'm rather naive about these sorts of things. What do YOU think? Comment or email IncitingARiotPodcast@gmail.com or Tweet me @IncitingARiot. Oh, and make sure to check out this video below!

Love and Lyte,

Fire Lyte

American Flags Ousted from High School

Save the angry emails that are most assuredly about to come my way, but I am not really sure why anybody could possibly be pissed off about 4 kids getting sent home from a California high school on Cinco de Mayo. Here's the rundown:

On Cinco de Mayo - otherwise known as National Mexican People Being Proud To Be From Mexico Day (or National Tequila/Corona Day, take your pick) - 4 students wore American Flag shirts. According to reports from school administrators, this created some hostility between the Hispanic students and other students. The school's principal asked the students to either turn the shirts inside out or go home for the day. The 4 chose to go home. And oh my goodness, what a shit storm has been caused by this.

Tea Partiers and American flag lovers around the country are trying to say that this is an affront to national pride and blah blah blah. I'm sorry, everybody, but please build a bridge and get the hell over it. With as politically correct as everybody - especially school officials - has to be these days, is it any wonder that school officials didn't want to chance racial tensions turning into acts of violence? Have you SEEN the current state of racism/immigration tensions in this country? Everybody is tense. Everybody is angry, whether you're for or against reform in its current state.

And, let's just be real for a second. When people say "immigration reform" these days, they mean Mexicans, people that look like Mexicans, and people that don't speak English and look fairly...you guessed it...like a Mexican. Interestingly, during the conference (linked above), only one student actually spoke, and that one student said that there have been growing tensions between caucasians and hispanics on that campus. If that's true, and if what reports are saying are true, then...come on...those kids knew what they were doing when they wore those shirts.

It's not like the students that were sent home were not given the opportunity to fix the situation. They chose not to, and I can almost guarantee that there is a provision in their school dress code codifying inappropriate protest material - or something of the sort. I went to a podunk little high school in the belt buckle of the Bible Belt, but we still had a provision saying we couldn't wear anything that would support potentially racist, homophobic, or otherwise potentially harmful messages. On the occasions when some shitkicking redneck kid wore his confederate flag shirt to school, he was asked to either turn it inside out or leave campus.

Yes, despite whether the high school principal took part in civil war reenactments, which he did.

Dudes, when you wear clothes to school that you know are going to piss off the other students, expect to be sent home. I fully support the administrators' decisions, and I am also a proud American and a proud flag waver. You can do both.

What do YOU think about this situation? Leave a comment, email IncitingARiotPodcast@gmail.com, or tweet me @IncitingARiot!

Love and Lyte,

Fire Lyte

Monday, May 10, 2010

Fantabulousmazing!

Episode THIRTY of Inciting A Riot: the Podcast will be fleshed out and recorded (hopefully) today. As I do on occasion, I checked the iTunes page of the show to see rankings, comments, etc.

I got the MOST hilarious comment on the iTunes page, and I just HAD to share it with you. StingySleeper writes:


As the title indicates, this podcast has made me create my own new, albeit unorthodox word. I can't put down my iPod, even though I have six hours until school starts and haven't slept.


This podcast never leaves me satisfied, but I meant that in a good way. I can never seem to get enough of this. I can say this with all seriousness, that I think we should forget same sex marriage, and skip to marrying podcasts. I would dump my boyfriend and give this thing the biggest diamond I could find.


Don't change a single thing, and keep the greatness coming!


Oh SS, you are freaking AWESOME! That made me laugh so hard, and I am quite flattered. You may, of course, purchase me all the diamonds you'd like! I hope you enjoy the next episode as much as I enjoy researching and putting it together!

Love and Lyte,

Fire Lyte

Sunday, May 9, 2010

Faisal Shazad leads to MORE civil injustice?

Nobody seems to have a freaking clue. All anybody seems to agree on when it comes to this guy is that he's the one responsible for the failed bombing attempt in New York on May 1. And, even when it comes to that he did it, the why of it all is being guessed at by pretty much every media organization out there.

Interestingly enough, however, is that many of the organizations claiming they know the facts about Shahzad seem to be pulling them out of thin air. One story that began circulating almost immediately was that South Park's recent controversial episode involving Muhammad in a bear suit was the reason for the attack. Then it was Pakistanian Taliban (who claimed they didn't do it, but they didn't mind that somebody tried it), and the list went on from there.

Funnier still is that the man now at the heart of this story was a fairly model (LEGAL) American citizen living the American dream until 2009 when his life seemed to take a turn for the worse - he defaulted on his home loan and quit his job. The guy lost his home to foreclosure, headed to the middle east, and then *poof* appeared back in America with a car full of fireworks and fertilizer. (Apparently he missed bomb-making class at terrorist school.)

No group claims ownership of this guy, and he has yet to say he's actually part of any organized terrorist cell. Reports say he's been cooperative with officials, and he gets a gold star for playing nice. Whatever.

In scary news: Joe Lieberman, the guy who wouldn't let healthcare be, has come up with a new law that would turn Big Brother into


REALLY FRIGGIN HUGE BROTHER!

The bill he has proposed, which he's calling the Terrorist Expatriation Act, would effectively strip citizens of their citizenship - and all rights accompanying it - should they be suspected of being 'associated' with terrorist groups. The Washington Post reports that Lieberman's office has further clarified the State Department would fully and of its own accord assign blame for people they feel are working with terrorist groups, and then strip them of their citizenship. Notice how there's no middle step. 

No middle step like...oh...I dunno, a TRIAL?! When someone accuses you of something, shouldn't you get the chance to defend yourself? Not if good ol' Joe gets his way. Now, it's funny, because depending on which news source you look at, either tons of Republicans are backing this guy, or nobody is. I remember the rush to pass the Patriot Act back in the early 2000s, and I hope that we remember the shame of that particular piece of legislation. 

What Shazad did could have been bad. It wasn't, but it could have been. He will pay for it with, probably, a life sentence in some maximum security get up. But, I have to speak in the future tense here. The guy hasn't gone to trial yet. Nobody has gone to trial for this crime, yet. We cannot be the country whose Big Brother government can revoke your citizenship based on a hunch. We can't be the people who are ok with infringing on basic civil rights to the point of racial profiling and bullying of those that have neither the resources nor the voice to fight back. 

Because, if we do this, if we push these lines that Arizona and Joe Lieberman and Scott Brown and others are wanting us to push, then where does it end? Wbat group is safe? Let's Big Brother the gays, because they're getting too swishy. How about the blacks or the Jews; they haven't been the subject of a witch hunt in a while? Oh, speaking of that, what about witches! Let's burn a few! Gardeners are taking money from farmers by growing their own produce! Fat people are causing holes in the ozone with increased flatulence! 

I mean, let's get ridiculous here. This is what a slippery slope looks like, Rioters, right before you tip over the edge. 

Oh, and by the way, it's 2010.

Quick Big Brother news: Check out this REALLY scary ad from Pennsylvania [below] about paying your taxes. You wanna talk Big Brother? These guys have it down pat. Wonder how far we are away from legislating something like this?

Love and Lyte,

Fire Lyte


Thursday, May 6, 2010

What is Paganism? YOU DECIDE!

June is fast approaching, and while we will be on our third World Religion by that time, I will also have a brand spanking new pseudo-religion episode that month as well. This one, however, will be completely written by you, the Rioters.

You have until June 23rd to get me your definitions, thoughts, arguments for or against, beliefs, opinions, and elucidations on what - EXACTLY - is paganism. The point of this episode, I hope, is to illustrate the myriad of ideas on this subject, and, perhaps, facilitate a discussion matrix of those ideas.

Johnny Rapture had a point, and while I'm not sure it came through clearly, I believe it was this: without a definition, we can only go so far in the fight for legitimacy. At some point calling the Egyptian ceremonialist and the Native American shaman the same thing becomes a bit ridiculous. Now, is this show going to absolutely define paganism?

ABSOLUTELY NOT!

Is it my hope to be the person to come up with THE definition? Again, absolutely not. The point of this show will be to exchange ideas, start peaceful discussions, and highlight the beautiful shades of pagan that exist. 

So, I ask you Rioters, what are we? You've heard how I handle the religions on the podcast. Give me the basics of paganism as YOU see them. We can all Google 'pagan(ism)' and come up with some meaning, but I'm looking to hear your viewpoint. Please, also, do NOT send me exceedingly long diatribes on history and philosophy, and blah blah blah. I recently put out a 2.5 hour podcast, and I think that won't happen again for a while. (read: ever) Get to the point. Who, what, where, when, and how. 
  1. Who do YOU consider a pagan. Not the dictionary, the internet, or anybody else. Give me a few sentences at most here. (Example: I believe a pagan is anyone who practices magic and rides a unicorn.)
  2. When did the concept of paganism - as it is thought of TODAY - originate in YOUR view? (Ex. Paganism originated with the crash landing of illegal aliens from Arizona at a location now known as Area 69.)
  3. Where is paganism - as YOU perceive it to be - practiced TODAY? (Ex. Paganism is practiced in my pants every night at 7:30p.)
  4. What, exactly, do you define paganism to be? Not Wikipedia. Not the dictionary. Not your D&D discussion group. If somebody asked you to define paganism, and you were miles away from your laptop and smartphone, how would you respond? (Ex. Paganism is the reason my wife lets me sleep with other women at Beltane, because the Goddess would make her barren otherwise.)
  5. How is paganism practiced today? (Ex. Paganism is practiced using rubber gloves in a sterile environment while wearing a tutu.)
These answers should be no more than a 5-7 sentence paragraph each. I want your opinions. Facts, dates, etc. I can find on my own. I'm just looking for the perception of what paganism is, the idea each of us has when we use the term. Give me your first thoughts, your gut reactions to these questions. 

June 23rd is the cut-off date! 

Also, if you're a blogger, podcaster, or pretty much a sack of flesh with lungs, and you'd like to be a part of this special episode via Skype, let me know that, too. In addition to your letters, I'm hoping to have a live discussion with pagans of all walks of life. Your letters will act as the driving force of this discussion!

Email me your thoughts, and let me know if you'd be interested in being part of the discussion, at IncitingARiotPodcast@gmail.com

Quick plug: May is a new month, and it's about the time that I beg for votes on Podcast Alley! So, if you can spare a quick moment, head over there and vote for this show and all your favorites!

Love and Lyte,

Fire Lyte

Tuesday, May 4, 2010

Triumphs and Glorious Moments

Tomorrow is my 4-year-anniversary with my Partner. Most people say that they've had ups and downs with their loved one, but I'd have to say we probably take the cake. We have yelled. We have cried. We have had astounding triumphs and glorious moments. My partner showed me exactly how love isn't like the movies, but it's better. Love is like the fit of a comfortable glove.

The average marriage these days lasts between 3-5 years. We're smack dab in the middle of that, but we're not married. I'd like to marry this man. I'd love to enjoy all of the benefits that go along with the stresses of long-term relationships. I'd like to know that when I am sick and dying in a hospital my partner won't be forced into a nursing home and made to watch our lives be auctioned off by the powers that be.

This is not a diatribe on gay marriage. It isn't. It's just interesting, isn't it?

Happy Anniversary Beloved.

Love and Lyte,

Fire Lyte

Episode 29: Inciting A Defensive Riot

Episode 29 of Inciting A Riot: the Podcast brings back the fabulous Velma Nightshade of WitchesBrewHaha. One podcaster just isn't enough to take on all of the Riotous topics that were talked about today. From sex to griping, we've got a riot for everyone in the longest episode of the show yet!

News: AZ immigration reform isn't quite done, the oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico won't be done for a while, and I thought we were done discriminating against students in schools.

Word of the Day: Irrupt

Gripe Department: Overly-Defensive Pagans seem to be the latest wave in the pagan community.

Spirituality: Sex around the Beltane fires, is it really that necessary?

We take on a good deal of listener feedback and announce the winner of April's Swag Draw! Remember, May is a new month, and you can enter into this month's swag draw for YOUR chance to win!

Subscribe through iTunes, vote on Podcast Alley, follow the blog on IncitingARiot.com, take a gander at my Examiner articles, Tweet me @IncitingARiot, check out the CafePress Swag Shop, and send your questions, comments, gripes, or complaints to IncitingARiotPodcast@gmail.com.

Love and Lyte,

Fire Lyte

Home Page: http://www.IncitingARiot.com

Podcast Alley: http://www.podcastalley.com/podcast_details.php?pod_id=86829

Examiner: http://www.examiner.com/x-43503-Chicago-Pagan-Activism-Examiner

iTunes: http://www.itunes.com/podcast?id=337689333

Twitter: http://twitter.com/IncitingARiot

Swag Shop: http://cafepress.com/IncitingARiot

Project Pagan Enough: http://www.incitingariot.com/p/project-pagan-enough.html

Monday, May 3, 2010

Boy Scouts Do It Gamer-Style

Boy Scouts of America have gotten with the times and created a Video Game Badge. (above) Well, not a badge, but a belt loop. The organization that is known for tying knots and enjoying quality time together in secluded wooded areas has now decided to head back indoors for some first-person fun.

A few of the requirements to get the belt loop include:

  1. Make a plan with your parent/guardian to purchase a game appropriate to your age.
  2. While being supervised by a parent/guardian, install a gaming system.
  3. Demonstrating knowledge of the video game rating system, creating a schedule balancing gaming with schoolwork and chores, and learning to play any new video game that is approved by a parent, guardian or teacher
Ooook. I understand that in order to remain relevant in 2010, many organizations are trying to update their public images, but...the Boy Scouts? Seriously, if everybody is inside playing games, who will tie our knots? Who will start fires with sticks and rope? 

WHO WILL WALK THE OLD LADIES ACROSS THE STREET?

To a slightly serious point, what is this saying about our culture? I understand that people love their XBoxes and their Wiis and their other various idiot boxes. And, I also understand the hypocrisy of an online blogger and podcaster decrying the woes of what modern technology is doing to our youth, but to encourage kids to sit inside and play games?

The Boy Scouts - an organization I was a part of for one whole year...ok Cub Scouts, but whatever - encourages its members to get outside, get active, become a productive member of society and the surrounding ecosystem. We're not going to do that by sitting inside and playing Call of Duty 27. I get the point of the badge: allowing the kids to earn points for something they already love doing. The same thing used to be true about canoeing, camping, etc.

But, what's next? The Masturbating Badge? The Watching Porn Belt Loop? The Fooling Around Behind The Bleachers Pin? Boys love doing that, too! 

What is the extent of these badges, and how modern will the Boy Scouts become? As cliche as this phrase is, only time will tell. 

What do YOU think of this modern belt loop? Should Boy Scouts be getting outside and tying knots, or is it totally fine to be inside playing video games instead? Leave a comment below, Tweet me @IncitingARiot, or email IncitingARiotPodcast@gmail.com and weigh in on the Boy Scout Belt Loop Riot!

Love and Lyte,

Fire Lyte

Winner: Liz Christy & Randomness

Congratulations go out to Liz Christy - of the blog Lizzie's Logic - who was our winner for the April Swag Draw! Liz will be getting a basket of goodies, including: a Project Pagan Enough bumper sticker, an Inciting A Riot large mug, and a WitchesBrewHaha official sharpie.

A big thanks goes out to Velma Nightshade - friend of the show and guest on Ep. 29 - for supplying the Sharpie. Cross-promotion ROCKS!

The latest episode of the Riot was recorded. On May 1st. I realize it is now May 3rd, and the show is still not out, but it will be by the end of the day. Velma and I recorded over 2 1/2 hours of audio, and I've got the wonderful task of editing the whole thing down.

At this very moment, I'm going to be working on my BOS, because Ep. 16 of WBHaHa got me all Incited to work on it. Thank you Velma for getting in my head. After that, I have a really interesting story about Boy Scouts I'll be posting.

Also, a BIG shout out and thank you to Brook from the iPod Witch for giving my little show a shout out on her latest show - Ep. 40.

Stay tuned!

Love and Lyte,

Fire Lyte