Ansteopality Revisited

[Aodhan Ite an Fhithich]

Dia duit!

Gunnora Hallakarva wrote in a message to All:

 GH>         I think you are way off base.  

No, Jeremy is dead on target.

 GH> The stupid guy in El Paso is
 GH> gonna think we're devil worshippers no matter what we do.  

So why give him further ammo?  I take it you've never had one of your posts
taken out of context and flung in your face with accusations of "mischief and
mayhem."  I have.  It was *not* fun.

 GH> I submit that anyone who believes
 GH> that anyone posting on the "Principality of Hell" topic was or is a
 GH> Satanist is severely humor-impaired, and may in fact have an IQ
 GH> lower than the average human body temperature.

That won't prevent them from smearing us in public or dragging us into court.
(In fact, it probably guarantees it.)

 GH>         You say, "But, consider the damage that could be done to us
 GH> if any of the persons you mention got hold of these missives." 
 GH> What damage?  I've heard fanatic folks on talk radio since the
 GH> seventies off and on claiming to have been eye-witnesses at SCA
 GH> Satanic rituals.  Have any of them ever harmed the SCA?  Not if we
 GH> just ignored them.  I'd sure like to hear examples of real, actual
 GH> damage that you think the SCA can suffer because of some religious
 GH> kook in El Paso or wherever.

I don't know about harm to the SCA per se (although the expense of dealing with
their inane, decidedly non-Christain ranting could be considered such), but as
for harm to individual SCA members, I would think the child custody case in
Cleveland (Inis Fenics) a few years ago would qualify.

 GH> Plus, the last I heard, the Constitution protects
 GH> freedom of religion.

Uh..., don't get me started again, Gunnora.  We've been down this path with
freedom of speech...

 GH>         Lighten up, will ya?  It's a JOKE.  

But in rather poor taste, under the circumstances.

Baron Aodhan Ite an Fhithich, ML
Dobharchu Herald