Path: utzoo!mnetor!geac!jtsv16!uunet!wuarchive!brutus.cs.uiuc.edu!uakari.primate.wisc.edu!uflorida!stat!fsu!prism!gs26
From: gs26@prism.gatech.EDU (Glenn R. Stone)
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: Re: Call For Discussion: talk.religion.pagan
Message-ID: <3304@hydra.gatech.EDU>
Date: 10 Nov 89 17:00:52 GMT
References: <20614@ut-emx.UUCP> <1017@umigw.MIAMI.EDU>
Reply-To: gs26@prism.gatech.EDU (Glenn R. Stone)
Organization: when necessary
Lines: 28

In article <1017@umigw.MIAMI.EDU> aem@Mthvax.CS.Miami.Edu writes:
>I would vote against it as proposed, because according to my American
>Heritage,
>	pagan n. 1. A person who is not a Christian, Moslem, or Jew;
>		heathen. 2. One who has no religion. 3. Formerly, any
>		non-christian...

What the American Heritage says has nothing to do with who the
people who call themselves Pagan are.  

[suggestions for t.r.wicca or t.r.nature deleted]

No, that's too restrictive.  Paganism isn't just Wicca, nor is it
purely nature worship.  Methinks perhaps t.r.neopagan might do?
But those who would want to post there would, IMHO, know what 
the group was about just by the "pagan" label, anyway....

PLEASE, people, let's not have another namespace war.  We don't need it.
It only causes negativity.  What you call something is not NEARLY as
important as What It Is.  Call it .pagan, call it .neopagan, call it
whatever gets the full point across, but DON'T SQUABBLE.  Sheesh!

(see and translate my .sig quote for how I feel about it.)

Glenn R. Stone
gs26@prism.gatech.edu, CCASTGS@GITNVE2.BITNET, ...!gatech!gitpyr!ccastgs
Box 30372, Atlanta, GA 30332
"Stat rosa pristina nomine, nomina nuda tenemus."  -Eco, _The Name of the Rose_