Conversations From The Porch 12/15 by Hrafnstong Radio | Spirituality Podcasts

Conversations From The Porch 12/15 by Hrafnstong Radio | Spirituality Podcasts

Yuletide traditions: bringing into your home, teaching the children; appreciating your family; Papa Odin comes in and takes a couple of children's phone calls; "Privileged Pagans"; Morlog's "Holy Blessings for the Yuletide"; Uruzz rocks a new Norwegian music artist.

Conversations from Porch 12/01/2013 episode

http://www.blogtalkradio.com/hrafnstongradio/2013/12/01/conversations-from-the-porch

Cleanliness next to Godliness; being true to your people; talking to kids about Jesus and paganism; living your faith vs putting on a show; TV's season of the witch...

Conversations from the Porch Show from Nov 17, 2013

http://www.blogtalkradio.com/hrafnstongradio/2013/11/17/conversations-from-the-porch

The archive of the "lost" episode (3rd Sunday in November)... Can't remember what we talked about, but, it was a good enough show that we were bummed about not being able to post it.

Conversations From The Porch 10/20 by Hrafnstong Radio | Spirituality Podcasts

Conversations From The Porch 10/20 by Hrafnstong Radio | Spirituality Podcasts

Inner-courts, outer-courts, and misfits; Dopplegangers; SAUSAGE! What is "Winter Nights"? Am I too old to be a student? Coming to terms with our own, personal, issues; Morlog's Orlog and Enrollment Periods.

Conversations From The Porch 10/06 by Hrafnstong Radio | Spirituality Podcasts

Conversations From The Porch 10/06 by Hrafnstong Radio | Spirituality Podcasts

Are folkloric customs being manipulated into the modern concept of Reconstructionist Pagan religion? Too many memberships confuse one's own mission statement; naming your weapons and building communal meeting places; Morlog's Orlog Hails the Bees and Uruzz "pimps" the heathen value of Katy Perry.

Conversations From The Porch 09/01 by Hrafnstong Radio | Spirituality Podcasts

Conversations From The Porch 09/01 by Hrafnstong Radio | Spirituality Podcasts

Spiritual personalization, getting in touch with nature and how we see the gods around us.

Converstions From The Porch Episode 8/18/13

http://www.blogtalkradio.com/hrafnstongradio/2013/08/18/conversations-from-the-porch

Harvest festivals, logic vs faith, preparing your students, that witch burning Mathilde bastard, Morlog's orlog, Uruzz rocks.

Conversations From The Porch 08/04 by Hrafnstong Radio | Spirituality Podcasts

Conversations From The Porch 08/04 by Hrafnstong Radio | Spirituality Podcasts

Dan Halloran's Witches and Pagans; UK's occult porn filter; Gay Christian marriages and questioning male witch masculinity; Religious Freedom; Social ineptitude and politicians... Morlog's wife incites a Stark Raving Mad moment. Five Finger Death Punch and Morlog's Orlog.

Conversations From The Porch 07/21 by Hrafnstong Radio | Blog Talk Radio

Conversations From The Porch 07/21 by Hrafnstong Radio | Blog Talk Radio

Atheist pagans, Christo heathens; raised pagan vs. converting to paganism; relevance of archetypal paths; Patheos Pagan Portal survey.

Conversations from the Porch 06/16 by Hrafnstong Radio | Blog Talk Radio

Conversations from the Porch 06/16 by Hrafnstong Radio | Blog Talk Radio

Should pagans have faith or belief in gods, UPG: is it just a delusion; Pagan Media....

Faithless Pagans Revisited (Part II)

It seems that I am not the only one who has been disturbed by the recent debate about whether pagans need faith, or, should believe in their religion, or not. John Becket has a post over at Patheos  addressing his concern over recent articles written by prominent pagan authors.

 

T. Thorn Coyle has an article at the Huffington Post that seems to have John all bent out of shape, aptly titled, "Why I am Not a Believer" making the following statement in the first paragraph:

 

"As a matter of fact, belief holds little importance to me at all." 

(image from http://static.thorncoyle.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/01/media-thorn-7-lg.jpg)

Mr. Becket points out that though the article admits a modicum of  belief, experiences should be the primary focus and goal to shape a person's interpretation of paganism. Although, that is not what I got from Coyle's article. What I perceived is, that experiences (experienced over and over) are the basis of what can be interpreted as belief, but, all "belief" is, is a story of one's experiences retold over and over again, until humans cite a story for themselves [belief] and retell it as THE story to end all, be all (the basics of any religious doctrine).

 

Of course, interpretation is the key to understanding... and, interpretations are as vast and varied as there are individuals to make them. Mr. Becket seemed to appreciate Galina Krasskova's interpretation, though, from her essay on PaganSquare titled "We Don't Need No Stinkin' Theories".

 

"I very much believe that there's a certain foundation lacking in our communities across the board... Right interaction with the Powers would have been modeled by virtue of its being worked into the very social fabric of our community. This would have been how the whole community viewed the world and the Gods and it would all have gotten reinforced every day. The reality of the Gods would have been taken as a given... We lack even the capacity in many cases to conceive of what that would have been like and what it would have meant for us as people trying to engage spiritually... I think many of our controversies and problems come when post-modern attitudes come up against indigenous sensibilities with respect to the Holy...We put far too much stock, in my opinion, in our theories and ideas and philosophies and while these things certainly have their place, it should not be at the exclusion of actual spirituality. I've seen all of these tactics being used to avoid engagement. [belief/faith]".

 

RIGHT ON, SISTA! But, where do these two women sit in contrast to "faithless pagans" (as interpreted from my twisted viewpoint)? Where has all the faith and belief in these exploited "Gods of Old" gone? Again, I ask, what is the purpose of calling oneself "pagan" if you hold no belief in pagan Gods?

 

Perhaps, the answers lay in the obvious difference between these women's "faiths"... from a topical standpoint of who walks the walk and IS polytheist (as opposed to, simply, talking the talk).You see, Galina is heathen and T. Thorn is pagan. Would it be safest to say, then, that pagans are quite faithless in their religious devotion to "deity", while heathens are more apt to believing in pagan Gods? Eh... Pagan. Heathen. I guess it's all chocked up to interpretation, isn't it?

 

[Ikinde Skreja Ominnsaer, June 2013, CFTP]

 

Conversations from the Porch 06/02 by Hrafnstong Radio | Blog Talk Radio

Conversations from the Porch 06/02 by Hrafnstong Radio | Blog Talk Radio

Parentnoia and step-parenting; prison ministry; alpha dogs of kindreds; muppetizing CFTP for Youtube; Charlie the Unicorn and FurrTV, Pahokee podunk and Uruzz Rocks.

Hold Dear and Illuminate!

There are 3 candles that illumine every darkness:

truth, nature and knowledge.

~ ancient Irish triad

What is light? Many of us think simple concepts such as "light" so mundane that no one need really to look it up in a dictionary. To suggest anyone do just that may be the most insulting request a person could imagine, but, I did it. (Me, and my damnable literalities, again!)

 

Light [n]: 1.a) Something that makes vision possible; b) the sensation aroused by simulation of visual receptors: brightness. 2. Daylight; dawn. 3. A source of light as: a) celestial body, b). candle. 4. archaic - sight. 5.a) Spiritual illumination b) inner light c) enlightenment d) truth. 6. A particular aspect or appearance presented to view. 7. A particular illumination. 8. Something that enlightens or informs 10. (pl) A set of principles, standards, or opinions. [verb] to ignite; animate - to start something to burn. [adj] trivial, scant, gentle, faint, frivolous, changeable, cheerful. [Webster's Collegiate Dictionary, 8th edition]

 

Rev. Kinrei Bassis stated in the May-June 1985 Journal of Shasta Abbey "There is a widespread spiritual delusion which can be described as 'Love and Light.' It can be found throughout history and has been, at times, a problem for most religions."

 

The problem, my dears, is context (the parts of a verbal interchange of ideas that surround a word or passage and can [not does] throw light on its meaning). Many people can use facts to strengthen an argument. Notwithstanding, some arguments have strong possibilities, but, possibilities are not concrete fact. Case in point, "Ancient Aliens", the most widely known program whose arguments rely heavily on context and operative words (e.g. can, may, possible, perhaps) to sway general opinion, and force a modernist standard of consideration for archaeological relics (ref "Light" definition #10).

 

In the case of an unmonitored religion such as Wicca (or other pagan faiths), spiritual truths are subjective and purely contextual, even though they can be shared (as in Shared Personal Gnosis or SPG). Do these shared spiritual points of view constitute an exact, or concrete truth? No. They simply provide a personal truth - a personal light (ref "Light" definition #5, 6 and 7). Though historical fact may be factored into certain religious practices, they do not carry the burden of personal belief inasmuch as they justify it (ref "Light" definition #1a and possibly as a verb).

Rev. Bassis continued to state: "The mistake of 'Love and Light' can vary from being simply an error in emphasis within the teaching, to propounding and practicing extreme forms of delusion. Every teacher uses different expressions, and one cannot judge their validity on a superficial glance at the terms."

 

So, then, what is love?

As defined in Webster's, Love [n]: 1.a)1. a strong affection for another rising out of kinship or personal ties. 1.a)2. attraction based on sexual desire. 1.a)3. affection based on admiration, benevolence, or common interests. 2. warm attachment, enthusiasm, or devotion. 3. The object of attachment, devotion, or admiration. 4. The unselfish loyal and benevolent concern for the good of another. 5. A god or personification of love. 6. an amorous episode: love affair. 7. the sexual embrace. [verb] to hold dear: cherish; to feel a over's passion, devotion or tenderness for: caress; fondle amorously, to copulate with; to thrive in.

If you accept the principle that all of humanity are one, big, interrelated family - then definition #1.a)1. works for the "Love and Light" line. However, the remaining definitions are farthest from anything any of us feels for a person, as soon as they are met. Merrily met, or not, the deep-rooted affection OR admiration OR unselfish loyalty that goes along with "love" simply is not there.

There are 3 sparks that kindle love:

the face, the demeanor, and the way of speaking.

~ ancient Irish triad

A god or personification of love (#5) can be reasonably inserted into the context of "Love" where it is concerned, but, not every individual will immediately comprehend "love" as "god(dess)" without being reminded, first. Perhaps, the "love" is more of a command - a verb, to be more precise.

 

However, love is just an emotion. Emotions ebb and flow like the sea - always moving, always changing; mutable. Why is this emotion present as a standard, a basis, if it is always in flux?

"Hold Dear" and "Illuminate"


According to Raymond Buckland, he was given an outline describing the sort of high ideals of love pagan leaders should strive for. It can be found on page 54, and has been simply called "The love of the priest and priestess". In these lines, there is stress on the thought that no matter what despicable things you do to your HP/S, their love for you is unchanged; this is supposed to be that "perfect love" taught about in Wicca and implied in half of the words to "love and light".

 

It is extremely difficult to accept the role as leader when you are incapable of understanding what is expected of you in this role. You are expected to be unwavering and disciplined in your faith and you are expected to uphold the highest standard of "love" as defined in the oldest recorded definition of it:

 

I Corinthians 13:4-7

⁴ Love is patient, love is kind. It does not envy, it does not boast, it is not proud. ⁵ It does not dishonor others, it is not self-seeking, it is not easily angered, it keeps no record of wrongs. ⁶ Love does not delight in evil but rejoices with the truth. ⁷ It always protects, always trusts, always hopes, always perseveres. (...Like it, or not, this is the context behind "perfect love" and the love of the priest and priestess.)

 

Yet, just because love is given out, doesn't mean it is necessarily reciprocated. If you adhere to "love and light", but are incapable of verbal or physical displays of love or enlightenment, are you "breaking rede"? Not at all. In fact, you're probably upholding it by NOT giving love; by NOT sharing your light with others. Because in doing these things, you are introducing an aspect of willful manipulation into your first meeting, and, manipulating others and their wills is against the Rede. You want to instigate an acquaintance, instead, based off of a mutual respect and character tolerance, first. The "love and light" will come much later, if at all. In consideration for all of this, and in my honest opinion, "Love and Light" should only be dished out by HP/S to their adherents.

 

However, "Love and Light" is a general expression that define the practitioners of Wicca (and, other paganisms) as individuals - each person having their own light (truth) and love (thing they hold dear to themselves). So, the next time someone greets or leaves you by saying "Love and Light", treat it as if they are really asking you two important questions: 

Are you capable of nurturing a mutual affection

based on admiration, benevolence, or common interests?

AND, are you spiritually illuminated?

 

[Ikinde Skreja Ominnsaer; May 2013 - Conversations from the Porch]

The UPG Delusion

December 2012 issue of Smithsonian Magazine includes an interview with Dr. Oliver Sacks, author of Awakenings, a biographical account of his experiments with patients in disease-induced vegetative states (later made into a movie with Robert DeNiro and Robin Williams). As impressive as Dr. Sacks’ works are, both literary and medical, it is his recent work, Hallucinations, and the interview about it that caught my attention. So, I reference my good ole Webster’s Dictionary – just to verify some definitions, because my brain is being bombarded by contemplations typical to my unique brand of offensive “left field” banter.

Hallucinate: to affect with visions.

UPG: (Unsubstantiated Personal Gnosis) used to identify information gained thru meditation, “intense” flashes of intuition, visions and other spiritual experiences.

Gnosis: esoteric knowledge of a spiritual truth.

 According to Carl Jung, the human psyche desires original experience and not assumptions, to base its trust in. Unfortunately, humans make a habit of accepting assumptions from various religions and sciences in order to justify his personal gnosis. When anyone speaks of religion and science, generally, they’ve already incorporated aspects of their own gnosis into their discussion, albeit in some cases, a very limited amount; and, the more generalized the topic, the more personal gnosis is included.

Dr. Sacks, however, believes that every choice we make is predetermined by the neurophysiology of the human brain; “free will” is only an illusion. In other words, the programmed neurophysiology of homo-sapiens throughout history has created a sort of “genetic memory” which should not be confused for immediate cognizance.

 

UPG is one of the most acceptable excuses for an inconsistent religious practice existing in reconstructionist paganism, today. As mentioned earlier, it heavily relies on alternative neurological responses to personal spiritual experience (or, “visions” and “intuition”). Dr. Sacks writes:

“In general, people are afraid to acknowledge ‘hallucinations’ because

they immediately see them as a sign of something awful happening to the brain.”

Now, reread his statement replacing the word “hallucinations” with “visions”. Although, the implication of “visions” is not as severe, the physical process of “hallucinating” is still the same. At the point where a person undergoes a spiritual experience that leads to the formation of an UPG they have already begun to put it through the process Jung mentions (above).

Jung goes on to explain that these processes reflect attitudes and concerns within a person’s personal life, whereby if he projects his own psychology into it (which, apparently he does; above) the experience has been rendered false by way of personal bias. It can no longer be presented to any public with objectivity; there is only the pretense of truth and a deceptive fiction. Dr. Sacks mentions that “our better natures are constantly threatened by the bad things” [in our lives].

Sacks was part of the LSD research of the 60’s, and has no desire to revisit synthetic hallucinations, though he researches the neuroscience of the hallucinatory experience. He expresses no need for metaphysical, psychological experiences beyond the “daily clinical experience”. Considering his view on “free will”, it is understandable.

 “If you would know a mystic,

do not confine your search to monasteries and temples.” –Ralph M. Lewis

The point being that everyday experience can fill those voids in reconstructionist religions, where most practitioners seem to insist there is a deeper spiritual process that must be discovered by way of spiritual vision [hallucination]. But, if humans by genetics are cognizantly biased by “bad stuff”, “neurons” and “personal gnosis(es)” why should UPG be such a controversial topic? Whatever we do to fill those voids is just a genetic memory we all should have an inclination toward – whether we hallucinate it, or not.

According to Dr. Oliver Sacks, there are mysteries of religious experience. Ecstatic states play an important role in “religious presence hallucinations” (whether said states are “ecstatic” or not is still debatable, such as found in cases of epilepsy sufferers). In point of fact, the Hallucinations book is suffused with a sense of contradiction – hallucinations [visions] as horrible afflictions AND as wondrous gifts. An observation lamented by many visionaries, I’m quite sure.

 

 

Carl Jung summarizes best by saying various forms of religious knowledge cease to flow from within a person [via meditation, intense intuitive flashes, visions], they are inspired from without – those “daily clinical experiences”, instead. It appears to be a means by which recons subdue their humanist religious inclination (the genetic memory) of being spiritual creatures, in favor of inflating the ego by justifying highly subjective hallucinatory experiences (visions) as obscure, yet, valid truths. In other words, UPG is nothing more than delusion.

[Ikinde Skreja Ominnsaer, May 2013]

 

The Portable Jung –“The Spiritual Problem of Modern Man”, pages 461 through 466.

Smithsonian Magazine (Dec. 2012); “The Gonzo Neurologist”.

The CR FAQ, multiple authors.

Webster’s New Collegiate Dictionary (series 8)

Conversations from the Porch 05/19 by Hrafnstong Radio | Blog Talk Radio

Conversations from the Porch 05/19 by Hrafnstong Radio | Blog Talk Radio

Various topics... abortion, Westboro Baptist, sacred spaces... and all sorts of craziness.

A Pagan Media Dilemma

We are stuck in the middle of a digital revolution, and it is breeding ignorance at an epidemic rate! Where one may see this behind topics such as the "true" origin of the American Civil War, it is far less obvious in subjects hitting more closely to home, like, what is relevant to us as pagans.

 

Heather Greene, of The Wild Hunt, released her article "What is Pagan Media" and a whirlwind of inquisition began: How do you know where to put your trust?  By what criteria do you have to judge the writer or the news site? How do you know if something is straight news or merely commentary?  What are the credentials of the writer?  Does the site have an agenda? (the queries go on & on.)

 

If there was a Pagan News Channel, who would you want to see as anchor?

 

In spite of many efforts by pagans, worldwide, to keep abreast of news and information pivotal to polytheists, there has never been a pagan-specific collective warranting an official title of "media" or "media sources" in/for paganism. Though efforts by websites such as The Wild Hunt, Penton Independent Pagan Media, and Pagan Newswire Collective, have presented we poor fools with a professional-grade standard of "media sources", none of them seem to personally regard themselves as sources of pagan media, worldwide. They strive to deliver pagan interest news stories to vast constituencies, and still have, yet, to realize their own importance -as- pagan media. Why?

 

Pagans are without the "inside scoop" of what IS newsworthy, nor have they the ability to root out "internet intellectuals" offering well-written opinion on vague subjects using a recent news bulletin as responsible journalism for the here-and-now. Let's face it, pagan (or, not) - people seek the  path of least resistance. Unfortunately, we have thwarted ourselves by taking quite an advantage of the modern digital revolution.

 

Although not strictly pagan, yet, concerned for the "digital-age ignorance" we humans currently live in, Lewis Lapham points out that our idyllic internet informational exchange seems to be erasing all traces of humanity's thousands of years' worth of cognitive cultural development and replacing it with sensationalized dribble. He 'laments Google' for its unbiased and effective means of piling tons and tons of nonsensical shit atop sites of true worth and value. Only the sites with the most traffic get top billing in a search engine, whether the information on that site is authentic, or not.

 

Pagan news stories have fallen to the uneducated, unpoliced and irresponsible "backyard pagan reporter", or, the top-notch professional ignoramus that either takes up some nameless pagan tradition for an hour's worth of intel, or, finds the most gaudily-garbed guru in the neighborhood. Facebook doesn't make it any easier, either. Nor, does it pose a hindrance - it is a double-edged sword.

 

So, when doing a search for pagan-worthy news (which is considered "shit" or "sensational" by mainstream media, anyhow) what, precisely, is the medium you will find it on? Where are the standards of journalistic integrity and informational purity going to come from, if the mainstream media has already written the "news" (remember: shit, or, sensationalism?) being gathered by sites pagans deem ethical? Until a vilified means of "pagan journalists" is standardized, and they collaborate to provide a serious and professional "pagan media", we will still rely on the websites that present us with pagan news.

 

In certain (if not a majority of) cases, it is probably best to surmise that Heather's own query may be the first eye-opener The Wild Hunt has had: "In which Pagan news sources are you instilling your trust?  Where and how do you get your news?

 

 

So, Heather, my rebuttal is: When will The Wild Hunt realize its worth -to- pagan media and what standards should Wild Hunt "bloggers" be held to in order to qualify them as "pagan media journalists"? (Because, like, TWH is already at the top of most pagans' lists, anyway; it needs to be taken ALL the way.)

 

 

[Ikinde Skreja Ominnsaer; 5/2013CFTP]

 

 

 

Conversations from the Porch 05/05 by Hrafnstong Radio | Blog Talk Radio

Conversations from the Porch 05/05 by Hrafnstong Radio | Blog Talk Radio

We ganked a topic about rites of passage vs. milestones; interview with STIFYN EMRYS; Uruzz Rocks, Morlog's Orlog.

Faithless Pagans

As you know, we get much of our fodder from Facebook groups and pages. There are so many diverse opinions, there, and when one strikes a nerve we just have to discuss it on the CFTP_FB page. This one, however, is still lurking around in my brain; so much so, that Uruzz was awakened this morning by my talking in my sleep. Apparently, I was having a wonderful and in-depth conversation with the Admin of the page our current 'gem' comes from:

 

"I practice a tradition of paganism that requires no belief".

Because I am that asshole who likes to make sure we're all on the same page, I've copied a few definitions and inserted links for people who might not be keen on the current vernacular....

Paganism has become the identifier for a collection of new religious movements attempting to continue, revive, or reconstruct historical pre-Abrahamic (pre-Christian) religion. In the book, A History of Pagan Europe (1995) "pagan religion" [paganism] is characterized by the following 3 traits:

1. Polytheism: recognizing a plurality of divine beings.

[What is the point of recognizing many gods without a belief in them?

This would be atheism.]

2. "Nature-based": Pagan religions have a concept of the divinity of Nature, which they view as a manifestation of the divine

[By this definition we tap into what is commonly referred to as earth religion,

and it is a form of neopaganism that some people have determined to

be a contemporary, and separate form of paganism.]

3. "Sacred feminine": recognizing "the female divine principle", identified as "the Goddess" (as opposed to individual goddesses) alongside, or in place of the male divine principle.

[This is the concept of deity as female.]

With all these entities that paganism endorses, why are there traditions of paganism, suddenly, popping up that require absolutely no belief system, whatsoever? So, I went back into my personal book hoard to grab a few oldies off the shelf.

Ann-Marie Gallaher's Spells Bible (2003) has this to say from page 9:

"We know, from spells inscribed on cave walls or sheet of lead found in sacred wells,

that our ancestors practiced and believed in the efficacy of magic."

This statement has no divinity in it; simply stating that there was a belief in magic. Of course, there should be a belief in magic - a requirement, if you ask me! What is the purposed of performing magic if you don't believe in it?

Sally Dubats' Natural Magick (1999) points out:

"Many witches believe hexing sends negative energy into the world..."

This addresses witches, alone. Practitioners of magical arts whose belief systems may, or may not be pagan. By this, I refer to Vivianne Crowley's Wicca ...

"What the Church later lumped together as 'witchcraft' had 2 elements-

pagan worship and magic." (pg. 18)

Laurie Cabot's Power of the Witch expounds more on why 'witchcraft' and 'Wicca' are sometimes viewed synonymously on page 14:

"The word 'witch'...has evolved. There are different opinions about its origins.

From [root words] we derive the word 'Wicca',

a term many in the Craft use today to refer to our beliefs..."

Vivianne Crowley, apparently, agrees to an extent, saying:

 

"Wicca...is a living, growing system of thoughts, beliefs..."

So, why 'Wicca', and not just 'paganism'...? Because of the differences in the practices. Paganism is a religion that embraces magic without making it a priority for worship. Wicca is a religion that has prioritized magic over that of worship. Don't believe me? Then why even cast a magic circle before an esbat or sabbat? Neither form of paganism seeming to lack a need for belief.

Laurie Cabot continues on page 20:

"Pagans believe that biological processes are spiritual processes and

that there is divine meaning in every natural event."

Hell, Stewart Farrar has an entire chapter in his book What Witches Do starting on page 40, titled: "What witches believe."

 

What is the point to doing any of this, if you don't believe?

Belief is the acceptance that something exists.Something one accepts as true or real; a firmly held opinion or conviction. Faith is confidence or trust in a person, thing, deity, or in the doctrines or teachings of a religion. It may also be belief that is not based on proof.

Taking up a course of study to explore paganism is something we have all done. After the day is done, though, you either have faith in your pagan religion and gods, or, you don't. Why do faithful pagans have to make accommodations for those who simply like calling themselves such, without the belief in deity (or nature) that defines paganism as a religion, in the first place?

 

[Ikinde Skreja Ominnsaer, 2013, Conversations from the Porch]

READ ME: The Next Show is a Killer!

We've had guests come on to the "Porch" in the past, who've been quite a joy to speak with - on and off air. Let's see. There's been the controversial author who broke his self-imposed exile in order to speak with us. The Priestess-President of the Panthean Temple, author, diviner and artist has graced us with her presence (and, we call in to bug her on her show, too). The creator of the first-ever proto-Indo European reconstructionist pagan website. Swain Wodening. Various events hosts... So, what's next?

In the past, we have endeavored to keep all future interviews "hush-hush"; going with the whole "life is a box of chocolates" theory: you never know what you're going to get. After 2 years of sorting out the broadcasting process and problems, we've decided to go after bigger and bolder interviews. We are definitely trying our best to make sure that our interviews address questions that you, our listeners, want to have asked.

We need your input! Send a message to us through Facebook, or, email. Everything you need to contact us is in the "about" section on FB! Give us names of people you'd like to hear on the "Porch" -you know we will ask the weird questions, so SEND US THOSE QUESTIONS OTHERS ARE AFRAID TO ASK ON THEIR SHOWS!

And, we'd love to bring back "Open Porch" broadcasts. These are the shows where you, our listeners, can call in and comment or complain about something you've heard on a previous show. If you want to say something about a previous interview, or, whatever, the "Open Porch" broadcasts are your opportunity to do so.

When are they? Whenever we post they will be (usually, on FB) and we also declare an "open porch" at the beginning of each of these shows - complete with TOLL-FREE CALL-IN NUMBER for you poor bastards, like us!

I promise you that the more feedback we get, the bigger and bolder interviews will come. BTW: We have interviews scheduled for both May broadcasts, already. I ain't saying shit to anyone who isn't chatting us up behind the broadcasts! One communicative listener knows who's supposed to be on the next show, and, she's excited as hell we got someone this cool!

 

Do your part - tune in and feed-back!

Conversations from the Porch 04/21 by Hrafnstong Radio | Blog Talk Radio

Conversations from the Porch 04/21 by Hrafnstong Radio | Blog Talk Radio

Vikings on History Channel; Ancient Alien Norse Gods; Beltane thoughts; INTERVIEW: Bruce with the Lake Okeechobee Summer Solstice Pagan Festival; Cat pees next to Morlog; Morlog's Orlog; new Amon Amarth with Uruzz.

Conversations from the Porch 04/07 by Hrafnstong Radio | Blog Talk Radio

Conversations from the Porch 04/07 by Hrafnstong Radio | Blog Talk Radio

Dan (O)Halloran; politics; positions of power; morality; "Glory Hammer"; Morlog's Orlog & "the random 5".

Conversations from the Porch 03/17 by Hrafnstong Radio | Blog Talk Radio

Conversations from the Porch 03/17 by Hrafnstong Radio | Blog Talk Radio

Hrafnstong Tribalism; Uruzz takes a burger vacation; Taking back St. Patty's Day for the pagan; Beware of certain sources; Morlog's nuts and the Kotex of Doom (Pics on the CFTP FB pg).

Conversations from the Porch 03/03 by Hrafnstong Radio | Blog Talk Radio

Conversations from the Porch 03/03 by Hrafnstong Radio | Blog Talk Radio

Discussions on FB convo threads: Privilege, Deity Etymologies, Homestead(s); Interview with proprietors of Emain Macha Alabama site and upcoming events in the SE region of US; "___"-Pride Parades and Attention-seeking.

Conversations from the Porch 02/17 by Hrafnstong Radio | Blog Talk Radio

Conversations from the Porch 02/17 by Hrafnstong Radio | Blog Talk Radio

Another stupid Valentine's Day; Disablot / Charming of the Plough; Ancestors; Offerings for Land Spirits; Blog-Discussions about "Nature Worship" and a Petition to Neuter "God" in American Media... among other things.

Conversations from the Porch 02/03 by Hrafnstong Radio | Blog Talk Radio

Conversations from the Porch 02/03 by Hrafnstong Radio | Blog Talk Radio

Interview with Phyllis Steinhauser, High Steward for The Troth; taking back certain words, like "rejoice", for polytheists; Morlag's Orlog and Uruzz Rocks.

Conversations from the Porch 01/20 by Hrafnstong Radio | Blog Talk Radio

Conversations from the Porch 01/20 by Hrafnstong Radio | Blog Talk Radio

Gender roles in heathenry; Ik spits on Morlag; Growing beyond our upbringings; Uruzz discusses drinking Mead with pussy, and, The Ik explains the difference between "sympathy" and "empathy" as it pertains to transgendered individuals.