So I am sitting in the waiting room of a doctor’s office and the TV is on. It is tuned to ABC rather than FOX (the station of choice here in town) and for that I was thankful. The View was on, and though the chattering and the way the hosts talk over each other can be annoying, it was at least not Glenn Beck or Rush Limbaugh.

But then their conversation turned to Pat Robertson and his heinous remarks about Haiti. I was glad to hear all four of them – including conservative Christian Elizabeth Hasselbeck, roundly condemn Robertson. I was surprised also to hear Elizabeth defend Obama and what she felt was a veiled reference to Robertson in Obama’s reassurance that Haiti would “not be forsaken.”

But the conversation quickly came to annoy me. “Why,” I thought, “am I forced to sit here and listen to all this crap about what their god would or would not do?” You cannot escape it. This is a debate we would not even be having, we would not be forced to listen to and to endure, if it were not for monotheism. There was no Satan in the days of polytheism for people so sell their souls to. This was an accusation that could not have been made. And therefore, a debate which could not have taken place.

We cannot escape it, however. We see it on TV, we see it in magazines, in newspapers, and on the Web. Hate, hate, hate. Condemnation after condemnation.

It is only at times like this, it seems, that any sound of condemnation comes from moderate Christians. Most of the time, the hate goes unremarked. Generally, the only people who speak up are atheists. Even many Pagans refuse to speak up. I’ve been told – scolded would be a better word – by Pagans who tell me that “Pagans don’t do that.” We Pagans are supposed to make nice with Christians. Apparently, no matter how egregious the offense.

And I am offended. I take my own advice. I turn the channel, I flip to a different page of the of the paper or the magazine I’m reading, or go to a different website. But when you’re out in public, you’re a hostage. You have no control over the TV while you’re waiting to see your doctor or your dentist, or while you’re eating your meal. And in a town like this, it’s very rare to find a TV tuned to ABC.  If the girl behind the desk hadn’t been so busy, I’d have gotten up to tell her how much I appreciated them keeping the TV on a channel other than FOX. It was that remarkable, I thought.

But even having to fend off the propaganda, to dodge the shitstorm of falsity and disinformation spewing from the conservative media, is an aggravation. These people, I think, must be insecure about their god and their beliefs to have to invoke him with every other word. Even Elizabeth Hasselbeck managed to get a “holy spirit” thrown in for good measure before all was said and done. Maybe she was afraid of being forsaken if she didn’t.

I am a pious Heathen. I am devout. I love my gods and my religion. I do not, however, feel the need to mention them in every breath. They are part of my life. I am secure enough not to have to keep them and my beliefs on the tip of my tongue to prove it to anyone. And I know Jesus spoke of this, of this public display of piety that conservative Christians seem to think is required of them today. But they cherry-pick his words, just as they cherry-pick the “Old” Testament, choosing what to believe and what not to believe as if it’s a multiple choice with no wrong answers.

Frankly, I would be happy if I never had to hear another word out of them. If I want to know what they think about their god or their beliefs I’ll visit their website or blog or read their autobiography or follow their Twitters. Otherwise, I’d like to get through supper just once, or a doctor’s appointment, without having to hear about the holy spirit this and the holy spirit that. Do you think that’s too much to ask?

“Atheism is an extreme solution to the problem of monotheism.”

That is pretty much all I have to say about atheism, not being an atheist myself. I don’t think atheism is an unexpected or surprising solution to the problem of monotheism. After all, it is monotheism that gave birth to modern atheism, which was not apparently much in evidence in polytheistic times. In other words, monotheism is its own worst enemy.

“True religion is religion that works/is true for you.”

This is my view of “truth” in religion. There is no capital-T truth, a fact recognized and embraced by polytheism, which is by its very nature diverse. At the same time, this search for a capital-T truth has done nothing to unify people (even of the same purported religion) or to translate across cultures. Polytheism, on the other hand, IS a means of translation. People could see in each other’s gods their own gods in a way that monotheists cannot identify their one god. It’s an irony: the many bring unity while the one brings division.

It is interesting that the coming atheist advertisements on New York subway walls brings such protest. And it’s all from monotheists. I don’t know any polytheist who is offended by atheism, but monotheists really get their undies in a bunch. One comment I saw recently was that these atheist advertisements are a form of intolerance, that atheists are the truly intolerant ones in the equation. Apparently, it’s permitted for monotheists to express their belief, but it’s somehow intolerance to express disbelief? It makes no sense, but then, that can be said about monotheism in general.

If I had an advertising budget, I’d be advertising polytheism – Paganism as ethnic religion. Why? Because it’s a moderate solution to the problem of monotheism. It was not atheism that monotheism attacked, but polytheism. Polytheism exists outside of monotheism, and precedes it. It in no way requires the presence of monotheism. It is not the absence of or the rejection of monotheism. It is simply of itself a belief in the many, from long before anyone thought to substitute a “one.” But if you look at atheist rhetoric, and I’m not speaking just of published literature but of atheist remarks published on social networking sites, websites, blogs and forums, most of it is directed AT monotheism, and at Christianity in particular. And this is not surprising, as I said above. Monotheism gave birth to atheism, after all. And atheism, while in general a rejection of any kind of belief in a divine, was originally a specific rejection of Christianity.

From the perspective of a polytheist like myself, that’s throwing the baby out with the bathwater. Reject all gods on the basis of a bad relationship with one? That’s like swearing off all women because of one bad dating experience. It’s not women on the whole that are bad, but one woman. Similarly, it is not all gods who are bad, but one (or more precisely, the beliefs associated with that one). So, as I said, polytheism is a moderate solution to the problem of monotheism. Simply because monotheism doesn’t work doesn’t mean that polytheism can’t. It’s a legitimate alternative, one which was largely eliminated through centuries of persecution BY Christianity for the simple reason that it DOES work. The efficacy of polytheism is beyond question and in fact is proven by the great lengths to which its Christian persecutors went to destroy it.

Polytheism worked then, and it can work now. If Christianity does not work, there is no need to take an extreme solution and reject the divine altogether. For that reason, I would see polytheism advertisements as a public service, a sort of “Hey, wait! Don’t reject the divine altogether without looking at some reasonable alternatives.” That is the reason I established Mos Maiorum Foundation (www.mosmaiorum.org). I do believe very strongly that polytheism is true religion (it works). It works for me, it works for others, and it can work for you. I am not opposed to atheism. People should be free to believe or not believe as they choose, but I think something is lost when people are not even aware that there are choices. Christianity did its job too well and people too often see only two choices: Christianity or bust (atheism). Or if they find an alternative it might be an Eastern/oriental one, excluding any possibility of religion traditions in their own culture (Heathenism, Hellenism, etc). I think it’s our duty as polytheist to make these options known.

I’m not out to recruit anyone. I’m not out to proselytize. You won’t find me going door to door or standing on a street corner talking about “developing a relationship with Thor.” That doesn’t mean I won’t do what I can to make people aware of the customs and traditions of their ancestors. It’s their birthright, and it’s been stolen, and they have a right to know about it. If you don’t know all your options, it’s rather difficult to make a good choice. I think I owe that much to the memory of my ancestors and to my gods.

Besides which, atheism can’t offer anything polytheism can’t: an absence of religious division and holy wars. Remember, polytheism is original religion, and it worked. It worked so well Christianity surpassed Hitler’s genocide to eradicate it. Must be pretty worthwhile then, huh? I think so. If you want a corrective, reboot to the original factory settings: polytheism.