<staff edit>
The problem of course is that the Easter -> Astarte/Ishtar thing is a false etymology with precisely zero evidence to support it. It's a claim that's been around for well over a century, but a repeated false claim is still a false claim.
The reality is that we actually do know the etymology of Easter. In the Venerable Bede's work On the Reckoning of Time he explains the names of the Anglo-Saxon months, one of these is Eosturmonath, which corresponds to the Latin month of April. According to Bede the name of the month comes from an old Anglo-Saxon goddess that used to be worshiped named Eostre, however in his own time it had taken on the name "Paschal month" on account that this is when the Christian Paschal Feast was celebrated; the Anglo-Saxons having long already converted to Christianity in Britain.
So what do we know of this Anglo-Saxon goddess? Nothing. Literally nothing. Bede is our one and only source that the Anglo-Saxons had such a goddess, no other record exists, nothing in the written record, nothing in the archeological record, there aren't any cultic sites or relics or any evidence of any kind anywhere on the planet outside of Bede's account; and this is literally the only thing he has to say about this particular goddess, her name.
It's entirely possible that Bede was in fact entirely mistaken, and that the Anglo-Saxons never had a goddess by the name of Eostre and that he was simply misinformed on the subject.
There is no connection between Eostre and Astarte or Ishtar other than that if you tilt your head at an angle and try really hard they can sort of, kind of sound almost vaguely similar or like they could be related. However Eostre was an obscure and otherwise entirely unknown Anglo-Saxon goddess worshiped in Britain at some point before Christianization and after the Anglo-Saxon conquests; Astarte and Ishtar are names for Semitic goddess worshiped in the Levant. This is like trying to say that Krishna and Christ are the same; it's a nonsense proposition.
-CryptoLutheran
