?

Log in

No account? Create an account
 
 
16 October 2009 @ 09:53 am
Link post: things that have struck me this morning  
  1. A new manifesto by Episcopal Bishop John S. Spong, who is the retired bishop of Newark. Brought to my attention by whoknew44.
    ...The battle in both our culture and our church to rid our souls of this dying
    prejudice is finished. A new consciousness has arisen. A decision has quite clearly been made. Inequality for gay and lesbian people is no longer a debatable issue in either church or state. Therefore, I will from this moment on refuse to dignify the continued public expression of ignorant prejudice by engaging it. I do not tolerate racism or sexism any longer. From this moment on, I will no longer tolerate our culture's various forms of homophobia. I do not care who it is who articulates these attitudes or who tries to make them sound holy with religious jargon. ...

  2. "Keeping Up With the Times", a poem by Suzette Haden Elgin (ozarque).
    She could do magic
    as well as anyone;
    she was highly skilled.
    ...

    ETA: Edited version here

  3. Last night's entry at Making Light, a discussion of the deaths and injuries resulting from a "New Age Sweat Lodge" event near Sedona, Arizona.
    ... Two people have died and a total of 19 were treated at one of three medical centers Thursday night when participants collapsed after a New Age-type sweat lodge experience near Sedona. ... [Yavapai County Sheriff Steve] Waugh also said that [James Arthur] Ray, who led the sweat lodge ceremony, refused to talk to investigators on site and returned to California. ...

    ... The “solo experience in the forest” was a “vision quest” in the uninhabited country around the ranch following the 36-hour fast. On the day of the sweat lodge fiasco, participants were served a buffet breakfast in the morning, then sat through a few hours of seminars before the sweat lodge got going around 3:00. Near as I can make out, the sweat lodge session went wrong somewhere around 4:30, and had become a multi-victim emergency scene by 5:00. ...

    ... As I said earlier, “Remember all of these when we’re asking why participants stayed in James Ray’s misbegotten sweat lodge beyond the limits of their own endurance.” If you have the sense God gave a soda cracker, you do not (1.) promise people results that will both transform them to the point of temporarily estranging them from themselves, and automatically provide them with the means to endure that transformation; (2.) put them through multiple exercises that are both psychologically and physically challenging; (3.) push them to test their own limits, and give them the impression that bailing out of the exercises is wussy, a defeat, and a waste of their ten thousand dollars; and (4.) fail to monitor them closely for signs of distress. ...


  4. Judge hearing California marriage lawsuit asks for proof that same-sex marriage will harm opposite-sex marriage -- and doesn't get it. Brought to my attention by browngirl.
    [U.S. District Chief Judge Vaughn Walker] challenged the backers of California's voter-enacted ban on same-sex marriage Wednesday to explain how allowing gay couples to wed threatens conventional unions, a demand that prompted their lawyer to acknowledge he did not know.
 
 
 
Spark_in_darknesssparkindarkness on October 16th, 2009 02:50 pm (UTC)
*dearly hopes for that manifesto to become official policy* please gods we need some good news right now.


And that judge? Rocks like a rocking thing :)
une idee fixeideealisme on October 16th, 2009 03:05 pm (UTC)
That story about the sweat lodge was shocking - how irresponsible and deeply wicked.

I too feel some wariness about the eagerness to use Native American traditions (which whites have done their utmost to destroy) as some sort of hucksterism and fake spirituality. It's quite disgusting.
A Wandering Hobbitredbird on October 16th, 2009 04:49 pm (UTC)
What struck me about the California case is that this wasn't even at the evidence-gathering stage. The judge was asking "what harm do you allege?" and the lawyer couldn't think of any way that same-sex marriage might harm mixed-sex marriage.

What I wonder is, did his backers assume he knew their arguments, or were they just desperately hoping that the judge wouldn't ask this question?
darrel jenkins iidjenk on October 16th, 2009 04:58 pm (UTC)
The way I see it, it is a tacit admission that they have nothing in the way of evidence that can pass legal muster. Unlike that idiot Orly Taitz, at least their lawyer is smart enough not to put a half-assed argument out, only to have it destroyed upon cursory examination. The best he can do is argue for that a "wait-and-see" approace is best, even though I doubt his backers want to wait or see anything...
You're out of adventures :(claire on October 16th, 2009 11:12 pm (UTC)
Last year the gay couple who lived directly downstairs from where I was living at the time got married. Even in such close proximity, I am fairly sure no gay marriage germs invaded our apartment and did anything at all to our marriage!