Browsed by
Tag: King

Marianne, you have an admirer

Marianne, you have an admirer

Comments 3 comments

Marianne Meed Ward of the Toronto Sun has my admiration. She has written an opinion piece – in the Lifestyle Section, yet – that connects some of the dots in the conflict between the Jehovah’s Witness belief in the total abstention from blood and the welfare of children in cases where life-saving blood transfusions may be needed.

There are big themes here – civil liberties, freedom of (and from) religion, freedom of (and from) speech, child welfare, biblical scholarship, and the line between religion and the state.

Are such deadly biblical interpretations and movements a matter of natural/cultural selection? Or are they, as believed by followers, a mark of God’s true people?

What if you wanted to sacrifice, say, geese – at the town square every Sunday morning?
What if people decided, as Jehovah’s Witnesses used to, that vaccinations were also to be banned by God’s people?
Or – public education?
Or that we should pluck out what offends us – such as the eyes of the youngest, or oldest, of our nuclear family as a “body”?

Shall I become more ridiculous, or are you following me here? This debate could go anywhere. I hope some talented people get involved – Jehovah’s Witnesses have been a good place to practice such debate before.

In my reading of the various holy books, life always trumps law.

Thank you, Marianne. That is a great place to start! It’s a good place to start for a lot of the debates we should be having. Go read the article, people.

(Thank you again, Danny, for keeping me up to date)

The case really is one that should be debated. It probably needs some general unearthing even for some JWs – they don’t actually keep to kosher laws about meat and blood, and the leadership has gotten a bit technical on the “parts” of the blood that are not covered by the ban on blood transfusions. Presumably some bits of the blood are excluded as being without that elusive “soul” element that cannot be shared. Incidentally, the “soul” element is also completely distinct from the “spirit” of/in breath, which is not considered sacred and it therefore ok to share in life-saving circumstances. Imagine if we were arguing about resuscitation or oxygen therapy!

This would be a fascinating debate on many levels – in and out of the courtroom. In larger terms, it would be good for the planet (I hope) to confront some of the conflicts between some religious behavior and the general welfare. At this point, I have to say, however regretfully, that I believe that any debate of that sort could be better argued in Canada, far from the neo-legalististic pseudo-theocrats of America* – or those of the Middle East.

The issue of blood transfusions is not likely to create sources of destructive violence. Jehovah’s Witnesses don’t fight in wars. Nor do they vote. That seems pretty safe. They are, for the most part, good people who are trying to do what they believe is right.

Let’s start talking again about what is right. Let’s have more of a meta-discussion.

I define “religious” very broadly. I can’t actually say that I have met very many people whose ultimate concern really seemed to be God, but perhaps I am not as perceptive on that as I would like to be. One thing, though, the ones I trust tend to have little need to trumpet pronouncements.

In any case, the peoples of the book have got to talk, and this is a good place to start. It can be a practice run to learn terms of reasonable, spiritually responsible, terms of (and for) debate.

Think of the possibilities for discussion! Jehovah’s Witnesses are a minority group, who believe that “persecution” proves their righteousness in the end times. The Watchtower Bible and Tract Corporations (and their governing body of a dozen men in New York at the Watchtower building/block next to the Brooklyn Bridge) hold great sway over many aspects of their followers’ lives. For the most part, the stated aims have good effect, although there are some harmful aspects too (destructiveness to families, abuse, psychological problems, and other issues discussed here and elsewhere). Still, they are no worse than many other groups in terms of their somewhat totalitarian hold.

Cognitive dissonance can be a problem for JWs, and against that the leadership limits information and damps down possibilities for debate (unlike the Jews and early Christians they say they admire). The scholarship is questionable, the learning is by rote repetition of selected, highly interpreted biblical passages.

Despite the leadership’s changing policies on the blood issue, most Jehovah’s Witnesses consider this life-or-death decision as an important way to choose to stand for God. By doing so, they believe that they may be chosen to live forever on a Paradise Earth (after the oft-rescheduled impending Armageddon). It’s a blind faith fundamentalist fixation, reinforced.

Yet I believe that this debate – the debate itself – may save lives. Once people are used to debate and critical thinking, I believe that they can love it. There will be some for whom the cognitive dissonance will finally become irrepressible. They may be thrown into crisis and may start to think things through for themselves. This could have a larger impact on the population at large.

On the negative side, Jehovah’s Witnesses may be told that the debate is being brought – as persecution – from the worldly reality of Satan’s control. Some of these will hunker down and refuse to think at all. Independent thinking (outside the guidance of the “organizaton”) is against their religion. It may be that the leadership simply gets “new light” from God. One possibility is that they could say that each person is responsible for themselves. Who decides for children? Parents? Doctors? A corporation in New York? Can they decide for themselves? It’s a very messy issue, and a fruitful one.

I also have a personal interest in observing what religion scholars have to say. I’ve read a lot on this issue, and it would be extremely fun for me. I wrote a chapter in my dissertation comparing communion and vampirism along viral questions of framing, and it is also a theme in my novel (the writing of which still doesn’t get enough of my time). I have always wanted to see the issue of blood debated by the very best of minds. What is this quasi-spiritual, quasi-physical substance of soul, and sacrifice? Where and when does spiritual communion turn into literalism, into cannibalism? What is this that promises immortality, and what is the cost of such beliefs?

*P.S. The intrusive side trains of thought. These should really be separate blog entries, but to me they are related.

Most Americans can’t get their heads around why it might be a tad bit idolatrous to take a pledge of allegiance to the nation’s flag. Indivisible? Oh, please. Don’t get me started on liberty and justice…for all. I don’t think most people even think about what they are saying. It’s a ritual, like “Heil.” The reds. The blues. Yet our world is fractal, complex – not dualist. We need a new synthesis of thought – a breakthrough to a better path.

If there is a God, whatever that God might be, we all would have to be (by definition?) “under God,” all the time. And not only “America,” not only people of one particular religious path or discipline. What do we mean by “under God” anyway? Under God’s rule? Under God’s banner? Under God’s protection? Under God’s blessing? Can anyone truly claim God as their property? Or it is meant to be a statement of humility? Nah. Don’t think so.

A lot of people look for the Kingdom in the world. But didn’t God warn against the desire for human kings? The kingdom (the corporation? the tribe? the nation?), the relationship to the cosmos, the eternal, is within you.

No, President Bush, it is not your government

No, President Bush, it is not your government

Comments 9 comments

This about sums it up. Bush really doesn’t seem to be able to accept the differences between American democracy and a kingship.

Bush declares himself absolute ruler: It’s ‘my government’
August 8, 2006 6:28 AM

Once again, President George W. Bush has shown complete disregard and utter contempt for the documents which define this country: The Declaration of Independence and the Constitution.

Speaking in Crawford, Texas, Monday, Bush said:

“The loss of life on both sides of the Lebanese-Israeli border has been a great tragedy. Millions of Lebanese civilians have been caught in the crossfire of military operations because of the unprovoked attack and kidnappings by Hezbollah. The humanitarian crisis in Lebanon is of deep concern to all Americans, and alleviating it will remain a priority of my government.”

“My government?” Abraham Lincoln, in the Gettysburg Address, said the Constitution establishes a government “of the people, by the people and for the people.” The Declaration of Independence starts with phrase “We the people.” They say nothing of turning the government over to any elected official so that it becomes “my government.”

Presidents have administrations and they can, and usually do, refer to such as “my administration.” But Bush, we believe, feels his power is absolute and the government of this nation belongs not to the people but to him and him alone.

This is not the first time that Bush has disregarded the protections of freedoms that are the cornerstone of our Republic. His widespread abuse of power has forced the Supreme Court to slap him down again and again, especially on the abandonment of Constitutionally-guaranteed rights for detainees at Guantanamo and others held without due course in the hysteria following the 9/11 terrorist attacks.

The American Bar Association recently issued a report noting his abuse of the Constitution through a deluge of “signing statements” where he declares he does not have to obey laws passed by Congress.

Attorney General Alberto Gonzales, while serving as White House Counsel, wrote a memo that referred to the Constitution as “an outdated document” and Bush himself has expressed contempt for the very document he has twice sworn an oath to uphold and defend.

America is no longer a democracy or a democratic republic. Government no longer belongs to the people. The President of the United States has declared it do be a government of Bush, by Bush and for Bush.

In his own words, Bush calls it “my government.”

As has happened too often in the past, the fate of a nation and the world rests in the hands of a megalomaniacal despot who claims absolute power to wage war, destroy freedom and spread chaos.

© Copyright 2006 by Capitol Hill Blue

The Matriarch King is Dead

The Matriarch King is Dead

Comments 1 comment

“Women, if the soul of the nation is to be saved, I believe that you must become its soul.”
— Coretta Scott King

Coretta Scott King is dead.

A woman of grace and strength and courage and dignity is gone.

Equality. Human Rights. Non-violence. Peace.

She worked hard to keep these ideas out front and center as solid goals for our country. She fought alongside many others for a national holiday in honor of her husband’s birthday. She opened the King Center (Martin Luther King Jr. Center for Nonviolent Social Change-the site of his tomb and of good works to support the dream) here in Atlanta. She spoke out on a wide range of issues (every last one of which is completely disregarded if not actively opposed by the current administration). She raised four children, too – and I hope they can learn to resolve their differences about where their parents’ legacy should take them as a family. The Kings belong to us all.

I am stuck here today with no transportation. I feel a deep urge to go to the King Center. I wish that I could. I am sending out my deep support and caring for everyone in America who feels this emptiness like I do today. The Matriarch King Coretta is gone, another good strong voice gone. May her memory inspire others.

On local news, I heard Rev. Joseph Lowery (former president of the Southern Christian Leadership Conference, among other things). He was asked if he thought there were young people rising up to replace the likes of these heroes of our nation.

He said no. Then he explained in a clear, gentle way (that I can’t duplicate) that no-one can replace King, or anyone. It’s not a matter of replacing. They walked in their own shoes, they had their own history, they thought what they thought, they did what they did.

Young people can’t replace anyone.

They can, however, be inspired and motivated by them – to be fully themselves and find their own work.

I watched film footage of the Kings and others, and the tears rolled down my face. What a woman she was.

They call her “the widow of slain civil rights leader Martin Luther King Jr.” (note that they don’t use the word “assassinated” much anymore), but she worked strongly for the same goals he did. She didn’t suddenly care about freedom and justice – only just in support of her husband’s memory – but was an strong voice of activism in her own right.

Freedom. Justice.

I don’t remember anytime in my life before when these two words have been so stripped and twisted and misshapen as now. Freedom? Justice? We’ve degraded these words into meaninglessness. I do hope that there are those among the young who will rise up.

I can’t really explain how I felt when I went to CNN and saw the top two headlines:

Coretta Scott King dies
Alito confirmation expected today

The juxtaposition gave me a chill. Today our Senators will show how little they value King’s work – Alito cometh.

I think our dear leader would be wise to keep the hypocrisy to a minimum if he tries to say anything about her death in the State of the Union Speech tonight. His policies haven’t shown much concern for what she stood for and worked for.

I’m going to force myself to watch this speech, although it will be painful. It’s my civic duty.
And I have a feeling about it, which I need to verify or disregard.

Today:
1865: The 13th Amendment to the Constitution passes, abolishing slavery in the United States.

More words from Coretta Scott King:

“If American women would increase their voting turnout by ten percent, I think we would see an end to all of the budget cuts in programs benefiting women and children.”

“My mother always told me that I was going to go to college, even if she didn’t have but one dress to put on.”

“Struggle is a never ending process. Freedom is never really won you earn it and win it in every generation.”

“Every person is a child of god and every human being is entitled to full human rights.”

“We have got to stand firm for a more compassionate health care system, which leaves no person behind — a system that takes responsibility to insure that no citizen be denied medical care because they lack adequate insurance. There is something wrong with a system that requires telethons for sick people, but always has a blank check ready for the Pentagon. The Cold War is over, but we still have a Cold War military budget, which is draining needed financial and human resources that should be invested in the health security of the American people. ”

“The gay bashers and homophobic people are the best allies AIDS could have. By preaching hatred and fear of gay people, they are creating a climate that discourages openness and education about AIDS which can help prevent its spread. They spread shame and guilt where their should be compassion and healing.”

“Justice is never advanced in the taking of a human life. Morality is never upheld by legalized murder.”

“The King Holiday celebrates Dr. King’s global vision of the world house, a world whose people and nations had triumphed over poverty, racism, war and violence. The holiday celebrates his vision of ecumenical solidarity, his insistence that all faiths had something meaningful to contribute to building the beloved community.”

“Homophobia is like racism and anti-Semitism and other forms of bigotry in that it seeks to dehumanize a large group of people, to deny their humanity, their dignity and personhood. This sets the stage for further repression and violence that spread all too easily to victimize the next minority group.”

“I still hear people say that I should not be talking about the rights of lesbian and gay people and I should stick to the issue of racial justice. But I hasten to remind them that Martin Luther King Jr. said, “Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere.” I appeal to everyone who believes in Martin Luther King Jr.’s dream to make room at the table of brother- and sisterhood for lesbian and gay people.”

“I think that nonviolence allows you and empowers you to do what is necessary, because what you do is build coalitions. You can’t do all of it by yourself, but you can put together a coalition and get other people involved, or join organizations that are already involved and continue to work to eradicate poverty, of course, since poverty is still with us, very much so. My husband — it was one of the triple evils that he talked about — poverty, racism and war. And of course, they all are forms of violence, and we have to continue to work to make sure that people everywhere have a decent livelihood, that they have jobs, they have housing, they have health care, they have quality education. All of these areas that we still have to work on and to improve, so that the quality of life for all people is improved, and we can achieve indeed the “beloved community” that Martin talked about, that I believe in.”