"Of course Magic is supportive of and loves his son. Why should anyone be surprised? What I can't tolerate is a lack of tolerance." - NBA superstar Kobe Bryant, responding to yesterday's TMZ story about Magic Johnson's support for his gay son. TMZ ponders: "The strong implication -- tolerance is not just limited to parents and their kids, but to pro athletes whose teammates may soon come out of the closet. In case you aren't reading between the lines -- given Kobe's stature, his statement could have a huge impact on athletes coming out."
A personal blog by a graying (mostly Anglo with light African-American roots) gay left leaning liberal progressive married college-educated Buddhist Baha'i BBC/NPR-listening Professor Emeritus now following the Dharma in Minas Gerais, Brasil.
Wednesday, April 3, 2013
JMG Quote Of The Day - Kobe Bryant
"Of course Magic is supportive of and loves his son. Why should anyone be surprised? What I can't tolerate is a lack of tolerance." - NBA superstar Kobe Bryant, responding to yesterday's TMZ story about Magic Johnson's support for his gay son. TMZ ponders: "The strong implication -- tolerance is not just limited to parents and their kids, but to pro athletes whose teammates may soon come out of the closet. In case you aren't reading between the lines -- given Kobe's stature, his statement could have a huge impact on athletes coming out."
Via Tricycle Daily Dharma:
Tricycle Daily Dharma April 3, 2013
Nirvana Right Now
Maybe
we think that nirvana is a place where there are no problems, no more
delusions. Maybe we think nirvana is something very beautiful, something
unattainable. We always think nirvana is something very different from
our own life. But we must really understand that it is right here, right
now.
|
- Maezumi Roshi, “Appreciate Your Life”
Tuesday, April 2, 2013
Via JMG: Uruguay Approves Same-Sex Marriage!
Moments
ago the Uruguay Senate approved its marriage equality bill by a vote of
23-8. The bill now returns to the nation's lower legislative chamber to
reconcile a minor change. President Jose Mujica has promised to sign
the bill and marriages should commence within a few months. ¡Felicidades
Uruguay!
UPDATE: Freedom To Marry cheers via press release.
Reposted from Joe
UPDATE: Freedom To Marry cheers via press release.
“Freedom to Marry applauds the people of Uruguay and their government for moving forward into a future in which all loving and committed couples can share in the freedom to marry and the meaning and protections marriage brings to families. Uruguay’s vote today to move past civil union to marriage itself, Argentina’s enactment of the freedom to marry in 2010 and the Mexico Supreme Court’s unanimous ruling last month in favor of the freedom to marry -- citing the U.S Supreme Court cases of Brown v. Board of Education and Loving v. Virginia -- all are inspirations and examples decision-makers here in the United States, including our Supreme Court justices, should swiftly follow to get the U.S. where it needs to be.”
Labels: marriage equality, South America, Uruguay
Via Buddhism on Beliefnet:
Daily Buddhist Wisdom | |||
|
Via Tricycle Daily Dharma:
Tricycle Daily Dharma April 2, 2013
Spacious Mind
Most
of our suffering comes from habitual thinking. If we try to stop it out
of aversion to thinking, we can’t; we just go on and on and on. So the
important thing is not to get rid of thought, but to understand it. And
we do this by concentrating on the space in the mind, rather than on the
thought.
|
- Ajahn Sumedho, “Noticing Space”
Monday, April 1, 2013
Via JMG: Uruguay To Advance Marriage Tomorrow
Rex Wockner passes along this email from Uruguay's LGBT rights group.
The Uruguayan Senate will vote the marriage equality bill tomorrow, Tuesday, April 2. As you may remember, the bill had been passed by the Chamber of Deputies in December, but the Senate has modified it. According to our Constitution, those modifications will have to be confirmed by the Deputies for the bill to be finally approved. The modifications are minor and do not affect the bill's essence. We know the bill will be passed by both Chambers by an overwhelming majority, and in a speedy way. After this Tuesday's vote by the Senate, the lower chamber will probably vote and pass it in one or two weeks (all in April). Once passed, the government has up to 90 days to regulate it, i.e., to make the necessary changes in red tape to implement it. Hopefully, the first couples will be getting married in July/August.Zoom, zoom, zoom.
Via Buddhism on Beliefnet:
Daily Buddhist Wisdom | |||
|
Via Tricycle Daily Dharma:
Tricycle Daily Dharma April 1, 2013
A Kind Heart
In
order to cultivate a truly loving and kind heart, we need to develop
the practices that cultivate and strengthen forgiveness and the natural
compassion within us. Our ability to forgive allows us to make space for
our ability to meet suffering—our suffering as well as the suffering of
others—with a kind heart.
|
- Gina Sharpe, “The Power of Forgiveness”
Sunday, March 31, 2013
Via Tricycle Daily Dharma:
Tricycle Daily Dharma March 31, 2013
The Truth about Pleasure
The
truth is, we don’t really want to be free from desire or to admit that
clinging to the pleasures of the senses—the taste of delicious food; the
sound of music, gossip, or a joke; the touch of a sexual embrace—ends
unavoidably in disappointment and suffering. We don’t have to deny that
pleasant feelings are pleasurable. But we must remember that like every
other feeling, pleasure is impermanent.
|
- Bhante Gunaratana, "Desire and Craving"
Saturday, March 30, 2013
Via Tricycle Daily Dharma:
Tricycle Daily Dharma March 30, 2013
The Sound of Silence
Silence
is something that comes from your heart, not from outside. Silence
doesn’t mean not talking and not doing things; it means that you are not
disturbed inside. If you’re truly silent, then no matter what situation
you find yourself in you can enjoy the silence.
|
- Thich Nhat Hanh, “The Heart of the Matter”
Friday, March 29, 2013
Via Buddhism on Beliefnet:
Daily Buddhist Wisdom | |||
|
Via Tricycle Daily Dharma:
Tricycle Daily Dharma March 29, 2013
Experiencing Impermanence
Every
sensation shares the same characteristic: it arises and passes away,
arises and passes away. It is this arising and passing that we have to
experience through practice, not just accept as truth because Buddha
said so, not just accept because intellectually it seems logical enough
to us. We must experience sensation’s nature, understand its flux, and
learn not to react to it.
|
- S. N. Goenka, “Finding Sense in Sensation”
Via Buddhism on Beliefnet:
Daily Buddhist Wisdom | |||
|
Thursday, March 28, 2013
Via Tricycle Daily Dharma:
Tricycle Daily Dharma March 28, 2013 |
|||
Born Each Instant
- Soko Morinaga Roshi, “One Chance, One Encounter”
|
Via FB / FatherMichael Beckett:
Someone invariably mentions 1st Corinthians 13, the famous "Love Chapter." Love is patient, love is kind, love never insists on its own way and so forth. Wonderful advice for marriage, but Paul was not talking about marriage. He was addressing a church fight: the believers in Corinth had split into factions and were competing for prestige and influence. We see echoes of this conflict throughout the letter, but especially in chapters 12 and 14, which surround this passage.
Others want the passage from Ruth: "Where you go, I will go; where you lodge, I will lodge; your people shall be my people, and your God my God" Another moving passage, but it's certainly not about marriage. Ruth addresses this moving speech to her mother-in-law Naomi: from one woman to another. Isn't THAT interesting???
And then, the second creation story in Genesis comes up: (Yes, there are TWO creation stories): "Therefore a man leaves his father and his mother and clings to his wife, and they become one flesh" (Genesis 2:24). This passage is certainly appropriate to marriage, as it reflects the level of intimacy and commitment that distinguishes marriage from other relationships. Jesus quotes this passage, too, in Matthew and Mark, but he isn't exactly discussing marriage. Instead, Jesus' topic is divorce, and when ministers read these Gospel passages at weddings, as they often do, the message seems a little off. I'd rather not hear about divorce at a wedding.
One other passage frequently surfaces in weddings but rarely in mainline Protestant Churches. This passage has become part of the traditional wedding vows that most people today leave out. The part about wives should obey their husbands. Ephesians 5:22-33 commands wives to obey their husbands and husbands to love their wives. Conservative Christians may try to explain away the offense of this passage, but there's no escaping its ugly reality. Ephesians calls wives to submit to their husbands just as children must obey their parents and slaves must obey their masters.
The point is, Christian weddings rarely feature passages that directly relate to marriage. Only one passage, Genesis 2:24, seems especially relevant, while other passages require us to bend their content to our desire to hear a good word about marriage. Things are so bad that the worship books for many denominations turn to John 2:11, where Jesus turns water into wine at a wedding feast, to claim that Jesus blessed marriage.
Yes, he turned water into wine at that wedding. But we must remember the circumstances: His mother, Mary, went to Him for help because the hosts had run out of wine. He told her that "It is not my time." But in the way of all mothers, she continued asking, and like a good Son, he did something for His mother. Jesus' first miracle wasn't to bless a wedding, but done as a favor for his mother. People think that Jesus blessed marriage because he attended a wedding. That's the best we can do? No wonder it's common for couples to struggle over the choice of Scripture for their wedding ceremonies. The Bible just doesn't have much to say on the topic.
The only thing Jesus really DID say about marriage was, "What therefore God hath joined together, let not man put asunder." (Matthew 19:6) Divorce, was sin in Jesus' eyes. The only exception in which Jesus permits divorce is when adultery has already corrupted the marriage.
Moreover Jesus condemns all remarriage after divorce as adultery. Nor does He speak of remarriage as a one-time act of adultery, but of the ongoing relationship as adultery.
Let's be honest, unfortunately, many Christians use the Bible to support their own prejudices and bigotry. They talk about "biblical family values" as if the Bible had a clear message on marriage and sexuality. Let's be clear: There's no such thing as "biblical family values" because the Bible does not speak to the topic clearly and consistently.
Let's not even go into some of the Bible's most interesting marriages. We won't talk about the fact that
Lamech had two wives - Genesis 4:19.
Esau had three wives - Genesis 26:34 & 28:9.
Jacob had four wives - Genesis 29:28 & 30:4-9.
Gideon had many wives - Judges 8:30.
Abijah had 14 wives - II Chronicles 13:21. and the list goes on.....
Nor will we talk about some of the Bibles most chilling teachings regarding marriage, such as a man's obligation to keep a new wife who displeases him on the wedding night (Deuteronomy 22:13-21), his obligation to marry a woman he has raped (Deuteronomy 22:28-30) or the unquestioned right of heroes like Abraham to exploit their slaves sexually. I wonder: Have the "biblical family values advocates" actually read their Bibles?
In Biblical times, a wife was regarded as chattel, belonging to her husband; the descriptions in the Bible suggest that she would be expected to perform tasks such as spinning, sewing, weaving, manufacture of clothing, fetching of water, baking of bread, and animal husbandry. However, wives were usually looked after with care, and men with more than one wife were expected to ensure that they continued to give the first wife food, clothing, and marital rights.[Ex 21:10]
Since a wife was regarded as property, her husband was originally free to divorce her for any reason, at any time. A divorced couple were permitted to get back together, unless the wife had married someone else after her divorce.[Deut 24:2–4
Betrothal (erusin), which is merely a binding promise to get married, like engagement, is distinct from marriage itself (nissu'in), with the time between these events varying substantially. Since a wife was regarded as property in those days, the betrothal (erusin) was effected simply by purchasing her from her father (or guardian) and the girl’s consent is not explicitly required by any biblical law.
It's high time people came clean about how we use the Bible.
Via JMG: Ezra Klein Vs Justice Scalia
"The idea that there is something so wrong with same-sex households that it would be preferable for these children to go two or four or six years without permanent parents — an idea, again, that has little to no evidence behind it, and that is in fact contradicted by most of the evidence — bespeaks a homophobia so deep that it is hard for me to believe it could persist long among people who actually know any children in the foster system, and who actually know many gay couples. [snip] The answer to Kagan’s question is that gay marriage doesn’t harm traditional marriage. But the answer to Scalia’s retort is that he’s got it precisely wrong: Gay marriage is good for children in the foster system." - Ezra Klein, reacting to Justice Scalia's claim that there is "considerable disagreement" among sociologists regarding children adopted by gay parents. (Tipped by JMG reader Russell)
Via JMG: Obama On SCOTUS: No Predictions
Yesterday President Obama spoke with the nation's two largest Spanish-language networks regarding this week's marriage cases before the Supreme Court.
Speaking to Univision:
Reposted from Joe
Speaking to Univision:
“I never predict what the court will do. But I used to teach constitutional law, and there is certainly a strong basis for determining that in this age, given what we now know, given the changes that have been taking place in the states around the country, same-sex couples should be treated fairly and have the same rights benefits, be able to transfer property, all the rights and recognitions that heterosexual couples do.”Speaking to Telemundo:
"I think it is time for the justices to examine this issue. I think not only is it right and fair but also consistent with our Constitution to recognize same-sex couples It doesn’t mean everybody has to agree from a religious standpoint about this issue. It does mean that it is very important for us to remember that we’re a nation where everybody is supposed to be equal before the law."(Via Pink News)
Labels: Barack Obama, LGBT History, marriage equality, SCOTUS
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)