Friday, February 28, 2014
Via HUffington / Here's What You Can Learn From Being In The Same Room As The Dalai Lama
A friend described hearing the Dalai Lama speak in a convention hall
as "being in the presence of God." Another friend, who years ago also
was in the audience at another big arena, said the feeling of peace that
came over her from being so close to His Holiness was a "life-changer."
So when the opportunity to be in a smallish setting with him at a celebrity-studded lunch hosted by the Lourdes Foundation in Los Angeles was offered, my hand shot up.
Here's what I learned from being in the same room as the Dalai Lama:
1) The Dalai Lama has a wickedly contagious laugh that melts hearts and Hollywood egos.
I suspect he wishes it could also melt weapons of mass destruction, but even falling short of that, it's still a joy to hear. He laughs especially hard when he is telling one of his own stories, like the time he was chased by a ferocious dog when he was a small boy. Running from danger is sometimes the best course of action, he noted, and shows wisdom not cowardice.
2) Being the messenger of peace is a hard job. Being the messenger of inner peace, even harder.
And hardest of all may be convincing people that the key to their happiness lies within them, not some place else. The switch to our inner light belongs to each of us. His Holiness says that when one person is happy, it spreads to their family; when the family is at peace, so becomes the community, the state, and so on. To change the world, we must first change ourselves.
3) The Dalai Lama would consider going to the moon with Sharon Stone.
While he may not be alone in this thinking -- and has discussed his weakness for beautiful women before -- he used the occasion of sitting under the space shuttle Endeavour's wing at the California Science Center to answer a question of whether he would ever consider space travel. Thanks, but no thanks, said His Holiness, at least not until it becomes more commonplace. And he turned to actress Stone to see if she wouldn't join him. He stared at the Endeavour hovering over him in its majesty and proclaimed that while it "looks like a solid entity," its successful function depended on many many other things. Like all great things of achievement, he said, there was a team behind it.
4) It isn't technology that is bad -- quite the contrary.
Technology is good. It's when we let it control us that it becomes a bad thing. Technology does not produce compassion. The Dalai Lama does not own a smart phone, nor does he watch much TV -- which we suspect disappointed many of the reality TV stars in the audience.
5) The Dalai Lama carries a toothbrush with him.
His Holiness carries a small orange day bag with him. The contents: several pieces of candy that he offered to share with actress Stone; extra reading glasses; an under-arm thermometer in case the flu bug bites; and a toothbrush kit because, he said, it's important to brush after every meal. He also carries a small clay statue of Buddha, which he wouldn't unwrap even when Stone asked to see it. Everyone needs a strong sense of self, he said. Without it, you are weak. It is from this sense of self that compassion, determination and altruism are born. The flip side of that coin is ego.
6) We chase the wrong kind of wealth.
The pursuit of materialism -- external wealth -- derails our pursuit of inner wholeness -- internal wealth. His Holiness knows monks who live in the most spartan of conditions, surrounded by the barest of necessities and yet they are happy. He also knows many of the world's richest people who are financially able to surround themselves with every trapping that money can buy. And they are some of the loneliest people he knows.
7) People are attracted to the calm, not the storm.
The Dalai Lama has an entourage. People just want to be in his presence. His Holiness says that a calm mind brings inner strength and is essential for good health. Practicing kindness and compassion and learning to understand the roots of anger are the compasses for finding the calm.
Make the jump here to read the original and enjoy links
So when the opportunity to be in a smallish setting with him at a celebrity-studded lunch hosted by the Lourdes Foundation in Los Angeles was offered, my hand shot up.
Here's what I learned from being in the same room as the Dalai Lama:
1) The Dalai Lama has a wickedly contagious laugh that melts hearts and Hollywood egos.
I suspect he wishes it could also melt weapons of mass destruction, but even falling short of that, it's still a joy to hear. He laughs especially hard when he is telling one of his own stories, like the time he was chased by a ferocious dog when he was a small boy. Running from danger is sometimes the best course of action, he noted, and shows wisdom not cowardice.
2) Being the messenger of peace is a hard job. Being the messenger of inner peace, even harder.
And hardest of all may be convincing people that the key to their happiness lies within them, not some place else. The switch to our inner light belongs to each of us. His Holiness says that when one person is happy, it spreads to their family; when the family is at peace, so becomes the community, the state, and so on. To change the world, we must first change ourselves.
3) The Dalai Lama would consider going to the moon with Sharon Stone.
While he may not be alone in this thinking -- and has discussed his weakness for beautiful women before -- he used the occasion of sitting under the space shuttle Endeavour's wing at the California Science Center to answer a question of whether he would ever consider space travel. Thanks, but no thanks, said His Holiness, at least not until it becomes more commonplace. And he turned to actress Stone to see if she wouldn't join him. He stared at the Endeavour hovering over him in its majesty and proclaimed that while it "looks like a solid entity," its successful function depended on many many other things. Like all great things of achievement, he said, there was a team behind it.
4) It isn't technology that is bad -- quite the contrary.
Technology is good. It's when we let it control us that it becomes a bad thing. Technology does not produce compassion. The Dalai Lama does not own a smart phone, nor does he watch much TV -- which we suspect disappointed many of the reality TV stars in the audience.
5) The Dalai Lama carries a toothbrush with him.
His Holiness carries a small orange day bag with him. The contents: several pieces of candy that he offered to share with actress Stone; extra reading glasses; an under-arm thermometer in case the flu bug bites; and a toothbrush kit because, he said, it's important to brush after every meal. He also carries a small clay statue of Buddha, which he wouldn't unwrap even when Stone asked to see it. Everyone needs a strong sense of self, he said. Without it, you are weak. It is from this sense of self that compassion, determination and altruism are born. The flip side of that coin is ego.
6) We chase the wrong kind of wealth.
The pursuit of materialism -- external wealth -- derails our pursuit of inner wholeness -- internal wealth. His Holiness knows monks who live in the most spartan of conditions, surrounded by the barest of necessities and yet they are happy. He also knows many of the world's richest people who are financially able to surround themselves with every trapping that money can buy. And they are some of the loneliest people he knows.
7) People are attracted to the calm, not the storm.
The Dalai Lama has an entourage. People just want to be in his presence. His Holiness says that a calm mind brings inner strength and is essential for good health. Practicing kindness and compassion and learning to understand the roots of anger are the compasses for finding the calm.
Make the jump here to read the original and enjoy links
Via JMG: Sen. Patrick Leahy Proposes Freezing Aid To Uganda Over Anti-Homosexuality Bill
“I am deeply concerned by the decision of President (Yoweri) Museveni of Uganda to sign into law the anti-homosexuality bill,” Senator Patrick Leahy, the most senior member of the chamber and chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, said in a statement. “Much of US assistance to Uganda is for the people of Uganda, including those in the Ugandan LGBT (lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender) community whose human rights are being so tragically violated,” he added. Washington is among Uganda’s largest international donors. The State Department said that in current fiscal year some $485 million in bilateral assistance had been provided to Uganda with most of the funds going towards health programs, as well as education, food security and military training. The State Department has signalled it is looking at a range of options to respond to the law, while White House spokesman Jay Carney said “we are undertaking a review of our relationship with Uganda in light of this decision.”With the aid of Western governments and NGOs, Uganda has seen a remarkable decline in HIV infections compared to its neighbors. Some US and European HIV/AIDS activists oppose cutting financial aid despite the latest law. Yesterday a prominent Ugandan LGBT activist begged that aid not be cut, saying such a move would only create a stronger backlash against LGBT people in his country.
Frank Mugisha, director of Sexual Minorities Uganda, has said he does not support aid cuts. ‘We can’t afford to create new victims,’ he said on Twitter this week. ‘We should go after the crazy politicians! Not innocent Ugandans.’ In February this year, prominent Ugandan LGBTI rights activist Abbey Kiwanuka petitioned the Dutch foreign affairs committee to use other ways to persuade Uganda not to make the bill law instead of cutting aid. His pleas were turned down. Edwin Sesange, director of the African LGBTI Out and Proud Diamond Group, said in a Gay Star News comment piece: ‘Aid in various forms helps all ordinary Ugandans, including LGBTI people who we are campaigning for. ‘Therefore the consequences of not being able to access those services financed by foreign aid will directly impact gay, lesbian, trans and bi Ugandans wellbeing.'RELATED: Sexual Minorities Uganda is the group suing Scott Lively for crimes against humanity.
Labels: Africa, bigotry, HIV/AIDS, LGBT rights, Patrick Leahy, religion, Uganda, Yoweri Museveni
Via JMG: UGANDA: World Bank Suspends $90M Loan Over Anti-Homosexuality Law
"We have postponed the project for further review to ensure that the development objectives would not be adversely affected by the enactment of this new law," World Bank spokesman David Theis said in an email. Ugandan president Yoweri Museveni signed an anti-gay bill earlier this week that strengthens already strict laws against homosexuals by imposing a life sentence for certain violations and making it a crime to not report anyone who breaks the law. The World Bank, a poverty-fighting institution based in Washington, usually refrains from getting involved in countries' internal politics or in issues such as gay rights to avoid antagonising any of its 188 member countries. World Bank president Jim Yong Kim, however, sent an email to bank staff saying the bank opposes discrimination, and would protect the safety of all employees.Norway, Denmark, and the Netherlands have also cut aid to Uganda's government and say they will redirect funding to private groups.
Labels: Africa, LGBT rights, Uganda, World Bank
Via JMG: Updated Marriage Map
The map reflects this week's changes in Texas and Kentucky. Note that a
second county in Illinois has begun issuing marriage licenses ahead of
the official statewide date of June 1st. Source.
Reposted from Joe Jervis
Via AmericaBlog: Following the victory in Arizona, a brief look at 2,000 years of gay history
Following the victory in Arizona, a brief look at 2,000 years of gay history
With the defeat of Arizona’s Bill-o-Bigotry, it’s a good time to reflect on the history and future of lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender rights.
Native Americans were fine with gay and trans people
Hundreds of years ago, when French missionaries traveled through North America, they recorded their observations of Native American culture.Particularly fascinating to them was what physician-historian Dr. Francis Mark Mondimore described in his book A Natural History of Homosexuality as “The Berdache Phenomenon.”
This refers to transgender and gay people within Native American tribes who, far from inciting loathing, were “respected, even revered in some Indian groups.”
George Catlin
(1796-1872), Dance to the Berdache. Drawn while on the Great Plains,
among the Sac and Fox Indians, the sketch depicts a ceremonial dance to celebrate the two-spirit person.
Native Americans tended to disagree. Their attitudes toward human sexuality were by stark contrast “relaxed and accepting.” Regardless of sexual preference, tribesman were treated with respect and dignity (including women who, as Mondimore puts it, enjoyed a status that was “much more egalitarian than among their European contemporaries”). Within certain groups the berdache was even revered for a “special connection with the gods and spirits.”
Clearly, the attitudes of Native American “savages,” as our ancestors dubbed them, were infinitely more progressive and civilized than Europeans of the time, and as the “religious freedom” debacle in Arizona shows, they were more civilized than those of many Americans even today.
With respect to the LGBT community, western culture often still genuflects to judgment and ostracism as opposed to compassion and acceptance. (Much debate is still had over whether one’s sexual orientation is a choice, as if that should affect how we treat gay people.) Even Native Americans, hundreds of years ago, with no access to a modern education, were above this cruelty.
And we know the Greeks and Romans had more permissive views than many today
As it turns out, a number of ancient cultures were rather tolerant as well. Neither the Greeks nor the Romans had words for homosexuality, though it was an accepted facet of both societies (reportedly, an actual “gay” identity didn’t begin to arise until the late 1800s, or later). In some ways, bisexuality was a social expectation for Greek and Roman men, within limits (Caesar was reportedly dogged by rumors that he was “gay,” to use the modern construct). It simply did not pose the same moral dilemma for them then, as it does for us now.Isn’t it strange that while amorous or sexual relations among same-sex Spartans were encouraged (it was thought that men would fight harder beside compatriots with whom they had had intimate relations), Michael Sam’s coming out has been greeted with anxiety by many within the NFL? The Spartans, as we know, represent the masculine warrior ideal, not unlike the spirit embodied by the game of American football. And yet primitive bigotry makes what should be a non-issue into something the NFL “isn’t ready for,” while a GOP lobbyist (who has a gay brother, no less) claims to be drafting legislation to ban gays from the sport altogether.
Jon Stewart had the final word about that during a recent segment in which he noted the violent criminal histories of several prominent NFL players, whom the league apparently is “ready for.” A Dallas sportscaster recently noted the same.
When did ancient tolerance become modern animus?
There doesn’t seem to be a historical consensus about the reasons why the change from tolerance to animus occurred, but there is ample evidence to show when. In his insightful work Christianity, Social Tolerance, and Homosexuality: Gay People in Western Europe From the Beginning of the Christian Tradition to the Fourteenth Century, historian John Boswell dates the beginning of the transition to the end of the Roman Empire. And, perhaps surprisingly, he explicitly rejects a view to which many likely subscribe: It was not, he thinks, Christianity that fomented the tide of homophobia that came to pervade Western culture.The reasons for Boswell’s doubts about the origins of modern homophobia are somewhat questionable; Mainly, he seems to think that criticisms by ancient church leaders of homosexuality, viewed within the context of their heedless attitudes toward other Levitical proscriptions, requires the conclusion that it was something more than religious doctrine that caused their homophobia. In other words, Boswell doesn’t think that early church leaders could be hypocritical and sincere, cherry-picking their offenses, which means Boswell probably doesn’t give the religious imagination, modern or ancient, nearly enough credit.
Regardless of the reasons, the fall of the Roman Empire (around 500AD) precipitated the widespread homophobia of the Middle Ages (an era spanning the next thousand years or so). During this period, Boswell describes a campaign of historical “whitewashing” by religious authorities aimed at purging references to homosexuality in Greek and Roman history. Some of the results are downright laughable, and are certain to remind readers of what Darwin called the “indelible stamp of [man's] lowly origins.”
Alcibiades, son of Cleinias. Photo by Marie-Lan Nguyen.
Consider, for example, the fate of Alcibiades, a known gay-lover of Socrates, when medieval Christian authorities retrospectively turned him into a “female famed for her beauty.”
In the same mirthful vein is this gem, for which I will use Boswell’s unmolested description:
In a manuscript of Ovid’s Art of Love, for example, a phrase which originally read, “A boy’s love appealed to me less” was amended by a medieval moralist to read, “A boy’s love appealed to me not at all,” and a marginal note informed the reader “Thus you may be sure that Ovid was not a sodomite.”Use here of the word “sodomite” to degrade highlights the historical persecution embedded in Judeo-Christian tradition. That history is clear and unambiguous, even if the original reasons for the persecution are not.
Back to Arizona
Thankfully, Arizona Governor Jan Brewer took a courageous step in blocking the fanatical advance of the religious right in her state. Because of that we can all celebrate a small victory in a larger, ongoing war, which the forces of progress and human dignity seem to be winning. But where do we go from here?In a recent Op-Ed, Harvard Law Professor Noah Feldman reluctantly concluded that the Arizona “religious freedom” law, SB1062, were it to have become law, would have been constitutional. This is disturbing, but probably (I think) true. The Supreme Court has yet to hold that under the Fourteenth Amendment’s Equal Protection Clause, laws discriminating against sexual orientation deserve “strict scrutiny,” which is the standard of review the Court applies to racial discrimination (but strangely not gender discrimination). The present standard for discrimination against gay and trans people is called “rational basis review” –t hat is, so long as a homophobic law is “rationally related to a legitimate government interest” it will pass constitutional muster.
Needless to say, this is a highly deferential standard. With four conservative Supreme Court justices virtually guaranteed to meet the challenge of any such law, by finding both a legitimate government interest and a manner in which said law is rationally related to that interest, the fate of LGBT rights likely sits in the uncertain hands of Justice Kennedy, who wrote the majority opinion striking down a key provision of the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) last June, 2013, leading to a flurry of recent gay rights successes in a number of states.
This is all the more reason for progressives not to wait for the Supreme Court’s false pretense of interpreting the Constitution (which it has almost never done in US history) to result in equal rights for the LGBT community. Gay and trans people have waited long enough. I would argue that we need a constitutional amendment granting not “the equal protection of the laws,” which is what the Fourteenth Amendment says, but “the protection of equal laws” for all Americans, regardless of race, gender, gender identity or sexual orientation. This is the proper choice for a proud and free democratic nation. Patiently waiting for the unelected Supreme Court is something rather more obsequious. (I’ll likely expand on this proposal in a future article.)
With the recent striking down of Texas’ bigoted same-sex marriage ban, the veto of Arizona’s ”religious freedom” bill, and the gutting of DOMA only half a year ago, America is inching ever closer (and ever more quickly) to civilization. Because the ancient Greek, Roman, and Native American cultures, among others, achieved sexual tolerance long ago, I hesitate to call these recent advances “progress.” But sometimes there is progress in regression.
Make the jump here to read the original article
Via Tricycle Daily Dharma
Tricycle Daily Dharma February 28, 2014
When Pain Happens
We suffer because we marry our instinctive aversion to pain to the deep-seated belief that life should
be free from pain. In resisting our pain by holding this belief, we
strengthen just what we're trying to avoid. When we make pain the enemy,
we solidify it. This resistance is where our suffering begins.
|
- Ezra Bayda, "When It Happens to Us"
Read the entire article in the Wisdom Collection through March 1, 2014
For full access at any time, become a Tricycle Community Supporting or Sustaining Member
For full access at any time, become a Tricycle Community Supporting or Sustaining Member
Thursday, February 27, 2014
Via Tricycle Daily Dharma
Tricycle Daily Dharma February 27, 2014
The Necessity of Love and Compassion
There
is no denying that our happiness is inextricably bound up with the
happiness of others. There is no denying that if society suffers, we
ourselves suffer. Nor is there any denying that the more our hearts and
minds are afflicted with ill-will, the more miserable we become. Thus we
can reject everything else: religion, ideology, all received wisdom.
But we cannot escape the necessity of love and compassion.
|
- H.H. the Dalai Lama, "Consider Yourself a Tourist"
Read the entire article in the Wisdom Collection through February 28, 2014
For full access at any time, become a Tricycle Community Supporting or Sustaining Member
For full access at any time, become a Tricycle Community Supporting or Sustaining Member
Wednesday, February 26, 2014
Via Tricycle Daily Dharma
Tricycle Daily Dharma February 26, 2014
Freed from Fixation
Our
lack of self frees us from the compulsion to secure ourselves within
the world. We do not need to become more real by becoming wealthy, or
famous, or powerful, or beautiful. We are able to realize our nonduality
with the world because we are freed from such fixations.
|
- David Loy, "Healing Ecology"
Read the entire article in the Wisdom Collection through February 27, 2014
For full access at any time, become a Tricycle Community Supporting or Sustaining Member
For full access at any time, become a Tricycle Community Supporting or Sustaining Member
Tuesday, February 25, 2014
Via JMG: Judy Garland's Kids To Reunite At Oscars
Liza Minnelli, Lorna Luft, and Joey Luft will reunite onstage at the Academy Awards on Sunday for a tribute to the 75th anniversary of the release of the Wizard Of Oz.
Reposted from Joe Jervis
Minnelli, Garland's daughter by her second husband, director Vincente Minnelli, is a legendary actress and singer in her own right — she won a best actress Oscar, for Cabaret (1972). The two Lufts' father was Garland's third husband and manager, Sid Luft. Lorna is also an actor-singer, while Joey has heretofore chosen to keep his life private for the most part. Garland's three children haven't always gotten along, but they are said to be on good terms these days and enthusiastic about this opportunity to celebrate their beloved mother in such a high-profile way. THR is told that specifics of what the commemoration will entail have not yet been locked down.
Via Tricycle Daily Dharma
Tricycle Daily Dharma February 25, 2014
Good for the Ego
We
can nod and smile when our ego, like a slightly demented relative who
means well, offers its endless array of opinions, judgments, and
knee-jerk reactions, but know that our ego is merely doing what it does
best: Valuate. More of that. Less of this. I don’t give a shit. Good for the ego. And thank goodness we’re more than just our egos!
|
- Jun Po Denis Kelly Roshi, “Liberation”
Read the entire article in the Wisdom Collection through February 26, 2014
For full access at any time, become a Tricycle Community Supporting or Sustaining Member
For full access at any time, become a Tricycle Community Supporting or Sustaining Member
Monday, February 24, 2014
Via JMG: HRC: Recall US Ambassador To Uganda
Via press release from the Human Rights Campaign:
President Museveni sent a clear message today that bigotry and intolerance – which is now further codified into statute in Uganda – trump the rights of LGBT Ugandans. Let there be no room for doubt, this bill could destroy lives and tear families apart. We call on Secretary of State John Kerry to temporarily recall the U.S. Ambassador to Uganda in order to strengthen our nation’s engagement on this issue. A temporary recall will send one of the clearest signals possible that the United States will not tolerate such abuses to any person’s human rights. We condemn the work of anti-LGBT Americans who pressed for the passage of this law. While many now distance themselves from passage of this bill, their work in Uganda helped bolster support and create space for enactment of the legislation. They could soon have blood on their hands.
Labels: Africa, bigotry, Christianity, HRC, John Kerry, LGBT rights, religion, Scott Lively, State Department, Uganda
Via Huffington: How to Determine If Your Religious Liberty Is Being Threatened in Just 10 Quick Questions
It seems like this election season "religious liberty" is a hot topic. Rumors of its demise are all around, as are politicians who want to make sure that you know they will never do anything to intrude upon it.
I'm a religious person with a lifelong passion for civil rights, so this is of great interest to me. So much so, that I believe we all need to determine whether our religious liberties are indeed at risk. So, as a public service, I've come up with this little quiz. I call it "How to Determine if Your Religious Liberty Is Being Threatened in Just 10 Quick Questions." Just pick "A" or "B" for each question.
1. My religious liberty is at risk because:
A) I am not allowed to go to a religious service of my own choosing.
B) Others are allowed to go to religious services of their own choosing.
2. My religious liberty is at risk because:
A) I am not allowed to marry the person I love legally, even though my religious community blesses my marriage.
B) Some states refuse to enforce my own particular religious beliefs on marriage on those two guys in line down at the courthouse.
3. My religious liberty is at risk because:
A) I am being forced to use birth control.
B) I am unable to force others to not use birth control.
4. My religious liberty is at risk because:
A) I am not allowed to pray privately.
B) I am not allowed to force others to pray the prayers of my faith publicly.
5. My religious liberty is at risk because:
A) Being a member of my faith means that I can be bullied without legal recourse.
B) I am no longer allowed to use my faith to bully gay kids with impunity.
6. My religious liberty is at risk because:
A) I am not allowed to purchase, read or possess religious books or material.
B) Others are allowed to have access books, movies and websites that I do not like.
7. My religious liberty is at risk because:
A) My religious group is not allowed equal protection under the establishment clause.
B) My religious group is not allowed to use public funds, buildings and resources as we would like, for whatever purposes we might like.
8. My religious liberty is at risk because:
A) Another religious group has been declared the official faith of my country.
B) My own religious group is not given status as the official faith of my country.
9. My religious liberty is at risk because:
A) My religious community is not allowed to build a house of worship in my community.
B) A religious community I do not like wants to build a house of worship in my community.
10. My religious liberty is at risk because:
A) I am not allowed to teach my children the creation stories of our faith at home.
B) Public school science classes are teaching science.
Scoring key:
If you answered "A" to any question, then perhaps your religious liberty is indeed at stake. You and your faith group have every right to now advocate for equal protection under the law. But just remember this one little, constitutional, concept: this means you can fight for your equality -- not your superiority.
If you answered "B" to any question, then not only is your religious liberty not at stake, but there is a strong chance that you are oppressing the religious liberties of others. This is the point where I would invite you to refer back to the tenets of your faith, especially the ones about your neighbors.
In closing, no matter what soundbites you hear this election year, remember this: Religious liberty is never secured by a campaign of religious superiority. The only way to ensure your own religious liberty remains strong is by advocating for the religious liberty of all, including those with whom you may passionately disagree. Because they deserve the same rights as you. Nothing more. Nothing less.
Make the jump here to read the full article
I'm a religious person with a lifelong passion for civil rights, so this is of great interest to me. So much so, that I believe we all need to determine whether our religious liberties are indeed at risk. So, as a public service, I've come up with this little quiz. I call it "How to Determine if Your Religious Liberty Is Being Threatened in Just 10 Quick Questions." Just pick "A" or "B" for each question.
1. My religious liberty is at risk because:
A) I am not allowed to go to a religious service of my own choosing.
B) Others are allowed to go to religious services of their own choosing.
2. My religious liberty is at risk because:
A) I am not allowed to marry the person I love legally, even though my religious community blesses my marriage.
B) Some states refuse to enforce my own particular religious beliefs on marriage on those two guys in line down at the courthouse.
3. My religious liberty is at risk because:
A) I am being forced to use birth control.
B) I am unable to force others to not use birth control.
4. My religious liberty is at risk because:
A) I am not allowed to pray privately.
B) I am not allowed to force others to pray the prayers of my faith publicly.
5. My religious liberty is at risk because:
A) Being a member of my faith means that I can be bullied without legal recourse.
B) I am no longer allowed to use my faith to bully gay kids with impunity.
6. My religious liberty is at risk because:
A) I am not allowed to purchase, read or possess religious books or material.
B) Others are allowed to have access books, movies and websites that I do not like.
7. My religious liberty is at risk because:
A) My religious group is not allowed equal protection under the establishment clause.
B) My religious group is not allowed to use public funds, buildings and resources as we would like, for whatever purposes we might like.
8. My religious liberty is at risk because:
A) Another religious group has been declared the official faith of my country.
B) My own religious group is not given status as the official faith of my country.
9. My religious liberty is at risk because:
A) My religious community is not allowed to build a house of worship in my community.
B) A religious community I do not like wants to build a house of worship in my community.
10. My religious liberty is at risk because:
A) I am not allowed to teach my children the creation stories of our faith at home.
B) Public school science classes are teaching science.
Scoring key:
If you answered "A" to any question, then perhaps your religious liberty is indeed at stake. You and your faith group have every right to now advocate for equal protection under the law. But just remember this one little, constitutional, concept: this means you can fight for your equality -- not your superiority.
If you answered "B" to any question, then not only is your religious liberty not at stake, but there is a strong chance that you are oppressing the religious liberties of others. This is the point where I would invite you to refer back to the tenets of your faith, especially the ones about your neighbors.
In closing, no matter what soundbites you hear this election year, remember this: Religious liberty is never secured by a campaign of religious superiority. The only way to ensure your own religious liberty remains strong is by advocating for the religious liberty of all, including those with whom you may passionately disagree. Because they deserve the same rights as you. Nothing more. Nothing less.
Make the jump here to read the full article
JMG HomoQuotable - George Takei
Labels: Arizona, bigotry, George Takei, HomoQuotable, Jan Brewer, LGBT rights, public accommodations, religion
Via JMG: White House Denounces Uganda
Statement by the Press Secretary on Uganda: Instead of standing on the side of freedom, justice, and equal rights for its people, today, regrettably, Ugandan President Museveni took Uganda a step backward by signing into law legislation criminalizing homosexuality. As President Obama has said, this law is more than an affront and a danger to the gay community in Uganda, it reflects poorly on the country's commitment to protecting the human rights of its people and will undermine public health, including efforts to fight HIV/AIDS. We will continue to urge the Ugandan government to repeal this abhorrent law and to advocate for the protection of the universal human rights of LGBT persons in Uganda and around the world.Let's hope we also get a statement directly from President Obama.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)