(no subject)

I may not be Anglican, but I fully agree with this editorial...

http://www.thenassauguardian.com/editorial/306280803287470.php 

 

Helen Klonaris

Dear Beloved Community

Here we are again at the community round table discussing the issue of whether or not to recognize homosexuals as fully human, as whole and legitimate children of a divine Creator. So powerful is this issue, it threatens to split the worldwide Anglican Communion in half. So powerful is this issue, it continues to divide families, and at the same time, not surprisingly, transform families into more richly compassionate, deeply loving and understanding human beings.

It is my experience of this transformation within my own family that has deepened my belief in the radical creativity and love of the Divine. It is this experience of transformation that has affirmed my belief in the existence of gays and lesbians, of bisexuals and transgender human beings as perhaps the most telling evidence of the creative and complex nature of the Divine.

Lesbians and transgender folk and bisexuals and gay men are here to challenge what is simple, what is perceived as black and white. We are here to challenge human structures when they become rigid and lose sight of the multiple and diverse nature of everything that breathes and crawls upon this planet. We are not here to fit into the status quo but to shake it loose from its comfortable stagnancy.

The challenge of this time is precisely what the Anglicans are embracing; how do we create 'unity within diversity'? The challenge of this time is to break open western definitions of "identity" as singular, as solitary, and recognize that our survival as human creatures in relationship with everything else alive in this world is about including each other in our ideas of 'self'. That to be alive is to be part of an interdependent system of selves: we are not alone, we are not separate; my identity must include you and vice versa if we are to survive together and grow.

The notion of "one right way" espoused by so many fundamentalist individuals and institutions including religious organizations and governments is no longer useful; it does violence to the increasing complexity of humanity: who we are is plural. We are many. We are African and Haitian and Mexican and Greek and Chinese and Korean and English and Palestinian and Israeli etc. and each of these is many, not singular; we are Yoruba and Vodun and Christian and Hindu and Buddhist and Muslim and Jew ect.; and in each of these we are many, not singular; we are female, male, two spirits, transgender, bigender, trigender, and heterosexual and bisexual and same gender loving etc.; we are more than we have imagined yet and nature's urge is always towards diversity, towards complicating the gene pool, because our survival depends on it.

This challenge calls us to create systems and models of inclusion at all levels. Our governments must step away from black and white, either/or definitions within the constitution, making room for the ever expanding diversity of human beings to be represented. When we call ourselves a "Christian" nation, we immediately create a set of people who are not "Christian"; we make them "others" who are not as good, as legitimate as ourselves. We create the conditions for war, where war is a state of internal or external conflict forcing one position over and above another.

Instead, we have to create legal and political and social and spiritual systems in which diversity is the highest good, not our need for power over and above others. Instead of a "Christian Nation" we might say "a nation that honours and respects diverse spiritual traditions"; instead of a singular "prime minister", we might choose to elect a diverse executive body of three 'heads' whose guiding ethos is respect for 'unity in diversity', which incidentally is a term Hindus and Buddhists have been using for generations. There might be an inter-faith body representative of all spiritual traditions elected to liaise with government. There might be an elected inter-cultural body that represents many cultural perspectives, which also liaises with government, so that within the infrastructure of our governing system there are already places for representation of many voices, all of whom exist in the Bahamas and should not have to fight their own government to be heard.

And, yes, definitions of 'marriage' and 'family' might be rewritten to include the wider range of possibilities already existing: male-female partnerships are only, perhaps, the most obvious, not the most right; families consist of people committed to each other's well being, regardless of blood relation, gender, sexual orientation, race and every other qualification.

The definition of 'identity' must be broken into, interrupted and changed: instead of 'identity' meaning 'what we are to the exclusion of others', 'identity' can begin to mean who we are with each other. We can begin to think of 'identity' as porous, as not a closed door, as changeable. This means a change in language, since the way we speak and write not only reflects what we think, it also influences how we think and look at the world and us in it.

Last week I saw a beautiful mural in the Mission district of San Francisco. The artist had written in both Spanish and English "I am another yourself". The artist was expressing the knowing that we are connected, our futures influenced by one another and that our perception of ourselves in relation to one another is potentially liberating or obliterating. This in the face of US policies which define Americans as not Mexican (whose history in this land is longer than that of European Americans) and, implicitly, as not people of colour, some 39 years after the death of Martin Luther King Jr. whose vision was so deep and wide he was able to see clearly the connections between white US violence against African Americans and the war the US was then waging against the Vietnamese. A vision which his late wife continues, drawing necessary connections between the oppression of people of colour in the US and the oppression of people of gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender orientations.

I am another yourself, says the artist to the people. Says the mystic to the Pharisees. Say the people to the elected ones.

To the editor of this paper, who warned last week that homosexuals are a cancer to the body of the church (sic), I say only this: proceed with caution.

What you cut from your body, mistaking it for disease may in fact be the medicine which your body, so ill at ease, is seeking.

The promise of transformation

"Hey... I resemble that remark!"

I... have ganked a Meme.  This is an original dreamt up by aureantes

How it works: Use a series of valid statements to describe yourself that are also true for historical, celebrity or fictional characters -- how far out you let 'em be depends on your intended audience, but the statements have to be relevant to you personally. You can do any number of items that you can come up with; I kept this first one down to 25, just so it wouldn't get too long.

If there is more than one answer you have in mind and you want people to try for all of 'em, put a number in parantheses following the statement. Then your friends take a crack at guessing who the hell you're talking about, and can challenge you in turn with their own list of allusions. 

So... >:-)

Here are the clues.  I've kept to 25 as well.  Some are from history, and some are from movies--and some are from both.  Some are obvious, and, yes I just had to be difficult with others. ;-P Each one only has one answer, though there are two movies in which I've identified with two characters. >:-)

1. Betrayal teaches her how to better own her power.

2. She's a fine poet and good in bed too, and was questioned closely on charges of Satanism.

3.  Quiet, gothy outcast, protective of her sister.

4. Dislikes stupidity and rudeness, cares very much for little sister.

5. In love with a song-writer, provides companionship and moral support through laughter and tears.

6. Believes that a person can be a living work of art.

7. Fascinated by sexuality and its place in society.

8. A bit of a rebel, very much in touch with her animal side.

9. Dreamer who rebels against mundane life, learns how to look closer to find the miracle in little things.

10. Introvert who likes creepy images and doesn't always get on well with the average human being.

11. By turns extremely weird and philosophical; often winds up being the voice of reason (sort of) in tense situations.

12. Gets tired of the same old thing; finds foreign customs fascinating.

13. Falls in love with an artistic and philosopical young man, and would leave her life to be with him at a moment's notice. 

14. Slightly crazy and dark misfit woman in a passionate relationship with a equally crazy, dark misfit man.

15.  Was picked on in school, leaned that there are more powerful things than popularity.

16. Talented girl whose mother pins her hopes and dreams on her to a troubling degree.

17. Found liberation in learning when to embrace emotions and when to control them.

18. An eccentric with a sweet-tooth who has no qualms about seeing bad'uns getting their just desserts....

19. Dreamer who doesn't always get on well with her family, loved by a guy with a good voice and tight pants.

20. Brainy, witchy girl with wild hair.

21. Artsy, smart woman with quirky and sometimes-overbearing relatives, has relationship with a brilliant and somtimes-troubled man who marches to the beat of his own drum.

22. Nutty chick who'd go to great lengths to help friends, is comfortable around not-exactly-human-types and hates the idea of a tyrannical government.

23. Has strong violent urges (though I don't indulge in them...) and a penchant for interesting and semi-poetic language. 

24. Believes that there's more than one way to be a good woman, and has a tendency to be subtly subversive.

25. Works at a hotel and has had to deal with very very strange people in the process.


(Nifty song meme ganked from beow11also coming soon--as soon as I can get to my cd's ;-P)