May I let my voice be a clarion call. I will use these words for justice. I will use these words for truth. And humour.

Friday, July 19, 2013

 

Origin of the Phrase "Women of Color" offered by Loretta Ross

** Origin of the Phrase, "Women of Color".
** Loretta Ross: SisterSong Women of Color Reproductive Justice Collective***.
** http://www.decolonizingyoga.com/origin-of-the-phrase-women-of-color/
** January 28, 2011.

Y'all know where the term 'Women of Color' came from? Who can say that?
See we're bad at transmitting history….

In 1977, a group of black women from Washington D.C. went to the National Women's Conference that Jimmy Carter had given five million dollars to have as part of the World Decade for Women -- there was a conference in Houston, Texas.

This group of black women carried to that conference something called A Black Women's Agenda, because the organizers of the conference… had put together a three-page minority womens' plank… , in a two-hundred-page document that these black women thought was somewhat 'inadequate.' .

And they actually formed a group called Black Women's Agenda to come there in Houston with a black women's plan of action that they wanted the delegates to vote to substitute for the minority plank that was in the proposed plan of action. Well a funny thing happened in Houston. When they took the Black Womens' Agenda to Houston, then all the rest of the 'minority women of color' wanted to be included in the Black Womens' Agenda. Okay?… Well, they agreed, except that you could no longer call it the Black Womens' Agenda!

And it was in those negotiations in Houston the term 'Women of Color' was created. Okay? And they didn't see it as a biological designation -- you're born Asian, you're born black, you're born African-American, whatever…. It is a solidarity definition -- a commitment to work in collaboration with other oppressed women of color who have been 'minoritized.'

Now what's happened, you know, in the thirty years since then is that people see it as biology now. You know, like, okay… and people are saying, "I don't want to be definied as a woman of color, I am black, I am Asian-American, well that's fine, but why are you reducing a political designation to a biological destiny? That's what white supremacy wants you to do. You know?

And I think it's a setback when we disintegrate as people of color, you know, around primitive ethnic claiming. You know, yes, we are Asian-American, Native American, whatever -- but the point is when you choose to work with other people who are minoritized by oppression, you have lifted yourself out of that basic identity. Into another political being. Another political space. And unfortunately so many times, people of color hear the term 'people of color' from other white people that they think white people created it, instead of understanding that we -- we self-named ourselves this. This is a term that has a lot of power for us. But we've done a poor ass job of communicating that history so that people understand that power.

Labels: , , , , ,


# posted by Rev J D @ 08:01 0 comments

Wednesday, July 3, 2013

 

Text of Wendell Berry's Speech at the 2013 Unitarian Universalist General Assembly


This was the reading for worship at First Unitarian Church of Pittsburgh on June 30, 2013.

Wendell Berry's Speech at GA 2013 Plenary Session 3
(http://www.uua.org/ga/2013/business/286869.shtml 
Berry begins @ 39:20)

Like probably everybody here, I'm concerned about mountaintop removal and climate change. But when we delay our concern until dangers have become sensational, we're late! Whether or not we're too late is a question which should not interest us. Even if we are too late, we still must accept responsibility, and try to make things better.

In fact, mountaintop removal and climate change are not the sort of simple problems that can be solved by what we call “problem-solving.” They're summary evils – gathered up from innumerable causes in the bad economy that we all depend upon and serve. It is not as though we have not been warned. The advice against waste, extravagance, selfishness, hubris, falsehood, and willful ignorance is old. But people of religion have generally entrusted questions about economy – about how we live – to economists, and industrialists. Environmentalists seem to think that problems caused by technology can be solved – or controlled – by more technology or alternative technology. People of both kinds seem to think that big problems have big solutions. Both are mistaken.

Fifty years ago, Harry Caudill published “Night Comes to the Cumberlands,” causing a flurry of public attention and a spate of federal interest in solving the problem of poverty in the Appalachian coal fields. But that book described the fundamental problem, which was – and is – the industrial plunder of the land and the people. And that problem -- already long-ignored by 1963 -- has continued to be ignored officially and conventionally for 50 more years. As Harry knew, and the politicians have not known, improving the health and economy of a region is not a one-issue project. It is not a one-solution problem. The long-term or permanent damage inflicted upon all life by the extraction, transportation, and use of fossil fuels is the most urgent public issue of our time, and of course it must be addressed politically.

But responsibility for the better economy – the better life – belongs to us individually and to our communities. The necessary changes cannot be made on the terms prescribed to us by the industrial economy and its so-called “free market.” They can be made only on the terms imposed upon us by the nature and the limits of local ecosystems. If we're serious about these big problems, we've got to see that the solutions begin and end with ourselves. Thus, we put an end to our habit of oversimplification. If we want to stop the impoverishment of land and people, we ourselves must be prepared to become poorer. If we're to continue to respect ourselves as human beings, we've got to do all we can to slow – and then stop – the fossil fuel economy. But we must do this fully realizing that our success – if it happens – will change our world and our lives more radically than we can now imagine. Without that realization, we cannot hope to succeed. To succeed, we will have to give up the mechanical ways of thought that have dominated the world increasingly for the last two hundred years. And we must begin now to make that change in ourselves. For the necessary political changes will be made only in response to changed people. We must understand that fossil fuel energy must be replaced not just by clean energy, but also by less energy.

The unlimited use of any energy would be as destructive as unlimited economic growth, or any other unlimited force. If we had a limitless supply of free non-polluting energy, we would use the world up even faster than we're using it up now. If we're not in favor of limiting the use of energy – starting with our own use of it – we're not serious. If we're not in favor of rationing energy – starting with the fossil fuels – we're not serious. If we have the money, and we're not willing to pay $2 to keep the polluting industries from getting $1, we're not serious. If, on the contrary, we become determined to keep the industries of poison, explosion, and fire from determining our lives and the world's fate, then we will steadfastly reduce our dependence on them, and our payments of money to them. We will cease to invest our health, our lives, and our money, in them. Then, finally, we will be serious enough – our effort complex and practical enough – by so improving our lives, we will improve the possibility of life.

Labels: , , , , , ,


# posted by Rev J D @ 07:49 0 comments

Tuesday, February 5, 2013

 

Ru Paul on Spirituality

Interviewer: "In the last episode of "Drag Race All Stars" you sat with the final four and went really deep with each of them. JujuBee (one of the contestants) later said that you have a God-given ability for reaching people. Do you view yourself as a spiritual mentor to these up and coming queens?
Ru Paul: Do I give spiritual advice? All the time. Everything I ever say is spiritual advice.
It's not like I'm a guru or anything, but it is the only game in town. It's the only conversation I can ever really have. As drag queens, we have taken the position of being shamans and witch doctors and people who remind the culture not to take itself so seriously. What it says on your driver's license isn't really who you are -- you are something much greater than that.
A lot of the queens coming on the show are just beginning to realize that. They know it on an unconscious level, that they wanted to transcend the labels and boxes that society would have them be in, so they turn to drag because it is a natural thing. It is what we are all doing -- God masquerading in drag."

Labels: , , , ,


# posted by Rev J D @ 09:56 0 comments

Tuesday, January 29, 2013

 

You Are My Sunshine (Chords and Lyrics)

I want to work out some new lyrics for this to reframe the jealousy and heartbreak.  Original version by Jimmie Davis and Charles Mitchell.

Chords are in brackets (e.g. [G])
Melody is lower case (e.g. c-b-a-g). Double-letter = hold longer.
Tempo and rhythm for each note depends on singer/player.

CHORUS
d   g   a      b   b     b  c-b-a-a-g-a   b     a-g  g              
You are my [G] Sunshine, my on-----------ly [C] Sun--shine          
                                                                    
g   a    b      c  ee e   ^gg-f-e-c-g g-a c-[C9]d (hammer-on)       
You make me [C] happy when skies      are gre-ey.                   
                                                                    
    g      a  b      c    e        ^g  ^gg       ee    b-a-g  g-a-g 
[G] You'll never [C] know dear, [G]How much [G6] I [C] love   you   
                                                                    
g      a            b       c      a   b-a-g-a-g  g     g           
Please don't [Cmaj7]take [C]my [D] sun-shine      a-[G]-way.        




d   g a      b     b    b  a b      a-g  g            
The other [G]night dear as I lay [C]sleeping          
                                                      
g  a     b     c    e-d d-g  g  a-bb-a-g              
I dreamt I [C] held you in   my arms                  
                                                      
    g    a b     c    e     e d        c  b-a-g g     
[G] When I a-[C]-woke dear, I was [Am] mista----ken   

g  a     bb   c      aa   g        b-a-g-e            
So I [C] hung my [D] head and [Em] cried.             








CHORUS








I'll always [G] love you and make you [C] happy.     


If you will [C] only say the [G]same.                


[G] But if you [C] leave me to love a-[Em]-nother    


You'll reg-[Bm]-ret it [D] all some [Em] day. >;;v/   








CHORUS








You told me [G] once dear, you really [C] loved me        


And no one [C] else could come bet-[G]-ween               


But now you've [C] left me and [Am] love a-[Em]-nother    


You have [A] shattered [D] all my [G] dreams. :(          








CHORUS






*Flourishes on chorus optional/ad-lib each time.  Above is one way.






Leads into "My Mannequin"



Check here for an explanation on how this song's lyrics represent christology.







pax hominibus,

agape to all,

joel




Labels: , , , , 


			  
# posted by Rev J D @ 08:43 0 comments  

			

 

		 
			  
Saturday, January 26, 2013

		 
		  
		 

WWHATSUP? Workshop on White Supremacy in the Workplace

			

			  







This workshop at the 15th Annual Summit Against Racism in Pittsburgh was a powerful experience, and I want to make sure that it gets documented.  I am hoping my church, and other churches, and other institutions are ready to go through this educational experience, and to prepare/plan for a blessed change.





For now, just the pictures:
(note there are ten pictures here, and usually every picture is worth a thousand words.  that would make 10,000 words.  but i don't think there are actually that many here. :D)


































In my thinking this is different nomenclature for what Unitarian Universalists call a "group covenant"









This is a no-bones about it clear statement of shared axioms







Here's a link to the AORTA Collective.












Some definitions of White Supremacy, as 

discovered in small group conversations












Great definition that covers a lot.  I've also heard: 
"Racism = prejudice + power."










Getting to the causes of institutional perpetuation is a key to unraveling inherent/instrumental racial oppressions, in my mind.













In case you prefer no headache from looking at the blurry words in the picture below:



Some Characteristics of White Supremacy Culture




    

  • Perfectionism
    • 

  • Sense of urgency
    • 

  • Defensiveness
    • 

  • Quantity over quality
    • 

  • Worship of the written word
    • 

  • Only one right way
    • 

  • Paternalism
    • 

  • Either/or thinking
    • 

  • Power hoarding
    • 

  • Fear of open conflict
    • 

  • Individualism
    • 

  • "I'm the only one"
    • 

  • Progress is better
    • 

  • Objectivity
    • 

  • Right to comfort
    • 











 




    
































 Thank you so much, folks at WWHATSUP? Pittsburgh for a powerful and transformative workshop!







I also found out about Dismantling Racism Works, a VERY powerful resource for doing trainings at your church or institution.  If I recall correctly, the Oakland UU Congregation adopted their process.  A little poking around their website shows a list of other resources for engaging in anti-racism work.


















Labels: , , , , , , 


			  
# posted by Rev J D @ 23:11 0 comments  

			

 

		 
			  
Tuesday, November 13, 2012

		 
		  
		 

Sermon:Tending a Sensitized Conscience

			

			  





Tending
a Sensitized Conscience



Delivered
November 11, 2012 at First Unitarian Church of Pittsburgh









       During
my twenties, I drove taxi for a year at Union Cab in Madison,
Wisconsin. I remember early on, the dispatcher – his name was Tim,
but everybody called him “Hat” – I remember Hat telling me,
“You've got to really
listen
to your radio.”  I thought to myself – Did he mean just always be
tuned in to the CB radio so we could listen and put in a bid when a
trip became available in our area? Did he mean to listen closely to
the songs on the FM radio stations? Or did he mean to really listen
to the voice of the dispatcher, to hear the tone of his voice, and
try to find out from his inflection whether the calls he was giving
were good calls that would take me and my fare all the way across
town, or they might be just a few blocks, for which I'd have to drive
a couple miles to get there? Or I thought maybe he meant even deeper
listening, and his use of the word “radio” was a metaphor – in
which he wanted me to listen to others so closely, and figure out the
stories prior to the stories, to hear what was happening in their
hearts and their heads. Then again, maybe it wasn't about people at
all. At the very beginning of the teal hymnal, we have a song that
says, “Listen more closely to things than to beings...”



       This
is a sermon about listening deeply. Listening with the purpose of
educating our conscience – our internal sense of right and wrong,
also known as that still, small voice within. This education I'm
talking about assumes that our conscience is not some static entity.
That our sense of right and wrong is dynamic. It assumes that as we
open to receive new experiences, the conscience is capable of
fine-tuning its compass toward the good, and also of becoming more
keenly attuned to nuance. The invitation I'm investigating today is
for each of us to consider sensitizing our conscience, according to
our present ability and desire. To make it capable of detecting
things that it previously could not.



       First
comes the question of why
to
do this. Having a sensitized conscience means being ready to take on
some of the sting of life, feeling a little more tender, maybe even
raw. It may be preferable or easier to just go out and numb the pain
we already have. And maybe your life does have a lot of pain. And if
that's the case, this sermon may well not be for you, at least not in
this moment. But if you are willing and have the capacity to move to
a deeper level of connection with suffering, the question of why
still looms. 



       I think of the enlightened Bodhisattva from the Buddhist
tradition who, upon reaching a state of enlightenment and
understanding suffering, then and there makes a vow to go back to the
human world and work to guide people to the alleviation of their
suffering. To choose that is to enter into a world of discomfort.
There's a good reason
to
go back and engage (from whatever state of enlightenment you already
have). Taking on some level of discomfort is bearable, especially
with the knowledge that the discomfort you take on with a new sense
of awareness may help alleviate some actual pain in the lives of
others. To my understanding, pain
is an order of magnitude stronger than discomfort.



       There's
another reason why you might want to develop a more sensitized
conscience – spiritual growth. There is always room for increasing
our awareness, thereby allowing for a better-informed conscience. I
have a brief story to illustrate this point. The first General
Assembly I attended was Portland in 2007. I was staying in a hostel 3
miles from the assembly floor. I got on the bus in the morning, and
got halfway there, and realized I'd forgotten my name badge. If you
forget your name badge, there is no way you can get onto the floor.
So I turned around, knowing I would be at least 45 minutes late, and
wouldn't be able to make it to any of the workshops during that
morning session. And I had an epiphany! There were three different
workshops all at the same time I had wanted to attend, and I would've
been unable to take in two of them anyway. Missing all three wasn't
really that much different, in a way. Right there on the bus I
realized that if I were at GA, I wouldn't be able to pay attention to
what was going on on the bus! And from there, I realized that we
are missing almost everything, all the time.
I imagined there were even a million things going on in that bus that
I wasn't aware of and would never be aware of. But that's no excuse
not to try and pick at least one thing to pay attention to. The key
is to prioritize what gets your attention.



       So,
a second question then is 'How
to cultivate a sensitized conscience?' The first step is to be
curious. Ask questions – of yourself, and in dialog with others.
“What am I experiencing? How do I feel about it? What experiences
have I had in the past that lead me to feel this way, and not some
other way?” Can you imagine how others with different perspectives,
based on different life stories might feel in the same experience?
It's easier to do if they're right there in the room sharing the
experience with you, especially if you can just ask them. 




       A
really good way to sensitize is to ask, “What am I missing?” The
things on the surface, at least, you and I try to catch. But, as I like to interpret my
old taxi dispatcher “Hat” as saying, find out what's under the
surface there. When there's a conversation or dialog, it's often more
telling to listen into the noise-floor for what's NOT being said,
either something that's under the surface, or may actually just be an
elephant in the room that people are focusing away from, either
consciously or unconsciously. I've learned to know my senses only
take me part way. As humans, using our senses, we do not have the
ability to see in the Infrared or Ultraviolet light, we cannot hear
the high-frequency sounds that dogs can hear, or the 7.8 Hz
low-frequency sound of the earth's constant rumble. We do not have
the inherent ability to detect radon gas in basements, not can we
detect radioactivity. We have to stop and ask, I wonder if there's
something I'm missing here, and then go out and get (or devise) an
instrument to find out. The same is true with developing a keener
sense of conscience.



       So
once we do begin to have a more sensitized conscience, what happens?
We do, indeed, start having to ask questions of ourselves, and begin
calling ourselves into accountability. Accountability is
uncomfortable, especially when one is less-than-willing to engage, or
not sure how to go about engaging (I have been in both situations
myself). You may start to feel guilt or shame for things you've done
or left undone, or you may feel fear of what might happen (such as
'doing it wrong') now that you're doing something.  Another thing
that happens is that we begin to see and feel new nuances from new
perspectives, and may feel compelled then to report back on what
we've discovered on this free and responsible search for truth and
meaning. A sensitized conscience is a very good tool for that search,
and practicing the right of conscience may very well be the result of
that search.



       There's
a sacred text -- actually a rather profane text, but sacred in that it serves a purpose worth studying -- I came across in late-August of this year. In this
case, the sacred text was words spoken by Clint Eastwood, at a
political convention. I don't mean for this to be a political sermon.
In fact, the only way I see it as political is that the root of the
word 'politic' refers to “how we choose to be together in
community.” Eastwood's way of being in community was quite
remarkable, actually.







Near
the beginning of his speech, he says: “So I -- so I’ve got Mr.
Obama sitting here. And he’s -- I was going to ask him a couple of
questions.” I thought to myself, “Is this performance art? Is he
acting? He must be acting.” 




He
went on to ask the silent and invisible man in the chair questions
regarding his 2008 promises vs his record regarding Guantanamo and
then interrupts himself, saying, “What do you mean shut up?”
He continues to ask questions to which the invisible man in the chair
remains silent, and then Eastwood interrupts himself again... “I am
not going to shut up, it is my turn.” He speaks for a
while longer, and interrupts himself again, responding indignantly to
the chair... “What do you want me to tell Romney? I can’t tell
him to do that. I can’t tell him to do that to himself.” Then
later, “I’m sorry. I can’t do that to myself either.”







       I
felt so appalled, I had to pause the video. It took me a day or so
after experiencing this for my conscience to begin to sort things
out. The issue was not with just the words. The real issue I saw was
with the process, the way it was done. I can only imagine President
Obama sitting with his family in the White House living room, or at work with his
staff, watching this pseudo-conversation. Were it me, I would be
nonplussed perhaps, and I don't know whether I would be amused or
very not
amused.  Here, Eastwood had brought an imagined likeness of the
president, the most powerful man in the world, and dressed him down.
He made this man – this African-American man who had been vested
with power by over 50% of the voters three years ago – he made him
invisible, put him there into the narrative without his permission,
and then, of all things – he made this imagined character into the
fabled (and fearsome) angry black man, without ever having his invisible man in the chair even speaking a word of his own. For all
listening, it was like hearing one end of a telephone conversation –
the profanities were unspoken, but they were there to be sure. After
almost four years of keeping his cool amid being treated like a
second-class president in so many ways -- as if he can't be
legitimate, or "our" equal or better than us -- finally somebody had
conveyed anger on his behalf, and strangely, it was Clint Eastwood
who did so. Wordlessly. Unexpectedly. Without permission.



       What
did it mean to me? I still don't fully know. Not without
complexifying, by being in conversation. My conscience tells me that
what Eastwood did was mean-spirited and unethical, and may eventually
somehow serve something good – but at a huge cost. This was not
microaggressions, this was aggression. And to be clear, I call this
racism.  And by shining his light in this way, Eastwood unconsciously
gave others permission to do the same. In this sacred text, is a
conversation that needs to be had, if we are to come together. 




       Throughout
this election cycle, and since the results came in, I have been
feeling the gravest sense of broken community. Among white people,
straight people, and men, with the unacknowledged privilege of being
white, or straight, or male, it seems there are large groups of
people feeling their privilege slipping away. I see them in fear and anger regarding this change, and believe they are avoiding invitations to come to common ground. I
see a power still entrenched, and refusing to let others speak for
themselves, instead speaking for them and plastering them with
labels.
      




       With
no universal conversation happening, the signal-to-noise ratio is low
[the children's story involved exploring the noise
floor
of various situations with respect to audio recording]. In order to
hear each other, to have a conversation that doesn't make the Abby in
each of us want to cry, we need to turn the noise down AND come to
common ground. Until all parties are ready to come together and talk,
however (and some are still not ready), I will be taking my
dispatcher's advice, and listening to the radio, trying to find
what's underneath and behind this. I want to see more than just the
surface of this pain, fear, and anger. And I want to get to a place
where we desire to have this conversation not
only
for the instrumental purpose of creating greater community, but also
for the intrinsic value of bringing each person back. to. wholeness.       As one granted privileges in several ways, who seeks to be a
better ally, I want our congregation to be ready to call out
oppressions wherever we see them. And I don't want the people with
dark skin to have to call out their examples of oppressions each time
they come. Or the women to call out theirs, or the LGBT folk, or the
people who have disabilities, or the people with oppressions
marginalized enough that they didn't even make this list. I want us
to be sensitized allies, who step up and into the conversations
before the persons on the receiving end have to become their own last
line of defense. And because I want to honor the dignity of all, when
I do step up and speak, I will try not to speak on behalf of others.
I will speak for myself. It has taken me a long time to figure that
out, and I doubt I still have it completely right. This spiritual
growth is a work in process.



       So,
now. How to tend
a sensitized conscience? The rewarding part is knowing you're coming
into closer connection with others, and making room for – as Leslie
Takahashi Morris states
it – the more gorgeous rainbow world, where there is room for a
river of identities. The reward is knowing that in closer connection,
you're listening back in time for the seeds (both the wondrous and
the tragic) that made them what they are. And you're listening
forward in time for the flowers they hope to bloom, that make them do
as they do.



       Another
way to cope with this new awareness is to know the reason why you
chose it. Principle zero – love! – the foundation and predecessor
for all our
principles.
Principle zero says step forward with a spirit of confident
love.
 That spirit of confident love says your still small voice within is
not
a burden to carry
as you make your way, but is a
blessing to guide you
each and every day. 



       Amen.










Labels: , , , , , , , , , , , 


			  
# posted by Rev J D @ 15:16 0 comments  

			

 

		 
			  
Wednesday, September 28, 2011

		 
		  
		 

Dragons and Dove

			

			  
Today I heard this song "Girl in the War" by Josh Ritter, on 91.3 while driving to pick up dinner.




I really like the imagery the lyrics call up.




from commenter Saltogurl: 




[regarding the Boynton Chapel in Door County, WI] in an archway, in front of the chapel one side there is a painting of Peter, on the other Paul.  Peter is holding two keys  one to the Kingdom, another to the chapel.  Above them, carved into the wood archway, is a dove and on each side of it dragons.  All I could think was a) "pretend the dove from above is a dragon and your feet are on fire".  I have never heard of a dragon next to a dove in any setting but apparently the dragon is a sign of protection in Norse mythology, and the dove is a sign of peace in a lot of western cultures.


See the post just before this one and the one about "the first death" and note that I've been in a state of confusion between wanting peace and preparing for war.   Still wondering where the war will play out, and if it's inside, when it will die down.
















pax hominibus,

agape to all,

joel
Labels: , , , , 


			  
# posted by Rev J D @ 19:23 0 comments  

			

 

		 
			  
Friday, August 19, 2011

		 
		  
		 

For JD part 2

			

			  
Labels: , , , 


			  
# posted by Rev J D @ 19:33 0 comments  

			

 

		 
		  
		 

For JD

			

			  



I'm shocked at how clear this recording turned out.  This was taken with my cameraphone from across Market Street (actually from on the bus platform, but still).
Labels: , , , 


			  
# posted by Rev J D @ 19:32 0 comments  

			

 

		 
			  
Thursday, March 17, 2011

		 
		  
		 

Feasibility Study of Wind, Water and Solar for Meeting All of Our Energy Needs

			

			  

.
.

Given the current crisis with nuclear power plants melting down in Japan and casting out radioactive material into the atmosphere that will adversely affect us all, now is a good time to re-share this study by Stanford scientists doing a comprehensive feasibility analysis of using renewable energy sources -- specifically Wind, Water, and Sun -- to meet all of our energy needs. 


chant/prayer/mantra: for all people, that our global tragedies and personal calamities will bring us truly together.

pax hominibus,
agape to all,
joel
Labels: , , , , 


			  
# posted by Rev J D @ 09:46 0 comments  

			

 

		 
			  
Tuesday, August 31, 2010

		 
		  
		 

FDR's Second Bill of Rights

			

			  
I support this.


Video here.

Text from here:

It is our duty now to begin to lay the plans and determine the strategy  for the winning of a lasting peace and the establishment of an American  standard of living higher than ever before known. We cannot be content,  no matter how high that general standard of living may be, if some  fraction of our people—whether it be one-third or one-fifth or  one-tenth—is ill-fed, ill-clothed, ill-housed, and insecure. 
This Republic had its beginning, and grew to its present strength,  under the protection of certain inalienable political rights—among them  the right of free speech, free press, free worship, trial by jury,  freedom from unreasonable searches and seizures. They were our rights to  life and liberty.
 
As our nation has grown in size and stature, however—as our  industrial economy expanded—these political rights proved inadequate to  assure us equality in the pursuit of happiness.
 
We have come to a clear realization of the fact that true individual  freedom cannot exist without economic security and independence.  “Necessitous men are not free men.” People who are hungry and out of a job are the stuff of which dictatorships are made.
 
In our day these economic truths have become accepted as  self-evident. We have accepted, so to speak, a second Bill of Rights  under which a new basis of security and prosperity can be established  for all—regardless of station, race, or creed.
 
Among these are:
 
  • The right to a useful and remunerative job in the industries or shops or farms or mines of the nation;
  • The right to earn enough to provide adequate food and clothing and recreation;
  • The right of every farmer to raise and sell his products at a return which will give him and his family a decent living;
  • The right of every businessman, large and small, to trade in an  atmosphere of freedom from unfair competition and domination by  monopolies at home or abroad;
  • The right of every family to a decent home;
  • The right to adequate medical care and the opportunity to achieve and enjoy good health;
  • The right to adequate protection from the economic fears of old age, sickness, accident, and unemployment;
  • The right to a good education.
        
All of these rights spell security. And after this war  is won we must be prepared to move forward, in the implementation of  these rights, to new goals of human happiness and well-being.
 
For unless there is security here at home there cannot be lasting peace in the world.

How I wish the US had pursued these with all its might.  I wish it still would.

pax hominibus,agape to all,joel
Labels: , , , , , , , , , , , , 


			  
# posted by Rev J D @ 00:52 0 comments  

			

 

		 
			  
Saturday, March 13, 2010

		 
		  
		 

About a Monk

			

			  
.
I just sent this to some folks in an online game, and figured I'd share here as well....

Did you hear the one about the monk in the monastery?

This monk joins a monastery where they have this really strict no-talking rule at the dojo.  The monk is allowed to say only two words every ten years.

After living there for ten years, the monk goes up in front of the sensei and says, "Food bad!"  The teacher writes these words down in a journal filled with the two-word quotes from each of the students, and puts the journal on the shelf until the next time.

After this monk's been there for another ten years, a total of 20 years, the monk returns to the sensei, and says, "Bed hard!"  The teacher writes it down in the journal and puts it back up on the shelf.

Another ten years pass, a total of 30 years, and the monk returns to the sensei for another decennial meeting.  The monk says to the sensei, "I quit!"

The sensei looks briefly through the journal and says, "Well, I can see why.  You've been complaining ever since you got here!"


LOL!


lyrics: "The artist aims for a miracle.  The painter wills his pictures to move off the canvas with a separate life.  Movement outside of the picture, and one rent in the fabric is all it takes for pandemonium to sluice through."
from Apocalypse by William S. Burroughs


chant/prayer/mantra: Complaining all the time.


pax hominibus,
agape to all,
joel
Labels: , , 


			  
# posted by Rev J D @ 02:12 0 comments  

			

 

		 
			  
Tuesday, September 15, 2009

		 
		  
		 

Unabridged Readings for My Upcoming Sermon

			

			  
.
Here are two readings, related to the sun, that I am considering using for the upcoming service I'm putting together.  I'll probably trim the latter down a little.

The Fabric of the Cosmos, by Brian Greene, p.171 (2004)

Where did our highly ordered sun come from? The sun formed about 5 billion years ago from an initially diffuse cloud of gas that began to swirl and clump under the mutual gravitational attraction of all its constituents. As the gas cloud got denser, the gravitational pull of one part on another got stronger, causing the cloud to collapse further in on itself. And as gravity squeezed the cloud tighter, it got hotter. Ultimately, it got hot enough to ignite nuclear processes that generated enough outward-flowing radiation to stem further gravitational contraction of the gas. A hot, stable, brightly burning star was born.
So where did the diffuse cloud of gas come from? It likely formed from the remains of older stars that reached the end of their lives, went supernova, and spewed their contents out into space.



Child of the Sun, by Margaret Dulles Edwards, p. 37 Beacon Press (1957, originally 1939)
This is the story of the Pharoah named Amenophis (a.k.a. Amenhotep
Suddenly, without changing the direction of his gaze, Amenophis raised his arm and threw a stone with all his strength into the water. At the sound of the splash, as if some magic spell had been broken, the whole garden became alive. The fish went scurrying to safety. The lotus flowers swayed on their long stems. The cat sprang lightly to the branch of a sycamore tree. The pharoah rose to his feet. He was still looking into the pool, but now his eyes were seeing, watching the ever-widening circles on the surface of the water. The ripples sparkled in the sunshine.
"It is a sign," he said.  Today I will act.  I will give one great command.  As the stone causes these widening circles, so at my word the truth will spread in my kingdom.
     “Too long priests have followed their own ideas and planned their own ceremonies.  The people have worshiped gods in many forms.  I shall allow this no longer.  No more wavering; no more half-way measures.  I will carry out my ideas.  Ever since that day just ten years ago when Mesu and I talked together about the sun, I have tried to find the truth about the gods.  Now I am sure.  There is but one God, the power of life behind the sun.  My people have always known of the greatness of the sun.  Today they shall worship this power with new understanding.  They shall call his name Aten.
 
      “This day is called my 'Name Day.'  It will be a 'Name Day' never to be forgotten in the history of my people—a day of new names and new meanings.   
 
      “I will give myself a new name.  No longer will I be called amenophis in honor of the god Amon, but Akhenaten, 'The glory of Aten.'
 
      “We will have a new symbol for our god.  Since ancient times the sun has been known by many symbols: a pyramid, a bird, or the wings of a soaring hawk.  But these signs are understood only in Egypt.  Aten is the god of the whole world and his symbol shall belong to all peoples wherever they live.  Aten shall be known by the disk of the sun with rays reaching down like hands with gifts.”

And here is a link to the data behind an astounding fact: it can take 100,000 years for photons of light created in the sun's core to make their way to the surface.  Once they get to the surface, it only takes 8.5 minutes to reach the earth (which, since it's moving at the speed of light, is interestingly enough, moving magnitudes of order faster than lightning).

I would also like to add  this link, regarding the types of stars in the universe.  Though I may not touch on this topic directly in the sermon, the general concept is implied.

chant/prayer/mantra: stay calm, carry on, enjoy your time.  breathe.


pax hominibus,
agape to all,
joel
Labels: , , , , , 


			  
# posted by Rev J D @ 23:32 0 comments  

			

 

		 
			  
Tuesday, August 11, 2009

		 
		  
		 

Relative Planet/Star Sizes

			

			  
.
Wow!  Look at this, and note how stunningly small our sun is compared to the biggest stars!

lyrics: We are all made of stars, by Moby.  Naturally...


pax hominibus,
agape to all,
joel
Labels: , , , , 


			  
# posted by Rev J D @ 23:25 0 comments  

			

 

		 
			  
Tuesday, June 23, 2009

		 
		  
		 

Stapled to the Wall in my Hostel in Salt Lake City

			

			  
.

Here is the Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints document "A Proclamation to the World."  It pretty much has their definition of one-man, one-woman marriage, along with some stuff about our Pre-mortal, Mortal, and Eternal states of existence.  It was written in 1995, and seems to be a strong antecedent for the Mormons' push for Prop 8 in California, and other anti-gay-marriage efforts elsewhere.

For me, this quote is the one that nullifies the whole document because it stands so strongly against reason, and even stands out as causing a visceral reaction: "We declare that God's commandment for His children to multiply and replenish the earth remains in force."  Overpopulate much?

It's stapled to the wall of the common room in this hostel.  They also have a cardboard cutout of Aragorn, a cutout of Obi Wan Kenobi, and a knight's suit made out of thin tin, that looks like it would fit somebody about 5' 8".

I am here in SLC with 5000+ Unitarian Universalists for UU General Assembly.  Perhaps more comments later on that.  For now, just know that I have Obi Wan and Aragorn for housemates.

pax hominibus,
agape to all,
joel
Labels: , , 


			  
# posted by Rev J D @ 22:37 0 comments  

			

 

		 
			  
Monday, October 13, 2008

		 
		  
		 

I approve of this video

			

			  
An absurd interview with David Byrne circa the Stop Making Sense tour and live album.


pax hominibus,
agape to all,
joel
Labels: , 


			  
# posted by Rev J D @ 01:05 1 comments  

			

 

		 
			  
Thursday, September 25, 2008

		 
		  
		 

Fritz Eichenberg's Woodcuts

			

			  
Ever since I saw the woodcut engravings in Dostoevsky's "Grand Inquisitor", I've loved Fritz Eichenberg's work.  Especially the folly pieces, most especially "The Folly of the Popes," which feels especially applicable given that the last four weeks of my Christ, Krishna, Buddha class have been focused on Patristic Christology. 

I wonder how many people starved in the streets, or were nailed up while they were debating details on the structure of the body, spirit, nature, and origin of Christ and the Logos.  Me, I always thought the function of Christ was the important part, perhaps to the degree that the Christology (what's our savior look like) seems a lot more like soteriology (how are we saved)


lyrics: "I don't care if their teeth are big.  I don't care if their legs are big.  I don't care if her hair is a wig.  Why waste time looking at the waistline?  First, I look at the purse." - First I look at the Purse, by Contours

colors: black and white

mood: how about that economy crashing down?  i kind of thought it would be 1-3 years further down -- perhaps the u.s. government will be able to fend it off this time.

chant/prayer/mantra:  may we look beyond all of our human constructions, and realize the true nature of all our resources.


pax hominibus,
agape to all,
joel
Labels: , , , , , , , , , 


			  
# posted by Rev J D @ 22:36 0 comments  

			

 

		 
			  
Tuesday, September 2, 2008

		 
		  
		 

A dream from the other night

			

			  
I often have freaky dreams, and they don't bug me too much.  In fact, I find them to be very inspirational sometimes.  I had a very freaky dream the other night.  

In this dream, I was a private in the military (complete with haircut I'm pretty sure), down on some military base in a hot climate.  I was in a large reinforced concrete bathroom, emptying my bladder, when an earthquake happened.    It seemed to go on for about 20 seconds, and I had found a less-than-clean place on the floor where I thought I'd be relatively safe.  As it was fading and we were worrying about aftershocks, there was another soldier about ten feet away over by the sinks, singing (to reassure himself), "We are chariots.  We are chariots.  We are bizarre chariots.  We're going to make it out of this world."

Wow.  I woke up around 4:00am, and using my best drowsy voice got a recording of what he sang.  I'm so glad I've got that little voice recorder.  Anyway, if you combine the above-linked understanding of chariot with this blog entry from a while ago, and this recent tattoo post (the symbolism and pragmatic semiotics, not the picture itself) on the bmemodblog, I'm not sure exactly what to make of it, but it must mean something...


lyrics: "Amazing grace, how sweet the sound...."

colors: burnt,white, and blue

mood: steady, and ready

chant/prayer/mantra: may we all be, and be loosely connected.


pax hominibus,
agape to all,
joel
Labels: , , , , , , , 


			  
# posted by Rev J D @ 20:56 0 comments  

			

 

		 
			  
Friday, November 16, 2007

		 
		  
		 

An "LOL" Revelation, regarding predicates, syntax, and programming

			

			  
The other day, I got a recall notice from the library where I work for this M.A. thesis I checked out regarding a connection between Alfred North Whitehead's notion of "concrescence" and Virginia Woolf's novels.  It got recalled, which means now I'm reading it.  In the first chapter, the author, Grete Stenersen, quotes Whitehead "All modern philosophy hinges round the difficulty of describing the world in terms of subject and predicate,..."

Heck, I didn't remember what a predicate was, so I looked it up on Google -- "define predicate".

At the Google link, I came to realize that the term "predicate" is also used in programming language, and that the use of written language is syntactical in nature.  Yes, that may be obvious, but for somebody who used to growl at command prompts in junior high when all the computer knew to say was "syntax error," I had deep associations of syntax being something that computers use, not people.

But NO...  Syntax is also for language, and the idea of predicate has crossed over from written language into computer language.

My laugh out loud was (and this involves coming all the way over into my world if you want to get it the way I did)....  What if our written language has been too underdetermined, and the "code" that we've been writing, vis a vis sacred text (whichever you ascribe to, whether its the Bible, the Qur'an, the Book of Mormon, the Upanishads, or the script for the Flintstones)...  What if that code we've (writers of sacred text) been writing is actually extremely buggy, and the syntax used there does "compile" for cultures, but just because something COMPILES doesn't mean that it runs as it was designed.  In other words, we're inside the debugger, still hammering this program out.

Complicating matters is the fact that every single person who reads any given text has their own internalized instruction set.  Just as running a program written for an Intel Pentium II chip, just as running that program on an Intel Pentium 3, or a motorola, or any of hundreds of different chips out there,...  Just as running a decent program on a certain chip might produce desired results, running that same program on a different chip could either not work at all and crash/stall/freeze, or appear to work, but come up with something spectacularly unexpected....  Just as that is the case, trying to apply a sacred text (that truth be told, other than allowing for Author's conceit that God wrote it and made no mistakes, is likely fraught with errors that only a person with a mote in their eye could ignore them)...  Trying to directly apply a sacred text across cultures is often a Bad Thing(tm).

But I've digressed.  I didn't mean to deal with the cross-culture/cross-platform issues.  The simple issue of getting a pattern of logic together that can be compiled and work on one specific processor is tough enough.  [note upon reread: the words that follow are dense, inchoate, and confusing.  sorry i'm not cleaning them up just now.  i'm just going to get them down for myself to ponder for later]  So... If the subject (the reader/agent) is the processor, the sacred text is the logic path, the code to be followed, what is the data?  Is the data the object in the sentence?  What happens when we start spooling in complex data?  And every word must be carefully defined, so that the results of the program are predictable.  And the code has to be tight, really TIGHT, so that it's not open to exploits, anywhere along the chain, whether in the chip design, when running the compiled code as intended, or in a way not intended.

side-note 1: the processor is the subject (each of us), the code is our system of assumptions and beliefs about how to act in the world, and the world is the data, or the object which we spool into our assumptions/code, and then act on based off of those assumptions

side-note 2 (not necessarily consistent with side-note1): in the real world, the data set, the compiled code, and the compiler are all one.  the one's and zero's on the hard drive, the subatomic particles/waves in the universe (including all aspects, not just material), are all capable of being elements to be acted upon, of being that which acts upon, and of being elements which determine how other elements will act upon each other (within bounds -- for example, we still can't change the gravitational constant, etc.).  Any element can at any given time act more like an object, or as a subject, or as a programming subject, and often will be a combination of the three.

But we're not starting out with tabula rasa in any way, shape, or form.  Everybody's already got embedded instruction sets.  How about creating a dual-boot?  By creating a small metal-level compiler within the original system, and creating a simple instruction set to boot to, is it possible to boot up a boot-strapping system that can unpack and recompile itself into a flowering system of logic that holds together, and form a truly common base of religion?

I think using the English language -- or any other written language --might prove to be too fraught with exploitability.  It will need to be in the universal language of mathematical logic, based on postulates and axioms (assumptions, beliefs, deep cognitive structures), leading to theorems (actions, habits, norms, laws, commandments, suggestions, resulting from the axioms) .  (and if we're not working from the same axioms, we're not able to have a legitimate conversation about appropriate theorems/corollaries at all.  sometimes i think the larger argument really is all about the axioms.)

E.g., Axiom 0: There exists a subject. (IOW, I am.  I think therefore I am.  I doubt therefore I am, etc.)
Axiom 1: There exists an object.  (IOW, there is a world different than, or beyond, the subject.  From a non-duality/unity viewpoint, this one would be thrown out.  But as a multitheticalist, I'll be keeping both dualistic and monistic views around for comparison.)
Axiom 2: There exists a predicate. (which describes the subject, explicating its features, its spirit, and its character)
Axiom 3:...
.
.
.

Start with
Null :           0
Space :        1
Space^2 :   10
Space^3 :   11

Anyway, people don't like to think of themselves as being programmed (even though we are, from birth) and the above is so inchoate as to be embryonic meanderings.  And the above, if readable at all (certainly fraught with syntax errors and doesn't compile at the present moment) is painfully dry, so there's a long way to go before its ready for prime time.  In addition, there's the ever-present -- and IMHO opinion, ever-important -- proposition of free will, allowing our spirit to flower naturally rather than being too tightly bound by some spiritual fascism.  Ah, the middle way....

lyrics: "Why shouldn't I?" by the Bob Manor band.

colors: black(1), white(2), blue(3), orange(4),....

mood: at the beginning of this post, chuckling.  at the end of the post, baffled and overwhelmed.  i think i should just go back to reading about whitehead's concrescence for a while and leave it at that.

chant/prayer/mantra: xboot.exe, blah blah blah.

And as a reminder, the thing that got me started on this blog post was the notion that our written/spoken common languages are so slackly put together compared to the deterministic programming done within computer languages.


pax hominibus,
agape to all,
joel

PS (added 1.13.08)- I just came across this post from the Logos Institute that speaks to this, regarding critiques of Orwell's thoughts on the necessity of precision of language.
Labels: , , , , , , 


			  
# posted by Rev J D @ 14:16 2 comments  

			

 




This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?










free page hit counter