The Republic of T.

Let’s face it, we’ve known for a while now that the president — and most, if not all, of his administration — has a hostile relationship with reality.

In the summer of 2002, after I had written an article in Esquire that the White House didn’t like about Bush’s former communications director, Karen Hughes, I had a meeting with a senior adviser to Bush. He expressed the White House’s displeasure, and then he told me something that at the time I didn’t fully comprehend — but which I now believe gets to the very heart of the Bush presidency.

The aide said that guys like me were ”in what we call the reality-based community,” which he defined as people who ”believe that solutions emerge from your judicious study of discernible reality.” I nodded and murmured something about enlightenment principles and empiricism. He cut me off. ”That’s not the way the world really works anymore,” he continued. ”We’re an empire now, and when we act, we create our own reality. And while you’re studying that reality — judiciously, as you will — we’ll act again, creating other new realities, which you can study too, and that’s how things will sort out. We’re history’s actors . . . and you, all of you, will be left to just study what we do.”

So, while I don’t fully agree with the Dalai Lama’s assessment of Bush’s grasp on reality, I think he’s pretty much on the mark.

The Dalai Lama, in a lecture in Philadelphia today, told a group of about 2,000,

Things are not black and white. Things are relative. Things are interdependent. When we look at a situation we have to consider all the factors.

Many world disasters, including war, including the Iraq war, are due to lack of this holistic nature (looking at all the factors.) Like Saddam Hussein– ending things for him. “Reality is not that simple.

Of course, I have great respect for, in fact, I love President Bus, because he is very frank, very straightforward. His intentions are good, but some of his policy in spite of his sincere motivation and right goal, and some of his method becomes unrealistic because of lack of understanding about reality.

He went on to explain,

“You cannot look in one direction. In order to see reality, (you) have to see in three or four or seven dimensions” and that this applies in the economical field, political field and international relations.”

Bush had good intentions? OK. I guess I’m not feeling quite that generous towards him right now, but I can’t quite convince myself that the man meant well.

The rest? I can’t argue with it.

The Pope and the Dalai Lama, that is. Ratz recently announced that he will not meet with the Dalai Lama next month, even though a Vatican official secretly told reporters that the pontiff would meet with Tenzin Gyatso, a/k/a the Dalai Lama.

No biggie. After all they met a year ago. But there were some details I missed when I blogged about it then.

(more…)

What a sneaky Buddhist dad I am. I wrote earlier about figuring out how to raise our son with a set of values so that he will be less vulnerable to fundamentalism, dogmatism, etc. when he gets older. Well, when Parker was much younger, I looked up several children’s books on Buddhism or with a Buddhist flavor. A while back I got one of them, I Once Was a Monkey: Stories Buddha Told, via BookMooch. It’s a collection of Jataka Tales adapted for children. (By the way, check out this great site with animated jataka tales. I’d show it to Parker, but I’m afraid I’d never use my computer again!)

I put the book on the shelf and left it there at first, because the writing was a little advanced for Parker then. But a couple of weeks ago, when we were getting tired of reading the same books we always read to Parker, I pulled I Once Was a Monkey off the shelf. But I didn’t offer to read it to him, because that would have given him a chance to refuse. I just started reading it silently and waited for his natural curiosity to kick in.

It did. For the first week, I read one story each night. Then he started asking me to read from it when I put him to bed. Now it’s one of his favorite books. And he gets the stories. He stops me and asks questions, and we talk about what’s happening in the story and why. By George, it worked. I don’t want to push my luck, but I think next time I have a chance I’m going to thumb through a copy of Zen Shorts, and if it passes muster, I’ll bring it home too.

Technorati Tags: books, buddhism, parenting, religion

This is a rather amazing picture. At least, it is to me. And after reading the story behind it, I can’t help wondering if, under the same circumstances, we’d see pictures like this in the U.S. And if we we did, how long would it take?

Technorati Tags: buddhism, constitution, current events, politics, religion, thailand

(more…)

I wrote earlier about trying to teach my son empathy, and even earlier about the question — as a parent who’s also a “non-theistic Buddhist” and wishes not to set foot in a church except for weddings and funerals — of how to raise our son with a clear set of values and ethics without having to resort to a return to some form of organized religion with, with it’s unresolved and unresolvable conflicts and baggage. For now, I’m trying to teach Parker to put himself in other people’s shoes and think about how certain actions would make him feel if they were directed at him, just to get across the idea that other people have the same feelings and feel the same pain that he does when he’s hurt. Next comes understanding why he should avoid hurting others, but for now, based on my observations, that much is already starting to filter through.

It’s a conundrum I’ve yet to figure out, but the hubby made a good point when we were discussing it last week (he’s pretty much in the same place I am when it comes to organized religion), that if we don’t bring him up with something in terms of a set of values, he’s more likely to be ripe-for-the-picking if he ever encounters a religious cult or fundamentalism when he’s older. That’s something I definitely don’t want. At the same time, I’m hesitant to “choose” a religion for our son or require him to go through the motions of adhering to a specific one, as I experienced growing up. (Going to church was not an option or a matter of choice in our house. So I went, and sort of pantomimed belief long after I’d give up on the faith I was raised in.)

And in American culture, it’s unavoidable. I can’t tell you how many times in the last four years, we’ve gotten religiously-themed presents for Parker; books about Jesus, Christian-themed toys, etc. I know they’re from well-meaning people who simply made assumptions that our family must be Christian (gay, liberal Christians, but Christians nonetheless, because what else would be be?), but it’s still rather awkward, because we end up making a serious effort not to offend, by not letting it show on our faces that it not “exactly what we wanted” for our son, and quietly setting it aside rather than figuring out a polite way of explaining that we don’t want our son getting those types of gifts. Instead, we quietly give them away.

But I can’t escape the feeling that something is unavoidably encroaching upon our family, it won’t go away if asked politely, and I’m not quite sure what to do about it.

Technorati Tags: buddhism, children, culture, parenting, puppy, religion, secular

(more…)

After writing one particularly long post about the Virginia Tech shootings, followed by a three part series, I thought I’d gotten everything I had to say out of my system. But when we attended the Rainbow Families DC conference a couple of weekends ago, we made it a point to attend the discussion groups on dealing with elementary and middle school as same-sex parents. It was the second one, which asked us to “dream big” and envision what an inclusive curriculum would look like.

When I imagined it, I immediately thought about one aspect of the sex-ed curriculum launched in Montgomery county, Maryland — and fought tooth and nail by PFOX — that I posted about earlier. In particular, I was reminded of a particular aspect of the curriculum that I posted about back in November, entitled “Respect for Differences,” which seemed to inspire (aside from the unit on condoms) the most or the strongest objections from the right. And as I sat there trying to wrap my brain about what a gay-inclusive curriculum would look like, one word kept popping into my head.

Empathy. Defined as (and this is my favorite definition among the ones I found) “feeling of concern and understanding for another’s situation or feelings.”

It sounds simplistic and naive. It probably is. But stay with me here. I promise I’m going somewhere with this.

Technorati Tags: bullying, bush, culture, current events, education, gay rights, politics

(more…)

This feels a bit like cheating as far as blogging is concerned, but it’s something that’s been on my mind since yesterday, when I saw Mike’s post at Questionable authority, about Chad’s post at uncertain Principles asking everyone to ease up on debate in the wake of the tragedy at Virginia Tech.

Of course, the bodies aren’t even cold yet, and already the blogosphere is a-flutter with people touting this as proof that the US needs to change its gun laws in one direction or another. I’m not going to link to them, but I’ve already seen three or four pieces using this to push one side or the other of the gun control debate, and I have a simple message for those people:

Stop. Please, just stop.

For the love of God, show a little tact, and shut up, at least until the families of the victims have been notified, and the community has had a chance to grieve a little. Next Monday would be a fine time to start– personally, I’d prefer “never,” but at a minimum, I’d say that while there are still families out there who don’t know whether their loved ones are alive or dead, you can sit on your hands, and spare us all your opinions.

(more…)

Like about 37% of adults, I’m an avid gamer. But like I’ve said before, I’m a bit of a odd duck when it comes to gaming. I’m pretty bad at first-person shooters, and most of them don’t appeal to me. My bent is towards simulation games. Those are common enough but only occasionally do I come across games that also involve another interest of mine, like political simulation games.  

So, I was surprised and intrigued to learn of a game that incorporated another interest of mine: Buddhism. And when I found out it was a game about Buddhist ethics, I decided to check it out. After all, it’s a game where you lose points for killing (including animals). How could I not check it out?

(more…)

First it was Buddhists in Congress. Then  it was revealed that there are six members of Congress with no religious affiliation at all. No religion at all?! Now it turns out one of the six is now the only self-declared atheist in Congress. It's Democrat (of course) Pete Stark, who had the nerve to answer honestly when the Secular Coalition sent him a questionnaire. (On their website, they refer to Stark as "openly nontheistic." Is that an awkward way to avoid saying "atheist"?) I'm not sure which is more surprising, that nobody's asked during his 18 years in Congress, or that he answered the question while still in Congress. He's from California, so maybe he can still get re-elected. But if he were from anywhere else, I'd be laying bets that he'll retire after this term. One thing's for sure. He'll never be president.

Last week, in a meandering wrap-up post on the Edwards blogger debacle, I posted this.

In fact, one of the things I’ve been thinking about in light of this weeks events is that the religious left and the non-religious left (or “the left” and “the other left,” and you can decide yourself which is which) have got to find some way of working together, and coming to an understanding on how to fight stuff like what I mentioned above from both a religious and non-religious perspective. Is there’s a way to do that while respecting both religious belief and non-belief? I don’t know, but we’re close enough to being in the same boat to make it worth considering.

Well, it looks like this week that conversation is starting to happen. Of course, it’s a bit bumpy, but it’s been interesting to see the discussion going back and forth.

(more…)

I've been on the road yesterday, for a business trip, so I didn't have time to post much. But after thinking about my last few posts, something came to mind that I realized I wanted to say but hadn't yet.

Now, admittedly, my previous take on anger is not exactly Buddhist of me, since Buddhism describes anger as a “destructive emotion.” I still think that it may be informative and even helpful at some points. But in larger sense, it’s also part of a process that’s necessary for some of us in this culture. It’s a stop along the way, but one we’re urged to move through quickly. Particularly if you’re a minority, and your anger is against the dominant culture or group, you’ll probably be told to simply “get over it.” (Which I think means or at least implies an acceptance of present conditions.)

But there’s no way to “get over it.” The only way is through it, as I saw described in an interesting post about women, religion, and anger.

Women are taught that they cannot perform as well as men outside the home and that, indeed, they are not allowed to try. Osiek calls this “the myth of male superiority” (10). There comes a point, however, at which women recognize their repression and realize the emptiness of the myth. Upon this realization, the woman reinterprets the events of her life, big and small, which reveal her oppression by male superiority. The natural response to this new-found awareness is anger. The anger is not inappropriate and it must not be repressed, for repressed anger leads to depression. Anger, however, is not the final resting place. In order to deal with this anger, the woman must go into the depths of her being and come to an impasse. This impasse is where she wrestles with the meaning of her “‘dual membership’ in the world of church and that of feminism” (23). “The way out [of this impasse] is the way through” (24), but Osiek’s description of that breakthrough awaits a later chapter.

I’m still waiting for that chapter as well, because I don’t know what “through” looks like in that sense. But I think the above could be said for just about anyone cast in the role of "other" in our culture.

Reading that reminded me of something I saw via Pharyngula, about how not to navigate that impasse (or, actually, one like it).

How do we get beyond this impasse? Not by shouting at people about "the God delusion". Religion is immensely important to people, and, although it's easy to point to the ways in which religious belief has caused serious harm, it's also necessary to appreciate its social and personal functions. Religious beliefs play an important role in people's sense of their own lives, explaining why those lives matter. Religion also offers genuine community with others, providing spaces for joint ethical commitment and joint action. You don't end this heated debate by simply telling folk to brace up — or to take their scientific medicine so that they'll feel better in the morning. They won't.

(more…)

It's always an honor to be nominated, and in that sense I've experienced something of an embarassment of riches in the number of awards this blog's been nominated for. However, I'm particularly honored this time, to be nominated for a Blogisattva Award, which are dedicated to "honoring excellence in English-language Buddhist blogging." This blog has been nominated in the "Best Achievement Blogging Opinion Pieces or about Political Issues." The winners will be announced on February 15th.

I guess I know where I'll be on January 27th; down at the National Mall with a Buddhist Peace Delegation, calling for an end to the war in Iraq. At least I'm going to try to make it down there, and maybe even take Parker and take some pictures. The delegation is cosponsored by the Buddhist Peace Fellowship, and includes one of the first ordained African American Buddhist monks. Barring inclement weather, it could be a good experience, and even a good way to kind of introduce Buddhism to Parker. He's at that stage where "Why?" is his favorite question, and I can imagine this event would inspire lots of questions.

I’m off to a slow start with blogging in the new year, but have a couple of posts coming up tomorrow. In the meantime, here’s an interesting tidbit I came across while searching for a reference for an upcoming post. Apparently, there are two Buddhists among the new members of Congress who will soon be sworn in.

Representative-elect Hank Johnson, a Georgia Democrat who ousted Representative Cynthia McKinney in the Democratic primary, became a Buddhist decades ago, though his family does not share that faith. A spokesperson said that Mr. Johnson plans to use a Bible, citing tradition.

Besides, there is no book in Buddhism that’s equivalent to the Bible or the Koran, said Representative-elect Mazie Hirono, a Hawaii Democrat. She said she probably would not use any book, but that in the past, when she was sworn in as lieutenant governor, she used a friend’s family Bible.

Ms. Hirono does not practice daily, but she is influenced by Buddhist values. It is “characteristic of Buddhism that there is respect and tolerance for other religions,” she said.

It’s the first one that gave me pause. Hank Johnson, a black Buddhist, got elected in Georgia? The only thing I can guess is that he kept that on the down-low, while making the obligatory rounds to churches on Sunday. He must not have told anyone, because I can’t imagine that a majority of Georgians in almost any district would elect a non-Christian to office.

Then again, it’s Cynthia McKinney’s district, so it probably leans progressive anyway.

But still. That just kinda blew my mind for a minute.

Kudos to the congressman-elect, tho’.

Jim sent me an email yesterday about the current issue of Shambhala Sun — which I subscribed to for a year or so, back when I had time to read magazines — and I was intrigued by the focus on mindful politics. I might just pick up this issue tomorrow, in order to read the full articles, because something jumped out at me from the excerpt of John Tarrant’s article “Return to the (Political) World”. Towards the end of last week I wrote that it was rather funny that someone as conflict averse/avoidant as I am would end up a political blogger, much less in the middle of a conflict like the one that broke out that week.

Then I read this.

Politics belongs in the general realm of imperfection, self-deception, desperate hope, and congenial affection we call civilization. That’s where the bodhisattva, who is interested in the fate of others, hangs out. Also, if you indulge in politics, certain personal implications accompany you; you don’t get away without being transformed by the material you are working with.

To consider politics is to open yourself—your mind and body, your naked and apparently unoffending skin, your naive hopefulness, and your joy in human company—to a tsunami of lies, humbug, drivel, false promises, masquerade, hypocritical piety, prejudice, greed, murder, and fattening food. To consider politics is to dive into this Hokusai wave of inauthenticity and to say, “Hmmm, this seems like a situation I can work with.”

Now, I don’t define consider myself a bodhisattva (it’s a lot to live up to). But it does help me make sense of an otherwise unlikely and crazy decision to engage in something that invariably leaves me tense and tied in knots. (Not that I haven’t given some thought to just starting a blog about vegetarian cooking, and just call it a day.)

But even if that brief excerpt. Tarrant’s article was right about something else; that you can’t help being transformed by it, and sometimes brought back to what you already knew.

(more…)

This has been on my mind for a while now, but it took a private email from a friend to nudge me into saying something about it. Since it's something I do on my blog, it makes sense to address it here too. I think the saying goes "I broke it in public, so I gotta fix it in public."

For some time now, whenever I write about Christianity, I've been doing so with a small "c," while capitalizing the names of other faiths. I've been doing it for a while now. I don't remember when or how it got started. It may have been intentional the first couple of times, but I kept doing it after I became aware of it and at that point it became intentional.

Well, from now I'm I'm not going to do that anymore. It's wrong, antagonistic, non-constructive, small, and petty of me to do that. It probably stems from some personal issues with religion in general and Christianity in particular, that I've mentioned before. But that doesn't excuse it. In fact, that makes it worse because it's insulting, dismissive, hurtful, and frustrating to people who are sincere in their beliefs, and who have nothing to do with my personal history.

Beyond that, it smacks of painting all Christians with the same brush as my intended targets (far-right, fundamentalist, theocrats, etc.), when there are progressive Christians who don't fall into that category. It hypocritical of me to do that when I wouldn't appreciate someone doing the same to me as an African American or a gay man.

It also makes it hard for me to engage in a discussion about religion — which is something I still intend to do, because it's an issue that's inextricably intertwined with politics, and because it's a subject I'm still trying to come to terms with on a personal level — because it overshadows or otherwise overpowers anything legitimate I might have to say about the subject. That's something I'll probably be doing for a long time. From now on, I want to try to do it in a way that isn't hurtful to others.

And finally, it goes against what I claim or at least aspire to practice in terms of right speech. And, yes, there are certainly other aspects of my blogging in which I'd do well to be mindful of that principle.

That said, I want to apologize both for the practice I mentioned above and to anyone who was frustrated or in any way hurt by it. I'll definitely continue blogging about religion as it intersects with political issues I'm concerned with. While I haven't changed my mind on the subject, or my beliefs, I hope that I can at least contribute something positive to the dialogue from here on out.

The Dalai Lama is to receieve the Congressional Gold Medal. An interesting development, considering reports that American Buddhism is on the rise. I wonder what some American religious leaders would have to say about that. Past recipients include Pope John Paul II and Mother Theresa. 

Too busy at work to do much posting today, but I was inspired to post an update about my adventures with BookMooch after getting into the office this morning to find three mooched books waiting for me. It works! It really works!

Two of the titles are fiction that I became interested in after reading a lot of Derrick Jensen's work — Ecotopia and Into the Forest — neither of which I had much luck finding in bookstores. Now I basically have them for free, or at no cost beyond the minimal postage spent on books mooched from me. (Media rate postage isn't terribly expensive.

But the title I'm probably most excited about is one I got for Parker, I Once Was a Monkey: Stories Buddha Told. I posted a while back about pondering how to raise a kid with a particular set of values in a non-religious family. To that end I've been searching for children's books related to Buddhism, that I can start sharing with Parker. Most of them are hard to find in bookstores, so rather than ordering one from Amazon I decided to give BookMooch a try first, and found one of the titles I was looking for. Yay BookMooch!

I've thumbed through it, and I'll have to give it a closer reading, but my first impression is that it's probably a little to advanced for Parker right now. (He has a tendency to get impatient if there are "too many words" and wants to turn the page before we're finished reading it, which I take as an indication that the particular book is one he's not ready for yet.) Still, I may try reading one story to him this evening, just to see how it goes. If he's likes it, great. If it's too much for him right now, at least I have it and it'll be on the shelf when he's ready to give it another try.