data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/912c3/912c3cb5367d786cd4aa6d441a6ec384cfe1fcb0" alt=""
See also the previous Wild Reed posts:
The Painted Forest
Exeter
Boorganna (Part 1)
Boorganna (Part 2)
Afternoon
Image: Michael J. Bayly.
Thoughts & interests of a queer seeker of the Divine Presence;
of a “soul dancer,” seeking to embody with grace and verve
the mystico-prophetic spiritual tradition
. . . For decades beginning during the Cold War, U.S. policy in the Islamic world has been aimed at suppressing secular reformist and leftist movements. Beginning with the CIA-engineered coup against a secular democratic reform government in Iran in 1953 (it was about oil), Washington has propped up dictators, coaching these regimes in the black arts of torture and mayhem against secular liberals and the left.
In these dictatorships, often the only places where people had freedom to meet and organize were mosques – and out of these mosques sometimes grew extreme Islamist movements. The Shah's torture state in Iran was brilliant at cleansing and murdering the left – a process that ultimately helped the rise of the Khomeini movement and ultimately Iran's Islamic Republic.
Growing out of what Martin Luther King called Washington's "irrational, obsessive anti-communism," U.S. foreign policy also backed extreme Islamists over secular movements or governments that were either Soviet-allied or feared to be.
In Afghanistan, beginning before the Soviet invasion and evolving into the biggest CIA covert operation of the 1980s, the U.S. armed and trained native mujahedeen fighters – some of whom went on to form the Taliban. To aid the mujahedeen, the U.S. recruited and brought to Afghanistan religious fanatics from the Arab world – some of whom went on to form Al Qaeda. (Like these Washington geniuses, Israeli intelligence – in a divide-and-conquer scheme aimed at combating secular leftist Palestinians – covertly funded Islamist militants in the occupied territories who we now know as Hamas.)
This is hardly obscure history.
Except in U.S. mainstream media. . . .
Kato is one of the activists leading the fight against the [Ugandan anti-gay] law condemned most recently by President Obama as odious and unjust. International pressure since the bill was tabled last October resulted in Uganda backing away from the law’s most draconian provision: the execution of some gays. However, it remains to be seen if the backlash will moderate it any further. Even without the death sentence, the bill still calls for life imprisonment for those who commit ‘the offence of homosexuality’ and goes so far as to criminalize a simple touch as an ‘attempt to commit’ homosexuality.
Witnesses told police that a man entered Kato’s home at around 1 p.m. on January 26, 2011, hit him twice in the head and departed in a vehicle. Kato died on his way to Kawolo hospital. Police told Kato’s lawyer that they had the registration number of the vehicle and were looking for it.
I see the primary Jesus experience as being that of a boundary breaker. His humanity and his consciousness seem to me to be so whole and so expanded that he was able to escape the basic human drive of survival that binds so many of us who are less fully developed. Unlike us, he appeared to need no security barrier behind which to hide. He could thus step across the boundaries of tribe, prejudice, guilt, and even religion into a new dimension of what it means to be human, and this is what caused people to experience God present in him. His call to us is therefore not to be religious but to be human and to be whole.
. . . [H]ere's why I call [Archbishop Timothy Dolan's recent] attempt to link opposition to gay rights to issues of life unwise: it backs the bishops into a dangerous corner where their lack of any profound respect for the real lives of real gay and lesbian human beings and the families these human beings are raising or to which they belong matters. And where this lack of respect for the real lives of some real human beings seriously undercuts their claim to cherish life.
When you treat the real lives of real human beings as if they don't count, you provide the world a message – one louder than words – about what you really mean, when you talk about respecting life. That message calls into question your claim to stand consistently and unambiguously for the value of life.
By linking gay rights to right-to-life concerns, the bishops make their own lived witness to the gospels a serious issue. They make their own lived witness to the value of life the most important aspect of their teaching about the value of life. They put the spotlight on themselves, on their treatment of their gay and lesbian brothers and sisters.
And if what we see when the spotlight shines on them in this area of their behavior is not admirable and consistent with what they proclaim about the dignity of persons and value of life, if we see callous disregard for the value of the lives of gay and lesbian human beings, then it becomes increasingly difficult to believe that their commitment to the value of life means much of anything at all. . . .