Cats

"Adam, Eve—we have caused this earth to be filled with all kinds of plant and animal life. We give all these things into your care and charge you to be wise and faithful stewards of them."   (Endowment 2010)

The photo (click to enlarge) shows most of the feral cats I've been feeding. From left to right: Leo, Tiger, Chaplin, Hugolino, Tom, Huga, Cinnamon, Sam, Scampers, Grouchy Mama. Not pictured: Lucifer and her three kittens: Spunky, Leopard, and Oscar.

Tonight some folks from Independent Animal Rescue came out to trap several of the cats; they'll be back in a couple nights for the rest. Jill, a friend of mine, who's a cat lover, put me in touch with IAR. They'll spay or neuter the cats and return them. There's talk of setting up a feeding station (!) which the organization will tend once we've moved away. It's what they call a "managed colony."

Tonight they trapped Lucifer and all three of her kittens, as well as Hugolino, Grouchy Mama, and Scampers, plus Tom, who didn't really need to be trapped since he's a domestic stray: they just picked him up and put him in the carrier. Hugolino will be neutered and returned, but Lucifer's kittens are young enough that IAR is going to try to get them adopted.

Hugolino, by the way, appears to be a sibling of the kitten Hugo and I tended for a day about a month ago. That kitten, Hugolina (note the feminine ending), has disappeared. I don't know if that means she didn't make it, or if she managed to win over some other human.

Various news

Same-sex marriage is legal in New York state. The stone may not be rolling forward, but it's at least creaking forward.

I watch footage of gay and lesbian people talking about how excited they are now to be able to marry in their home state, and I think: How can LDS leaders and other conservative Mormons not be moved by this? I get, cerebrally, all your arguments against homosexuality and gay marriage: I understand your world view. But I really don't get how you can not be touched by the joy of people talking about how they want to formalize their intimate relationships. "How is it that ye are so hard in your hearts?" (1 Nephi 7:8).

************

Continuing prayers for the Saudi women drivers. Prayers of thanks for the expressions of support they've received from world leaders, Hillary Clinton and the EU's Catherine Ashton among others.

Continuing prayers for those fighting oppressive regimes in Yemen, Syria, Libya. I pray that despite being conscious that some of the people that prayer covers may not represent great alternatives. But I have faith, or at least hope, in change.

Saudi women protest driving ban

Read the story

Since hearing a story about this protest on NPR last night, I've been thinking about the protesters and the men (e.g., husbands) who support them. It's mind-boggling that there's still a country where women are legally banned from driving. And of course that ban is just symbolic of a host of restrictions to which Saudi women are subject.

As a lefty-ish academic, I hear that voice in my head chastising me for being a cultural imperialist who presumes to judge other societies by my values. But no. "Male and female are alike to God," say my scriptures, and that's the standard by which I'm going to judge. If the Gods will gender equity—and I believe They do—then They are on the side of the protesters. Which means that the clerics who legislate female inequality and the government officials who enforce it are on the wrong side of heaven, as are the supermajority of Saudi women who reportedly support these inequalities. On this subject, I am not going to subordinate my ethical judgments to majority rule in the name of cultural pluralism. The little minority of troublemaking women drivers are doing what's right.

God be with them as they take the risk of pushing the envelope. Historically, the character arc for that role involves things like ridicule and imprisonment and beatings and even martrydom—so say my scriptures again. Hopefully, the situation in Saudi society is "thawing" enough already that this story can end more happily.

Pentecost

The Church of the Advocate held its Pentecost service as a picnic, so I went to church in a t-shirt today. I chose the "Kirtland 1836" t-shirt Hugo brought for me from a visit he made a little while back to the Kirtland Temple. I chose it for two reasons: (1) It was burgundy, which was the closest thing I had in my wardrobe to red, the liturgical color for Pentecost. (2) The Kirtland Temple dedication was Mormonism's reenactment of the Pentecost outpouring.

A couple Sundays ago, I had the opportunity to preach at the Advocate. The Gospel reading for the day was John 14:15-21. It's a passage particularly relevant to this worshipping community because it's the first passage in which Jesus promises to send the Paraclete, a word that the KJV translates as "Comforter" but the NRSV translates as "Advocate." In my sermon, I pointed out that Pentecost is the feast that celebrates the fulfillment of that promise. The Spirit dwells in Jesus' disciples—in all who love him. How richly we experience the Spirit's indwelling depends on how fully and conscientiously and whole-heartedly we keep Jesus' commandments, especially his command to love and serve. But from the moment we said "Yes" to Jesus' call, we became part of the Christian community, the community in which the Spirit dwells by definition.

That means the Spirit dwells in me, even if it isn't always readily apparent from my behavior. The Spirit dwells in all who have come to Christ by coming to the Church of the Advocate. And while I didn't say this in my sermon, the Spirit also dwells in all who have come to Christ by coming to the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. Have received that same Spirit, we have become Christ's body—all of us together. That's a mystery I don't understand.

Gay marriage drama--plus kittens

There's a rally planned at our state capitol in a couple days to protest a proposed amendment to the state constitution that, depending on the final language, could not only define marriage as "the union of one man and one woman at one time" (hmm... would Mormons in this state even blink before voting in favor of that definition?) but could also rule out any kind of legal recognition for domestic partnerships. The state university I've been attending here has allowed me to purchase health insurance for my domestic partner as if he were a spouse: would the university be able to keep allowing that if this amendment passes? I can certainly see how the proposed language could be cited in court to squash it.

I probably won't be able to attend the rally, so I've spent part of this evening sending the following letter to my state representatives and senator:

Dear ------ :

I'm writing to urge you to vote against HB 777/SB 106.

North Carolina has been my home for the past seven years, since I moved here accompanied by my partner of over ten years. Last year, the two of us were legally married in Washington DC. If we were an opposite-sex couple, our marriage would be recognized by the state of North Carolina; because we are a same-sex couple, it is not. Consequently, we live without a host of benefits--and obligations--that accrue under the law to married couples in this state. We've had to go to lengths that heterosexual married couples don't have to go to in order, for example, to try to secure the legal right to make life-or-death decisions for one another in the case of incapacitation.

HB 777/SB 106 reinforces prejudice against same-sex couples in this state. Underneath whatever positive spin its supporters put on it, this proposed constitutional amendment is prejudicial, plain and simple. I plead with you--please say no to this attempt to perpetuate discrimination against couples like my husband and me.

Yes, we're legally married--or as legal as we can get at this point in time. It happened just before New Year's. I didn't post anything about it at the time because my mother was still alive, and I didn't want her to know, since I suspected it wouldn't please her. I was planning to formally announce it to cyberspace in a blog post on our 6-month anniversary. But--cat's out of the bag now.

************

Also this evening, I signed an online petition for people of faith against LGBT discrimination. When it came time to identify my religious tradition, I put "Latter Day Saint." No hyphen, capital D. It seemed like the most precise way to identify. I think it's the first time I've formally claimed that label.

************

On a different subject: kitten drama. Another litter was born recently. A couple days ago, some neighborhood kids found them, took them home, parents wouldn't let them keep them--so they just turned them loose again, but not back where they found them. Two have now disappeared as far as I know. A third found its way to our downstairs neighbors. I took it off their hands and kept in the apartment through the rest of the day, with the idea that when I went out to feed the cats in the evening, I'd try to return it to the mother. The kitten was sociable and cute. She spent a good part of the day sleeping wrapped up in a towel, which she evidently enjoyed--she would burrow deep inside it.

That evening I returned her to mom, who after some uncertainty was ready to take her back. But then the kitten didn't seem to want to go back. I'd set her down in front of mom, and she'd turn around and toddle right back to me. It was like a damn Disney movie, and the cussing is because, yes, I admit it, I got misty. Finally, mom got a hold of the nape of her neck and carried her off to their hiding place under the sidewalk. The next morning, as I was walking the dog, the kitten popped right out to say hello, and I beat a hasty retreat. I haven't seen her since; mom seems to have moved her.

However, this afternoon I stepped out of the apartment and found mom standing on the steps, staring at me. Since she's never done that before, I take it to mean she thinks I have her other kittens, which is heart-wrenching. Damn meddling neighborhood kids.

Why is there blood on your skirts, Sharon Slater?

If you don't get the title of this post, read Helaman 9:26-35 and this news story.

I'm so angry, I find it hard to talk about this coherently.

It was not unpredictable, but it's still appalling, to see Mormons forging an alliance with a paranoid, violence-inflaming homophobe like Martin Ssempa.

I can empathize right now with the anger that produces a prayer like this:

Have mercy, O Lord,
on the wicked mob who have driven your people,
that they may cease to spoil,
that they may repent of their sins
if repentance is to be found.

But if they will not, . . .
and if it cannot be otherwise,
that the cause of your people may not fail before you,
may your anger be kindled,
and your indignation fall upon them,
that they may be wasted away,
both root and branch, from under heaven.

(D&C 109:50-52)

The problem is: God doesn't answer prayers like this. He doesn't intervene like this. That's the price we pay for agency. If we don't keep the Sharon Slaters and Martin Ssempas of the world from having their way with gay and lesbian people, no deus ex machina is going to save the day.

But if I thought God answers prayers like this, I would be praying it right now.

Of course, people on their side are praying right now that God will do these things to people like me.

Courage Campaign's "Testimony Video Contest"

The Courage Campaign, a progressive organization in California that's been prominent in the anti-Prop 8 movement, has launched a "testimony video contest" in partnership with Dustin Lance Black, a former Mormon who is one of a handful of gay rights activists to whom the LDS Church has recently made symbolic friendly overtures. They're asking people to submit homemade videos of themselves telling their personal stories, which Black will then review to find the "new face" of the marriage equality movement.

That particular public relations aim pretty much rigs the contest in favor of affluent professionals who are conventionally masculine and feminine (no gender transgressiveness or ambiguity, please!), since despite the horror it generates on the right, the LGBT movement has become quite conservative in its understanding of what counts as "respectability." But that's not the main point I wanted to make here.

What intrigued me about this initiative is the way that Black overtly invokes the LDS practice of bearing testimony. In a video promoting the initiative, he describes how growing up Mormon, he was encouraged to bear his testimony in front of the congregation, which, he explains, means "getting up in front of everybody you know and saying what it is you know to be true."

One of the aspects of Mormonism that has always made me proud of the faith is this practice--this very democratic notion (at least in theory) that everyone is entitled to stand at the pulpit and declare the truth as they have come to understand it. When I first started speaking at rallies back in the run-up to the Iraq war, I was conscious that I was doing the same thing I had done back in my days as a missionary: publicly proclaiming the truth as I knew it. Whatever radical critique there is to be made of the LGBT movement today, it tickles me to see this Mormon ideal being placed in the service of progressive politics.