I had a date tonight, not a boygirl date but a date with a group of non-neurotypical people on the right planet for me, and I am in love, sort of. In love with being with people who seem pretty wacko on the outside but when they speak they make sense to me. There's no fluff, no small talk, and everything they say is to the point and interesting, whether or not I agree with their point of view, and I didn't appreciate it until I was driving homewards and getting lost again, and it started to sink in.
I initially drove north from Puyallup on 161, being determined not to take the freeway if I didn't need to, all the way to where, according to Mapquest, I was supposed to "make a slight right" turn onto Pacific Highway/ HWY 99, so I got into the right lane which was an HOV lane, watching for the turn, but after a couple of blocks, checked the signs and realized that without turning I was already on 99.
Which threw me, all the way until I turned left on 16th Avenue and watched for 14th Avenue [I know, it doesn't make sense to me, either] but it petered out into a parking lot. So this time I got back onto 99 and passed the other 16th Avenue which I was supposed to take without seeing the sign but was alerted when I saw the street which "if you get to 176th you've gone 0.1 mile too far" so I did a U-ey and turned onto 16th, and then later there really was a 14th and I was there.
And met some really nice and interesting people, and shared my taco salad and their pizza and sparkling cider, and we all talked about various things for two hours and they were all very intelligent and knowledgeable and pleasant, and it started to make more sense that I would drive up 14 miles and 30 minutes through all the hell and dragons just to meet an assortment of strangers who were very little like me on the outside but a whole lot like me on the inside, and I thought, maybe I'll come back again.
And for once I was not spending the drive home in remorse and castigating myself for the stupid things I said and did and then I got lost again by not trusting Mapquest any more and finding my own route. I figured that if I made no turns from 161 to be on 99 on the drive up, I should make no turns from 99 on the way down and would end up back on 161. Which didn't work, and I'm pretty sure the turn I missed was for "I-5" which I didn't take because I didn't want to get Shanghai'd onto the freeway.
Probably that wouldn't have happened, and the signs would have shown up to just take 161 instead, but anyway I ended up in Fife, turning left onto 70th towards Edgewood and Puyallup. However, as soon as I saw Valley Avenue crossing 70th I turned onto it [instead of waiting for 161 to turn up] but I turned right, which took me back into Fife, so I had to turn around practically in someone's back yard and take Valley Avenue back home where I belong.
And thought, what a nice bunch of people.
Sunday, October 21, 2012
Monday, October 15, 2012
Comparing Elections: the Old And the New
Baha'is just had their Unit Conventions, electing a delegate from each district who will meet all together in May to elect the members of the National body, the National Spiritual Assembly. This is done every year, and because the system of election for the Baha'is is done in such a different spirit from United States elections, it is good to contemplate some of the differences.
The object of the Baha'i Faith is unity, so taking sides in a national partisan election [except for voting with a secret ballot, and as long as one does not declare membership with a political party] is forbidden. Some of us on Facebook have had a difficult time refraining from expressing sympathy with certain points of view; we need to wean ourselves away from the divisiveness of the American political process.
There are at least two main factors in the American partisan political process which create divisiveness. One is that the candidates are always running on the basis of their [or the party's] opinion about several issues. So if the candidate believes in the equality of men and women, and the voter does also, you would vote for them. The other factor is that people run who wish to represent a particular viewpoint, and are considered to represent the people who elected them, so they are responsible to vote in Congress in a way that represents the wishes of the people. I tend to experience a lot of tension at election time around worrying whether the person elected will uphold my rights or represent my point of view.
The Baha'i system is rather different. Members of the National Spiritual Assembly make decisions together as a team, at the time that the Assembly meets, and they are not setting the policy running the affairs of the Faith based on either their opinions, or the feelings of the "electorate." People who serve on the Assembly are responsible to God, not to the people who elected them. Also, in the Baha'i Faith, the members have already recognized and agreed with the major issues which were expressed by the Founder of the Faith, Baha'u'llah, so those issues are considered settled. There is no wrangling between members of the Assembly about issues, and in fact, no one in the Baha'i Faith actually runs for office.
Issues which the Founder of the Baha'i Faith "settled" include, but are not limited to:
Instead of people "running for office," Baha'is meet together at their local conventions and each person votes privately for one person who can "best combine the necessary qualities of unquestioned loyalty, of selfless devotion, of a well-trained mind, of recognized ability and mature experience." The task of voting is carried out with a "purity of spirit" in a "rarefied atmosphere of selflessness and detachment." The person receiving the greatest number of votes is elected as the delegate to the National Convention. No electioneering is allowed; no discussion of any individual's qualifications or suitability; there is no campaigning, and no one offers their services as a delegate.
According to Mahmoud's Diary, the written recollections of one of the Persian believers who accompanied 'Abdu'l-Baha on his journey to America one hundred years ago, 'Abdu'l-Baha made the following statement about the qualifications for President of the United States:
The president must be a man who does not insistently seek the presidency. He should be free of all thoughts of name and rank; rather, he should say, 'I am unworthy and incapable of this position and cannot bear this great burden.' Such persons deserve the presidency. If the object is to promote the public good, then the president must be a well-wisher of all and not a self-seeking person. If the object, however, is to promote personal interests, then such a position will be injurious to humanity and not beneficial to the public.
The object of the Baha'i Faith is unity, so taking sides in a national partisan election [except for voting with a secret ballot, and as long as one does not declare membership with a political party] is forbidden. Some of us on Facebook have had a difficult time refraining from expressing sympathy with certain points of view; we need to wean ourselves away from the divisiveness of the American political process.
There are at least two main factors in the American partisan political process which create divisiveness. One is that the candidates are always running on the basis of their [or the party's] opinion about several issues. So if the candidate believes in the equality of men and women, and the voter does also, you would vote for them. The other factor is that people run who wish to represent a particular viewpoint, and are considered to represent the people who elected them, so they are responsible to vote in Congress in a way that represents the wishes of the people. I tend to experience a lot of tension at election time around worrying whether the person elected will uphold my rights or represent my point of view.
The Baha'i system is rather different. Members of the National Spiritual Assembly make decisions together as a team, at the time that the Assembly meets, and they are not setting the policy running the affairs of the Faith based on either their opinions, or the feelings of the "electorate." People who serve on the Assembly are responsible to God, not to the people who elected them. Also, in the Baha'i Faith, the members have already recognized and agreed with the major issues which were expressed by the Founder of the Faith, Baha'u'llah, so those issues are considered settled. There is no wrangling between members of the Assembly about issues, and in fact, no one in the Baha'i Faith actually runs for office.
Issues which the Founder of the Baha'i Faith "settled" include, but are not limited to:
- Equality of men and women
- Racial unity: there is only one race
- Universal compulsory education
- Agreement of science and religion
- A universal auxiliary language
- Independent investigation of truth
- Spiritual means for the elimination of the extremes of wealth and poverty
Instead of people "running for office," Baha'is meet together at their local conventions and each person votes privately for one person who can "best combine the necessary qualities of unquestioned loyalty, of selfless devotion, of a well-trained mind, of recognized ability and mature experience." The task of voting is carried out with a "purity of spirit" in a "rarefied atmosphere of selflessness and detachment." The person receiving the greatest number of votes is elected as the delegate to the National Convention. No electioneering is allowed; no discussion of any individual's qualifications or suitability; there is no campaigning, and no one offers their services as a delegate.
According to Mahmoud's Diary, the written recollections of one of the Persian believers who accompanied 'Abdu'l-Baha on his journey to America one hundred years ago, 'Abdu'l-Baha made the following statement about the qualifications for President of the United States:
The president must be a man who does not insistently seek the presidency. He should be free of all thoughts of name and rank; rather, he should say, 'I am unworthy and incapable of this position and cannot bear this great burden.' Such persons deserve the presidency. If the object is to promote the public good, then the president must be a well-wisher of all and not a self-seeking person. If the object, however, is to promote personal interests, then such a position will be injurious to humanity and not beneficial to the public.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
