🚀 go-pugleaf

Have you gotten clearance from all the tribes you intend to discuss?
That is from the people who keep the traditions?  Many such traditions
and practices are not meant to be discussed in an open forum... 

If you're really gonna open this list... nevermind, you'll find our and
I can't think of a way to put it that you won't take in the wrong way.

Just let us know what state you live in so we can avoid it.
-- 
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
The above text contains my opinions, not IBM's.  Unless otherwise stated.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Nvwhtohiyada,  James T. Waya Gola Shupe  <*>  Database Support, IBM-Roch.
AFS ID: shupe@rchland            INTERNET: jt_wayagola_shupe@vnet.ibm.com

On 11 Aug 1997 13:09:51 GMT, shupe@vorlon.rchland.ibm.com (Jim Shupe)
wrote:

>Have you gotten clearance from all the tribes you intend to discuss?
>That is from the people who keep the traditions?  Many such traditions
>and practices are not meant to be discussed in an open forum... 

I came late to this thread, so please forgive me if I misunderstand.
But surely if I wanted to start, say, a Talmudic mail list, you
wouldn't claim that I must first get "clearance" from a board of
rabbis?  Or that I must get "clearance" from imams and mullahs before
starting a Koran mail list?  Of course, I would hope that rabbis or
imams or ministers or tribal elders would participate in the mail
list, in order to correct what they perceive to be errors or
misinterpretations and provide the benefit of their insider
perspective, but "clearance"... ?

Just doesn't sit right.

-- Steve

Steve--
Would you be offended if a non-Jew claimed to have "seen the light" by
attending a couple of services at an unnamed synagogue, then set himself
up as a "spiritual healer" and logged onto your Talmudic mail list and
held forth his opinions on all things Jewish, loudly and blatantly
drowning out any real discussion of the Talmud?  How about if he claimed
he was qualified to do this because his ggg-grandmother "might" have
been Jewish, but there is no documentation to back up this claim?  What
if this ggg-grandmother was supposedly a "Jewish princess"?
What's that?  There are no Jewish princesses? Just substitute the word
"Cherokee" for "Jewish" in the above paragraph and you will see what
Indian tribes are faced with daily in this country.
There are fake Indians everywhere.  And often the loudest, most
obnoxious people on newsgroups, mailing lists and the like are the
biggest phonies of all.
New-agers, wannabees, and fakes have appropriated Indian culture,
beliefs, clothing, ceremonials, etc. for over 300 years.
Tribal names cannot be copyrighted--hence, we have cars named Cherokee
and Navajo, white-owned construction companies called "Lakota".  The
tribal names have already been stolen.  Shall Indian tribes now hand
over discussion of private matters, including traditional healing,
dances, spiritual practices, etc. to any clown who wants to post,
without expecting any credentials?
I think not.  Enough already.

Mary Ann Hanada
member, Cherokee Nation of Oklahoma

Steve Beyer wrote:
> 
> On 11 Aug 1997 13:09:51 GMT, shupe@vorlon.rchland.ibm.com (Jim Shupe)
> wrote:
> 
> >Have you gotten clearance from all the tribes you intend to discuss?
> >That is from the people who keep the traditions?  Many such traditions
> >and practices are not meant to be discussed in an open forum...
> 
> I came late to this thread, so please forgive me if I misunderstand.
> But surely if I wanted to start, say, a Talmudic mail list, you
> wouldn't claim that I must first get "clearance" from a board of
> rabbis?  <snip>
> 
> -- Steve

On Mon, 11 Aug 1997 13:00:05 -0700, Mary Ann Hanada
<hanada@worldnet.att.net> wrote:

>Steve--
>Would you be offended if a non-Jew claimed to have "seen the light" by
>attending a couple of services at an unnamed synagogue, then set himself
>up as a "spiritual healer" and logged onto your Talmudic mail list and
>held forth his opinions on all things Jewish, loudly and blatantly
>drowning out any real discussion of the Talmud?  

Your point is a good one, and I sympathise with your position.  But I
guess it all comes down to control by the listowner and consensus
among the participants.  I am not sure that much is gained by the
listowner getting clearance ahead of time from anyone.  We have all
seen good mail lists and newsgroups invaded and destroyed by ranters
and ravers of one sort or another.

Anyway, if such a native religion list is started, I would very much
like to participate, learn, and contribute what I can.

Thanks for your thoughtful response to my post.

-- Steve